Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council - 11/18/1986
M U L N U H EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 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, Planning Director Chris Enger, 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 OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS II. MINUTES A. Special Joint City Council/Oevelopment Commission meeting held Tuesday, October 21, 1986 B. Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, October 21. 1986 C. Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, November 4L 1986 III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. Final Platapproval for Lake Park 3rd Addition (between Timber Lake Drive and CSAH4)Resglution Nu. 86-281 C. Final Plat approval for.'.Starrin .Pines Addition(E. Staring Lane Resolution No. 66-Z87 -- 0. Final Plat approval for Research Farm 3rd Addition (south of Research Road, west of TH169) Resolution No. 86-283 E. Application for conveyance of Tax Forfeited Lands F. Wendell A. Phillippi - Construction of Fish Ponds within the Shoreland Area G. Request for time extension by Ba oint Manor II for their Housing Revenue Bonds Resolution Na. 66-284 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. TECHNOLOGY PARK 7TH by Technology Park Associates. Request for Zoning District Vmendment within the Office District on 3.74 acres for construction of 27,700 square foot office building. Location: East of future Golden Triangle Drive, north of Nine Mile Creek (Ordinance No. 56-86 - Amending Ordinance No. 36-85-PUD-6-85) Continued from November 4, 1986 Council meeting Page 2748 T Page 2755 Page 2766 Page 2784 Page 2785 Page 2788 i Page 2791 Page 2794 Page 2805 Page 2817 City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,November 18, 1986 B. ALPINE VILLAGE by Herlitz Construction. Request for Rezoning from R1-22 to RM-6.5 for 7.58 acres and Preliminary Plat of Page 2820 8.23 acres into 19 lots and two outlots for a multiple family townhouse development. Location: East of Alpine Trail, south of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad. (Ordinance No. 57-86 - Rezoning; Resolution No. 86-280 - Preliminary Plat) V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS Page 2882 VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. Proposed NSP Transmission Line along Highway 5 (Continued from —4,-1996F— from November B. Bryant Lake Regional Park Master Plan - Hennes Parks (Doug Bryant, Page 2883 Southern Division Manager, and Alex Meyer, Landscape Architect) C. Request �y the Wilkies for public access to their land over Page 2884 Bluffs East 4th an�th Additions D. Re uest �y RgAil Ride project to redeem the Housing Revenue Page 2889 Bonds issued in 1935 No. 86-28a VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS A. Memo from Development Commission Page 2892 IX. APPOINTMENTS X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members I. Design of new City Hall Council Chambers B. Report of City Manager C. Re ort of City Attorney D. Report of Director of Community Services I. Edenvale Trail (continued from October 2, 1986) Page 2913 a. EAW Request b. Trail extension and Bridge at the end of Hillcrest Court 2. Uses Proposed for Existing City Hall Building Page 2924 E. Report of Director of Public Works I. Consider "No Parking from 2:00 AM to 6:00 AM" on City Page 2935 Streets UNAPPROVED MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1986 6:00 PM, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING BOARDROOM COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock, and Paul Redpath DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chair Don Opheim, Ann Youngdahl Boline, Dr. Jean Harris, Marvin A. LaGrow, Peter Stalland, and Walter Thompson CITY COUNCIL/DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, and Recording Secretary Jan Nelson I. ROLL CALL Commission members Harris, LaGrow, Stalland and Thompson were e� absent. �1 II. REPORT OF DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION TO THE CITY COUNCIL Commission Chair Don Opheim reviewed the role of the Develop- ment Commission, noting that this role has changed depending on the needs of the community. He said the consensus of the Commission members was that the Commission does have something to contribute. He said that they have often been project orien- ted and as such have been involved in such things as the Star City designation and lobbying efforts on a variety of issues. He said he thought they serve as an informal communication media for City Staff and the business community. Youngdahl-Boline said all the members agreed that a prime func- tion of the Commission would be to serve on special projects assigned by the City Council or the Planning Commission on a need basis. She said the members thought they also could help to serve the business community, particularly if they became better known to the business community. She said she under- stood the Development Commission was to confer with and advise the Council on all matters concerning the development of the City. She felt that such a general charge puts things in focus a little better. 11 Joint Meeting Minutes -2- October 21, 1986 Peterson asked Opheim and Youngdahl-Boline to elaborate on their concept of serving as a liaison between the City and the business community. Opheim responded that when they provided a forum last year to help with the retrofitting of buildings for the new fire code he became aware of the misunderstandings of the public employees regarding the impact of the changes on private business. He said another problem is the effect on local business of the relatively higher taxes in Eden Prairie. Bentley noted that his experience on the Chamber of Commerce indicated that it was almost impossible to get an equitable assessment level from one community to another unless it is strictly monitored by the County. He noted that he believed the Development Commission does provide a very important role in the community. He provided a list of suggestions for pos- sible roles and projects for the Commission. (Attachment A) Peterson said he would like to have more time to look over the list in written form before focusing on one or two of them as projects for the Commission. Redpath said he thought that we are probably wasting the time of the Commission members when they have not been given a charge. He said he thought the needs of the business community regarding transit might be a good problem for the Commission to tackle. Opheim said he thought all of the suggestions were good but he was also aware that the Commission members might not have extra time to get involved in large projects, consequently the burden might fall on Staff. He said he thought one of the big benefits is the input Commission members can give as a result of their daily work and that selection of Commission members should be made with a view to their background and possible contribution to the Committee projects. He said they have had a problem with attendance at meetings and he was concerned about a pro- cedure to deal with that. Redpath said that he understood from the past that if there is something for the members to do, the attendance picks up. Peter- son noted that, while the members may be fine people, they may not be qualified in the direction the Council assigns to the Commission. Peterson noted that some of the projects mentioned would re- quire expertise in certain disciplines not necessarily repre- sented on the Commission. He said he would want to discuss each of the suggestions in more detail before giving them to the Commission. As to members who don't attend, he said they �y�l a Joint Meeting Minutes -3- October 21, 1986 should call that to the Council's attention and those persons should be invited to withdraw. He said he thought the Commis- sion could play a key role in encouraging people who have the necessary expertise and interest in serving on the Commission. Opheim noted that there isn't a lack of volunteers to serve on the Commission but rather it is a matter of selecting the appropriate persons for the Commission. Peterson said, while he wasn't sure it could be changed, he believed the tax situation was a real concern of businesses and homeowners. He said he would like to suggest the Commission put together a task force that would probably include several other persons who are tax experts and determine what the situa- tion is. Redpath cautioned that this task force would have to be very unbiased as it would get a lot of flak. Pidcock said she thought we should give a specific charge to the Commission as it would give them focus. She said the A.M.M. study on housing might also be a future project. She said she thought studies on the tax revenue sharing or the tax situation would be great. Anderson said he thought, if we are taking the time to discuss the life of the Commission and only two of the members are here, there is an attendance problem and perhaps it would be best to disband the Commission and start over. Redpath said he wasn't sure how far the Council wants the Com- mission to delve into matters that are running parallel with those of other Commissions. He noted that Planning and Zoning donate countless hours to study and public hearings so he hoped we would not end up with the Development Commission studying what should be done while the Planning Commission and Staff is going off in the other direction. He said he thought the Com- mission should be concerned with what helps development and be involved in getting feedback from the business community. Bentley said the purpose of his list of suggestions was to demonstrate that there are many projects the Commission could get involved in if we were to assign them the task of getting involved in one or more of the projects. He said the Transit Commission will need input from several groups. j Peterson said he thought the Development Commission might look at the overall issue of transit to see what kind of develop- ment impact might occur or how public transportation will bene- fit a certain type of development. Anderson said he was concerned whether the present Commission functions well enough to carry out the studies suggested. He Joint Meeting Minutes -4.- October 21, 1986 also noted that you can't very well discuss the Commission without all or a majority of the members present. Opheim said he thought disbanding and reorganizing the Com- mission might work. He said his main response to the discus- sion was to question whether there is another Commission that works in other than a reactive manner. He said he thought they could function as information providers for the Council on points of interest because they don't have to react or vote on anything. He said they are most closely aligned to the Chamber of Commerce but have the strength of being an official City function and, as such, represent Staff and Council members. Anderson said he thought we should design a task for them so that there is a need for the Commission, otherwise they are just treading water. Peterson suggested that the Commission go away from this meeting with an affirmation from the Council that we believe they should exist and with two or three items they could explore over the next few months. They would then return to the Council and re- port on the feasibility of one or two items that they might study and research over the next nine months or so. He said that way they can decide what is important and what would work with their expertise. He said he would prefer that approach rather than just assigning them a task. Anderson said he would like to review the list of suggestions and then give the Commission a list of possible projects. He said by doing that we would give them a reason to exist. Pidcock said she thought they have a lot of expertise and talent available to do the things the Council doesn't have time to do. Youngdahl-Boline said as a Commission member she would like to have the Council assign several projects, have the Commission discuss them and return to the Council with three or four, and then have the Council decide which of the projects the Commis- sion should work on. Opheim noted that it was important to have people on the Com- mission that the Council would want to take advice from because the Commission has the function of advising or help:.ng the j Council. 1 Bentley noted that one aspect of doing some of the projects suggested is the potential involvement or use of outside con- sultants and he thought the Council would probably review and I entertain that possibility for a special task. Joint Meeting Minutes -5- October 21, 1986 Bentley asked Jullie about the rules relative to attendance on Commissions and asking members to step down. Jullie said he wasn't sure but he would check the Code. Peterson said he didn't believe there was anything in the Code but that we do review the attendance. He also noted that the Human Rights & Services Commission has by-laws and is building in a formula for attendance and that this might be advisable for all Com- missions. Anderson asked Jullie if he perceived a need for the Commis- sion. Jullie responded that they provide perspective on cer- tain issues but that they haven't expressed a desire or willing- ness to spend the time in studying and researching issues. He said unless they have a specific charge and they are willing to spend the time on it he would question whether the Commission should continue. Opheim said he thought the Star City status was probably still not right for Eden Prairie but he thought it was important that the Commission have some specific tasks --that they were looking for a mission. Pidcock said she thought the concept of the Commission provid- ing an outside view is very valid. She said she thought they provide a good sounding board but they do need a specific charge. Redpath said he thought Eden Prairie is ripe for All -American City and perhaps the Commission could look into that issue. Opheim said he thought that was a good idea. He said everybody on the Commission should be asked if they would be willing to put more time in and that should become a requirement for mem- bership on the Commission. Anderson said this might be a reason to reorganize the Commis- sion and acquire people who are willing to put time and effort into the activities of the Commission. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, (1) to charge the Development Commission with reevaluating participation in the Star City program and beginning preliminary investigation into the All -American City program; (2) at the 2nd meeting in Novem- ber the City Council will review the long-term makeup and re- quirements for Development Commission membership and the overall charge to the Commission with Council members providing sugges- tions to be included with the packet information for that meeting; and (3) the Council will meet with the Development Commission at the 2nd meeting in December to review items one and two. Motion carried unanimously. Possible roles/projects for Development Commission 1. Evaluation of city's housing needs (i.e. rental vs. single family, need for subsidized housing, etc.) 2. Impact of Tax Reform Act on: a. Housing construction (both single family and multiple) b. Impact on rents c. Impact on city's bonding authority 1. MIDB's 2. G.O.'s 3. Arbitrage impacts 3• Reevaluate city becoming a Star City a. What needs to be done b. Should we or shouldn't we? (new tax law impacts) c. Why are other metro communities continuing to pursue and receive this designation? .(Eagan, Woodbury);' 4. Become the catalyst for a reevaluation on the Major Center Area PUD -- this should be redone in much greater detail, reflecting existing development and needs. 5. Prioritize development goals and develop scenarios to achieve those goals 6. Review M.C.A. T.I.F. district -- Has it been a success? What more should be done? r 7. Develop legislative strategies to change Fiscal Disparities. I Develop report on F.D. impacts on Eden Prairie. 8. Possible independent status for Development Commission (i.e., no longer a "city" commission. r UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1986 700 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, Planning Director Chris Enger, Director of Community Services Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary Jan Nelson PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: All members were present. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS The following items were added to the Agenda: X. A. 2. Pidcock - Acknowled a Welcome Home letter; X. A. 3. P dcock - Tra is Stu ; X. A. Pidcock —Status of Disclosure Reso- lution; X. A. 5. Pidcock - Status of Liquor License for Mexican Village MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the Agenda and Other Items of Business as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously. II. MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 16 1986 MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve the Minutes of the regular City Council meeting held Tuesday, Sep- tember 16, 1986, as published. Motion carried unanimously. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. Special assessment agreement, Research Road (Agreement with c oo is ric and Douglas corporation provicting for im- provemen s C. Social assessment agreementBlossom Road(Agreementwith Prairie Lutheran Church providing —for utility and street im rovements �17S5 City Council Minutes -2- October 21, 1986 D. Final lat approval for B int Two south of Anderson Lakes Parkw and west of Center Wa Resolution No. 6- 264 E. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 0-86 amending City Code Section,2.05 relating to the salaries of Mayor and Council Members F. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. -86 amending City Code Section 9. 0 relating to Discharge o Weapons G. DOUGLAS CORPORATION HEAD4 DARTERS. Approval of Developer's Agreement for Planned Unit Development Concept for approxi- mately 68 acres for construction of 320,000 square feet of office/warehouse. Location: West of Highway #169, south of Anderson Lakes Parkway. H. J & L SUBDIVISION, by Frank R. Cardarelle. 2nd Reading of Ordinance #47-86, Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13.5; and Adoption of Resolution #86-267, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance #47-860 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 3.0 acres into seven single family lots. Location: Southeast quadrant of Blossom Road and Bennett Place. (Ordinance #47-86, Rezonings Resolution #86-267, Authorizing Summary and Publication) I. REUTER dRDF PLANT, by Reuter, Inc. 2nd Reading of Ordi- nance #52-86, Zoning District Change from Public to I-2 Park; and Adoption of Resolution #86-268, Authorizing Sum- mary of Ordinance #52-86, and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. Rezoning of 1.3 acres and Preliminary Plat of 10.63 acres into one lot. Location: Southeast corner of County Road #67 and Indian Chief Road. (Ordinance #52-86, Rezoningt Resolution #86-268, Authorizing Summary and Pub- lication) J. PARKWAY OFFICE -SERVICE CENTER, by Contract Lodging Corpora- tion. Amendment to Developer's Agreement for Parkway Office Service Center, Location: Northeast corner of Anderson Lakes Parkway and Highway #169. K. WILSON LEARNING CENTER, by Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota, Inc. 2nd Reading of Ordinance #48-86-PUD-8-86, amending Ordinance #24-84-PUD-3-84 within the Office Dis- trict; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Wilson Learning Center by Ryan Constructions and Adoption of Resolution #86- 270, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance #48-86-PUD-8-86, and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. Location: East of { Highway #169, west of Valley View Road, south and west of t Flying Cloud Drive. (Ordinance #48-86-PUD-8-86, PUD Re - zonings Resolution #86-270, Authorizing Summary and Publi- cation) �7 �o City Council Minutes -9- October 21, 1986 Regarding Item H, J & L Subdivision, Peterson asked if the tree inventory was complete. Enger said he checked with the planner and all construction was outside the treed area. Peterson asked if that means there was none required. Enger said he would have to check on it. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve Items A - G= Items I - Ko and ?tem H, pending submission of a tree inventory if deemed necessary by the Staff. Motion carried with Bentley abstaining on Item K, Wilson Learning. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. FEASIBILITY STUDY BAKER ROAD SANITARY SEWER north of St. Andrew Drive I.C. -0 (Resolution No. -20 Continue from August 9, City Manager Jullie noted that this item is continued from the August 19th meeting. He said there were questions on the part of residents as to what the alignment should be and the alternatives for land use. He said Staff under- stands that the residents have hired a consultant to help with their planning efforts and that they plan to submit a request for a zoning change. He said, after approval of some sort of a zoning plan, another petition for utilities would probably be forthcoming. He said Staff is recommend- ing the Council close the Public Hearing and reschedule the Hearing subsequent to the resolution of some of the ques- tions. Redpath asked where the service would be. Jullie said there is a real question as to where the service would be. Anderson said he had talked to some of the people and he understood they had not yet resolved the alignment or how the property is to be served. - Anderson asked what the guidelines are as to where notices of such utility hearings are sent. Jullie said notices are sent to those on the preliminary assessment rolls and it is published in the newspaper. Anderson said he thought it should be a larger area if it is an extension of a road as well as utilities. Jullie said he would make a point of expanding the notice area on this. John Mallo, 14000 Forest Hill Road, said he had heard via the grapevine that the sewer, and possibly the road, was going to be extended and he thought his area should have been included in the notice. He said he had two other - City Council Minutes -4- October 21, 1986 options for the property --one was to leave it as a dead- end road and the other was to develop a playground area since this is a high -density residential area without a playground area. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public Hearing and refer the item back to Staff for re- scheduling as deemed appropriate. Motion carried unani- mously. B. FEASIBILITY STUDY CRESTWOOD TERRACE STREET IMPROVEMENTS Resolution No. - 0 Continued from August 19, 1986 City Manager Sullie noted that this item was continued from the August 19th meeting. Referring to the memorandum of October 15th from Director of Public Works Dietz, Sullie said Staff is recommending that the Council order the re- duced form of improvements which would be the paving of the gravel portion on the west end. He said the costs would be levied throughout the petitioned area, as documented in the Feasibility Study, with construction scheduled for next summer. Sim Vohs, 9576 Crestwood Terrace, said he was in favor of this but there had been a breakdown in the communications procedure as many people did not receive notification of the meeting tonight. Sullie noted this is a continued Public Hearing so the original notices suffice for the legal process and, further, that most residents did get a copy of the petition form that they were asked to sign and return. Vohs asked if there would be an assessment hearing. Sullie said after the work is completed there would be an assess- ment hearing next fall. Vohs then noted that most of the people were in agreement with the revised proposal. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 86-210 for Paving Improvements of Crestwood Terrace, I.C. 52-079. Motion carried unanimously. Pidcock expressed concern about the confusion that seems to exist when Public Hearings are continued and asked if there is any way we can clarify the process. Peterson said perhaps it should be emphasized at the time it is continued to a date certain. I City Council Minutes -5- October 21, 1986 Bentley said he thought it would be a good idea for Staff to monitor the situation and if the emphasis on the con- tinued date doesn't seem to be adequate, then perhaps we should look into notice on continued hearings. Anderson said he thought if the residents say there is a lack of communications, then there is. He said he would like to have Staff check into a better way of informing people. Redpath said there is a time lag for residents getting on the tax rolls so that a year could pass before they were on the list for notification. Peterson expressed concern about the reduced graphics on some of the notices making it difficult to read or deter- mine the precise location of the proposed project. He said he thought we should look into a more effective way of do- ing the graphics. Bob Kanduth, 9601 Crestwood Terrace, said his notice was sent to his old address in Crystal. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 30337 - 30642 Redpath asked about Item 30615 to Supplee Enterprises Inc. for light bulbs. City Attorney Pauly said the lease most likely says that the tenant pays for light bulbs. Pidcock asked about Items 30524 and 30529 to Carl Jullie and Robert Lambert for September 86 expenses. City Manager Jullie said those items included conference expenses for both of them. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Payment of Claims Nos. 30337 - 30642. Roll call vote: Ander- son, Bentley, Pidcock and Peterson voted "aye" with Redpath abstaining on Item 30636 (Wilson Tanner Graphics). Motion carried. VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS There were none. VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. RESEARCH FARM �RD ADDITION, by School District #272• Re- quest for Preliminary Plat of 116 acres into one lot and three outlots. Locations West of Highway #169, south of Anderson Lakes Parkway, east of Purgatory Creek. Resolu- tion #86-269, Preliminary Plat) City Council Minutes -6- October 21, 1986 City Manager Jullie said notification of this item had been published and referred to the Staff Report of Sep- tember 19th that described the request for Preliminary Plat. He said the Planning Commission recommended approval at its September 22nd meeting, subject to the recommenda- tions of Staff. Peterson asked what is the sum total acreage the school will need. Jullie said it was 28 or 29 acres. Arlyn Grussing, representing Douglas Corp., noted that part of the School District's acreage is on the west side of the creek. Pidcock asked about the 25% park dedication or scenic ease- ment. Grussing responded that they have questions regarding liabilities that need to be answered before they dedicate the land as a scenic easement. Planning Director Enger said the Staff Report refers to the requirement of a scenic easement on part of the School District property east of Purgatory Creek. He said the school representatives did not want to do that at this time. He noted, however, that a request was received from Mr. Mitchell to relocate some of the outbuildings on the Northrup King property. He said there was some confusion as to where the outbuildings would be located and that there might be a problem if they were relocated onto the scenic easement. Anderson said he had talked with Mr. Lambert earlier about his concerns regarding the location of the school site and access from the neighborhoods to the school. He said he would really like to get all the information before we ap- prove anything. Anderson asked Mr. Gamm about the precise location of the school and what the School District is going to give the City as far as scenic easement is concerned. Mr. Gamm said it will be located adjacent to Anderson Lakes Parkway. Merle Gamm, representing the School District, said the district has about 28 acres of land, seven of which are located on the western side of the creek. He said at l some time that is a ' ppropriate, the School District intends to provide ownership to the City for the property on the west side of the creek but it did not seem appropriate to do so at this time. He said the question of outbuilding storage was a preliminary discussion only and was meant to determine whether such a storage area was a possibility. He said it would be down in the southern portion next to I . :...: ....; ............ r.r.r.r...r..:,.r.w..Y4r11;...uu.w.... .: ..v.r..,.,.�� ..r..W....��....,. City Council Minutes -7- October 21, 1986 a the creek. He also said they were interested in what they could do to enhance the existing structure so that it would look acceptable. Jullie suggested that the records show that Mr. Gamm repre- sented that the School District had no intention at this point to pursue any sort of encroachment into the proposed scenic easement area and if there is any such intent it would come back through a permit process as required by Code. Peterson asked about dedication on the east side of the creek. Lamm replied that they were not discussing that but that they were aware of the restriction as to no struc- ture being within 150 feet of the creek. Keith Orner, 8880 Knollwood Dr., asked if there were draw- ings of the site development available. Peterson said they were not that far yet. Orner said he had not been informed of any action regarding the Douglas Corp. Peter- son said there hadn't been any. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No. 86-269, approving the Preliminary Plat of Research Farm 3rd Addition for School District #272, with the understanding that at this point there is no intent by the School District to pursue any sort of encroachment into the proposed scenic easement area and, if there is any such intent, it would come back through the permit process as required by City Code. Redpath said he thought the discussion regarding the east side was with the Douglas Corp. Anderson said he thought the School District should be aware of the long-range plans for the creek corridor. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously, ; 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 City Council Minutes -8- October 21, 1986 1. City Manager Salary Review Peterson noted that he was pleased and impressed at the list of opportunities to which the City Manager availed himself this year. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to in- crease the City Manager's salary by $5,000, effective October 1. Motion carried unanimously. Bentley noted Mr. Jullie has proposed that a base rate adjustment of $2500 would go into effect as of January 1st every year and that a merit increase of up to $2500 would be based upon results of his annual performance review. He said in his mind this poses a new concept in salary adjustments. He said he would prefer to have more time to think about that concept so he would rather not deal with it tonight. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock,_to con- tinue consideration of Mr. Jullie's suggestion regarding an annual base rate adjustment and merit increase to the second meeting in November and to request Mr. Jullie to report at that meeting on his progress resulting. from the conferences he attended and his goals regard- ing conferences and on -going training for the coming year. Redpath noted that he would prefer to consider this at a special meeting in order to give sufficient time for Mr. Jullie's report. The consensus was to seta special meeting to consider Mr. Jullie's suggestion. Jullie noted that Superintendent McCoy wants to meet with us on November 20th at 6s00 PM and that the two meetings might be combined. The consensus was that November 20th was not a good date for the meeting. AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to set a Special Meeting for Tuesday, Novem- ber 25, 1986, at a time to be determined by Mr. Jullie, for the purpose of considering Mr. Jullie's suggestion and to invite the School Board to join the Council at that meeting. VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT: Amendment to the motion carried unanimously. VOTE ON THE MOTION AS AMENDED: Amended motion carried unanimously. a��a 11 2. Pidcock - Acknowledge Welcome -Home letter Pidcock acknowledged the Staff Report on Welcome Home. She noted that it looks like Welcome Home is complying with all the City codes and regulations and there appears to be no need for the Council to be concerned about the activities there. Bentley said he thought it will require on -going moni- toring on the part of the City to be sure that com- pliance is adhered to. 3. Pidcock - Traffic Study Pidcock asked to what date this had been continued. Jullie said it would probably be the second meeting in November as there are a lot of people who have expressed concern and they will have to be notified. 4. Pidcock - Status of Disclosure Resolution Pidcock asked City Attorney Pauly what the status of the resolution was. Pauly said he was still looking at it and will probably have something on it in late November or early December. 5. Pidcock - Status of Liquor License for Mexican Village Pidcock asked for information on the liquor license at Mexican Village. Jullie said it was on the Clerk's License List at a prior Council meeting and was approved. He noted that, since the law was amended, we no longer have Public Hearings for liquor licenses. He said Staff researches the applicants and it is then placed on the Clerk's License List on the Council Agenda.__ l Bentley said he wanted to propose a change in the pro- cedure for new applications only so that new applica- tions are made a separate Agenda item. He said he didn't think a Public Hearing was necessary but he did want the opportunity to take a closer look at the ap- plications. Redpath noted that it was very helpful in the past when we saw the Public Safety report and the credit checks. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, that all future new liquor license applications be made a sepa- rate Agenda item and that appropriate information be included with the Agenda materials. Motion carried unanimously. B. Resort of Citv Manager City Manager Jullie expressed his thanks for the salary increase, C. Report of City Attorney Regarding disclosure, City Attorney Pauly said that, if the State statutes are changed to base disclosure on the amount of a candidate's expenditures rather than population figures, it would automatically apply to all communities for the next election. He said he would recommend that the Council not act on anything until we see if the legislature makes such a change. Peterson asked when such a change would occur. Pauly said it would be next spring. Pauly also noted Mr. Lipke has just filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals. D. Report of Director of Community Services t There was no report. E. Report of Director of Public Works 1. Award Contract for Bluffs West 5th Addition and Vicinit Draina a Improvements -0 Reso ution No, - Design Engineer Rodney Rue reviewed the bids received for these improvements. He said that Staff is recom- mending the bid be awarded to J. P. Norex, Inc. MOTION. Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adopt Resolution No. 86-265, accepting the bid of $204,592.85 from J. P. Norex, Inc., as the lowest responsible bid- der for I.C. 52-069, Bluffs West Storm Sewer Improve- ments. Anderson asked what happens if we refuse a low bid for any reason. Rue said we would have to show justifica- tion for refusing it by proving that they were incapable of doing the work. Pidcock asked what happens if we run into something like Anderson Lakes Parkway. Rue said that would have to be addressed at the assessment hearing. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously. 1, City Council Minutes -11- October 21, 1986 2. Award Contract for Riverview Road and Riverview Drive' Utility and Street Improvements, I.C. 0(Resolu- tion No .-do-400) I` Design Engineer Rue reviewed the bids received for these improvements. He said that Staff is recommending the bid be awarded to J. P. Norex, Inc., and noted that , the bid of $309,572.68 is 17% below the engineer's es- timate. Peterson asked how they manage to do the work -for that amount. Rue said another contractor had commented that they must really want the job. Redpath suggested that change orders be watched very carefully. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded.by Redpath, :to adopt Resolution No. 86-266, accepting -the bid of $309,572.68 from J. P. Norex, Inc., as the lowest` responsible bidder for -I`.C. 52-101-, Riverview.Road and Riverview Drive. Motion carried unanimously. XI. NEW BUSINESS Pidcock asked if revenue from the liquor stores goes.into.the recreation fund rather than the general fund. Jullie noted that,.while the money goes into the general fund, when the - liquor stores opened it was. decided that the profits should be used for Public Safety and Park and Recreation programs. XII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn the meeting at 8:55 PM. ;l a��s UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1986 8100 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, Planning Director Chris Enger, Director of Community Services Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary Jan Nelson PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Councilmember Bentley was absent. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS The following items were added to the Agenda: Item LX. A. Vacancy on Human Rights & Services Commission; Item X. 71. Pidcock - Offer o Bu ding_EorPROFt Item X. B. -Cable TV Lineup ChaMest Item X. B.2. Report from Bon Te erendum I.IVi Lti,,u +Faa"uJ J MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Agenda and Other Items of Business as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously. II. MINUTES A. Special City Council Meeting held Thursday, September 1.8 The following changes were made to the Minutes: page 1, ROLL CALL -- change "Councilmember Pidcock was absent." to "Councilmember Pidcock was absent because of a Trans- portation Commission meeting."t page 2, paragraph 2, sen- tence 2 -- change "two" to "two geese" and "one" to "one goose". MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting held Thurs- day, September 18, 1986, as amended and published. Motion carried with Pidcock abstaining. 2�G6 City Council Minutes -2- November 4, 1986 f B. Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, September_23, 19d_ MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting held Tues- day, September 23, 1986, as published. Motion carried unanimously. C. Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, October 7, 1986 MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the Minutes of the regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, October 7, 1986, as published. Motion carried unanimously. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. Set Joint City Council S^_hool Board Meeting for Tuesday, E: 0 , Novem er 25, 9 , at the Schoo Administration BoaBoa—Froom C. PRAIRIE LUTHERAN CHURCH by Adkins Association. 2nd Reading of Ord inane e No. - , Zoning District Change from R1-22 to Public on 10.97 acres; Approval of Developer's Agree- ment for Prairie Lutheran Church; and Adoption of Resolution No. 86-253, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 46-96 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 10.97 acres into one lot for construction of a church. Location: South of Pioneer Trail, north of Blossom Road, and east of Bennett Place (Ordinance No. 46-86 - Rezoning; Resolution No. 86-253 - Authorizing Summary and Publication) D. WESTON BAY by the Pemtom Company. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No $ � Zoning District Change from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Weston Bay; and Adop- tion of Resolution No. 86-274, Authorizing Summary of Ordi- nance No. 51-86, and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 13.5 acres into 24 single family lots and one outlot. Loca- tion: South and east of Mitchell Lake, west of Timber Lakes Drive (Ordinance No. 51-86 - Rezoning; Resolution No. 86- 274 - Authorizing Summary and Publication) E. MWCC Permit Agplication for Riverview Drive Sanitary Sewer, Resolution No. -27 F. Easement a Bement for tem orary construction of Dell Road at Townline Road(througha corner or proposed Tom um parxing io r City Council Minutes -3- November 4, 1986 G. Final Plat approval of Weston Bay south end of Timber Lakes Drive, west side) Resolution No. -27 H. Final Plata royal of American Lutheran Church Addition north o CSAH and west o Bennett Place Resolution No. -Eb" I. Final Plat approval of Wilson Ridge Learning Center north- east oi' Prairie Ce-` rater Drive and Valley View RoaqJ Resolu- tion No. 76 - 2 7 Concerning Item D, Weston Bay, Pidcock said she would like anyone who purchased the lot that is within the Shoreline Management limits to be notified that it is within those limits. Enger said that would be difficult as there is no way of knowing who buys the lot. He said they would try to work out some accommodation, possibly as part of the Developer's Agreement. Peterson noted that changes should be made to Item Hi "north" should be "south" and "west" should be "east". MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve ,( Items A-C; Item D with the stipulation regarding notifica- tion to the purchaser of the lot within the Shoreline Manage- ment limitst Items E-G; Item H with the changed description, r "south of CSAH 1 and east of Bennett Place"; and Item I. Motion carried unanimously. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. SHADY OAK RIDGE 2ND ADDITION by Joseph Ruzic. Request for Zoning District Change From Rural to R1-13.5 on 5.4 acres and Preliminary Plat of 7.6 acres into 11 single family lots and one outlot with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals & Adjustments. Location: West of Old Shady Oak Road, north of Rowland Road (Ordinance No. 54-86 - Rezoning; Resolution No. 86-271 - Preliminary 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. Planning Director Enger said this item was first reviewed by the Planning Commission at the September 22nd meeting. He said it was continued to the October 26th meeting, at which time they recommended approval of the Zoning District Change and Preliminary Plat on a 5-0 vote, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Reports of September 19th and October 3rd. a��g City Council Minutes -4- November 4, 1986 Enger said the recommendations of the September 19th Staff Report included the construction of a five-foot wide con- crete sidewalk on one side of Shady Oak Ridge Road, modifi- cation of the grading plan to reflect a more gradual grading transition of the property to the north and west, submis- sion of a revised utility plan reflecting a catch basin system within Shady Oak Ridge Road to capture storm water run-off, and submission of a landscape plan reflecting the proposed tree replacement. He said the recommendations in the October 3rd Staff Report were concerned with tree re- placement and that proponent has now submitted a plan that meets the requirements for tree replacement. Director of Community Services Lambert said the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission reviewed this item at its October 20th meeting and recommended approval, subject to the recommendations of the Planning Commission and Staff. Peterson asked about the impact of the sewer connection on the area yet to be developed called The Garden. Director of Public Works Dietz replied that there is some delay occurring in that development, which is now called Luknic 5th Addition, because of a lack of sanitary sewer through the Ruzic property. Redpath asked how much land was left in the outlot. Krueger said there was a little over two acres. Redpath then expressed concern about the extra equipment laying around the property. Krueger said Mr. Ruzic had been working with Steve Durham of the City staff and that this issue had been resolved. Pidcock said this was one of her concerns also, having just been through a lawsuit on a similar type of problem. She said she would like to have more definite assurances that these things had been taken care of. She said she thought the 2.2 acres for the homestead was very close to the other parts of the development and that there should be some firm plans in place before approval is given. Enger responded that the 2.2 acre remnant would require action by the Board of Appeals to make it a legal sized lot because, according to City ordinances, a variance must be granted for anything less than ten acres. He said outside storage of any equipment over 3/4 ton is not allowed within the district. He said he had not visited the site today to check what equipment was left. a�� City Council Minutes -5- November 4, 1986 Enger said that if the Board of Appeals decision is nega- tive, Staff would return at the time of 2nd Reading with the statement that it is an illegal lot. He said that if the Board of Appeals approves the variance, one of the things they may consider is further restrictions on the use of the lot as to outside storage. Peterson noted that we might be satisfied then that this would be resolved by the Board of Appeals. Redpath said he thought we should have some restrictions on that outlot and that the Council should do nothing until that corner is cleaned up. Pidcock said she concurred with Mr. Redpath as it could save the City money to have it cleared up be- fore, rather than risk a lawsuit later. Anderson said he could go either way as long as it was cleared up before the 2nd Reading and final approval is given. Pidcock said she thought it would be more prudent to wait until it is resolved as things might have -a way of slipping through the cracks. Anderson asked Enger if he thought it could be cleared up with no loose ends before 2nd Reading. Enger said he thought the opportunity was there to clear up the matter. City Attorney Pauly noted that the planning statute says that a Preliminary Plat can be approved subject to the ful- fillment of certain conditions, and if those conditions are not fulfilled, then there is no requirement that the Final Plat be approved. Joe Ruzic, proponent, said that he had conformed with an order to remove equipment within ten days. He said the cat and some tractors are there but that equipment is involved in the construction on the hill. He said he didn't know what the concerns were since the lot had been cleaned up. John Severson, 11893 Dunhill Road, said he thought if Mr. Ruzic wants the project to be developed, then he should dress up the property to conform with residential. John Luknic, developer of Luknic 5th Addition, said he wanted to cooperate with Mr. Ruzic on this development and that the two of them had reached an agreement on how to get the sewer through Ruzic's property to his own prop- erty. He said his concern is that he can proceed with his own development. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public Hearing and to approve 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 54-86, Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 5.4 acres. Motion carried unanimously. z1U �. City Council Minutes -6- November 4, 1986 Pauly suggested that the Preliminary Plat be approved on condition that the Board of Appeals grant a variance with respect to the size of the remnant lot and with appropriate conditions relating to cleanup of equipment storage. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt Reso- lution No. 86-271, approving the Preliminary Plat of Shady Oak Ridge 2nd Addition for Joseph Ruzic, with variance on the size of the remnant lot subject to review by the Board of Appeals and with the condition that equipment storage on the remnant lot be cleaned up and maintained to conform to the City ordinances regarding outside storage of equip- ment. Pidcock asked Pauly if there can be a home business on a rural lot. Pauly said there could be one,with constraints as to what can be done. Pidcock said she was concerned about what :happens after this is approved should the equipment be brought back in. Pauly said he understood home occupation does not permit outside storage. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously. t MOTION, Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to direct Staff p to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations. Motion carried unanimously. B. SUPE� A by SuperAmerica Stations, Inc. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Fire Station to Neigh- borhood Commercial on 1.06 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to Highway Commercial on 0.38 acres and Zoning District Amendment within the Highway Commercial District on 0.68 acres, with Preliminary Plat of 1.06 acres into one lot and one outlot. Location: East of Highway #169, north of County Road No. 1, west of Pioneer Trail (Resolution No. 86-272 - Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment; Ordinance No. 55-86 - Rezoning; Resolution No. 86-273 - Preliminary Plat) City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published and property owners within the project vicinity had been notified. Daniel Tyson, representing proponent, addressed the proposal. Planning Director Enger said the Planning Commission reviewed this item at the October 26th meeting and, on a 5-0 vote, recommended approval of the Comprehensive Guide Plan -Amend- ment from Fire Station to Neighborhood Commercial, Zoning . City Council Minutes -7= November 4, 1986 District Change from Rural to Highway Commercial and Pre- liminary Plat of 1.06 acres into one lot and one outlot, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated October 3, 1986. Enger said the recommendations of the Staff Report of Octo- ber 3rd included modification of the landscape and grading plans to provide maximum berm heights, additional conifer and shade tree plantings and the continutation of the exist- ing eight -foot wide bituminous trail through the site. He said they have not yet received the modified landscape plan but have been assured it is forthcoming. Director of Community Services Lambert said the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission reviewed this proposal on October 20th and recommended approval per recom- mendations of Planning Commission and Staff and subject to the developer constructing the extension of the eight -foot wide bituminous trail. Peterson asked if the illustration of the project suggests that there will be additional greenspace between the project and the adjacent Associated Well building. Tyson said there will be greenspace in conformance with the landscape plan and that the existing asphalt will be replaced. Peterson noted that corner has become very popular as a place to display used cars. Tyson said they have contacted Associated Well Drillers and they are concerned about this problem too. He said the people at Associated Well ask the car owners to move the cars when they see them. Peterson asked if SuperAmerica has a policy that would prohibit such parking. Tyson said they have such a policy. Anderson said he was concerned about the landscaping and said he thought there should be more greenery and shrubs. Enger said that Staff has not yet received a plan that con- forms to the recommendations of the Planning Commission. He said the revised plan should be done to the same standards as the station on Hwys. 4 and 5. Anderson said he would like to see more plantings than are on the board now. Tyson said they are working on the revised plan but were delayed because of a miscommunication on the location and types of plantings required. Anderson said if he votes to approve the plan he would like to see it first. Tyson said it could be submitted before the 2nd Reading. Pidcock asked about the berm. Enger said it is part of the landscape plan. Pidcock said she would like to see this �7 2 i' C City Council Minutes -8- November 4, 1986 item continued. Peterson said he thought proponent had demonstrated a respect for our conditions and that he would prefer to move along with the Public Hearing with the lever- age of 2nd Reading approval. Tyson noted that they have been working diligently with the Planning Staff since July, but it is a very small space to work with. He said it is their intention to dress up the site as much as possible. Pidcock said she did not like to see the Council approve this when we don't have any definitive plans, particularly since it is such a visible corner. Enger noted that the standard procedure for a landscaping plan is that it be submitted before a building permit is issued and that a bond be posted for 1-1/2 times the value of the landscaping. He said the City has been asking for the landscape plans earlier in the review process, but it is not uncommon that the final plans are not available at this point. Eugene Petersen, 7443 Hames Way, said he is in favor of the station but would like to clarify what the reference was to a fire station. Mayor Peterson replied that this prop- erty was originally guided as a possible site for fire station, but that last year's referendum approved a fire station at Homeward Hills and Sunnybrook Road as a better location for a station in this area. Eugene Petersen then asked about the location of the sewer and water in the layout for the station. Tyson said the plan would require the development of the sewer and water from the existing Suburban Wood Products site through the street or through private easement to the site with eventual continuation of the water across the highway. He said proponent would pay the cost for the improvements. Mayor Peterson asked if Mr. Petersen was implying that there would be an early request for an extension of the water across the highway, because it would pay to stub out the services at this point if that were true. Petersen said his past request had been denied due to lack of interest from other landowners. Director of Public Works Dietz said that a Feasibility Study to extend the sewer and water had been proposed but it failed. Dietz said it would be possible to put some stubs on at City cost and recover the costs later. Peterson asked if that wouldn't be to the advantage of all parties. Dietz said that depends on where it would end up a��3 City Council Minutes -9- November 4, 1986 goings the water is already in and it would depend on where the sanitary sewer goes. Anderson asked if the station would be open 24 hours a day. Tyson said it would. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 86-272, amending the Comprehensive Municipal Plan. Motion carried unanimous- ly. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 55-86 for Rezoning. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock to adopt Reso- lution No. 86-273, approving the Preliminary Plat of Super - America for SuperAmerica Stations, Inc., with the stipula- tion that the revised landscape plan be submitted and approved prior to Final Plat. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations. Motion carried unani- mously. C. TECHNOLOGY PARK 7TH by Technology Park Associates. Request Tor Zoning District Amendment within the Office District on 3.74 acres for construction of 27,700 square foot office building. Location: East of future Golden Triangle Drive, north of Nine Mile Creek (Ordinance No. 56-86 - Amending Ordinance No. 36-85 within the Office District) MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Redpath to continue this Public Hearing to November 18, 1986. Motion carried unanimously. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 30643 - 30882 Anderson asked about Item 30807 to L. Lehman & Assoc. City Manager Jullie said they are consultants who are reviewing the E.I.S. and Remedial Action study and advising us on how to best protect the City's concerns in the Flying Cloud landfill issue. Pidcock asked if there had been any development on the liquor store shortage. Jullie said he would try to get a report on whether any further research had been done on it. City Council Minutes -10- November 4, 1986 Anderson asked about Item 30775 to GAB Business Services for a liability claim. Jullie said he would have to get back to him on that. Pidcock asked if there was any further information on the item to Virginia Ledford for legal services that she had questioned in a previous meeting. Jullie said that item was court report- ing services for depositions with regard to the landfill issue. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the Payment of Claims Nos. 30643 - 30882. Roll call vote: Ander- son, Pidcock, Redpath and Peterson voted "aye". Motion carried unanimously. V3. ORDINANCE & RESOLUTIONS There were none. VII. PETITIONS REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. Pro osed NSP Transmission Line alongHighway (Continued rom October 7, ,( City Manager Jullie said NSP is proposing to construct a 'l major transmission line down the Highway 5 corridor. He said they are here to make a 15-minute presentation on the overall proposal with the intent to return at the next meeting with a more definitive proposal. Don Chmiel and Jerry Larson, representing NSP reviewed the proposal and presented slides depicting the proposed route and the structures that would be involved. Larson said the project starts at the Westgate substation on Martin Drive and extends west through Chanhassen to the Bluff Creek sub- station and then south through Chaska to the Scott County substation south of the Minnesota River. He said Eden Prairie/Chanhassen is the fastest growing area in terms of electrical demand in their five -state region, and this project would help fill both the short-term and long-term needs for the area. Larson said that questions are usually raised about putting lines underground and noted that would make the cost eight to ten times greater. Pidcock asked what safety factors would be activated if one of the towers came down. Larson said a large circuit -breaker mechanism would cause the line to go dead immediately. Pidcock asked if there were other alternatives to putting large poles along Highway 5. Larson said they are proposing j`:, City Council Minutes -il- November 4, 1986 single -shaft structures that are better looking than the lattice towers. He distributed photographs of the proposed structures. f . Peterson asked if the public would be noticed about the November 18th meeting. City Manager Jullie said those people who attended the neighborhood meeting would be notified. Planning Director Enger said they had intended to develop a list of those people within a certain dis- tance from the Highway $ corridor. Redpath said he had originally heard some discussion about the Hwy 212 corridor but it appears they have gone further west. Larson said the State will not give any indication of when, or even if, the highway will be developed so they had determined this was the best route. Peterson asked what percentage of the increased capacity for Eden Prairie necessitates this new line that also con- tinues on to serve other areas to the west and south. Larson said 90% of the growth in the Minnetonka region was in Eden Prairie/Chanhassen so that the expansion would be required even without further growth beyond Eden Prairie. t Anderson asked if this project will cover some of the needs of the Shakopee area. Larson said it covers the needs of c the entire southern corridor of the southwest suburbs. He said today Eden Prairie is dependent on the existing line down to Scott County for back-up supply. Pidcock noted that Hwy $ is considered a parkway; therefore the scale should be in accordance with that rather than for a limited access freeway. Don Chmiel said they had notified approximately 547 property owners along the Hwy $ stretch about the neighborhood meeting, and four people attended the meeting. Redpath asked if this project would preclude the necessity of another substation in Eden Prairie. Chmiel said they could not promise that, in case there was another growth spurt in Eden Prairie like the last one. Anderson asked Enger what portion of the Major Center Area is completed. Enger responded that it is less than 20% completed. Anderson then asked if another substation will be needed if we get to 80-90% completion, Chmiel said the distribution substation being built to accommodate the Shady Oak area should alleviate some of the problems in the Major Center Area. City Council Minutes -12- November 4, 1986 Larson said they are planning to make provision on these structures to accommodate expansion in order to allow Bluff Creek to be expanded as a distribution substation. VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS A. Report of City Administrative Offices Committee Marty Jessen, representing the City Administrative Offices Committee, referred to the memo of November 4, 1986, from the Executive Committee that contained recommendations on the composition of the full Committee. He asked that the Council formalize the appointments. Pidcock noted her disappointment that there were only three women included among the nominees. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to appoint those nominated by the Executive Committee to membership on the Residents Committee for City Administrative Offices, as put forth in the memorandum of November 4, 1986. Motion carried unanimously. Jessen said the Executive Committee is also asking that the Council appropriate $6,000 for market research activities in order to determine the attitude of the community towards the City Hall issue. He said they are recommending that a contract be entered into with tk associates in the amount of $5r000, with the remaining $1,000 of the $6,000 appropri- ation available as a contingency fund. In regard to the letter of October 14, 1986, from tk associ- ates, Peterson asked City Attorney Pauly if there would be a problem with giving the firm a list of those who voted on the previous referendum. Pauly said he did not think there was a problem; that it was public information. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to authorize expenditure of up to $5,000 for the purpose of conducting market research activities as requested by the Executive Committee of the City Administrative Offices Committee. Motion carried unanimously. IX. APPOINTMENTS A. Vacancy on Human Rights & Services Commission Peterson referred to the memo from Natalie Swaggert re- garding a vacancy on the Human Rights & Services Commission and suggested that City Manager Jullie consult with Ms Swaggert and Ms Provo to determine if there are any names a�i% is City Council Minutes -19- November 4, 1986 of people who applied last time who would qualify for con- sideration. He further suggested that, if there are no names remaining on the list, Ms Swaggert could then pre- pare an article for the newspapers about the need to fill a vacancy on the Committee at this time. Peterson asked Jullie to thank Ms Swaggert for a very helpful and thorough review of the situation. Anderson asked if the procedure outlined regarding atten- dance at Commission meetings is unique to this Commission. Peterson said this is the only one with such a procedure. The consensus was that other Commissions might consider adopting such a procedure. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Redpath, to ask Ms Swag- gert and Ms Provo to investigate whether any previous appli- cants for the Human Rights & Services Commissionmight meet the categories for membership on the Commission; if there are no such applicants, to ask Ms Swaggert to prepare newspaper article requesting volunteers for the vacancy.; and requesting Staff to report back to the Council at the next meeting as to the progress on filling the vacancy. Motion carried unanimously. X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members 1. Pidcock - Offer of Building for PROP Pidcock said she had received an offer of an Eden Prairie building that is over 100 years old and is available for $1.00. She suggested that it could be moved to the old library site and then used for PROP. Pidcock said it would cost about $15,000 to move it. City Manager Jullie said he would check into the poten- tial for a site and the condition of the building. Director of Community Services Lambert said, while it might be possible to find a spot for it, he didn't be- lieve the intersection of Valley View and Hwy 4 would be the right place. Anderson said he thought this should probably belong either to the Historical Society or to Park & Rec. He asked how long we have to make a decision. Pidcock responded that we probably have a couple of months. Anderson suggested we get recommendations from those two groups before making a decision. City Council Minutes -14- November 4, 1986 B. Report of City Manager 1. Cable TV Lineup Chance City Manager Jullie said that Rogers Cable is planning to switch the channel alignment to be compatible with the Minneapolis lineup. He noted they are doing this in order to put some of their more attractive channels down in the lower band. He said the Southwest Cable Commission has approved this change; however, if any city does have a formal objection, it would stop the process. Jullie said he and Mr. Redpath, as members of the Com- mission, think this is a good change. He said the main objection is coming from the education access people currently on Channel 8. He said that the change will become effective unless the cities object and, further, that the change will have to be in effect for a period of one year before it becomes permanent. Redpath noted that the school channels would all be on the same channel with the proposed change, thereby ( simplifying the channel setup. Liz Anderson, representing Rogers Cable, was available to answer questions. 2. Report from Bond Referendum Committee Director of Community Services Lambert reported that the Park Bond Referendum Committee has been meeting since early September with the architect and planner on the proposed park bond referendum. He said they have set a tentative bond amount of $7.9 million for the addition to the Community Center, first phase of Miller Park, completing bike trails on County roads 4 and 1, and the acquisition and grading of a softball field complex. 9: Lambert said the Committee would meet several more 1 times before meeting with the Parks Commission in Decem- ber and the City Council in January. He said the recom- mendations and report of the Committee will be given to:`, the Council at the same time it is presented to the Parks Commission and they would also invite Council ' members to attend the December Parks Commission meeting. He said that meeting would be promoted as an informa- tional meeting for public input. He said the Commis- sion would probably request a special meeting with the �; l City Council Minutes -SS- November 4, 1986 Council in early January and would also invite the public to attend that meeting. Peterson asked if the Committee has a tentative pro- posal at this point. Lambert said the Committee has arrived at a tentative budget of $7.9 million and the architects are now working on a final design. Redpath asked if it has ever been presented as an either or situation; that is, can one part of the recommenda- tion be postponed more than the others. Lambert said all the items had been discussed, especially after the final cost was determined, but everyone has a very good rationale for their needs and programs. Anderson asked if there was agreement on the type of addition to be built onto the Community Center. Lam- bert replied that there will be a second sheet of ice, gymnasium, adult locker room, and space for drop-off child care. He said the plans for a running track and additional racquetball courts had been dropped. Anderson asked if they had a recommendation on the face of the existing building. Lambert replied that the referendum costs include a brick exterior similar to the high school on the Community Center expansion and that they expect the current litigation to result in a brick face being put on the existing building. Pidcock asked how much of the total amount is for the Community Center. Lambert said the estimate is about $4.8 million for the 70,000 square foot addition. Anderson asked if the Community Center would be avail- able for use by the schools during the day.. Lambert responded that the school staff is encouraging them to build a gymnasium as that would be used by the after- ! school programs. He said the plans include 200 square feet of office and storage for the school staff. Ander- son then noted that this is a joint type of conceptt that is, the school will be able to use it as well as the City. Pidcock asked if the school would participate in the costs. Lambert said they have suggested the school participate in some of the costs such as the high school team locker room expansion. He said he thought they would consider it, and he will be meeting with school staff on another issue so he planned to check on how to proceed with asking the school to consider sharing some of the costs. �`?ZU City Council Minutes -16- Peterson noted that the money comes out of the same taxpayer's pocket. Pidcock said that was true but the school participation would make it appear as more sharing between the two. Peterson noted, however, that it might make it more complicated in terms of controlling maintenance and user fees. Lambert said they were not suggesting cost participation in the gymnasium but rather the locker room expansion. Redpath asked if they had considered enclosed access to the high school. Lambert said they had discussed that, inasmuch as the proposed high school expansion goes in the right direction so that the two facilities will be about 300 feet apart. Peterson noted that he hoped any newspaper articles or reports relating to this proposal emphasize that it is a draft proposal and that public input is not precluded. Andersonsaidhe would like to have the rough drafts or prints approved before they appear in the newspapers. Lambert said the Committee has already looked at six or seven plans and the press may be at the meetings taking shots. Peterson asked that the words "Draft Proposal" be put across the top.of any pictures or proposals. Peterson asked if the date had been set for the meeting with Park & Rec. Lambert said it hadn't been set yet but he thought it would be either the first or second meeting in December. 3. Williams Pipe Line City Manager Jullie noted that the pipe line does go through a substantial portion of the southern part of the City. He said we have asked Williams for quite a bit of information on the line in order to develop an emergency plan. He said plans include having some neighborhood meetings with the pipe line representa- tives involved. Peterson asked who is supervising the work. Jullie responded that Jim Clark is in charge. Anderson asked the age of the pipe line. Jullie said it was installed in the 1950's, and it is a 12" dia- meter pipe. Anderson then asked when it was last tested. Jullie said they couldn't tell him when it was tested. Anderson said he would like that infor- mation. Jullie said he would get more information on it. City Council Minutes -17- November 4, 1986 Peterson asked if he had any idea when the information will be available. Jullie said it depends on when we get a report from the company. He said Williams will be meeting with several other cities and they have been inundated with requests. Pidcock noted that this is an emergency situation. 4. MNDOT band on Highway 5 City Manager Jullie said that improvements are being planned and we have a proposal from the State to pur- chase the right-of-way on either side of Mitchell Road south of Hwy 5 for $78,600, He said he would like authorization for the Mayor and himself to enter into the agreement with the State. Pidcock asked how much property was involved. Jullie said there is about a half acre on the ponding side and another half acre on the side by the fire station. Peterson asked if the figures are comparable .to what they are paying other property owners along the high- J way. Jullie replied that the City Assessor went over t the report and determined that the prices are fair. He said we have the right to go out and get another appraisal on our own. Pidcock said she thought they should verify what they are paying other property owners. A discussion followed regarding the value of the property. Jullie said he would check on the amounts they are paying others. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to author- ize City Manager Jullie and Mayor Peterson to enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the pur- chase of land for road right-of-way. Motion carried unanimously. C. Report of City Attorney Regarding the Dorenkemper litigation, City Attorney Pauly I- said that the Court of Appeals has now confirmed the favor- able decision of the District Court; therefore, the matter should be put to rest. D. Report of Director of Community Services There was no report. i �i(xf ( City Council Minutes -18- November 4, 1986 l E. Report of Director of Public Works XI XII. 1. Award Contract for Catch Basin Cleaning. Machine Resolution No, -279 Director of Public Works Dietz reviewed the bids re- ceived for this project and noted the recommendation of Staff to award the contract to Ruff ridge -Johnson Equipment Co., Inc., with their bid of $920270.40. Pidcock asked what a catch basin cleaner was. Dietz; described the machine and its uses. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by PiIdcock,''to adopt Resolution No:. 86-279, accepting the bid of Ruffridge Johnson Equipment Co., Inc.,, for.I.C.-52-108, Truck. Mounted Vacuum Catch Basin Cleaner. Motion carried;. unanimously.;- NEW BUSINESS MOTIONc Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to set ;a meeting of the Canvassing Board at 5s00 PM on Wednesday, November 5,, 1986, to approve theresultsof the elec-tion. Motion{carried, unanimously. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, ;to adjourn the meeting at 1005 PM. Motion carried unanimously. ,;L WHEREAS, the plat of Lake Park 3rd Addition has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder, and WHEREAS. said plat is in all respects consistent with. the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 'EDEN l PRAIRIE; A. Plat approval request for Lake ;Park 3rd Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated November. 10. 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 November 18, 1486. Gary 0. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST SEAL 0 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 A �' �\J DATE: November 10, 1986 SUBJECT: LAKE PARK 3RD ADDITION PROPOSAL: The developer, the Rottlund Company, has requested City Council approval of the final plat of Lake Park 3rd Addition. The plat is located west of County Road f4.and east of Timber Lake Drive in the North 1/2 of Section 17. The site contains 11.95 acres to be divided into 72 multi -family townhouse lots. This site was formerly Outlot A of Lake Park 2nd Addition. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council July 1, r t 1986, per Resolution 86-158. Second reading of Ordinance 34-86-PUD-586, amending zoning within a RM 6.5 district, was finally read and approved at the August 5, 1986, City Council meeting. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was also executed on this date. VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: All utilities and streets will be installed by the developer and are to be privately owned and maintained with the exception of the 160 water main. This 16" water main is a part of the City's distribution system. The City will participate in the cost of oversizing the pipe and will accept ownership and maintenance responsibilities upon satisfactory installation. The sanitary sewer necessary to serve an the adjacent parcel (located on the easterly side of plat) will also qualify for City ownership. Prior to release of the final plat, plat shall be revised to include right-of-way dedication in the southeast and southwest corners for the Miller Park access road. The alignment of this right-of-way shall be satisfactory to the Director of Public Works. Also, developer shall enter into a special assessment agreement with the City covering the construction `vC / GlD Page 2, Final Plat Lake Park 3rd Addition 11/10/86 costs of the Miller Park access road prior to release of the final plat. An alternative escrow account could be established at the discretion of the developer, which might expedite the release of the final plat. 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 3rd Addition subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement, and the following; 1. Receipt of street light fee of $117'3. 2. Receipt of engineering fee of $2880. 3. Revision to plat showing additional right-of-way for park road. 4. Execution .of special_ assessment agreement covering construction of park access road to `Miller. Park (or escrow account). CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 86-282 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF STARRING PINES WHEREAS, the plat of Starring Pines has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden 'Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462' of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder, and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City,plan and the regulations and -requirements. of the laws of the State ofMinnesota and'. ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. Plat approval request for Starring .Pines is approved upon: ( compliance with the -recommendation of the 'City, Engineer's report on this plat dated November 10, 1986. B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified: copy of this Resolution to the owners -and subdivision of the above named plat_ C. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. ADOPTED by the City Council on November 18, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk ( a�$� 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 DATE: November 10, 1986 SUBJECT: STARRING PINES PROPOSAL: Jerome Krebsbach has requested City Council approval of the final plat of Starring Pines, -a single family residential subdivision located west of Staring Lake and north of Pioneer Trail in the South 1/2 of Section 21. The plat contains 1.63 I acres to be divided into 3 lots. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council August 5, 1986, per Resolution 86-191. i The property was zoned RI-22 in November 1969, per Ordinance 21-8. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed October 7, 1986. VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: There are no municipal utilities to serve this site, therefore, individual septic systems and wells will be necessary. This existing condition and requirements resulting from future improvements are further explained in items 7 and 8 of the Developer's Agreement. This site is served by a gravel City street (Staring Lane). PARK DEDICATION: Requirements for park dedication are covered in the Developer's Agreement. i i` Page 2, Final Plat of Starring Pines 11/10/86 i RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of. Starring Pines subject to the requirements of this report. the Developer's Agreement and the following: 1. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $472. 2. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $250. JJ:sg cc: Frank Cardarelle Jerome S .Linda Krebsback 9190 f CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ' HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 86-283 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF RESEARCH FARM 3RD ADDITION ,t WHEREAS, the plat of Research Farm 3rd 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 al I proceedings have been duly had thereunder, and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY DF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. Plat approval request for Research Farm 3rdt; Addition is ' approved uponcompliancewith the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this ,plat dated November 1.2. 1986.: B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply_acertified 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 November 18, 1986. -c Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST SEAL 0 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works FROM: David L. Olson, Senior Engineering Technician DATE: November 12, 1986 SUBJECT: RESEARCH FARM 3RD ADDITION PROPOSAL: Douglas Corporation and Independent School District No. 272 have requested City Council approval of the final plat of Research Farm 3rd Addition. The proposed plat is a replat of Outlots B and C, Research Farm 2nd Addition. The plat is located south of Anderson Lakes Parkway and west of Flying Cloud Drive in the South 1/2 of Section 22. The site contains 116 acres to be divided into 1 lot and 3 outlots. Lot 1, Block 1 (containing 23 acres) has been purchased by the School District. Outlot A (containing 8 acres) is presently owned by the School District and eventually will be transferred to the City as a scenic easement area. Outlots B and C will be retained by Douglas Corporation for development and replatting at a future time. Also included with this platting is the realignment and -dedication of right-of-way for Research Road. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on October 21, 1986, per Resolution 86-269. City Council review and approval of grading and development plans are necessary prior to any development of property within this plat. Future platting and zoning shall conform to City Code requirements. VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: A Special Assessment Agreement covering the installation of municipal improvements necessary to serve the property must be executed prior to release of the final plat. Vacation Request 86-09, vacating the existing right-of-way for part of Research Road, was reviewed and approved by the City Council on October 7, 1986, per Resolution 86-261. Completion of this request is subject to inclusion on the final plat of ZU MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services ¢ d�— DATE: November 13, 1986 SUBJECT: Tax Forfeited Property Attached is -a copy of the list of tax forfeited lend"in Eden Prairie, as well as a=map.A ndicating the location of the forfeited parcels. The -majority of the parcels are single family lots in the. Chatham Moods .. Sud W sion'located-in the Minnetonka School District. There is also one -lot. along Duck Lake Road and four lots.along the south side of Valley iView. Road in the vicinity of Dell Road. The four lots-along,Valley View Road :appear to be i on marginal -soil for building purposes. The open Ispace-parcel immediately south of the three lots south of. :Val ley View and _east of -Dell Road is s ` wetland owned.by the Homeowner'sAssociation. The Parcel along Linden Drive is approximately. 1.18,acres, This parcel is. in the process of being repurchased by,the previousproperty owner. The :parcel that the City is requesting for acquisition,' located on map number five, is being requested by the City Engineering Department for right-of-way purposes. The Community Services Staff requests the. City Council to approve Resolution No. 86-277 that authorizes the County to offer the other parcels for public sale and to transfer PIN 13-116-22-22-0020 to the City for right-of-way purposes. BL:md a�9 u CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55344 RESOLUTION NO. 86-277 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF TAX FORFEITED LAND FOR PUBLIC ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY WHEREAS, the City of. Eden Prairie has :received from the County of. Hennepin a list of lands in said municipality which became the property:of the. State of Minnesota for non payment of real-estate taxes, which said list has been designated; as Exhibit A attached hereto, and WHEREAS, provided in the Minnesota Status 282, the City Council is asked to approved the public sale of these parcels, or to iindicate which parcels the. City wishes to acquire for public use, and; WHEREAS, the City desires to obtain title toPIN03-116-22-22-0020'for public road purposes, .NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of"the City of Eden' Prairie does request the, Board of Hennepin County approve the acquisition,of this parcel by the City of Eden: Prairie: ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this-18th of November, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, yor ATTEST: John D. Frane, Clerk SEAL t DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAX AND PUBUC RECORDS A607 Government Center HENNEPIN Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487-0067 s i October 29, 1986 i City of Eden Prairie John D. Frane, City Clerk —Treasurer 8950 Eden Prairie Road 1201, nLr/% Eden Prairie, MN 55344 J G Dear Mr. Frane: Enclosed is a classification list on ncn-conservative land located in your municipality. The described parcels forfeited to the State of Minnesota for non-payment of. property taxes. As provided in Minnesota Statutes 282,. we request that you either approve the parcel(s) for public auction, auction to adjacent owners if M4 282.01, Subd. 7A, is applicable, or request a conveyance to your municipality for public use. We require a certified copy of the City Council, Resolution w•rbarizing any action taken. If you request that a parcel. be conveyed to yoga municipality, me -also require that the form, "Application By A Govern mental Subdivision For Conveyance of Tax. Forfeited Land', be completed and mailed to this office. Only new special assessments which were levied after the forfeiture need be certified to this department. The remaining balance of any assess- ment levied previously will be picked up automatically, Please be advised that if the City Council fails to respond within ninety (90) days of the date of this letter, the sale will be deemed to be approved. If you have any questions, you may contact the Forfeited.Land Unit at 348-3734, or myself at 348-6989. Sincerely, Dale G. Folstad, Director Property Tax & Public Records y� 1 Sharon Ericn Tax Processing Section Supervisor t.. DGF:SE:be Enclosure HENNEPIN COUNTY ' on equol opporhmly employer i N ♦♦N � N N N N N N � M N V r N+ � Z N O N P N N P N PP N O N N V N p N N N p N S N ON t• N � M m a N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Obf « N p p Y N N QN N N p ppN pQN_ pN Q�+N e e e e �e o Ce eo G.m Ge Go Gm a bki o� yyeoo o SoNoe /-��e /<�e /<�e o yS« N �+tl P V P ain P N b«N. bO bO V 1P_o is I m m o r�pOp O O O O e O KO �e KO ppO O m m �' M S P N P M N � N rei d P P ieil N rei N \VO� O O m O m m O O m m m m m m O t VOI W W W W W M N N � r ✓ r r w In Mm �n•:t o o m o o a m m o 0 o a W r,N+ M T e e e e i e i e e e i eo W W 4 W W W W W W W W W W W W 4 r N N N ✓ N N N N N N N ✓ N N Ny m .+ p\p p\p \ p\p p\p \ p\p m\m pp\ p\p p\p p\p bb\ p\p \ pp CC P P P P P P P P P P P P P P T P 9 T < m c6 41 9 mg Zti O 0 e o e e o e e o e e o e e m e o 0 oe eo o 0 o m o o e o m o 0 o e e 0 o m e e e e o e o 0 0 0 �9� ,' ' � •:pp ' �1 N H N O V O V O O V O N O N O M. O N O Ir y� yy�� yy fl Co ZZy r P o NP PPPMN s aP eP P PV p 9P •O`N �P'I YY1N N�PJ NNN NP P P O. FjGzj N N VN N jPi N N N yLA pR � - ' O �e (V �P W V P P InAA\ ttN 'Q�jO �Qd DWI oa oe o0 oe e a a o e r W N � � O N pa P N ✓ 4 y SCK Z A O N O N O N O r O N O V O V O V O V Opp P � .. N O pZ Z p ~m>rv`m**AY-4 t� =1 � •�i :S}y :1' �p m m r ! 1�1 f�1 9 1�1 7 f�1 9 S}y Z T O S9 � (p > O p 5 iyp0 H ,yy M M zsoNo YOpI W Z pqAp wD T9 �ypp Nm Nw BOA N BeH AAA.A O N oo toO pN NloC1 • f C. 111 P13nP NO NZ EpE AZ A py2 n TT o 0 o pO NT N\ AN tittV e Y� pe \ F f M , �� O O a O O N O \ O\ P\ Y O F G.O \ OOP- S o o e o o e o 0 o e $.o 4.1 P.0 Y'' � P�`jj,•J1 CT P P P P P P P P P P N 7f 'ON ~ F y < N l r !� IO N N N N N N N N N N r7C PM N �98 in Irlift Mtr CI 1, C`7 all —yo id , -� Riw.,2r, 4L, F PI, ii'E jwj�m BPI! & I�, -, Iff VAN S911 ISO (12) (38)� tr: :�::kp:i.w.?.:. a•e 4:•r:.`i :::•;.:;; �� a .. Map I • (36) o ,, 3�P .•s. ; �r '��•�` ..,. i01.ja tad. r f'i 4�' . ti a (16) •.`.: �.Nyo 1 ({fl a rB38 �iTa� I lil 12 •• '$ .. `' a v°.a... WMI�TINd QNe �a� '. /j 'L � oa, � � .i� � . y t20) (19) ial •: +o �� �`<t:i;.' r : t,. ` zrfo ($121 tab) 411 c>:• ���� .,.r�if!�ia v ��1 �>:?e ■ a`¢l ,;. '•\�q\�,�6 ttaO �'!w r. �,j11 IS .. � _ 50 h 4: •:: I lye .i' • < ` TAX FORFEITED PROPERTY 05-116-22-21-0012 °Q-'l •t 05-116-22-21-0013 �t.�+ �: 05-116-22-21-0016 ° :- (24i r. �ti°`' y :.. t�z� ` p5-116-22-21-0017 05-116-22-21-0019 (2s) ' '.;� .'�� t 32i 05-116-22-21-0020 '05-116-22-21-0021 r :•:. .<, :y.::.r::::.::..:::<:w•:.` =,� ,� 05-116-22-21-0022 05-116-22-21-0024 05-116-22-21-0025 :>xt.:::<:::>::::::::►::':a'.+::.:<::: rz 05-116-22-21-0026 05-116-22-21-0027 N (tz' 05-116-22-21-0028 05-116-22-21-0029 05-116-22-21-0032 ,• r.-:' . _� No. MANOR RD. x w 05-116-22-21-0035 +' 21 —22— 0036 16 �'� (il 05-116 � 22-- G: 21-0037 4) _; 05-116-22-21-0039 gyp► �, ��,� 15 2 le y 05-116-22-21-0040 scale T 31 —... GOVT- L4T -4 .y ?6a4.3 :5 OA61 /75 DSO $8• /46E - o44►�(e3)8 c�' 99.34 210.19 p j19 �f /� o°rie a e `�13) :• ::, :::• :::•o-: a z 0 0 S• a I I till ,a �to1 20 •• 6 0 }:•:4:.. •::::}:.:... l75.56 1 i ' (43)' 4L�S• m utss F::i:;•(34 il- _ M .• ems.:, I � t� �' - n s °1I,s :•:. •::•::,.... n5.8 1901 a +0 201. 06 Vj , eSS ' ..1,11 I' fall i fjsl 10 13 (14) 0 !B(ler.� v`� 21 o) >o _"° el 4 SQ �a•n s )) =3 FF=• as : —r n6.rq I too. W 1 0 7s r: c 16 fall c mod, i 1 0 0l s1 z lE{�� n 00 0 0 0 14 tt m 17 (2 Q A 22 a� • 24 o: 100 100 17 . i 0.4 J l� •N +oi, a° i' o t51 .50 z o 1 a \ is h /23(p n k,,E �co ,4N I �(15 IG 1 M q{,TR ILS16� o 0 23 k� • , ? e J>rrso ►«t3j)s ael� 10 l°�) l� (100 176. ' 204.14 J t37.3 5 2 s :j55 11 NE tsswEss HONEYSUCKLE V89/ 3 E LA4 qti ti+. - � taoo- 1>a , „o °e etrSi t 1 s ( 5/1c) a �)e n At t: t t t k5;�� x°l/•!l'OE i E. s to to `. ,• 0 100 9((l 90 100, N 1 �7O h (,q`�N h9 10`t, II 12� W = 18a 19N •t (wl tl99 (0) (44) z /12 1JJ.C? 77.0 90 /0 M 177.14 203.99 , 17 a 8160)� Ins) !3 a?0/ n 178:4 17701o:N 20408`�', iA.➢ li1\� N 414 1 bs.9 6s• is c .W� /V t 4 ♦ ' • rs•1 z 6Aoy e. p 1li t I /00 s41 Y: 10pp ( Ess) 81.7 66.3 w 5l Eoo o; Ise f, •111 z r00.07 2 3 4 ®�,d r 5 .t 1680 , (1) i•s� E ao s }so ,E ? , e) W :: 00 0 roo 0 2:7 I r7 ti � / ^' et. 4 .5•�� fag.� JE $ tto &, - % a ,.. I I -'R 11, 011 N8B'3/4fW ll�� $� =V �'ISiT r4 •- .n I Q v, .rlv', �'` • MI-•i - �� `�•�� - � � � n -/ 0 „4,Ij, i 1l .e Q1t611 7 _ N,i:.? a Es NQ o IILI r �S1 o, 'y W 1SD 1{°•�« S t� SS _ " A „ ^ 110) " ✓-t:.y t».° ` ,Jill y V�y'4,5�Z .l ; •+. •-' . � a e3s �aa `�3a (alai.` :'a - e.,tcss' �s /•° r�4n :, w.4:�'" t,,. ,. ° (4) 1;::3a' =(aZ 44 (49too 166 1. . 1- • map 2 4 13 .. 5 .00 �u' TAX FORFEITED PROPERTY r _ �✓,r. ,4ZO 05-116-22-31-0043 NS WAIVE • Y Vv 1c, 7 %Ir or is Lor io 5 lot.. -A 34 - al (7) lo—I 3I f4 In 7 93 nvl ji n 157— 14 tzt Loroil$ .6" • tile F 66 iL 41 It w 2 —iL o to 42,f ;645 8N LOT 4 Z44 `Tuss,'-COURT41. SL 10 5 LAJ 51 �(j 2 4 Qc o'. Qb 4of LOT 25 roe j $5 3 68zo I:, .'W 41 o go , IZ I 14 1, 41 /-4 R P�f or 1-3 h. DRIV ", 1, ` E;-'j 31 22 423IH 21 /-� 1 3? 71, 39 'so I' 35 P EAST 28 9.68 6, 1,% z, —aARC IN 140f, . kz- map 4 6za:3, C7 TAX FORFEITED PROPERTY -11".% I ION 25 6-2d-14-0059 15 eR4r!•o�+ o� H :moo• : -_ _ _ •�' `''' �'' (30 AQ 8 .e A p a (y'y �r�✓� ti Off. rl ,� ti^ � A x Qr ° Sy�>pj M : ail ••.' Q c-.�s No so d ro o Cl) E V , ) t, © w � CP Map a alr TAX FORFEITED PROPERTY 02-116-22-22-0020 Xp r, 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 DATE: November 14, 1986 SUBJECT. Grading Permit for, Wendell A. Phillipp.i Wendell A. Phillippi of 10.300 Riverview Road has requested:City6Council approval of his application for a gradingpermit. He plans onconstructing 3 connecting ponds within the Purgatory Creek loo0 Plain on -his property. ;The excavated material :from the Pon would be spread over the hillside above: the flood plain andberestored with seed and mulch upon completion. Mr.. Phi IIippi has been working with the`.Planning Department and the :Engineering Department regarding this project and both departments feel that their concerns have been addressed: Mr. Phillipp has also contacted the Riley, Purgatory Creek Watershed District and the-DNR. A permit is not required by either agency and both consider this proposal consistent with their guidelines. This proposal has been presented to the Parks," Recreation and. Natural Resources Commission and Planning Commission. Recommend'.approval of / this grading permit. Please refer to the attached supporting data. l JJ:sg 'i `i 'i ,i 1 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jean Johnson, Zoning Administrator: TWUGH: Chris .Enger, Director of Planning DATE: November 7, 1986 RE: PHILLIPPI REQUEST FOR LAND ALTERATION PERMIT APPROVAL WITHIN FLOODPLAIN AND SHORELAND City Floodplain Code requires Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources j Commission and Planning Commission review-- and recommendations for the Council" prior to City approval of work within a floodplain area. City Shoreland Code requires Parks, Recreation, and Natural .Resources Commission and Planning Commission review and recommendations to the Council prior to City approval of any grading or fill within a shoreland-area. The applicant has reviewed his request with the Department of Natural Resources and the appropriate Watershed District and secured their go aheads. This is consistent with Code requirements. The Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission `reviewed the permit application at their November 3, 1986, meeting, and recommended approval to the Council. - Planning Staff believes the work, as outlined, will be consistent with the Floodplain and Shoreland Code purposes of not impeding; the flow of water and utilizing ponds to permit holding of water versus rapid water run-off into streams. i i _ ,j UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION Nov. 3, 1986 ; is j i i' A B. Phillippi's Shoreland Grading/Filling Refer to letter dated October 9, 1986 from Wendell Phillippi; letter dated October 28, 1986 from the Watershed District and letter dated October 17, 1986 from the DNR. Lambert introduced Brian Williams who was present at the meeting to answer any questions regarding the proposal. Lambert shoved the Commission the site location on an aerial photo. The grading plans have been presented to both the Watershed District and DNR for their approval. The main concern is what impact the grading will have on the creek valley. Lambert said he feels the ponds would be an ammenity and recommends approval Cook referred to the portion of the letter that mentions spoils being removed and spread along the hillside. He asked if plantings would be added here. Williams said yes and that it was suggested a wood fiber blanket for erosion control of tailings be added on the hill prior to seeding. UNAPPROVED MINUTES 1. APPLICANT: Name t?e*idell _-N. Phillinpi Address 1.0, l9 give --vies. '0:.O. -den Prairie "r l Tel. (Day) 546-4439 (Night/Weekends) P41-4967 Contractor Performing Work see caretalcer: Brian '?i11 0Vs Tel. (Day) 944-2799 (Night/Weekends) 944-2799 Signature of Applicant 2. DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION OF EXCAVATION OR GRADING WORK PROPOSED (ATTACH PLANS) see attached mans 3. CITY CODE SECTION APPLICABLE (11.55) MINING OPERATION AND LAND ALTERATIONS REGULATIDN (SEE REVERSE) (11.45) FLOOD PLAIN ORDINANCE OTHER 4. REVIEW AND APPROVAL REQUIRED CITY COUNCIL PLANNING & ZONING COMM. /V �I// WATERSHED DISTRICT 1 PARK & RECREATION COMM. ✓ PLANNING DEPT. D.N.R. BUILDING DEPT. M.P.C.A. CITY ENGINEER 5. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A. SEE CITY SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING COMPACTION AND SURFACE RESTORATION OF STREETS IF PERMIT INVOLVES WORK IN CITY STREETS B. DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL SHALL BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO ANY GRADING WORK. C. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO NOTIFY UTILITY COMPANIES PRIOR TO ( EXCAVATION. y, D. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE REASONABLE MEANS TO CONTROL DUST AND SHALL TAKE ACTION TO CONTROL DUST WITHIN 4 HOURS UPON NOTIFICATION BY CITY ENGINEER. E. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN EXISTING ACCESS AND HAUL ROADS IN A SAFE AND CLEAN CONDITION. PERMIT HOLDER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COSTS OF STREET CLEANING NECESSARY AS A RESULT OF THIS WORK. F. FLAGS, FLARES, SIGNS, OR BARRICADES SHALL BE ERECTED TO PROTECT TRAFFIC AND PERSONS AT ALL TIMES. (DAY AND NIGHT) G. STREETS MAY NOT BE CLOSED TO TRAFFIC UNLESS EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED BY THIS PERMIT. H. APPLICANT MUST PROTECT ALL EXISTING UTILITY INSTALLATIONS. 6. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A. HAUL ROADS B. BONDING C. FEE (SEE FEE RESOLUTION)_J� D. COMPLETION DATE nnc ari or 1rRf, E. NUMBER OF WELLS ON SITE METHOD AND FIRM WHO WILL PERFORM CAPPING ALL WELL CAPPING IS SUBJECT TO INSPECTION BY BUILDING DEPARTMENT). F. OTHER "Any grading, filling, removal of soil, cutting of trees or vegetation, or other land alteration other than as provided in this permit and the plans submitted as a part hereof is expressly prohibited and a violation of the City Code." 7. PERMIT APPROVAL AND AGREEMENT Approved by the City of Eden Prairie By Date The undersigned Permitee understands the terms and conditions of this permit and all applicable City Ordinances and herein agrees to perform such work in conformance thereof. By Date ) l 4 q 'Tendell t . Phillippi 10300 Riverview road Eden Prairie,'!N 55344 Eden Prairie City Council October 9, 1936 Dear Councilmembers: iTe propose building a series of three ponds to collect a number of seeps in the lower Purgatory Creek Valley. Fueled initially by a concern for the safety of our horses and frus- tration of mired vehicles, as the plan developed it became aesthetic as well as utilitarian. Briefly, three ponds -- one with a small cascade, another with a small island -- will be dug out by drag line. Their location is proscribed by the present location of springs and boggy soil at the foot of the north valley wall of Purgatory Creek. These ponds will then drain back into the ditch that presently collects this soggy area and feeds into Purgatory Creek. In researching this project, we were sent to the DNR. Judy Budreau, in the DNR Water ''ivision, was contacted (see attached letter). She had previously been on the site and had then had this project mentioned to her. Currently, she has no objections to this project but mentioned three concerns: 1) we may not use Purgatory Creel: for a water source; 2) no direct discharge into . the creek; and 3) consult *ait'.1 the T.,Tatershed District about the project and tailings disposal, We also contacted Bruce Gilbertson, DYR Fisheries, and John Parker, MR Wildlife, and received helpful information from both. Curiously, the Fisheries Department urged greater depth to pre- vent T7inter fish kill, while the Wildlife Department urged shallower depth to promote plant and animal life. We have attempted to provide some of each in our project. Next was a very helpful visit to Bob Obermeyer of the Rilev/ Purgatory Creek Watershed District, who is of course :familiar with the project area. Again, he had no objections and offered his expertise II e required that all spoils be removed from the floodplain and spread along the hillside. Suggesting this as a good time of year (late fall) for this project, he also solved our problem of being unable to start seed on the hillside by using a wood fiber blanket 04I DOT #3885) for erosion control of the tailings. He also helped determine drain pipe sizes and pond topography. The I,!atershed District requires no per:rit as long as the project is less than one acre of surface (spoils, dam and water) and this too, is a condition we will meet. Jean Johnson of the Citv Plannin- Department has also Seen the site and has been tremendously helpful. :!e wish to than! - her and all involved in this process for your time and efforts. _'� � �: \ � . ` gyp' all Cs;� `s•J. i. _ �� :EJvti vun. ."r � Plow' ..,I .\.; � - p /]•T :' � �. =mil% _ �';-��,;�_\�•�.I ',�� ,; 11 _ � � '� h?' �' 0 2ti 1(JI1\ n�•�% d � -25 �� /\ o.; ,. - l` i F ,1; \ o I ��• ��� � y1� � zl 1 e�•I����BLUFF �. /34 ✓ \en`2ArA 351 s x3 _ .36 1 \__� o �,.. . / Blue Lake f �H+ ✓J — — -- —Rice Lake NO I's 10' IP LOCAMM MAP ) �.,� I„ I'7'I - p / � � i••--'+..ter/ � _ ~ u ' I ( d ii�i I,l � I ^• 11 I /, I /, •� i i n to i � r / r e. a• `71. M N '+ FF lil I .s + W(ni Wine i ^ I co �1'� W u A �I 'I I 0. � � I � N e Tq C•� N >>f ci.` I ,I W A�)Y�d A�� a�g1t►i• at} ACV I. r �I '1�1 i� I � I' f • (�Np A Z `V, N n M � � �i1 (� `) �. \ 4 O � oW n R � N +r In p e 0 In Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed Distri Engineering Advisor: Barr Engineering Co. 6800France Ave. Edina, MN 55435 920.0655 L Legal Advisor: Popham, Haik, Schnobrich, Kaufman & Doty 4344 IDS Center Minneapolis, bIN 55402 333.4800 II Octobar 28, 1986 Mr. Wend ell A. Phillippi 10300 Riverview Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Re: Ponding Basin Construction - Phillippi Property Dear Mr. Phillippi: The engineering advisors to the Board of Managers of the Riley- Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District has reviewed the Information t as submitted for the -construction of three ponding basins in the lower Purgatory Creek valley, Because this project does not propose to alter or disturb more than l acre in surface area, in accordance with Section E(2) of the District's Revised Rules and Regulations,a grading, and land alteration permit will not be required from the 'District for -this project. Tf you have any questions regarding the District's comments, please call us at $30-0555. Sinceul5 , Ryyber C. Obermeyer I3ARR NGINEERING CO, Engineers for the District RCO/111 c: Mr. Frederick Richards Mr. Frederick Rahr Ms. Jean Johnson WAP/330,0 1 i October 17, 1986 Mr. Brian Williams 10300 Riverview Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 I RE: PROPOSED POND CONSTRUCTION, FLOODPLAIN OF PURGATORY CREEK NWk, SE}, SECTION 36 TOWNSHIP 116 NORTH, RANGE 22 WEST (WENDELL PHILLIPPI PROPERTY) Dear Mr. Williams: As you requested, this letter will confirm our conversation regarding Department of Natural Resources (DNA) permit requirements for the above -referenced proposal. i The only public waters on this site is Purgatory Creek. If the pond construction does not involve any alteration of Purgatory ,Creek below the Ordinary High Water (OHW) level (top of the bank), no DNR - I Division of Waters permit will be required. I have advised you to contact Bruce Gilbertson of DNR Section of Fisheries regarding stocking of ponds, and Jon Parker Area Wildlife Manager regarding pond configuration, IFeel free to contact me should you have further questions. Sincerely, 64Y41 udreau Area Hydrologist METRO REGION DIVISION OF WATERS /lkr J12 { AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER I A RESOLUTION NO./ A RESOLUTION TO AMEND AN INDENTURE OF TRUST DATED AS OF DECEMBER 1, 1985 BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE AND FIRST TRUST COMPANY, INC. AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH WHEREAS, by resolution adopted December 30, 1985 by the City Council (the "City Council") of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota (the "City"), the City has given its final approval to the issuance and delivery of its $6,850,000 Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Bay Pointe Manor Phase II Limited Partnership Project) (the "Bonds") dated as of December 31, 1985; WHEREAS, the proceeds of the Bonn ds have been loaned to Bay Pointe Manor Phase II Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership (the "Company") for the purpose of acquiringand constructing a multifamily housing project to be located' in the City (the "Project"), all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C; WHEREAS, the City has entered into an Indenture of Trust dated as of December 1, 1985 by and between the City and First L Trust Company, Inc. (the "Trustee") to provide, among other things, for the issuance of the Bonds (the "Indenture"); WHEREAS, the Company has requested that the City and Trustee amend the Indenture to provide for an extension of time to September 1, 1987 for which certain events must occur specified in Section 307 of the Indenture of Trust; WHEREAS, the form of the Supplemental Indenture effecting i the extension is attached hereto as Exhibit A; j WHEREAS, all bondholders have consented to the amendment J! of the Indenture and bond counsel has or will deliver its opinion that such amendment and extension will not adversely affect the tax exempt status of interest on the Bonds; WHEREAS, the Company has executed a certificate evidencing its present intent to complete the Project. Such executed certificate is attached hereto as Exhibit B; WHEREAS, the City has relied on the truth and accuracy of the representations and warranties contained in such certificate; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. The City Council of the City hereby authorizes the Mayor and officers of the City to execute and deliver the Supplemental Indenture. All of the provisions of the Supplemental Indenture, when executed and delivered as authorized herein, shall be deemed to be a part of this resolution as fully .and to the same extent as if incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. Section 2. The Supplemental Indenture.shall be substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A ,with :such necessary and appropriate variations, omissions and insertions as permitted or required by such documents or as the Mayor and officers of the City executing the same, with the advice of bond counsel, shall determine, as evidenced by such execution thereof. Section 3. The officers of the City, attorneys and other agents or employees of the City are hereby authorized to do all acts and things required of them by or in connection with this resolution and the Supplemental Indenture for the full, punctual, and complete performance of all the terms, covenants and agreements contained in the Supplemental Indenture. Adopted by the Eden Prairie City Council, on November 25, 3 1986. C C SEP i G 1985 16331 South Hillcrest Court Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 September 13. 1985 Mr. Don Uram Planning Department City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Rd. Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 Dear Sir: Re: Alpine Village Proposal Further to our telephone conversation, this letter will confirm our strong objection to the proposed rezoning in our area for the purpose of construction of townhomes to be known as Alpine Village. My family and I, along with our neighbors, have purchased our homes in the belief that we live in a single family, Low -Density Residential area. When zoning regulations are changed, it not only has the potential to lower property values but change the general character of the area. We feel that city officials have a responsibility to maintain the status quo and retain the zoning regulations in effect at this time. Please present this letter as strong opposition to the proposal at the Planning Commission meeting on September 23, 1985. Thank you for your cooperation. Yours sincerely, / Michael ristow 4ar ristow t Sept. 18, 1985 EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION Eden Prairie City Hall 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 RE: REZONING FROM LOW TO MEDIUM DENSITY - HABIGER & ASSOC. ALPINE VILLAGE We strongly urge you to deny the rezoning request of the above development. All the Hillcrest and Alpine Streets already present a - continuous ly dangerous situationdueto the hills which cause cars to gain momentum well above the posted speed limit, not to mention the curves around which these fast cars go. A few years ago a four way stop at Alpine Way, North Hillcrest and South Hillcrest was added for just - this reason. There is no doubt that an additional 60+ cars would spill over beyond Alpine Trail and cause an unbearable traffic situation for all our streets. We realize that development of this area is inevitable. However, we strongly urge you to retain the low density zoning in effect at present. This would add far less traffic to our neighborhood and be more compatible with existing housing. Sin r ly, � 12 .J div ura and Don Isensee 16151 S. Hillcrest Court Eden Frairie, MN 55344 937-8342 P.S. Please place Laura Isensee on the Sept. 23rd hearing agenda to address the traffic and safety concerns of this proposed rezoning. Thank vou. .ILLa Harvey 16190 alpine 7sy September 10, 1935 Office of City Planning SEp j 9 i9a� 3950 Aden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, ":T 55344 s To the :::embers of the Plannin., Co.lmision: As a honeov✓ner of the ?oath property located at 15190 Alpine "lay, I ••rant to express my oorosition to the rezoning request made by the developers of ^lpine 7illaae. "Uth no engineering background, I can only offer my concerns from the ^tandroint of homeowner and mother of three sc'.iool-age children. I hcpe all the questions of 3rading, fill, vehicle access, and the offect on the -wildlife saactuary aill be addressed by those more knowle;eable than me at the meeting, :y concerns lie in the ir.inact of these thirty units on our nei.,hborhood, and of course, the four a i; _ _'ootage requirement may be met but -:Then the steel race of our yard is considered, these wAts will be far closer than. they ap_;ear on paper. I have 'zoen told by the architect t::at tree coverage will be :core than adequate. Gentle^:en, this io '"i:lnesota - trees :rill only provide a screen for five nonths of each year. ~7e are all concerned with the growth in our schools. Passa e of the referendum is by no -leans a certainty. 'rro of ny children, students at Prairie lieu, find t:ie::selves in classes with sizes approaching 30 students. '.ven r/it11 strict compliance to the master aide plan, these Claris Zlzes Trill continua to 1C Lidi - cri:.-inapt buildinZ is allo-aed or e_:certioas :.:ade, t:e q.ai.ity or our childreo!s education ,.i'_1 decline fort er. I 'aav? been a:,:,ed to Jo Sider t:P ,)O-_ti,).l 0.ierlitz C0'1!!'ICr ._on. ":1-Y .lave Ou:,d .'le.IC0l7e7 ait'1 _ - _t r too .:C 1:11"✓e to de,iel0l) ?_ccordi.l;; t) t'.e :.:astcr ^lap. _':13 ^u,-sae.^, :.12. ._:Oulln? t �... ,. co!iStruction co ina:L -Have :::lade L.'.7lre of t i_', !)9fore _ urc::, red t.ie _a:. ? _ _ t 'den c' _ :: ;y I September 23, 1985 i Eden Prairie Planning Commission 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Eden Prairie Planning Commission, First of all, we wish to thank you for taking the time to in- form us, beyond the newspaper article, of the proposed ammendment to the Comprehensive Guide Plan, concerning the Alpine Village development plans. We have been particularly impressed with the way that the Planning Commission has coordinated the growth of Eden Prairie over the ten years we have lived here. We can agree with the need for all types of housing being made available to give our community balance as well as providing opportunities to developers to encourage growth so that tax revenue and services can expand without being a burden to the residents and businesses. one of the reasons we moved into our neighborhood was the low density type of housing. We felt it had been evaluated and zoned in accordance with how it was being developed. With the established barriers on three sides, we were confident that the neighborhood would not be subject to a change in usage. The traffic is another area of focus. We can remember the access street to County Road 4, one block north of Hillcrest Lane, being closed which reduced the danger of accidents for cars coming over the rise at the railroad bridge. With thirty more families living at the proposed location, we can envision the same problem occurring at Hillcrest Lane. Emergency vehicle access would be hampered and there would be increased danger for children. It appears that major re-routing and inconvenience would occur. The Purgatory Creek Flood Plain would be affected, too. Apparently many established points in the Comprehensive Guide Plan would have to be changed at the expense of long time residents. We desire that Eden Prairie, as well as the Planning Commis- sion, continue to be regarded for its well thought out and stable planning. For these reasons, we would like to request that the proposed rezoning requested for the Alpine Village development be denied. Thank you for your part in Eden Prairie's future. 29 cerelyy�// ennis M. Peterson p Judith M. Peterson Jew 80 n 16 t �a °'`S- ° � r< << « ' ftt� v. 16o6O �k&ey f�o$o Azp,,jr WA / 6 Y si /A tt r, n r1�cw.,ar4�y. C � I AM OPPOSED TO THE DEVELOPMENT Of ALPINE VILLAGE, EDEN PRAIRIE, MN. OR ANY ZONE CHANGE TO SAME PROPERTY. Date Signature Address 1�171 a'(' `11 2 f 41 /) { �! .%,� �:✓ %� „lC a �'�G t%Lt;�r %�,l ��.�.. / n-7V Apt' o JP 70 1 .> I I C I AM OPPOSED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF ALPINE VILLAGE, EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA OR ANY ZONE CHANGE TO SAME PROPERTY. 71166.5 .7/1Y/8 S 7/i9/ 8 S q � kC, [yam Address /6 z, I N,LLc► 4T- L,aJt 6::�ca����: 6 aq[ j��� I /4 /Y9" X-/,CC c I OPPOSE THE DEVELOPING OF ALPINE VILLAGE, EDEN PRAIRIE, MN Date Name Address 9 , 0 t o � - .z o - � 5 �•`.-�. / Irv-L.�,,,�_ l •SS�I �%(o . ��:C��.t� �C� Lt p`''. � 3 ' ,}Pj-;-/�j1`�.. �`'1+�:•o�,t-Z�_„_, �Ssl� Jtlo /4LC1�L�-r--,i ` -,S5 ^ 3s/ w .) :��:.�, Q, C ( _ Bay woocf - Lao c C,Ly cli� kJeo Prairie, tifnl SS3yq F,Q, C,'ty o{�,cc5 ep 23, 19 (YS gg5d E, P. �wd. eicn Prarl'e, XtN 553� SEE 25 1985 tie: �r��isea '' f}(P;ne Vlll�.4R-. We (.ire Lles-e 'iz l.t: ,-n 1/icl (l0b(f ,Il LAC LL; vc rj1c,, h'vi)ec2 �iKaiiop, J Q 11 vVhLn u;e Lo``�ht- o,.u� �ot ci,1Lt Lu lr Uur h01'r,� t7,IS ��rir, i 11�5 J, Onc oi- UlC rri�ln recuowlWe. Cho:c / c �n y'i.1C j 1 L �'}'�'C ff L� \ 4U c Uic rc Uo LuY .ghat ttu LL {,Gl on e{ Ker s,& of the nfZ i^rauz� �x►en,C�c ral lrt oo, —1 Ile. 'i0fle.S in L^t.\r dcjLlu`�mn ok, anGl U\ 4hc olr2c� Dire y��lal{tl > ,ingtt- Foi111 1y G�.�eiilnc:rS. _� % roe �, vf-�ownhornes is buli h�.dr ii-lou�cr f�c �`uall \" OlYld ucal\nL of our ho{nes — V,or —I O M6I+I'u,N t c, rI udc SC. S �&X�d�If1 kain[cu nc:w-, W!" eAokt 4'e r i,avc. tra oc,hl- -i c1;; b\iai 4-6 '. 1 ; u.,,,- lowl,,- ti\-c Valet` Of I II Cot\ olliu ol\.l T JC c>XEi , �LIC lv�l.'L cl,S (1InJSC� �l>tS(�1V}rl�,:l ltlI : L1,�Cini �( 11U ��u<i 'I.,(). '-oc Lur(',L,\'t.. C,i,L(\ Okjlr iUt (JT ) 11 v,) ca i,UL �cc \ 11 t1\C. cj� , fr,�tn(;• (.l � :.�1L �tl•\ �t� NU -�\.11 F,1i� ,_�,-1•',�cl �h��...t L� }Jt �;� :i r ;�,i.� �" i`,.11 1 :,�,C-- i,�.%` \:0..\L�. .�L•�..� �I(•.b '�rt�,Ju",a\t C- rt 1.1 , C C ,j i j Dwight S. Harvey 16190 Alpine Way Eden.Prairie, MN PRESENTATION TO -PLANNING COMMISSION ,;PINEVILLAGE :•PROPOSAL I. Deviation from the Comprehensive Guide:Plant A. Moved to Eden Prairie in 1974.from Chicago suburban area where development was haphazard; no concern for transition from apartments, to townhomes, to single Family, to industrial, etc., etc. B. Specifically requested realtor to recommend areas where zoning was strict and Guide Plan was adhered to; realtor strongly recommended Eden Prairie. C. Purchased home in area consisting of single Family homes essentiallyfully developed except for subject property. Aware from Guide Plan that area was to remain single family. D. owner of subject property also aware (or should have been aware) of current zoning and Guide Plan. Now, because of economics in developing as single family, he is asking 'for change to Guide Plan. Why should current single family, homeowners be forced to participate, through change in zoning, in his bad economic decision? l C C II. Use of the land: j A. Subject property and surrounding area consists of high slopes and steep grades which drain to Purgatory Creek floodplain. B. Townhome development would replace existing runoff retention materials (trees, grass and soil) with 30 roof surfaces, asphalt driveways and road. C. Would definitely have resultant effect on floodplain which needs to be thoroughly studied. Environmental impact statement? III. Lack of transition area: A. Currently existing plant material is entirely deciduous trees; no evergreens. B. Accordingly, for majority of year, no "screening" between townhomes and existing single family homes would exist without substantial planting. C. Even with "screening," topography of site in relation to existing single family homes would expose single family homes to full or roof exposure to majority of planned townhomes. (Pictures provided to demonstrate grade and lack of transition.) IV. sanitary sewer hookup: A. Developer proposes to extend existing sewer from south edge of property (current termination of Alpine Trail) to northeast end of his property. B. According to current plan, he would petition City to make connection to main interceptor east of Purgatory Creek. c c C. Per City Engineer, sewer connection would be required to be under Purgatory Creek. D. Connection would require City to, obtain permission from the following: 1. City Engineering. 2. Riley-Purgatory.Hluff Watershed District. 3. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 4. Metropolitan Waste Commission (connection would be to major Metro interceptor). 5. Land owner on the east to gain easement for connection. E. Why should City make this its project instead of developer? What benefit to the City?Who would pay? C � C October 5, 1985 Mr. Chris Enger, Director of Planning" City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Mr. Enger: As requested, attached ice, summary of my commants to the Planning Commission on September 23. 1985 development proposal. regarding the Alpine Village` I again thank the Commission For the opportunity to speak :on, the issi,e and for the -fine.. research *he,rity staff did in prep4ri-ng -. For the hearing. .. _. Allen L. Bode 11+090 Alpine Way Eden Prairie, MN t y 1 ,I i i I Allen L. Bode 16090 Alpine Wav Eden Prairie, MN - is Presentation to the Planning Commission t;eptember 11, 1985 Alpine Viilane Proposal 1. Deviation from Eden Prairie Guide Phan: A. Came to Minneapolis area in 1971 from Chicago area " ,and searched for housing area that.was,void of y- multiple family dweil'ings, as we had previously, been part of a PUD. Search of Bloomington, Eden Prairie, and Minnetonka led to HIVIcrest.7 Alpine area, where we were assuredthrough inquiry and;` the presence of a formalized city guide plan, that", this area woutd never be subject to multiple family dwellings. i B. Hillcrest - Alpine area is tota:iy-populated P except for the small area at the end or Alpine ' 1� Trail adjacent the railroad track. Ueviation from the standard single family housing in this adjacent area is as unacceptable to the neighborhood today as it has been in the past. We believe the city was correct in the master - guide plan when it was developed and is correct` today in holding to that plan. C. The developer in question was totally •ware of the master plan when he purchased property, and was .aware of the neighborhood opposition to any multi -family development_. We strongly feel Vic f- neighborhood and the city have the right and l obligation to insure that any development in the area adheres to the master- guide plan as it was - established a number of years ago. - I 1 '� i Allen L. Node 16090 Alpine Way Eden Prairie, MN It. Proposed Development: A. The developer has indicated that the development would be built in five stages with the various stages to be built based upon demand. Given the developers most ambitious plans, the area would be under construction for a minimum of two years and more likely from three to four years. In addition to the construction noise traffic. dirt, and - general nuisance. the selling of theproposed units would required a substantial amount of traffic to a secluded, inaccessible area. Traffic of this type would disruptive to the community. hazardous to the children of the community, and plague the neighborhood with unwarranted, unwanted sightseers and gawkers. l N. The, townhouse development is also to be governed by an association that would be.empower.ed-to collect assessments and provide servires for this development. Given the general lack of demand for housing at this time. it is likely that an :amount of this development would shortly be investment property with absentee owners. The general consensus of associations in the past has been that when absentee ownership of units in an association Is prevalent, the funding of maintenance and upkeep is limited and the development is a problem in general appearance, the type and number of occupants and the resale value for itself and the general :,urrounding area. C. Emergency access to the propo-.ed development would be via Hillcrest Lane and Alpine Truil or Hi11cr;:st Lane and Alpine Way. Sloth Alpine TraiI and A I p i nc� Way permit r)ark i nq on both sides of the Street ,and are both two way .trpets. Should a � ne I ghborhood activity be LIF'Oerw•av at the t i me, of ,in emergency, it i; probably that :jccess to :ar_a could be interdicted with rr.sultind IoSs tc Iife .and {property. 1 would strongly urge the city to consider this liability brforr• any additional � construction to the area is permil:ted. { 0 PRESENTATION TO EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION — SEPTEMBER 23, 1985 0 ALPINE VILLAGE PROPOSAL 0 Presented by: David H. Quanbeck 16150 Hillcrest Lane Eden Prairie, MN 55344 I. Introduction and Background Am a resident living on Hillcrest Lane, the street adjacent to Alpine Trail and Alpine Way; Hillcrest Lane is the primary connec— tor street on which Alpine's traffic enters Hennepin County Highway 4. As one of several homeowners in the Alpine and Hillcrest neighbor— hood I asked to focus expecially on the traffic impact of this requested rezoning and multiple unit development. II. Traffic Growth Projections We generally understand and agree with the City's observations and calculation of current traffic, i.e. Alpine Trail and a portion of Alpine Way contribute about 200 trips/day. The City's report projects that the proposed development at 100% occupancy would contribute an additional 240 trips/day (30 units x 8 trips/day), more than doubling the current traffic. Using the Comprehensive Guide Plan's target designation of "Low Density Residential", this 7.5 acre site would theoretically con— tain 18.75 or 19 dwelling units producing 190 trips/day. "Theoretically" in that, as a practical matter, the parcel of land contains extreme elevation contours. It is sandwiched between the existing railroad on one side and the 100 year flood plane level on another. This parcel may not in fact be buildable into 19 units; _. thus the realized additional traffic in the guideplan's view would very likely be less than 190 trips/day. The area is currently zoned R1-22 Single Family Residential as is the surrounding neighborhood. If developed in that way, as most t neighbors expected, it would probably support 8 to 10 single family lots; not the 13 to 14 the acreage alone suggests. Consequently, we would have expected an increase in traffic of 80 to 100 trips/day; literally a third of what is being proposed. This would probably be acceptable in light of existing conditions. �,.'_ Page 2 A III. "Existing Conditions" 1. The present Alpine Trail has both a crested hill and a curve of at least 45°; neither is conducive to safe traffic much less a significantly increased traffic load. 2. Alpine Trail connects to Hillcrest Lane in order to reach County 4. The intersection with Hillcrest Lane (and Alpine Trail), controlled by a yield sign, has a very poor sight line to the left, down Hillcrest Lane. Residents of Hillcrest Lane are often "surprised" by entering Alpine traffic which simply assumes the coast is clear. 3. A two or three fold increase in joint Hillcrest Lane and Alpine traffic will exacerbate the entry onto County 4 in heavier traffic periods. The sight line to the north for traffic enter- ing County 4 is limited to no more than the near end of the bridge over the railroad. * Remember: The city closed and vacated an older connection from Alpine Trail to County 4 only a few hundred feet north of Hillcrest Lane due to its danger potential. IV. Traffic Growth Solution/Scenerio If traffic levels become too great at the Hillcrest Lane/Alpine intersection onto County 4, I understand the likely scenerio would be the installation of a traffic signal at North Hillcrest Court and County 4. This control would be teamed with islands in County 4 to prevent southbound County 4 traffic from turning into Hillcrest Lane, or entering from Hillcrest Lane. The result would be an unnatural funneling of greatly increased traffic counts through the present neighborhood, likely using Alpine Way to reach North Hillcrest Court and it's signal con- trolled entry to County 4. This would clearly turn North Hillcrest Court into something far busier than the quiet street and access to cul-de-sacs those home- owners thought they lived on. V. Emergency Vehicle Traffic Access into the proposed development by fire and other emergency vehicles appears to be difficult. Fire protection of 38' high 3 story units demands hook and ladder equipment. The narrow streets (present and proposed), the plan's cul-de-sac, and no purported street connection beyond seem to present a questionable and difficult situation. The questions have to be: Can fire equipment maneuver quickly and effectively? Can they get out without backing out? Is that realistic? November 4, 1985 16165 Hillcrest Lane Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Eden Prairie Planning Commission 9950.Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Commissioner&: I an writing in regards to the "Alpine Villaga" development proposal that has been continued for the third. meeting. As a naighborhood, we have met in small groups to attempt to present our concerns and opposition in a polite, coordinated and coherent manner at.the public hearings. While you have expressed some appreciation for this effort, I an afraid that you are misinterpreting the degree of unanimity and rising tide of anger that exists. You Commissioner& have an opportunity to reinforce e basic principle of community planning; that is, when a development is proposed with such dubious value to the community at -large, and an overwhelmingly negative impact on the immediate neighborhood, you have a responsibility to respect the neighborhood autonomy and deny the development. Any claimed concerns about "future development proposals" are inappropriate relative to this proposal; as long as there is a strong sense of community and a responsible Planning Commission and process (as I do balieve we have presently), then future use of the land will be properly determined. I strongly urge you to have the courage to deny this proposal. ...._7 Sincerely, f� G�L C-A ' J Allan Callander 11 0 STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: November 8, 1985 PROJECT: Alpine Village LOCATION: East of Alpine Trail, South of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad. APPLICANT: Habiger and Associates, Inc. REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Change from RI-22 to RM-6.5 on 7.58 acres, with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals. 2. Preliminary Plat of 8.36 acres into twenty-two lots for construction of 19 townhomes and an existing single family home. Background r This is a continued item from the October 28, 1985, Planning Com- mission meeting. At that time, the Commission made a motion recommend- ing that the development plans be returned to the proponent for additional revisions in response to recommendations made in the Staff F Report dated October 25, 1985, and 15 Commission and neighborhood con- cerns. Primarily, these recommend- p ations included a re -configuration of the building clusters to reduce the massing of the three-story walkout units, the modification of the landscape plan to provide additional screening from Alpine Trail and from views to the south, the submittal of a traffic analysis for the area, and the resolvement of ^2 r 814 the sanitary sewer easement and rLB extension issue. Following is a , brief summary of these issues. ---_ Site Plan I e 7Z Based on the previous site plan, a 22 major concern was the massing of the AREA LOCATION MA '_T Alpine Village 2 November 8, 1985 two D-unit building clusters due to the fact that they are designed as three-story walkouts and located on approximately 20 feet of fill. The applicant has since revised the site plan and building configuration to "break up" this massing. This was accomplished by relocating one, 4-unit D-cluster and replacing it with a 3-unit C-cluster which is a 2-story design decreasing the perceived height of this structure. In addition, the remaining 4-unit D-cluster was replaced by a 2-unit and a 3-unit D-cluster. These units were placed further to the east, thus allowing for more open space and increased distance to the single family residences. Also, the landscaping in this area has been increased, thus providing additional screening while adding scale to the project. Landscaping Based upon a total building square footage of 45,366 square feet, a total of 142 caliper inches are required per the landscape ordinance. The landscape plan depicts a total of 371.5 caliper inches provided. Staff's previous recommendation was to provide a mixture of coniferous and deciduous trees to introduce variety on the site and to help screen the units from views on Alpine Trail and from the single family residences to the south. This has been accomplished by revising the landscape planting schedule to include 235 caliper inches of coniferous trees and 136.5 caliper inches of deciduous trees. The applicant has introduced mass plantings of coniferous trees and berms along Alpine Trail to help break up the views of the garage fronts and to screen parking. In addition, additional plant material has been located between the townhome units and the residences to the south to help break up the views and to reduce the massing of the units. The additional plantings along with the reconfiguration of the building clusters has begun to accomplish this; however, Staff would recommend that the caliper•inch size of the plant material to the south of building cluster #3 be increased to a 3Y minimum. Traffic A traffic analysis conducted for this study area has been submitted by Barton- Aschman Associates, Inc. Briefly, their conclusion was that the Alpine Village Townhouse Development will not have a significant impact on the traffic capacity of the street or intersections, nor on vehicular or pedestrian safety in the area. They do, however, recommend that the yield signs at the intersection of Hillcrest Lane and Alpine Trail be replaced by stop signs and that a stop sign be placed at the intersection of Alpine Nay and Alpine Trail. (See traffic study for proposed Alpine Village Development, Eden Prairie) Sewer Extension At this time, no additional information has been provided regarding the proposed sewer extension across Mr. Anderson's property to the east. However, in conversation with both the applicant and Mr. Anderson, they have informed the City that they are in the process of negotiating a sewer easement. This easement will be required prior to City Council review of the proposed project. Conclusions As stated in the previous Staff Report, from a technical standpoint, the townhome ( project conforms to the Comprehensive Guide Plan, relates well to this site, and has many characteristics of a single family residential development. However, the issue of whether a multi -family project is an appropriate use for this site in regard to 1. Prior to review by the City Council, proponent shall: 2 3. 4. A. Modify the landscape plan to include additional larger caliper inch (3.5 inches minimum) along the south side of building cluster #3 to help screen the views from the adjacent single family residences. B. Submit water pressure and flow rate calculations to the Engineering Department for reivew to ensure adequate fire protection. Provide 4 details regarding the proposed sewer easement and extension. C. Submit details regarding the proposed sanitary sewer easement. Prior to Final plat approval, proponent shall A. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District and the City Engineer. B. Obtain approval from the Board of Appeals for variances requested for height of the structure to be 38 feet. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall: A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee. B. Submit samples of exterior building materials and proposed colors for review. C. Submit an overall lighting plan, with details, for review. D. Submit an overall signage plan, with details, for review. Prior to grading permit issuance, proponent shall: A. Nofity the City and the Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance of grading. B. Stake the construction limits with a erosion control fencing. C. Stake the grading limits with a snow fence. Any trees lost outside of the proposed grading limits shall be replaced on a cross - sectional trunk, area inch for area inch basis. 11 STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: October 25, 1985 PROJECT: Alpine Village LOCATION: East of Alpine Trail, South of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad. APPLICANT: Habiger and Associates, Inc. REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Change from R1-22 to RM-6.5 on 7.58 acres, with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals. 2. Preliminary Plat of 8.36 acres into two lots for construction of 19 townhomes and an existing single family home. Background This is a continued item from the � September 23, 1985, Planning Com- mission meeting. At that time, the Commission made a motion recommend- ing that the development plans be returned to the proponent for revisions in response to recommend- ations made in the Staff Report, dated September 20, 1985, and �iP Commission and neighborhood con- cerns. Briefly, these recommend- ations centered around the issues of substantiating a Guide Plan Change, the appropriateness of the proposed land use, and specific site planning4,0 details. Comprehensive Guide Plan The previous Staff Report discussed g in detail t''le procedure involved in �y amending the Comprehensive Guide L Plan which, when based upon the j previous project submittal, was unsubstantiated. The proposal at that time was a Comprehensive Guide Alpine Village 2 October 25, 1985 fPlan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential to accommodate 30 townhome units on a 7.58-acre site or 4 units/acre. A Low Density Residential Guide Plan designation would allow for up to 2.5 units/acre, or 19 total units on this particular site. Based upon discussions with Staff and in response to Commission and neighborhood concerns, the applicant has since revised the Alpine Village site plan to reflect the current Guide Plan designation, and has withdrawn the request for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment. However, the applicant is still requesting a Zoning District Change from R1-22 to RM-6.5, to allow attached housing. Site Plan The current site plan depicts a total of six new structures made up of two, three, and four -unit buildings. A total of 19 units are being proposed at a density of 2.5 units/acre, which is consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan. In addition to reducing the number of units from 30 to 19, a number of other changes have occured to the overall development plan in response to previous concerns. To begin, questions were raised regarding the number of garages facing, and driveways accessing onto, the Alpine Trail extension. Using a combined driveway approach, and reducing the number of units results in a total of 11 driveways as compared to 30 driveways. In addition, combining driveways along with the decrease in number of units, the reorientation of the buildings, and berming along Alpine Trail helps to "break up" the views of the garage fronts. These items will be discussed in detail in the Landscape section. As designed, the proposed units meet the minimum required building setbacks in an RM-6.5 Zoning District. Also, the distance between building clusters has increased from a minimum of 42 feet between building clusters #5 and #6 to a maximum of 74 feet between building clusters #2 and #3. Distances between building clusters in all cases exceed the distance which may occur between single family homes in an R1- 22 Zoning District of 30 feet. Finally, because of the reduction in the number of units, the elimination of the southernmost cul-de-sac is now possible. This will decrease the amount of impervious surface on the site aiding drainage, while also increasing the distance between the townhomes and the single family neighborhood to the south, furthering the transition between land uses. It also serves to reduce the amount of grading on -site resulting in the retention of additional trees in this particular location. Utilities Water and sanitary sewer service are available to this site. Water service is proposed by an extension of an 8-inch water main within the Alpine Trail right-of- way. Because this extension dead -ends at the eastern property line, the Fire Marshal has requested calculations regarding water pressure and flow rate at the end of this line to insure adequate fire protection. If there is not sufficient pressure and flow rate, the applicant will be required to loop the water line. These calculations will be submitted and reviewed by the Engineering Department prior to City Council review. In response to questions raised by Staff, Commission, and concerned neighbors, the applicant has submitted a letter detailing their intentions for the proposed sewer extension (see Attachment A). This letter states that the applicant is currently C (� Alpine Village 3 October 25, 1985 attempting to secure an easement across the property to the east. If they are successful, the developer will pay all costs relating to the sewer extension. If they are not successful, the applicant will petition the City for the securement of an easement. Again, should this occur, the developer will pay all costs associated with the sewer extension. This letter has been reviewed by the City Engineering Department and has been deemed acceptable. Finally, as the previously plan depicted, a series of four holding ponds in essentially the same locations are being proposed. Detailed storm water run-off calculations shall be submitted for review and approval by the applicant to the Engineering Department and Watershed District, prior to Council review. Grading Again, due to the reduction in the number of units, overall site grading has been decreased. In addition, Alpine Trail has been realigned per Staff's recommendations and the grade of the street has also been reduced. Berming along Alpine Trail is also being introduced to help break up the views of the garage fronts and to screen parking areas. Because of the street alignment, building locations, and flood plain locations, these berms do not completely screen these areas and shall be supplemented with mass plantings of coniferous trees (see Landscape section). Staff feels that the grading and site plan, as submitted, takes into consideration the natural site characteristics and is more sensitive to the existing environment than what has been proposed for single family development. Traffic Using a standard trip generation rate of eight trips per day per household for multi -family residential, a total of 152 trips per day would be expected, assuming 19 townhomes at 100% occupancy. Of these, 10%, or 15 trips, would occur in the peak hour. These figures compare to a total of 240 trips per day, or 24 trips in the peak hour assuming 30 townhomes at 100% occupancy as depicted on the previous site plan. Overall, a reduction of 88 trips per day and 9 trips in the peak hour has been achieved. Based on actual traffic counts taken on Hillcrest Lane, east of County Road #4 and west of Alpine Trail, existing traffic at this point now averages 471 trips per day or 44 trips in the peak hour (see Attachments 8 and C). With the additional 152 trips per day or 15 trips in the peak hour resulting from the townhome development, an average of 623 trips per day or 58 trips in the peak hour can be expected. At the previous Planning Commission meeting, and in discussion with the neighborhood, concerns were raised regarding intersection safety at the intersection of Alpine Trail and Hillcrest Lane, and at the intersection of Alpine Way and the proposed Alpine Trail extension (see Attachment 0). The Engineering Department has observed these intersections for potential problems and states that at the present time, no problems have been reported. Should the Alpine Village project be developed and intersection problems occur, the Engineering Department will do a detailed analysis to determine the extent of the problems and to recommend solutions. Further, the applicant has retained the firm of Barton-Aschman to do a traffic analysis of the affected area. This report shall be submitted for review Prior to the City Council meeting. Alpine Village Landscaping October 25, 1985 The previous Staff Report stated that there were a number of large caliper -inch trees located on this site. Due to the reduction in the number of units and the elimination of the southernmost cul-de-sac, a number of trees which were within the previous plans grading limits, are now being saved. A majority of these trees are located in the southwest corner adjacent to the single-family residences. It is felt that the existence of this group of natural vegetation will aid in the transition between land uses. The landscape plan, as submitted, meets the minimum landscape requirement per ordinance for a development of this size. Based upon a total building area of 45,441 square feet, a total of 142 caliper inches are required. A total of 381.5 caliper inches are provided. Of this total, 50 caliper inches are of the coniferous variety. In reviewing the landscape plan, Staff has determined that the majority of trees used for screening purposes throughout the development are of the deciduous variety with the exception of those trees planted in the northwest corner of the site adjacent to building cluster #1. These plantings primarily screen building cluster #1 from the adjacent property to the west and from the railroad tracks to the north. No specific landscape treatment has been given to any of the other building clusters in order to break up the views of the garage fronts, screen parking areas, or to decrease the massing of building clusters #2, 3, and 4, from views to the south. In response to these items, Staff would like to make the following recommendations. To begin, because the opportunity for substantial berming along Alpine Trail to screen parking areas and to break up the views of the garage fronts does not exist because of site configuration and building setback, Staff recommends mass plantings of coniferous trees along Alpine Trail to accomplish this. It is felt that the plantings, in conjunction with the proposed berming, shall be sufficient. Finally, in response to concerns raised about the massing of building clusters #2, #3, and #49 Staff presents the following suggestions. Because of the orientation of building cluster #2 and the existence of substantial natural vegetation between the building and the single family residences to the south, the massing of this structure is not as apparent as the others. However, to further aid in the screening process of this building cluster, Staff recommends that additional landscaping (coniferous variety) be placed along the south end of the building. In regard to building clusters #3 and #4, concern has been raised about the amount of fill and the height of these buildings obscuring views from the south. Although the landscape plan depicts a number of large caliper inch (3.5" to 5") trees planted along the rear of these units, the combined height of fill and building creates a wall of approximately 60 feet in height within the individual building clusters measuring approximately 108 feet in length. Staff does not feel that this type of architectural massing is consistent with the character of the surrrounding single family neighborhood. Because of this, Staff has a number of recommendations to reduce this massing including revising the grading plan to lower the elevations in conjunction with reducing the height of the structures, the elimination of a number of units to increase the amount of open space, or separation of the units into a greater number of building clusters which have less architectural mass. These alternatives could be supplemented by additional landscaping further reducing the visual effect on the adjacent properties of the proposed building clusters. It will be the responsibility of the applicant to explore and present alternatives for continued review by City Staff and the Planning Commission. Alpine Village October 25, 1985 Architecture Architecture will remain essentially unchanged with the exception of the elimination of the A -type units. Proposed unit and building cluster breakdown is as follows: Unit 8 - Three Units @ 2,135 square feet/unit = 1 building Unit C - Four Units @ 2,375 square feet/unit = 1 building Unit D - Eight Units @ 2,300 square feet/unit = 2 buildings Unit E - Four Units @ 2,784 square feet/unit = 2 buildings A total of 19 units in six building clusters are being proposed to be built in two phases. Construction is scheduled to begin in the early Spring of 1986. The applicant will be required to file an application with the Board of Appeals for consideration of a height variance due to the fact that the E-type units exceed the maximum height allowed in an RM-6.5 Zoning District of 30 feet. In addition, the applicant will be required to submit exterior building material and color samples prior to the City Council meeting for review by City Staff. Preliminary Plat The preliminary plat depicts the subdivision of one lot into two lots for the construction of a 19-unit townhome development. Lots 1 and 2, containing 7.5B acres and proposed for townhomes, is currently zoned R1-22 with a request for a change to RM-6.5. The remaining 0.85, (36,94D square feet) which has an existing single family home located on it, shall remain zoned R1-22. Signage and Lighting Any signage or lighting details shall be submitted for review by Staff prior to building permit issuance. Transition and Land Use In summary, the major issues presented in the previous Staff Report and of concern to the Planning Commission and neighborhood alike, was the transition between the single family residences to the south and the intensity and appropriateness of the proposed land use. In response to this, the applicant has made a number of revisions to the original site plan. The previous plan submitted depicted two, three-story walkout building clusters within approximately 130 feet of a single family residence. Staff's recommendation at this time was to either relocate or remove these building clusters to provide more of a transition between land uses. As a result of this, the applicant eliminated the southernmost cul-de-sac and the units fronting on this street. This accomplished three primary objectivies. First of all, it reduced the number of units from 30 to 23. This number was further reduced to 19, which is consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan's Low Density Residential designation. Secondly, it increased the distance between the single family homes and any proposed building cluster to a total distance in excess of 250 feet. Finally, it allowed for a decrease in the amount of grading required, thus allowing for the retention of the existing natural vegetation which has served to create what can be viewed as a natural transition between uses. In addition, the building cluster closest to the single family residences has been oriented in a north/south direction, thus reducing Alpine Village 6 October 25, 1985 the visual effect by providing and end view of the building from the south. Staff recommends that the amount of landscaping at this location be increased to provide further screening of this building. Staff has also made recommendations regarding the massing of building clusters #3 and #4, and transition to the adjacent single family neighborhood (see Landscape section). Further, the previously submitted plan depicted 30 townhomes proposed for this 7.52- acre site or 4 units/acre. Current plans depict a total of 19 units or 2.5 units/acre which is in conformance to the Comprehensive Guide Plan. On a site such as this, where there are a number of physical constraints, it is sometimes advantageous to cluster units to reduce the effect on the environment. Based upon a conceptual plan designed for 10 single family lots and the current plan for 19 townhomes, a significant difference exists between the two in terms of relation to the site. As the conceptual plan indicated, the amount of grading required for single family development essentially eliminates the natural character of the site including a significant amount of natural vegetation. In comparison, the proposed townhome project reduces the amount of grading on -site, while saving a number of large caliper inch trees aiding transition. Overall, the proposed development plan for townhomes is sensitive to the site and relates well to the natural environment. Finally, the question remains as to whether the proposed townhouse project is an appropriate use for the site. Although the project relates well to the site from an environmental and site planning standpoint, is it an appropriate use for the site from a compatible land use standpoint? For example, located immediately to the south and west of this tract of land is a well established single family neighborhood. In addition, there is a single-family home to the northeast of this project. With the exception of the tract of land to the east, this 7.58-acre tract will be the last piece of land developed in this area. Because of this, should the site be developed in a manner that is consistent with the surrounding large -lot single family development, or should the type of development relate to the site while also lessening the impact on the adjacent properties as the townhome project appears to do. Conclusions From a technical standpoint, the townhome project conforms to the Comprehensive Guide Plan, relates well to the site, and has many characteristics of a single family residential development. However, the issue of whether a multi -family project is an appropriate use for this site in regard to the relationship to surrounding single family land uses remains. If the Commission feels that the proposed townhome project is not an appropriate use for the site, then the appropriate action would be for the Commission to recommend denial. There is some outstanding information on water pressure and flow rates and traffic considerations which has not been received at this time. If the Commission feels that this information is necessary in order to make a decision, then a continuance may be in order. If the Commission felt that this would be an appropriate use for the site, then the appropriate action would be for the Commission to recommend approval subject to the following conditions: Prior to review by the City Council, proponent shall: A. Modify the landscape plan to include additional plant material along the south end of building cluster #2 to help screen the views from the adjacent single family residences. C � Alpine Village 7 October 25, 1985 B. Modify the landscape plan to indicate mass plantings of coniferous trees along Alpine Trail to help break up the views of the garage fronts and to screen parking areas. C. Modify the building cluster configuration to reduce the massing of clusters #3 and #4. D. Modify the landscape plan to include additional plant material between building clusters #3 and #4, and the single family residences to the south. E. Submit water pressure and flow rate calculations to the Engineering Department for review to ensure adequate fire protection. F. Submit a traffic analysis based on the site design for this area. . 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 and the City Engineer. B. Obtain approval from the Board of Appeals for variances requested for height of the structures to be 38 feet. 3. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall: A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee. S. Submit samples of exterior building materials and proposed colors for review. C. Submit an overall lighting plan, with details, for review. D. Submit an overall signage plan, with details, for review. 4. Prior to grading permit issuance, proponent shall: A. Notify the City and the Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance of grading. t, B. Stake the construction limits with a erosion control fencing. C. Stake the grading limits with a snow fence. Any trees lost outside of the proposed grading limits shall be replaced on a cross - sectional trunk, area inch for area inch basis. C (. habiger & associates, inc. architects, construction managers, developers 7808 glenroy road — suite 200 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435 (612) 893-1020 October 17, 1985 Mr. Michael Franzen Senior Planner City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 RE: Alpine Village Townhomes Dear Mike: The purpose of this letter is to inform you of the intention of the Alpine Village Townhome development to endeavor to secure a private easement across the adjoining property for the purpose of constructing a sanitary sewer connection, as per Exhibit "F", Sheet 2, Of our submission. If we are successful in securing an easement, we will design and construct, to City specifications, the pro- posed sewer line, the cost of which will. be borne by the development. If we are unable to secure a private easement to construct the proposed sewer line, we would Petition the City of Eden Prairie to secure an easement for the sole purpose of constructing the proposed sani- tary sewer connection. We will reimburse the City if they choose to construct the proposed extension, for all costs incurred by the City, or we will design and con- struct the extension at our cost. Sincerely, C'rarles � :labi�ljer Development Agent Alpine Village Townhome Development ATTACHMENT A Statement of Intent - Sewer Line Extension .30, i ii ATTACHMENT 6 Street Location - Traffic Counts DATE 9-a. 9-dS 9•a6 9•d.7 AVERAGE of COUNT DAY MON TUE WED THUR FRI SAT SUN WEEKDAY WEEK END 12-IAM 0 Z 0 2 -- 1-2 I a I 2-3 0 0 O 3-4 0 0 0 0 4-5 0 0 0 0 3 3 r5-6 6-7 AI I(, 7-8 V. A9 33 y0 e-9 db d° a5 ar 9-10 / / 9 /8 10-11 / fq ( /b 11-12N .1 d d /5 12-1 d9 A 146 3(. 1-2 .20 I 2-3 A Q d 14 3-4 3 d8 d 31 4-5 60 V. 5-6 S-5 41 3(. 4 l o 37 4.6 q 7-e 3 A 3 e-9 1 18, 16 19 9-10 10-II I Id rb II -12M /` N TOTAL 3 SKETCH O N ATTACHMENT C Traffic Counts AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 117 Remarks; RECORDER TYPE: HR ❑ MR ❑ AR ❑ MACH NO TAPE NO. FILE NO. ATTACHMENT D Intersection Study Area Map 01 STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: THROUGH: DATE: SUBJECT: LOCATION: APPLICANT: REQUEST: Background Planning Commission Don Uram, Assistant Planner Chris Enger, Director of Planning September 20, 1985 Alpine Village East of Alpine Trail, South of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad. Habiger and Associates, Inc. 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 7.58 acres 2. Zoning District Change from R1-22 to RM-6.5 on 7.58 acres, with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals 3. Preliminary Plat of 8.36 acres into two lots for construction of 30 townhomes and an existing single family home This property is part of Outlot 2, Alpine Estates, and was zoned R1-22 with the rest of the Alpine Way single family subdivision at the time of adoption of Zoning Ordinance #135 in 1969. Previous development proposed for this site was to include the construction of two single family homes, in addition to the existing house on Outlot 2, with platting into three separate lots. Surrounding zoning classifications include R1-13.5 to the north, R1-22 to the south and west, and Rural and _ flood plain to the east. The entire area, including the subject proper- R- L ty, is guided for, and being t4 developed as, Low Density Single B Family residential dwelling units. The applicant is currently request- \� f . 1 _ - �. -- 102-5 4 AREA LOCATION MAP 9 C Alpine village Staff Report 2 September 20, 1985 ing a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential, a Zoning District Change from R1-22 to RM-6.5, and the preliminary platting of one outlot into two lots for the development of 30 townhomes, while retaining the existing single family home in the northeast corner of the property. Comprehensive Guide Plan Substantiation Because of the current zoning classification (R1-22) and Comprehensive Guide Plan designation (Low Density Residential), the development of townhomes, as proposed on this site, would require a change in zoning classification and Comprehensive Guide Plan designation to RM-6.5 and Medium Density Residential, respectively. Three important factors that are taken into consideration when considering a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change are as follows: 1. Does the change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan significantly change the land use balance in the community? 2. Is the use of the property compatible with existing surrounding land uses? 3. Is the type of proposed land use an appropriate use of the site? In other words, it is equal to, or better than, developing the site in conformance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan? It is the responsibility of the proponent requesting the Comprehensive Guide Plan Change to provide substantial evidence to warrant any change. These questions will be considered, and presented along with alternatives in the Conclusions section. Site Plan The site plan depicts nine buildings clustered in two-, three-, and four -unit buildings. Total unit count for this 7.5-acre site is 30 units, resulting in a density of four units per acre. The majority of units (23) front upon the extension of Alpine Trail, thus resulting in views of all garage fronts and also creating a traffic safety hazard from the number of cars backing out into a public street. For example, in the northeast corner, there are fourteen driveways within a 232-foot distance. (See Exhibit A of the Submission Materials) These driveways measure 16 feet in width and have approximately 11 feet of open space between them. To alleviate this, Staff recommends the developer investigate alternatives, such as turning the buildings in towards one another and allowing for one driveway, sharing driveways to decrease the number of driveways from 30 to 15, or providing some sort of internal site circulation other than the extension of Alpine Trail. In addition to reducing the traffic safety hazard, the elimination of ail garage fronts along Alpine Trail will also be more aesthetically pleasing. Required building setbacks in an RM-6.5 District include a 30-foot front yard setback, a 10-foot side yard setback on one side, a 25-foot combined side yard setback, and a 20 foot rear yard setback. As designed, the units proposed meet the 4 minimum setback requirements. Distance between buildings ranges from 20 feet between buildings clusters #1 and #2 to 43 feet between building clusters #8 and #9, { which are three-story structures. The site plan indicates the proposed extension of Alpine Trail from its current location at the western property line and continuing through the site until its Alpine Village Staff Report 3 September 20, 1985 termination at the eastern boundary. Alpine Trail has been envisioned as being continued through the adjacent site and being connected with the existing street network to the east. In a discussion with the City Engineering Department, Staff has determined that the most logical extension of Alpine Trail would be to the east, adjacent to the railroad, and connecting with Michele Lane. (See Attachment A of Staff Report). No plans have been made regarding this street extension. The plan also shows the addition of one 260-foot long cul-de-sac located along the south property line and servicing two building clusters totalling seven units. The four - unit building will be two stories in height, while the three -unit building will be three stories in height. This is an important factor when considering the views and transition from the single family residences to the south. Traffic Based upon the current Comprehensive Guide Plan designation for the property, a maximum of 2.5 units per acre, or 19 units, could be developed on this 7.5-acre site. Trip generation rates for single family residences can be calculated at ten trips per day per household, with 10% of the trips occurring in the peak hour. The resultant number of trips occurring for a single family development on this property would be 190 trips per day, with 19 trips occurring in the peak hour. By comparison, using a trip generation rate of eight trips per day per household for multiple residential, a total of 240 trips per day would be expected assuming 30 townhomes at 100% occupancy. Of the 240 trips per day, 10% of these, or 24 trips, would occur in the peak hour. Overall, a difference of 50 trips per day, five of these additional trips occurring during the peak hour, can be expected with townhome development of the property as compared to single family development of the property per the Comprehensive Guide Plan density of 2.5 units per acre. Grading The natural topography slopes southeasterly towards Purgatory Creek from high points existing along the edges of the property. These points range in elevations from 916 in the southwest corner, to 924 in the northwest corner, and to 934 in the northeast corner. With an 848 elevation as the low point, the maximum difference in elevation is 86 feet. Natural grades range from a low of 3% in the southeast corner adjacent to Purgatory Creek to high of 33% in the southwest corner. Because there are slopes of over 12% and an elevation difference of over 30 feet, review of the treatment of the steep slopes is required along with the development review. Overall site grading for the proposed townhome development project can be described as extensive. Cuts of at least 20 feet are being proposed in the northwest corner, while fills of at least 28 feet are expected in the southeast corner. Proposed grades are at a 3:1 maximum. In comparison to this, grading for a single family development would require cuts of up to 24 feet and fills of up to 34 feet. (See Exhibit 0 of the Submission Materials) Grades on the proposed extension of Alpine Trail approach 8%, which is the maximum allowed by Code. When grades do approach the maximum, the potential for snow removal and traffic movement during the winter months is somewhat hindered. Staff would recommend that the grades of the street extension be reduced. However, this may not be possible due to the excessive grades of the property. The feasibility of grade reduction for the proposed extension of Alpine Trail should be explored by the proponent. 11 Alpine Village Staff Report 4 September 20, 1985 Utilities Water and sanitary sewer service can be provided to this site. Water service to the subject property can be provided by connecting with an existing 12-inch water line located within Alpine Trail and extending an 8-inch water line along the extension of Alpine Trail until its termination at the eastern property line. Sanitary sewer service can be provided by tapping an existing 60-inch sanitary sewer trunk line located to the east of the subject property and extending a 12-inch sewer line approximately 950 feet to the eastern property line. At this point, a 9-inch sewer line will be continued to service the proposed development. The proponents have indicated that they would be requesting the City to design and construct the necessary extension of sanitary sewer line across the adjacent property. With regard to storm water run-off, a series of four holding ponds is being proposed, along with a major drainage swale centered within the property and releasing into the Purgatory Creek flood plain. In addition, there is an existing culvert located to the north beneath the railroad tracks which also drains onto the subject property. The general direction of drainage from this site, as designed, would be in a southeasterly direction towards the Purgatory Creek flood plain. Prior to final plat approval, the proponent will be required to submit detailed storm water run-off calculations, holding pond capacities, and erosion control measures for review by the Watershed District and City Engineer. Landscaping As the existing tree inventory indicates, there are a number of large caliper -inch trees located on this site. The majority of these are located along the ridge line to the northeast, adjacent to the existing single family house on the site, to the southwest adjacent to the existing single family homes, and adjacent to the Purgatory Creek flood plain. As the proposed landscape plan shows, the majority of existing trees, ranging in size from less than two caliper inches to over 24 caliper inches, will be replaced by new trees, 80% of which measure 2.5 caliper inches. The landscape plan as submitted does meet the minimum requirements of the City Code; however, Staff feels that, due to the size of plant material presently located on the property and the residential nature of surrounding neighborhoods, a portion of the plant material used for replacement should be increased to at least three caliper inches. Architecture As previously mentioned, the site plan depicts a total of nine buildings, resulting in a total of 30 units, or four units/acre. There are five different unit types proposed with unit and building cluster breakdown as follows: Unit A - Two units @ 2,040 square feet/unit = 1 Building Unit B - Seven units @ 2,135 square feet/unit = 2 Buildings Unit C - Four units @ 2,375 square feet/unit = 1 Building Unit D - Eleven units @ 2,300 square feet/unit = 3 Buildings Unit E - Six units @ 2,784 square feet/unit = 2 Buildings Units A, B, and C are two-story structures, while Units D and E are three-story structures. Height of these structures ranges from approximately 2B feet for the two-story units to approximately 38 feet for the three-story units. Maximum Alpine Village Staff Report 5 September 20, 1985 building height allowed within the RM-6.5 District is 30 feet. Because of this, the proponent will be required to file an application with the Board of Appeals for consideration of a height variance. The site plan and building elevations indicate that there is an underlying theme between buildings, creating a feeling of cohesiveness to the development while also providing for archtitectural variety. This is also emphasized through the use of common building materials and possibly a common color scheme. In this case, the primary exterior building material is four -inch lap cedar redwood siding. Color samples shall be submitted for review by City Staff. Building elevations try to take advantage of existing grades and views across the flood plain. Specific architectural treatment proposed within the units include pitched roofs, tuck -under, double -car garages, and the standard deck and/or balcony. Conclusions In general, Staff feels that the project as proposed does not substantiate a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change based on the fact that it does not completely address the issues presented earlier. These issues include the balance of land uses on the Comprehensive Guide Plan, the compatability between proposed and existing land uses, and whether the proposed use is an appropriate use of the site. In response to the first issue, a change in land use classification of 7.5 acres from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential within the City as a whole does not make alot of difference; however, on a small neighborhood scale it does. Because of this, for Staff to support a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change, the issues of land use compatability and whether the proposed use is an appropriate use for the site must be addressed completely. One important factor to consider in reviewing this project is the relationship of the proposed land use to those land uses currently existing in the area. As mentioned, this site, as well as the surrounding area, is guided for Low Density single family residential development and zoned for single family residential uses. This is evidenced by the fact that the entire tract of land, with the exception of the flood plain to the east, is adjacent to Low Density Residential subdivisions with zoning classifications of either R1-13.5 or R1-22. In a situation like this where there is consideration of placing a Medium Density Residential development within an area predominantly developed as single family residential, an important factor to consider is the transition between the two distinct land uses. As stated, the difference is the intensity of land use associated with Low Density Residential development versus Medium Density Residential development. Based on Staff analysis and as the site plan indicates, there are four single family residences located within 130 feet of the proposed building locations. This fact is emphasized because three of the units are three stories in height. Because of the fact that all four single family homes are located at elevations higher than the proposed buildings and looking down at them, Staff believes that an adequate transition is not being made. As a result, Staff is recommending that at a minimum, building clusters #1, #3, and #4 be moved away from the property line and additional landscaping and berming be located so as to aid in the transition from Low Density to Medium Density Residential. To accomplish this transition, a reduction in building units may be necessary. a ATTACHMENT A POSSIBLE ALPINE TRAIL MENTION C f A. ALPINE VILLAGE, by Habiger & Associates, Inc. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 7.58 acres, Zoning District Change from R1-22 to RM-6.5 on 7.58 acres, with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, and Preliminary Plat of 8.36 acres into 21- lots for construction of 19 townhomes. Location: East of Alpine Trail, South of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad. A continued public hearing. Planner Enger explained that this was the third time the proponent had been.. Planning Commission Minutes 2 November 12, 1985 before the Commission with this project. Revisions had been made to the 5 plans and additional information provided for City review. Mr. Charles Habiger, proponent, reviewed the three-dimensional model and graphics depicting proposed screening with the Commission. He stated that he had also spoken with the property owner to the east regarding a utility easement for extension of sanitary sewer to the proposed development. He stated that negotiations had been started, but that the property owner to the east had determined that he did not want to have an easement through his property. Mr. Habiger stated that, due to this response, proponents would be asking the City to participate in the extension of the sanitary sewer and in obtaining the necessary easements for the development. Mr. Habiger reviewed the issued of property value. He stated that the value of the units proposed for construction was within the same range, or higher, than those existing in the neighborhood at this time. Mr. Habiger stated that it was not the responsibility of the developer to provide for a private park for the neighborhood by allowing this property to remain undeveloped, that the land owner had a right to develop the property, Planner Uram reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff Report dated November 8, 1985 with the Commission. He stated that the major issue was that of land use compatibility with the existing residential uses in / this neighborhood. Gartner asked why the proponents were requesting a variance to allow for greater height of the structures by eight feet. Mr. Habiger responded that it was their desire to work with the topography of the site and not disturb the natural "lay of the land" any more than necessary. Gartner asked what the maximum length of a cul-de-sac could be according to City requirements. Planner Enger responded that the maximum length allowed was 500 feet. Proponents were requesting a 900 ft. long cul-de-sac. Planner Enger noted that there were other cases of such lengthy cul-de-sacs in the City where other alternatives were not available for various reasons. Marhula asked if the cui-de-sac would be temporary, or permanent. Planner Enger responded that it would likely be temporary and eventually the road would be connected to development to the east. Gartner asked whether it would be possible to have a different type of development occur on this property, without City review, if an approval was granted for the 19-unit proposal currently before the Commission. Planner Enger responded that the City took precautions to see that what was approved was developed, for example, the City entered into an agreement with each developer regarding any particular parcel. In each agreement, a specific set of plans were always referred to, those plans being the ones reviewed and approved by the City. Also, the zoning ordinance approved for any parcel was tied to those specifically approved plans. Planner Enger noted that, within the agreement, there was also a clause regarding the conditions of the agreement passing on to any heirs, successors, or assigns of the property. If any changes were desired for the approved plans, it would require review again by the Planning Commission and City Council based on Planning Commission Minutes 3 November 12, 1985 this condition. Hallett asked about developing the property as Low Density Residential with traditional single family homes. Planner Enger responded that Staff had reviewed the alternative of using the same road alignment as proposed for the townhome development, but, instead, platting single family lots along this road. He stated that it was a feasible plan, which would not necessarily require sewer and water for development. Planner Enger stated that this "single family" plan had been reviewed by the City Engineer. The City Engineer's response was that the smallest lot which could be approved without sewer and water would have to be a half -acre lot, that he would not be comfortable without sewer and water on any lots smaller than a half -acre in size. Mr. Barry Kramer, 7000 Alpine Trail, expressed concern about the potential for traffic problems in the area with the addition of this development. He stated that recent traffic counts had been done for this area; however, he added that he did not feel the traffic counts had been taken in the appropriate location. Mr. Kramer stated that he felt traffic counts should be considered along Alpine Trail, since, in his opinion, the majority of the traffic would be routed along Alpine Trail. Mr. Kramer noted that Alpine Trail was only 26 ft. wide, adding that, with cars parked on either side, the width of this road would be prohibitive for carrying as much traffic as was planned by this proposed development, in addition to the existing Ir traffic on the road. Mr. Kramer expressed concern for the safety of children in the neighborhood, also. He pointed out that the intersection of Alpine Trail and Hillcrest Lane was a school bus stop. He stated that he did not feel that the sight lines at this intersection were such that the children would be easily seen by traffic. Mr. Kramer presented slides of the intersections discussed. Mr. Al Bode, 16090 Alpine Way, stated that he was still concerned about the difference in land use proposed for the site. He added that he did not feel a Comprehensive Guide Plan change was in order for the property. Mr. Bode stated that the majority of the people in the neighborhood with whom he had spoken had told him that the City had the area zoned as R1-22 and guided for Low Density Residential land use. Mr. Bode stated that he felt this must be the information that the developer had, as well. Mr. Bode stated that he felt the developer's requests for variance to height of the structures and for length of cul-de-sac should not be approved in any case. He asked what the benefit would be to anyone but the developer, in the event these variances were granted. Regarding the property value information provided by the developer at this, and the previous, Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Bode stated that he felt it was not appropriate for the developer to be using assessed valuation for comparison purposes as it was a known fact that assessed value could be significantly lower than market value for property. Mr. Bode also questioned the ability of the developer to sell the townhouse units given the recent information in newspapers regarding the abundance of townhomes in the Metropolitan Area. Planning Commission Minutes 4 November 12, 1985 Mr. Dwight Harvey, 16190 Alpine Way, expressed concern about the requirement for a sanitary sewer connection to be paid for by the City, instead of by the developer. He stated that he had spoken with Mr. Anderson, owner of the property to the east, regarding his wishes for development at this time. Mr. Anderson indicated to him that he was not prepared to develop at this time and was not in favor of granting an easement for purposes of extension of a sanitary sewer line across his property. At this time, Mr. Anderson's property had been established as a wildlife santuary by Mr. Anderson, himself. Mr. Harvey stated that, in his opinion, it appeared that the developer was taking advantage of this property owner just for the purpose of developing, without offering anything in return. Mr. Harvey expressed concern about the compatibility of the proposed multiple family use with the existing single family neighborhood, which had been in place for 20-25 years. He noted that in the eleven years he had lived in his home, that the two owners of the property proposed for development that he knew had been content to leave the property in its present state, with a family living in the A -frame house. Mr. Harvey stated that he did not feel the existing neighborhood was against development, completely, for this property, only that they were against any multiple family units being developed on the property. He stated that he felt the issue was one of consistency. Mr. Harvey stated that the developer had stated that only three homes would have direct visual impact from the proposed multiple family units being developed on this property. He then presented slides indicating that other existing homes would also have views of the structures. Mr. Harvey noted that because the developer wanted to place 20 ft. of fill on the property and because the developer was also requesting a variance to allow for the structures to be 38 ft. in height, that many of the existing homes in the single family neighborhood would have views of the proposed units, not just three of them. Mr. Harvey stated that he had found that all developments in the area to the north and west had generally been single family over the past several years. He stated that, if this development was approved, it would be the only townhouse development north of Highway #5, as far north as the Eden Prairie north municipal boundary. Mr. John Lyngdal, 16170 Alpine Way, stated that he concurred with Mr. Harvey regarding the fact that the existing neighborhood was not "anti - development," but that they did not want a multiple family development approved for this property. He stated that he felt the developer should have known about the difficulties of this site all along. Marhula stated that he felt the multiple family units provided for as little disruption of the topography as would be possible for development of this property; however, he added that he was concerned about the compatibility of the land use with the existing neighborhood. Marhula asked if the proponents would be requesting the City to install the sanitary sewer with a public improvement project. Mr. Habiger responded that this was the case. Mr. Habiger added that the proposed location of the easement through Mr. Anderson's property to the east was in the best Planning Commission Minutes 5 November 12, 1985 possible location for Mr. Anderson to develop his property at some point in the future. MOTION 1: Motion was made by Bye, seconded by Dodge, to close the public hearing. Motion carried--7-0-0 Marhula asked if the City ever became involved in the condemnation of property for purposes of extension of sanitary sewer to service development. Planner Enger responded that condemnation was one of the most expensive methods for a City to use in a situation like this. He stated that the proponents had indicated that they would cover all of the City's costs, if this became necessary in order to obtain sanitary sewer for the property. Planner Enger added that it was the City Council that most often became involved in these matters. Hallett asked if Mr. Anderson would be reimbursed for his property if it were condemned. Planner Enger stated that it would require a court proceeding to do so, but that the settlements were often generous. Gartner asked if the proponents had agreed to pay for the sanitary sewer line across Mr. Anderson's property. Planner Enger stated that the City r Staff had received a letter to that effect. Gartner asked how long the extension of pipe would be. Planner Enger responded that it would be approximately 1,100 ft. Marhula asked if other alternatives for servicing the property with sanitary sewer had been explored, suggesting that possibly a lift station would be a viable alternative. Planner Enger responded that Staff had reviewed the possibility of a temporary lift station, but that City policy was to install a lift station only as a last resort. Planner Enger stated that there was continual maintenance required with lift stations over the life of the system, which could be costly. Gartner asked if the amount of fill proposed, 20 ft., would end up damaging many of the existing trees. Planner Enger stated that this should not be the case. He stated that some trees would be lost, regardless of the type of construction done on the property; however, the majority of them would be saved. Planner Uram reviewed the landscape plan for the development, indicating the trees to be saved, those to be lost, and those to be replaced by the developer. Planner Enger stated that, upon review of the or the development, it was Staff's opinion that the amount ofrgrading ading pshown lan fwas the least amount of grading likely to take place for development of this property. He stated that both plans, single family development and multiple family development, both with the same road system, would likely be equal in ( terms of preservation of the natural features of the site. i Chairman Schuck asked if the proponents were willing to consider development of the property as R1-22, instead. Mr. Habiger stated that, if the townhouse development was not approved by the City, then the proponents r Planning Commission Minutes 6 November 12, 1985 would likely return with a single family development proposal for the property. Marhula stated that it was not a question of density at .this time, but one of ':housing ,style and neighborhood styles. He one' of the; questions that the Commission must answer was what ;the:incentive.would be to approve a development of this type in this location. Marhula pointed out that Staff had determined that there was no difference between the multiple family and single family developmentapproachesto this property in terms of preservation of natural features, thereforethere' would be no "trade off" for ,approving a multiple family 'development an this property; Marhula stated that he was concerned about the; compatibility of the neighborhoods. Dodge asked what would happen if the Planning Commission recommended approval of this project and the 'City'Council did -:not approve the extension of sanitary sewer. "Planner Enger'responded that `the project would not be built in that case. Johannes asked if attached units were allowed in the R1-22 Zoning District. Planner finger responded that they were not. Marhula asked if any duplexes existed in this area. Planner Enger responded that there were three. - MOTION 2: Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Marhula,' to recommend to the City Council denial of the request of Habiger and Associates, Inc., for.'Zoning District Change from R1-22 to RM4.5 for; 7.58 acres, based on the finding that the plans for multiple family development are not compatible with the. adjacent and existing single family neighborhood. Motion carried--7-0-0 Marhula noted that the neighborhood should be aware that the development of the property as single family may mean greater traffic volumes in the !I future. E. ALPINE VILLAGE, by Habiger & Associates, Inc. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 7.58 acres, Zoning District Change from R1-22 to RM-6.5 on 7.58 acres, with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, and Preliminary Plat of 8.36 acres into two lots for construction of 30 townhomes. Location: East of Alpine Trail, South of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad. A continued public hearing. Staff reported that the proponents had made major changes to the development proposal. Of greatest significance, proponents had eliminated their request for an amendment to the Comprehensive Guide Plan designation for the Property and reduced the total number of units to 19, which met the existing Low Density Residential designation of the property. Staff noted that there were still concerns from the existing surrounding residents regarding sewer and water, storm water drainage, and traffic, in particular. Mr. Charles Habiger, proponent, reviewed the changes made to the plans in detail, including straightening of the street, elimination of a cul-de-sac, units were removed in some areas, less trees were being removed, the steepness of the street through the project was lessened, less fill would be needed with the revised plan, there would be a reduced amount of hard surface cover, and less grading would be needed with the revised plan. Mr. Habiger discussed the architecture of the structures, noting that the living units were oriented toward the flood plain natural area for the best views. r lHabiger noted that e City Fire Marshall slhad Se egardingtheextension ofwater throughtheproject. The plans, submitted, did not indicate whether adequate water pressure would be available for those units located at the end of the road. Mr. Habiger stated that proponents would be submitting calculations to the City Engineer's office regarding this. He noted that proponent's consulting engineers had indicated that there would be adequate pressure for emergency purposes. Mr. Habiger stated that it was clear that one of the major concerns of the surrounding residents was the traffic to be generated by such a development. Mr. David Koski, Barton-Aschman, Associates, traffic consultants for proponents, stated that based on their calculations, the total number of ( vehicle trips per day from the development would be approximately 160, 49 of i 1 which would occur during the PM peak hour and 33-40 of which would occur during the AM peak hour. Mr. Koski discussed various street signage methods, which would aid in control of the intersections involved in this neighborhood and provide greater safety for the residents. Mr. Koski stated I Planning Commission Minutes 5 October 28, 1985 that it was his conclusion that the amount of additional traffic introduced into this neighborhood by this development would not induce additional hazardous traffic conditions. Mr. Habiger reviewed slides of the area from locations surrounding the site. He stated that the cost of the units would be between $97-130,000 each. Mr. Habiger then reviewed the average demographic background of the purchasers of such units. Mr. Habiger noted that another concern of the existing surrounding residents was that of the potential loss of property value to their property as a result of development of multiple family units adjacent to their single family units. He stated that he had contacted the City Assessors in Eden Prairie, Edina, and Bloomington, all of whom had informed him that they knew of no situation where the construction of multiple family units had decreased the value of single family units in a neighborhood. Planner Uram reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff Report of October 25, 1985, with the Commission. Marhula stated that he felt the site plan had been well prepared in terms of protection of natural features. He stated that tended to agree with the traffic counts discussed by Barton-Aschman, and agreed that there would not be a significant amount of traffic volume increase in this area. Marhula stated that one of the remaining questions regarding the project was the matter of establishment of a multiple family residential development in an area designated for Low Density Residential and surrounded on three sides by existing single family homes. He pointed out that the only access to this multiple family area would be through the single family residential area. There would be no separate access for the multiple family project. Marhula stated that, typically, the City tried to avoid this type of situation. Gartner stated that she felt the traffic would be the same for 19 multiple family units as for 19 single family units, therefore, she did not believe the traffic would be a problem for this area based on this new proposal. Acting Chairman Hallett asked how many existing single family homes would have a direct view to this development. Mr. Habiger stated that there would be three directly adjacent to the site. He stated that there would be two others, which were not abutting the property. Mr. Al Bode, 16090 Alpine Way, speaking on behalf of the neighbors, stated that everyone he knew who had mcved into this area had checked with the City and had been told that the property was zoned R1-22 and tfiat the Comprehensive Guide Plan designation for the property was Low Density Residential. The developed area of this neighborhood consisted of large lot single family homes, only, no multiple residential. He stated that he felt the construction of multiple residential units would be inconsistent with the existing development in the area. He pointed out that the developer had to be aware of the existing development of the neighborhood upon purchase of the property. N Planning Commission Minutes 6 October 28, 1985 Mr. Bode stated that the neighborhood was also concerned due to the statements being made that the Twin Cities area was suffering from a "glut of townhome development" overall. He stated that this was a concern in that the property may eventually become rental, versus owner -occupied property, with the potential for becoming run down. Mr. Bode stated that another major concern was that of construction timing. He stated that, since the property could only be accessed by routing through the existing single family neighborhood, construction would have a significant impact upon the existing neighborhood. Ms. Gina Borden, 16180 Alpine Way, stated that she had made the investment in her home based on the information of the Comprehensive Guide Plan. She stated that she felt that townhouse residents had different lifestyles and created a different type of neighborhood than a single family neighborhood. Ms. Borden also expressed concern about the potential traffic increase. Mr. Dwight Harvey, 16190 Alpine Way, stated that he did feel that the slides presented by the developer accurately represented the view he would have from his home located south of the proposed development. He stated that he felt the units would be visible from his home. Mr. Harvey expressed concern regarding the extension of sanitary sewer to the property, indicating that he had spoken to the property owner to the -� east of the proposed development and had been told that no one had approached him regarding extension of the sanitary sewer across this property to service this development. He added that this property to the east had been maintained as a private wildlife santuary by the owner for some years and that the majority of the property to the east was located within a designated flood plain area. Mr. Harvey also stated his concern regarding the amount of fill that would be required for the development of the property as proposed. He pointed out that the units would eventually reach a point 58 feet higher than the existing grade of the property including the amount of fill and structure height. Mr. Harvey also expressed concern regarding the drainage from the site to the southeast. He stated that this was a normally dry area and that he was concerned that the amount of development involved would cause standing water to exist in the area, allowing for a breeding spot for mosquitoes. Mr. Harvey stated that the property owner must have had the knowledge that the property was surrounded by single family residential units, since his home and others in the neighborhood were approximately 20 years old. He stated that he did not feel that it should be the responsibility of the neighborhood residents to share in the cost of a bad economic decision by the property owner, simply because the owner could make more money by i building townhouse units on the property. Mr.David Quanbeck, 16150 Hillcrest Lane, stated that he had an uneasy ( feeling about placing multiple family units at the end of a single family neighborhood, as had been expressed by one Commission member. He pointed out that he felt the large lot single family character of the neighborhood should be maintained by development of this property in the same way. Planning Commission Minutes 7 October 28, 1985 Mr. R. Hoffman, 15950 North Hillcrest Court, stated that he did not feel the area should be developed as multiple family, but as single family residential to maintain the character of the existing surrounding neighborhood. He stated that he had not received notice of the hearing. Staff was asked to check into this situation. Mr. Hoffman also expressed concern for the potential increase in traffic problems in the event this development was allowed to take place. ;. Ms. Mary Walentiny, 7030 Alpine Trail, stated that her major concern was that of increased traffic in the area. She noted several examples of heavy traffic which she had witnessed recently. Gartner asked about the sanitary sewer extension across the property east of the proposed development. Planner Enger stated that the developer had apparently not discussed this with the property owner to the east. He stated that this matter would have to be settled prior to final approval of the development. Bye asked if there had ever been a proposal for multiple residential development in this neighborhood. Planner Enger stated that he was not aware of any such proposals. Mr. Barry Kramer, 7000 Alpine Trail, stated that he felt the property should be developed as single family residential. He noted that the developer had 1 stated at a previous meeting that, if the property were developed as single family, it would likely be developed with less than 19- units as allowed by the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Mr. Kramer stated that he felt this would be preferrable from many points of view in that it would reduce the impact of development of this property in terms of traffic, grading, maintenance of. natural features, etc. Acting Chairman Hallett asked if it would be possible to develop the property with 19 single family homes. Planner Enger stated that it would be possible, but that it would take a tremendous amount of grading and fill. Marhula stated that he felt three issues remained, which needed to be addressed prior to Commission action on this item, including- land use, traffic, and the sanitary sewer connection. Other commissioners concurred. MOTION: Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Gartner, to continue the public hearing to the November 12, 1985, Special Planning Commission meeting in order to allow proponent opportunity to answer questions regarding land use, traffic, and sanitary sewer connection for the development. Motion carried--5-0-0 l i it j: r I: i C. ALPINE VILLAGE, by Habiger & Associates, Inc. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 7.58 acres, Zoning District Change from RI-22 to RM 6.5 on 7.58 acres, with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, and Preliminary Plat of 8.36 acres into two lots for construction of 30 townhomes. Location: East of Alpine Trail, South of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad. A public hearing. - Mr. Charles Habiger, proponent, stated that he had held meetings recently with residents in the area surrounding the proposed development and that, based on those meetings and the findings of the Staff redesign. Report, he would like to request a continuance to see if the concerns could be mitigated by Mr. Habiger presented the materials for the development as proposed, reviewing proposed architecture and site characteristics of the property. C Planning Commission Minutes 4 September 23, 1985 Planner Uram reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff Report of September 20, 1985. He noted several concerns regarding the proposed Comprehensive Guide Plan Change to Medium Density Residential including compatibility with the surrounding existing uses of Low Density Residential, whether the proposed plan was a "better" Comprehensive Guide Plan designation was better than the existing designation, and whether the site plan details substantiated the change. Planner Uram stated that it was Staff's opinion that the use was not compatible with surrounding land uses, since the surrounding uses were all Low Density Residential and surrounding zoning districts were R1-22 and R1-13.5. With respect to a "better" plan than the existing Comprehensive Guide Plan designation would allow, Staff noted that, often, clustered units could more effectively save natural features of a property, but that this had not been shown with this plan due to the density proposed. And regarding site plan details of the project with respect to the requested Comprehensive Guide Plan change, Planner Uram stated that Staff was concerned about traffic, visual impacts, and transition with the project as designed. He also stated that, in order to service this property with sanitary sewer, it would require an extension of sanitary sewer of 950 ft. from the east and that proponents had not yet made any arrangements with the property owner to the east whose property the extension would cross. Gartner stated that she felt the residents of the community should be able to depend on the integrity of the Comprehensive Guide Plan and felt that the neighborhood had reason for being concerned about this requested change based on the plans proposed. Gartner stated that she liked the proposed architecture of the project, but that she felt this was an inappropriate location for a project of this density. Bye stated that she did not feel that a project of this density would be an asset to this neighborhood. She added that she was concerned about the traffic situation with the addition of these units, as well. Johannes asked if a single family residential plan had been prepared for this site and how many units of single family residential would be allowed on this property based on the current Comprehensive Guide Plan designation. Planner Uram stated such a plan had been prepared by the developer and rejected, adding that 19 units would be possible under the current Comprehensive Guide Plan designation. Johannes asked if more of the natural features would be saved by multiple residential, or single family residential, development of the property. Planner Uram stated that it was possible that the multiple residential development of this property could save more natural features. Johannes stated that he was not certain that single family homes would be the best unit type for this property and added that he, too, was concerned about the traffic matters presented. Acting Chairman Hallett asked if there was land east of Purgatory Creek g (� which was developable and whether the extension of the road Proposed would i be necessary to service such property. Planner Enger stated thattherewas developable land in this area, but that the extension of the road was not necessary for that property to develop. Acting Chairman Hallett asked what the advantage would be to allowing this road to be extended across Purgatory i Planning Commission Minutes 5 September 23, 1985 Creek. Planner Enger stated that it would allow for another outlet for traffic out of that area, through the Alpine Way neighborhood, and provide for additional access for public safety vehicles. Mr. Al Bode, 16090 Alpine Way, expressed concern for the proposed change to the Comprehensive Guide Plan designation for the project. He stated that his decision to purchase a home in this area was based upon the fact that the area was nearly completely developed as single family residential and that the City's plan indicated the same type of use for this remaining open property. Also, the property was zoned R1-22, a single family residential designation. Mr. Bode also expressed concern for the phasing of the project. He questioned how long construction traffic would be present and have an impact on the existing residential neighborhood, considering the fact that there was only one access to the property, which was through the existing neighborhood. He also questioned how such a small townhouse project could support an association in order to deal with snow plowing, architectural controls, etc. Mr. Bode expressed concern that such a small association may not survive the costs of such maintenance requirements and the project may become run down for lack of maintenance. With respect to other developments in the City, Mr. Bode stated that he had seen parks, trails, or other amenities dedicated to the City as part of the development. He stated that this was not the case with the proposed project ( and asked who, besides the developer, would have anything to gain by the development of this property as proposed. Mr. Dwight Harvey, 16190 Alpine Way, stated that his property was located directly south of the proposed development. He stated that he supported and agreed with the comments made by Mr. Bode regarding the development. Mr. Harvey stated that he felt the development of this property may have a negative impact on the creek and wildlife in the area. In addition, he stated that he felt there was a problem with lack of transition to his home to the south and that of his neighbors. He presented pictures to the Commission of the property as viewed from his home. Mr. Harvey stated that, while some trees did exist between his property and the proposed development, they were deciduous trees, which would provide little, or no, screening for the majority of the year. He stated that he felt three-story townhomes would be very visible from his home, especially since the elevation of his property was greater than that of the proposed development. Mr. Harvey also expressed concern about the intentions of the developer to request a public improvement project for extension of sanitary sewer to the property. He stated that he felt this would be a burden to the City financially. a Mr. David Quanbeck, 16150 Hillcrest Lane, expressed concern about the traffic. He stated that he felt that, due to the topography, if sing le ( family homes were developed on this property, it would likely bea r ` development representing ten to twelve units, as opposed to the maximum l possible of 19, which would mean substantially less traffic than the proposed 30-unit townhouse project. Mr. Quanbeck stated that he felt the developer was proposing a rather unusual situation by trying to locate so i { 1 c 10 GENERAL 272537.08 11 CERTIFICATE OF"INDEBT 2356.40 15 LLIQUOR'STORE-P V,M- 42833.64 17 LIQUOR STORE -PRESERVE _ 3B676.28 3I PARK ACQUIST 6 DEVELOP 16049.62 3 UTILITY BOND FUND 193055.20 39- 86 FIRE: STATION CONSTRUCT 423:B9 44 UTILITY 'DEBT FUND = 149757.28 45 UTILITY DEBT FD ARB 135316.61 51 I14PROVEAENTrCONST FD 393993.71 55 'IMPROVEMENT DEBT:FUND ARB 37451.25 " 57 'ROAD IMPROVE14ENT:CONST FO 88699`.41 73 HATER FUND .38140.14 77 'SEWER FUND 158830.83 $156812I.34 NOVEMBER '18,1986 29397 VOID OUT CHECK 103.05- 30646 VOID OUT CHECK 5.00- 869 VOID OUT CHECK 836.00- 3B3 P E R A PAYROLL 6/13/86 12.41 0884 AT & T COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 150.12 30885 AT & T INFORMATION SYSTEMS SERVICE 831.75 30B86 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE -SENIOR CENTER NEWSLETTER 37.50 30887 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 21426.49 30888 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CONFERENCE -ENGINEERING DEPT 45.00 30889 SUPPLEES 7 HI ENTER INC NOVEMBER 86 RENT -LIQUOR STORE 4205.27 30890 JIM WALTER PAPERS XEROX PAPER -CITY HALL 527.24 30891 MN OFFICE ON VOLUNTEER SERVICES CONFERENCE -COMMUNITY CENTER 32.00 30892 BRIAN BERTELSON REFUND -SKATING LESSONS 16.00 30893 JUSTIN CHADWICK REFUND -RACQUETBALL LESSONS 15.00 30894 ANGELA CRAMER REFUND -SKATING LESSONS 13.00 30895 JEANETTE GILLIS REFUND -SKATING LESSONS 16.00 30896 KARI HOLLAND REFUND -PRENATAL EXERCISE 26.00 30897 JEANNE KELLER REFUND -PRENATAL EXERCISE 26.00 30898 MATT KLOSKOWSKI REFUND -SWIMMING LESSONS 3.00 30899 MARK LEVOIR REFUND -SKATING LESSONS 16.00 30900 DENISE NARCHI REFUND -PRENATAL EXERCISE 26.00 30901 JOHN REMAKEL REFUND -SKATING LESSONS 16.00 30902 CHRISTOPHER ROSE REFUND -SKATING LESSONS 16.00 30903 VOID OUT CHECK O.OD 30904 BETH WILSON REFUND -PRENATAL EXERCISE 26.00 30905 TRAVIS WOUDSTRA REFUND -SKATING LESSONS 16.00 30906 MINNESOTA GAS CO SERVICE 2004.92 30907 EAGLE DIST CO LIQUOR 1307.03 108 EAGLE WINE CO LIQUOR 150.79 j09 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 217.25 30910 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO WINE 1112.42 30911 QUALITY WINE CO WINE 2198.52 30912 TWIN CITY WINE CO WINE 4353.35 30913 MARK VII SALES WINE 147.00 30914 DANA GIBBS PACKET DELIVERIES 65.00 30915 AT & T COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 36.57 30916 CMS SEMINARS INC CONFERENCE -COMMUNITY CENTER 225.00 30917 MINNESOTA GAS CO SERVICE 1547.66 30918 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 4968.38 30919 JAY TREAT WAGES -TEEN VOLUNTEER PROGRAM 103.05 30920 MN DEPT OF P/S MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATIONS 9.25 30921 JASON-NORTHCO PROPERTIES REFUND -OVERPAYMENT ON UTILITY BILL 8970.75 30922 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER NOTARY FEE -FINANCE DEPT 5.00 30923 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK PAYROLL 10/31/86 23494.42 30924 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 10/31/86 9953.05 30925 DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS PAYROLL 10/31/86 18210.70 3D926 DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS PAYROLL 10/31/86 175.14 30927 GROUP HEALTH PLAN INC NOVEMBER HEALTH INSURANCE 2286.95 30928 PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN NOVEMBER HEALTH INSURANCE 16475.85 30929 MEDCENTERS HEALTH PLAN INC NOVEMBER HEALTH INSURANCE 7509.70 30930 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM PAYROLL 10/31/86 10.00 30931 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 10/31/86 5058.00 30932 ICMA RETIREMENT CORP PAYROLL 10/31/86 76D.00 933 PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE CO NOVEMBER LIFE INSURANCE 687.12 34 COMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE NOVEMBER LIFE INSURANCE 218.70 13881633 NOVEMBER 18,1986 30935 RE R A 30936 INTL UNION OF OPERATING ENG 30937 P E R A 938 CITY -COUNTY CREDIT UNION 939 NORWEST BANK HOPKINS 0940 B 5 K ELECTRIC 30941 CORNERSTONE ADVOCACY SERVICE 30942 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO 30943 BEER WHOLESALERS INC 30944 COCA COLA BOTTLING CO 30945 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 30946 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO 30947 KIRSCH DISTRIBUTING CO 30948 MARK VII SALES 30949 PEPS1/7-UP BOTTLING CO 30950 ROYAL CROWN BEVERAGE CO 30951 THORPE DISTRIBUTING CO 30952 TWIN CITY HOME JUICE CO 30953 RITA ANDERSON 30954 PRISCILLA A BAILEY 30955 JUDITH E BAKER 30956 LEONE BARTA 30957 JOAN BARTH 30958 BERNADINE BEAUVAIS 30959 JESSIE 8EYL 30960 CONSTANCE GLAD 30961 JOHN BLOOMER 30962 ADELINE M BRAMWELL (163 JEANNE BRANDT o964 CHERYL BRIDGE 30965 R08ERTA BRONSON 30966 DOLORES V BROWN 30967 JAMES C BROWN 30968 SHARON 8UNTIN 30969 JOHN BURKLUND 30970 DOROTHY A CA8A 30971 BARBARA CAIL 30972 LINDA JEAN CAMPBELL 30973 LOIS JANE CAMPSELL 30974 ANN CHEATHAM 30975 LOUISE J DOUGHTY 30976 NANCY DOWNEY 3D977 NORMA ENGEL 30978 PERRY FORSTER 30979 THELMA FRICKE 30980 VIRGINIA K GARTNER 30981 JANET GERECKE 30982 JULIET A GLEASON 30983 ANN R HAGEN 30984 LEOTA HALES 30985 CHERYL HANSEN 30986 JUNE L HANSON 3D987 ANNE R HAWKINS n988 HELEN HAUPT 8464178 NOVEMBER LIFE INSURANCE 81.00 NOVEMBER UNION DUES 693.00 PAYROLL 10/31/86 20146.24 PAYROLL 10/31/86 2363.13 PAYROLL 10/31/86 600.00 HOUSING REHABILITATION PROJECT 1096.00 -2ND HALF 86 BATTERED WOMEN RIGHTS 1250.00 COMMI55ION SERVICE 2634.86 BEER 4672.35 MIX 790.55 BEER 4119.20 BEER 11729.35 BEER 395.15 BEER 14186.80 MIX 403.75 MIX 177.70 BEER 16491.08 MIX 22.20 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 77.63 ELECTION JUDGE 69.75 ELECTION JUDGE 82.13 ELECTION JUDGE 6.75 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 78.75 ELECTION JUDGE 83.25 ELECTION JUDGE 79.88 ELECTION JUDGE 99.00 ELECTION JUDGE 81.00 ELECTION JUDGE 82.13 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 78.75 ELECTION JUDGE 81.00 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 119.63 ELECTION JUDGE 47.25 ELECTION JUDGE 81.00 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 78.75 ELECTION JUDGE 74.25 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 29.25 ELECTION JUDGE 75.38 ELECTION JUDGE 112.75 ELECTION JUDGE 81.00 ELECTION JUDGE 82.13 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 77.63 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 `-- ELECTION JUDGE 82.13 ELECTIDN JUDGE 78.75 ELECTION JUDGE 104.50 NOVEMBER 18,1936 30989 CAROLE HEDLUND 30990 MARY B HELFAND 30991 KATHARINE C HENDRICKSON )992 BERNICE M HOLASEK .,0993 ALLENE HOOKOM 30994 ISABELL IVERSON 30995 ELAINE M JACQUES 30996 BILL JELLISON 30997 SHIRLEY JELLISON 30998 DORIS JOHNSON 30999 PAT JOHNSON 31000 LYLE'J JOHNSTON 31001 PAULINE G JOHNSTON 31002 LAUREL KEITEL 31003 ` DELORES KLEIN 31004 JUDY KOBER 31005 SUZANNE K LANE 31006 KAREN LAVELLE 31007 GEORGE-ANN LILLIE 31008 NANCY LITTLE 31009 LYDIA MARTINSON 31010 VIOLA MCLAIN 31011 RICHARD W MCMULLEN 31012 WILLIAM D MCNEIL 31013 CAROLE MEIDINGER 31014 IRENE T MEYERS 31015 LAURA MICHAEL 31016 JUDY MILLER �1017 RUTH MITAL 318 JOYCE MYHRE 31019 ALFRED L NELSON 31020 CAROLINE NELSON 31021 MARION NESBITT 31022 KATHLYN NICHOLSON 31023 RUTH OLSON 31024 ANN PARKER 31025 LAUREL G PENNEBAKER 31026 JAMES RANNOW 31027 LAURINA REIFF 31028 BETTY SCHAITBERGER 31029 FRANCES SCHAITBERGER 31030 NANCY SCHMIDT 31031 BETTY R SCHNEIDER 31032 DOROTHY SCHWARTZ 31033 ALICE SMITH 31034 KARLA K SMITH 31035 VONG SUVANNARAD 31036 ANNE C THOMAS 31037 WALTER E THOMPSON 31038 RUTH L TRAASETH 31039 ELAINE B UDSTUEN 31040 MARY UPTON 31041 MELODY VILLARS 31042 ROSE WACKER 143 MARIE WITTENBERG 417093 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 74.25 ELECTION JUDGE 81.00 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 101.75 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 72.00 ELECTION JUDGE 78.75 ELECTION JUDGE 99.00 ELECTION JUDGE 105.88 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 82.13 ELECTION JUDGE 75.38 ELECTION JUDGE 78_75 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 101.75 ELECTION JUDGE 78.75 ELECTION JUDGE 99.00 ELECTION JUDGE 75.38 ELECTION JUDGE 81.00 ELECTION JUDGE 84.38 ELECTION JUDGE 72.00 ELECTION JUDGE 67.50 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 78.75 ELECTION JUDGE 36.00 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 77.63 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 72.00 ELECTION JUDGE 77.63 ELECTION JUDGE 82.13 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 78.75 ELECTION JUDGE 75.3E ELECTION JUDGE 101.75 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 81.00 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE B2.13 ELECTION JUDGE 6.75 ELECTION JUDGE 82.13 i ELECTION JUDGE 83.25 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 74.25 ELECTION JUDGE 29.25 ! ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 78.75 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 i. ELECTION JUDGE 11.25_'? ELECTION JUDGE 76.50 t`'', NOVEMBER 18,1986 31044 ETHYL WOKASCH ELECTION JUDGE 77.63 31045 JO ANN WRONSKI ELECTION JUDGE 99.00 1046 BARBARA VANDERPLOEG ELECTION JUDGE 100.38 .047 JOSEPHINE ZALUSKY ELECTION JUDGE 75.38 31048 THOMAS ZALUSKY ELECTION JUDGE 82.13 31049 ALLIED BLACKTOP CO 1986 SEAL COATING -STREET DEPT 6553.62 31050 ENEBAK CONSTRUCTION SERVICE -TECHNOLOGY DRIVE 88699.41 31051 NODLAND CONSTRUCTION INC SERVICE-WYNDOMHAM KNOLL 143053.95 31052 NODLAND CONSTRUCTION INC SERVICE -HIDDEN GLEN 3RD ADDITION 48448.67 31053 SHAFER CONTRACTING COMPANY INC SERVICE-CTY RD 4 A MITCHELL ROAD 194648.30 31054 SHAW-LUNDQUIST ASSOC INC SERVICE -WATER TREATMENT PLANT ADDITION 192793.95 31055 ACRD-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 702.62 31056 ALPHA VIDEO & AUDIO VIDEO TAPES -POLICE DEPT 113.80 31057 AMERI-STAR LIGHTING REPAIRS -PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING 146.92 31058 AMERICAN COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION 1987 DUES -DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES 75.00 31059 THE AMERICAN FORESTRY ASSOC 1987 DUES -CITY FORESTER 24.00 31060" AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK BOND PAYMENTS 172767.86 31061 AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC BOOKS -ENGINEERING DEPT 6.00 31D62 EARL F ANDERSEN A ASSOC INC SIGNS -STREET DEPT/ELECTIONS/PARK PLANNING 1613.28 31063 JERRY ANDERSON HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD 94.00 31064 ROBERT ARNDT OCTOBER 86 CUSTODIAL SERVICE 200.00 31065 ASPLUND COFFEE CO INC -CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES FOR COMMUNITY 84.00 CENTER 31066 ASSOCIATED ASPHALT INC ASPHALT-STREET DEPT & PARK MAINTENANCE 14328.76 31067 ASTLEFDRD INTL INC CUSHION/GAUGE/CYLINDER/KIT-STREET DEPT 223.62 31D68 PATRICIA BARKER EXPENSES -ELECTIONS 83.00 31069 BATTERY A TIRE WAREHOUSE INC -BRAKE PADS/BRAKE SHOE/BEARINGS/SEALS/ 28B.69 -CYLINDER/SIGNAL LAMPS/SIGNAL REFLECTORS - f STREET MAINTENANCE -.070 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON SEPTEMBER 86 IMPOUND SERVICE 3DO.DO 31D71 LOIS BOETTCHER -PARK & REC COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 52.50 FOR 11/3/86 31072 BRADY OFFICEWARE OFFICE SUPPLIES 4.11 31073 DAVID BROWN FOOTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 135.00 31074 PAUL BROWN FOOTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 378.00 31075 BROWN PHOTO FILM PROCESSING 294.96 31076 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC ROCK -PARK MAINTENANCE A STREET MAINTENANCE 5909.94 31077 BUSINESS FURNITURE INC CHAIR -ASSESSING DEPT YP0.00 31078 CARDELLE & ASSOCIATES INC SERVICE-FRANLO PARK 1460.DO 31079 CARLSON & CARLSON ASSOC SERVICE -EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 1488.OD 310BO WALLACE W CARLSON CO PRINTING FALL BROCHURE -COMMUNITY CENTER 3027.50 31081 SUE MCCARVILLE MILEAGE 14.00 31082 CLUTCH & TRANSMISSION SER INC -PIN SET/BRAKE LINING/RIVETS/BRAKE SHOES/ 1171.43 -ROD/TURN BRAKE DRUM/2 SPEED MOTOR/ AIR DRYER -FIRE DEPT & STREET DEPT 31083 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE OCTOBER 86 SALES TAX 14700.37 31084 CROWN RUBBER STAMP CO NOTARY STAMP -BUILDING DEPT 19.15 31085 CURTIS INDUSTRIES -BRAKE CLEANER/ CARBU RATER PARTS & CLEANER/ 318.54 is CABINET -STREET DEPT 31086 CUSTOM FIRE APPARATUS INC FIRE HOSES/HOSE CLAMPS -FIRE DEPT 1620.00 31087 WARD F DAHLBERG OCTOBER 86 EXPENSES BO.00 31088 DALCO -LASER PRESSURE WASHER/CLEANING SUPPLIES- 664.37 PARKS DEPT & COMMUNITY CENTER f��089 J90 CRAIG W DAWSON EUGENE MEETING EXPENSES 33.42 DIETZ -OCTOBER 86 EXPENSES & 1987 MEMBERSHIP 266.50 DUES -ENGINEERING DEPT 89754176 L 31091 DORHOLT INC 3-PART RECEIPT BOOKS -POLICE DEPT 695.00 31092 JENNIFER;DRESSEN MILEAGE 81.00 31D93 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU SUPPLIES -COMMUNITY CENTER` 9,64 31094 EDEN PRAIRIE: CHAMBER OF COMMERCE` LUNCHEON FOR PLANNING SESSION -CITY HALL 60.06 EDEN PRAIRIE LIQUOR EXPENSES -ELECTIONS 60.81 (1095 )96 CIW OF EDINA OCTOBER 86 WATER TESTS 160.00 1097 EPIC USA -TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONSULTING SERVICE- 1000.00" CITY HALL 31098 RON ESS HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PO 188:00 31099 00EYE A SONS BALES -STREET MAINTENANCE 38'50 31100 FAIRVIEW COMMUNITY HOSPITALS BLOOD'TESTS-POLICE DEPT 40.73 31101 FORD DANK-&-PAINTING,CO-INC MAINTENANCE CONTRACT -WATER DEPT 1500.00 31102 FOUR -STAR BAR & RESTAURANT SUPPLY; SUPPLIES-LIQUOR`STORE 149.50 31103 JOHN`FRANE . SEPTEMBER7B6'EXPENSES 165.00 31104 FRANZ ENG REPRODUCTIONS INC BLUEPRINTS -ENGINEERING DEPT 31105" LYNOELL FREY: MILEAGE 47.00 31106 G & K SERVICES TOWELS -PARK MAINTENANCE 12.92 31107 G &'K SERVICES TOWELS -LIQUOR STORE 10.66 ' 31108 G & K SERVICES COVERALLS -WATER 'DEPT 256.60 31109" G A L CONTRACTINGINCSERVICE-VALLEY VIEW ROAD TO MITCHELL ROAD 2154.48 31110 DARRELL_GEDNEY HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD 66.00 31111 GHA=LOCK-JOINT INC -WATER MAIN AOAPTORS=VALLEY:VIEW ROAD & 4760.00 - BAKER ROAO 31112 JEANETTE GILLIS KIDS KORNER INSTRUCTOR/FEES PO 121.50 31113 ROBERT GINSBERG REFUND -PLAN CHECK' DEPOSIT:: 50.00 31114 STACY LEE-GODWIN VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD - ::52.00 31115 GOODYEAR TRUCK TIRE CENTERS 4 TIRES -STREET MAINTENANCE _ _ _.. 623.32 31116,,000E GREEN HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PO_ 31117 GROSS OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 1.600 ..00 6791 31118 ROBERT-HANNON'III HOCKEY`OFFCIAL/FEES PO 20.00 119 HARMON GLASS OOOR GLASS -PUBLIC ;SAFETY BUILDING 70.59 HENNEPIN COUNTY CHIEFS OF POLICE CONFERENCE-POLICE`<OEPT 90.00 31121` DEPARTMENT OF PROP TAXATION -POSTAGE-FOR VOTER -REGISTRATION: B7.22 VERIFICATION 31122 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL CENTERS AUTO BODY PAINT -POLICE DEPT 241.20 31123 HOLMSTEN ICE RINKS INC ACRYLIC FLOOR -COMMUNITY CENTER 261.00 31124 HONEYWELL SERVICE - 35.00 31125 HYDRO ENGINEERING INC PIPE RENTAL -DRAINAGE 600.00 31126 IBM MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT -CITY HALL 424.32 31127 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL GIST #272 EXPENSES -ELECTIONS & COUNCIL . i 64.80 31128 INTL OFFICE SYSTEMS INC MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-C.ITY HALL 130.01 31129 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC FOLDING CHAIRS/DESIGN LIGHTS -WATER DEPT 8 2.52 31130 JOHNSON-BIGLER COMPANY INC SUPPLIES -CANINE -UNIT 85.06 31131 CARL JULLIE OCTOBER 86 MEETING EXPENSES 29.00. 31132 JUSTUS LUMBER CO -STRIPPING/REINFORCING-MESH/NAILS/STAPLES/ 396.74 LUMBER -PARK DEPT & PUBLIC SAFETY' , 31133 KARULF HARDWARE INC -BRUSHES/BAGS OF CONCRETE MIX/NUTS/SAW 820.18 -HORSE/RUSTOLEUM/MASKING=TAPE/RUG CLEANER/ -TWINE/BELTS/SPONGES/CAULKING/BOLTS/ -LEVELS/FASTENERS/.WASHERS/SCRAPERS/PLIERS/ i , -CHISEL/BROOM/SCREWORIVERS/KEY RINGS/ -BATTERIES/SCREEN/FLASHLIGHT/S.TAPCES/ -PLUGS/KEYS COPIED/LIGHT BULBS/PAPER -PLATES/NAPKINS/KNIVES/TRASH CANS/PAINT/": ROLLERS/SAWS/STEP LADDER/CAR MATS/PAOLOCKS ( -30360 1 31134 31135 KENDALL USA LARRY KLICK TILE FOR LOCKER ROOMS -COMMUNITY CENTER 301.04 -INSTALLATION OF SNOW SLIDE CONTROLS - 484.00 31136 KOKESH ATHLETIC SUPPLIES INC PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING -STOP WATCH/ICE PACKS/VOLLEYBALLS-CITY 264.29 MARY KOTTKE HALL & COMMUNITY CENTER BASKE138 (1139137 KRAEMERS HOME CENTER KROY INC MPACTBALL DRIVE/RULERPARKOFFICIASDEPT & WATER DEPT 79.55 31141 LANCE PHOTO SUPPLIES -POLICE DEPT 153.43 3114 31142 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD LATHROP SUPPLIES -LIQUOR STORE JULY & AUGUST 86 LEGAL SERVICES 196.15 26942.66 31143 PAINT SUPPLY CO LEEF BROS INC PAINT & EQUIPMENT RENTAL -PARK MAINTENANCE 1015.22 31144 LEEF BROS INC COVERALLS -STREET DEPT RUG CLEANING -CITY HALL 52.50 31145 31146 LOUISVILLE LANDFILL INC M-V GAS CO LANDFILL CHARGES -PARK DEPT & STREET DEPT 109.80 66.50 31147 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC SERVICE -CHAIN IDLER PULLEY/CHAIN IDLER WELD/ 210.00 46.44 31148 MIKE MARUSHIN SNAP RING -STREET MAINTENANCE -WRENCHES/BELT TIGHTNER-STREET DEPT & 92.55 31149 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC WATER DEPT EXPENSES -CITY HALL 31150 31151 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC METROPOLITAN FIRE EQUIP CO EXPENSES -CC NITYER 7.16 31.15 31152 METRO FONE COMM INC DRY CHEMICALSS---FIRE DEPT NOVEMBER 86 PAGER -RENTAL -SEWER DEPT 144.30 31153 31154 METRO PRINTING INC METRO WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION VOTER INFORMATION MAPS -ELECTIONS OCTOBER 10.50 0537:50 31155 METRO WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION 86 SAC CHARGES DECEMBER 86 SEWER SERVICE 88039*96 311.56 MIDAS SERVICE CENTER EXHAUST SYSTEM -WATER DEPT 88070.00 - , 31157 MIDLAND PRODUCTS CO -CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES FOR COMMUNITY 247.57 - 31158 31159 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP MILLER/DAVIS CO CENTER BLACKTOP -STREET MAINTENANCE & PARK DEPT 6752.28 60 MARION MILLER LEGAL FORMS/CARD FILE/TAPE-PARK DEPT KIDS KORNER INSTRUCTOR/FEES PD 26.42 161 31162 MPLS AREA CHAPTER MN CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO FILM RENTAL/BOOKS-COMMUNITY CENTER 276.60 75.00 31163 31164 MINNESOTA COMMUNICATIONS CORP MINNESOTA SUBURBAN SERVICE NOVEMBER 86 PAGER RENTAL -WATER DEPT 5150: 51.50 31165 NEWSPAPERS INC MODERN TIRE CO ADS -LIQUOR STORE 31166 MPH INDUSTRIES INC 8 TIRES -STREET MAINTENANCE TEST RADAR EQUIPMENT -POLICE DEPT 61.04 258.55 31167 31168 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO WM MUELLER & SONS INC BALL PIVOT/BALL SOCKETS -STREET DEPT 58.91 1- 160.91 31169 31170 MUNITECH INC MY CHEESE SAND -PARK MAINTENANCE TEST COMPOUND METERS -WATER DEPT 31171 SHOP NORTHERN CULVERT EXPENSES -PUBLIC SAFETY 94477 82.31 216.90 12.90 -PIPE FOR UNDERPASS AT ANDERSON LAKES 3425.00 31172 NORTHERN POWER PRODUCTS INC PARKWAY -DRAINAGE -FINAL HALF OF PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE 31173 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE CONTRACT -PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 247.50 4 -STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION -FLYING CLOUD jj 4050.00 31174 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO DRIVE BETWEEN VALLEY VIEW ROAD & LEE DATA -STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION -PRAIRIE 4. CENTER -DRIVE BETWEEN FLYING CLOUD DRIVE & 5100.00 31175 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO TECHNOLOGY DRIVE''; -STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION -GOLDEN TRIANGLE 31176 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO DRIVE AT WEST 76TH STREET -TEMPORARY STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION- 800.00 ! VALLEY VIEW ROAD & FAIRWAY DRIVE 505.00 (91620521 31177 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO -STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION-EDEN COMMONS 575.00 DEVELOPMENT 31178 NORTHWOOD GAS CO INC SERVICE 512.06 31179 NORWEST BANK MINNEAPOLIS NA BOND PAY14ENT 149757.2E 1180 BILL OLSON BLACKDIRT-STREET DEPT 212.50 181 PACIFIC POOL & PATIO REFUND -BUILDING PERMIT 85.50 i182 PARK AUTO UPHOLSTERY SEAT REPAIR -STREET MAINTENANCE 80.00 31183 CONNIE PETERS MILEAGE 17.25 31184 JOYCE PHELPS SKATING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PD 887.20 31185 PITNEY BOWES PHOTO DRUM/DEVELOPER-COMMUNITY CENTER 365.00 31186 KEITH POKELA VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 52.00 311B7 POKORNY COMPANY SUPPLIES -FORESTRY DEPT 8.45 31188 POMMER MFG CO INC PLAQUES & TROPHIES -COMMUNITY CENTER j 932.45 31189 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC -REPAIRS DUE TO LIGHTNING STRIKE -PUBLIC 337.35 SAFETY BUILDINGPRINTING-COMMUNITY 31190 PRINT SHACK CENTER 136.75 31191 PRIOR LAKE AGGRETATE INC SAND -STREET MAINTENANCE & PARK MAINTENANCE 479.76 31192 PUMP & METER SERVICE INC PUMP REPAIRS -STREET DEPT 73.76 31193 RECREATION SPORTS OFFICIALS ASSOC FOOTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 787.50 31194 ROGER'S SERVICE CO -BRUSHES/BEARINGS/ALTERNATOR REPAIRS- 242.44 STREET MAINTENANCE ? 31195 ROOT-O-MATIC SERVICE -SEWER DEPT 66.50 31196 ST PAUL STAMP WORKS INC 1987 DOG TAGS 205.01 31197 -WAYNE R SANDERS MEETING EXPENSES 16.75 31198 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES INC PORTABLE RESTROOMS-PARK MAINTENANCE 92.86 31199 BETH SAUGEN VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 13D.00 31200 ERIC SAUGEN VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 318.50 31201 SETTER LEACH & LINDSTROM INC SERVICE -FIRE STATION 423.89 31202 SETTER LEACH & LINDSTROM INC -SEPTEMBER 86 SERVICE -REMODEL COMMUNITY 761.37 CENTER 11203 SETTER LEACH & LINDSTROM INC -AUGUST & SEPTEMBER 86 SERVICE -EXPANSION 9143.59 TO COMMUNITY CENTER 31204 SEXTON DATA PRODUCTS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 74.75 31205 SIMPLEX TIME RECORDER CO TAPE RECORDER PARTS -COMMUNITY CENTER 20.50' 31206 THE SKETCH PAD SIGNS -ELECTIONS 167.03 31207 BRIAN SMITH MILEAGE 67.25 3120E W GORDON SMITH CO -SWITCH/DIESEL/FUEL/GREASE/SPRINGS- 5963.07 FIRE DEPT & STREET DEPT 31209 SNAP ON TOOLS CORP SOCKETS/RACK-STREET MAINTENANCE 27.7,5 31210 SNYDER DRUG STORES INC SUPPLIES -COMMUNITY CENTER 5.3E 31211 SOUTHWEST AUTO SUPPLY INC -MASTER CYLINDER/BELTS/IGNITION/FILTERS/ 2018.44 -BATTERIES/DIRT MASKS/SPARK PLUGS/TUBES/ -U-JOINTS/HEATER CORE/FUEL PUMP/HOSES/ HEAD LITE-STREET DEPT & WATER DEPT 31212 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC ADS -LIQUOR STORE 283.50 31213 SPORTS WORLD -LETTERING/STOP WATCH/RACQUETBALLS- 1104.80 COMMUNITY CENTER 31214 SQUARE CUT CABINETS -POLICE DEPT 475.00 31215 STATE TREASURER OCTOBER 86 BUILDING PERMIT SURCHARGE 7890.7B._ 31216 STRETCHERS PROFESSIONAL POLICE EQ AMMUNITION -POLICE DEPT 31.20 31217 R K STROM REFUND -PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT 50.00 31218 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET -LENS/LAMP/TRUCK REPAIRS -FIRE DEPT & 2769.09 STREET MAINTENANCE 31219 SULLIVANS SERVICES INC PUMP TANK -SENIOR CENTER Fn nn ! 18769926 : NOVEMBER 18,1986 31220 SUPPLEE ENTERPRISES INC SUPPLIES -LIQUOR STORE 3.29 31221 SWANK NOTION PICTURES INC FILM -COMMUNITY CENTER IM 90 31222 TARGET-220 SUPPLIES -COMMUNITY CENTER 25.02 C'j` ?3 `KEVIN TIMM FOOTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 308.00 24 -LORNA,THOMAS MILEAGE $.00 31225 ,TIERNEY BROTHERS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES -SENIOR CENTER 41470 31226 TURF SUPPLY CO CHEMICALS -PARK MAINTENANCE 2325.00" " 31227- TWIN CITY SUPPLY REFUND -BASKETBALL LEAGUE 'FEE 30.00 31228 ;TWIN CITY TESTING SERVICE -BLUFFS EAST 4TH ADDITION 3500.00 31229 -:,UNIFORMS UNLIMI-TED UNIFORMS -POLICE DEPT 3568.40 31230 UNITOG RENTAL. SERVICES UNIFORMS FOR CITY.EMPLOYEES 1397.25' 31231 'UNIVERSITY - OF MINNESOTA STUDY OF ROUND LAKE -PARK. MAINTENANCE 1125.0D 31232-.VAUGHNS INC AMERICAN FLAG -CITY HALL 73.32 31233 ;VIKING STEEL 'PRODUCTS INC PARTS -PARK MAINTENANCE " 10.94 31234 WATER PRODUCTS CO -COUPLING-SLEEVE/COUPLING NUTS/CURB STOP/- 6971.58 " -SUPPORT 'GASKETS/SEAL. TUBES/MAIN VALVE/ -DRAIN PLUNGER/HYDRANT GREASE/100-3/4 -METER.CONNECTORS/13 2" 1000 GAL METERS @E418.00/LANDSCAPE. MATERIALS 31235 WESCO ICE: ARENA. REPAIRS=COMMUNITY:CENTER 291.66 31236 -KEN WORDE HOCKEY; OFFICIAL/FEES PD 124.00 31237 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE FIRST AID SUPPLIES -WATER DEPT, 35.40 31238 ZIEGLER'.INC =O-RINGS/SEALS/VALVES/RIMS/CAP/PISTONS/ 2170.42 -BEARINGS/PLATES/NUTS/FILTER/HOSE/ EQUIPMENT REPAIRS -STREET MAINTENANCE 31239 ZIEGLER TIRE SERVICE CO TIRES-FIRE'DEPT 619.62 2274250 51568121.34 i NpV � J Q1-I2--T G. A'OSHOLT ATTORNEY AT LAW 1800 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST 120 SOITTU Srxrn STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 (0I21 :I32 - I200 October 31, 1986 Hon. Gary Peterson Mayor of Eden Prairie Eden Prairie City Hall 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Bluffs East 4th and 5th Additions Dear Mayor Peterson: At the May 20, 1986 council meeting Hustad Development, Inc. sought preliminary plat approval for its Bluffs East 4th and 5th Additions and the related PUD concept review and zoning variances outlined in the public hearing notice, a copy of which is enclosed. I appeared at that meeting as a representative of the Wilkie family, which owns the land shown in red on the enclosed map. As your minutes from that meeting will indicate, the Wilkies objected to the Hustad plat because it did not provide for access to their land. Preliminiary approval was granted, but in doing so you and the other council members recognized the problem and expressed the view that the Wilkies and Hustad Development should make an attempt to provide for access to the Wilkie property with a private easement. Following your direction the Wilkie's wrote Hustad with a proposal for doing that. Hustad Development did not reply to that letter other than to verbally indicate an unwillingness to negotiate a solution. Having been rebuffed in their effort to solve the problem, the Wilkies engaged Peter Kenable of Krueger & Associates to study the problem. Mr. Kanable has prepared a plan which will provide access for the Wilkies and, he believes, result in a better overall arrangement for Bluffs East 4th and 5th Additions. He has conferred with Michael Franzen and shown him a preliminary sketch. Mr. Franzen thinks the plan has merit and wants to see a final drawing. Mr. Kanable is preparing that now and will be submitting it shortly. I f Page October 31, 1986 Hon. Gary Peterson Please place on your agenda for the November 18 council meeting a request by the Wilkies for public -access to their land over Bluffs East 4th and 5th Additions. Until that time the Wilkies request that you withhold final approval of Hustad Development's plat. The Wilkies appreciate your concern about the problem ' of their losing access to their land. In cooperation with the planning department they are working toward:a solution which will be. in the best interest s-of'all concerned. Sincerely yours, ohn C. Rosholt cc: Michael Franzen Bob Wilkie Bill Wilkie Jim Wilkie Joel Puckett -nO.,Qa n O•O Am o"-+Ov3z •1 m Y 0. a Y m 0 • c1 J O m O N A 3 arf o< fYD ;� 6 � .�.. £ a C. O 6 N Y a c Cl .c •• 0 Y O 0 J J m m O 0 R rf J fD Y J .,-. O m ff d �• Cl N K In SV ^ 0 cu o v a s Jv S-0 c o rn m rrN cr W a J + J m m V Y d JVm(Am K m J a J c N (1 m S N JC O S1a J m O. O. S W 0 3 c J mmJ o.—ao< 1 � m 1a Y N m t0 o J m e 0 N Y d= n W m N J m y1 O J e+ m 3 �• w N Z C o J a vai a m -n o O J 1 9 c o -1 (a. W Y G7 C m O. tit Y N C Y O< (T m �• a C% pp a m m J N m S -� m G< W Om a p� �p ,•, d -n 3 J m J o m� O J N tY N« O O J •+• rT e•T m 0 °i fD ° m ��c -+ A 3 0 1 low m y Y a lc a . m � J• W 3 3 J I, m T m D m fp J O NrA fJ e•Tn OG C m m W O Y+ O m d A A J yy J m 3 J Etta J �.c al Sa O•m m c 7 .1 (1 m J N V m O. m Y ja d Y 7 O. £�. 1+ ty N F+ d '* O 7 m � 3 .Y.. N J S A A O t Y f �' m "� 1 N m 3 J M d A m coo n o. J o. 3.0 0_ Y Y m£ N c 0 3 n nv 9 nJ cr O'K m M. a� 1y N 0 I 10 O J 1'1 o.O.O N N r m a d Cl O O mO N •v ON O.O a m p c J £ £ 'O m d+ d ... im ~'fro a lai M wo 9.a s O h 6 c R rl• J Y N W 7 m 1r W£ G m -+ ... m J •+ la m = 5. 7. O. m J N rT �+ 7 '* 7 0 -+ 10 + 1< f w 1< + la O r m cl D r N A m < m m 0 D O Z z O m O v c W 1i A z G7 City Council Minutes -6- May 20, 1986 Pidcock asked what the usual procedure is to get a sewer line connection to property. Dietz responded that the Feasibility Study will determine the costs, the needs of the area and the probable alignment after which the project will proceed, with the possibility of condemnation if agree ment cannot be reached. Redpath asked if the road connection could be made through Autumn Woods. Hustad noted that it was a possibility. Peterson said that there is a definite need for a road connecting to Hwy #1. Pidcock expressed concern about fire and police protection in the project. A discussion of the collector road followed. Pidcock asked what the projected population of the project would be. Hustad said there would be 245 dwellings with about 500 residents. Pidcock also asked about the plans for the area between the current Hwy #18 location and the projected new roads. Hustad said it was proposed to be commercial and multi -family residential. Anderson asked about the possibility of running the road adjacent to the creek rather than between houses. _Hustad said that would not be economically feasible and that many of the current residents have voiced their desire to keep the area very private. A discussion followed regarding the future value of property in the area. Martin Diestler, 9905 Bluff Road, expressed concern regard- ing problems on Bluff Road, including the dangerous intersec- tion at Hwy #18, the need for lighting along the road and for stop signs to regulate traffic speed, and the temporary lift recommended by staff. He also expressed the needs for sewer and water in the area. John C. Rosholt, an attorney representing the Wilkie family, noted that the project does not provide access to the Wilkie Property. He expressed concern that the only option left for them will be a bridge over Purgatory Creek. Bentley asked if the Wilkie's had considered using the par- cel of land as a density transfer for development of their land across the creek or if an easement could be set up to allow for future access to the parcel. Rosholt said that an easement would be better than no access at all. Peterson noted that he felt there was at most one buildable site on the Wilkie property and that the concept of density c C City Council Minutes C -7- May 20, 1986 transfer would seem to make more sense for the property. He asked City Attorney Pauly about the legal rights involved. Pauly responded that there is no legal right apart from the provision in the City Code stating that, if a property owner is developing his property, provision will be made for the extension of a public road into the adjoining property; however, in this case extending the road would result in a cul-de-sac that would probably take up the only buildable portion of the site. Bentley said his opinion was that it would not be in the best interest of the City to put a public road there because of the potential damage to the entire scenic area that would result from possible development once there was access to the property. Peterson noted that the Wilkies could exercise the option of negotiating a private easement with Hustad. Jerry Hegge, 10015 Pioneer Trail, expressed concern about the effect of the project on the protected wetlands area by storm water run-off and the extensive grading required. He also expressed concern regarding increased traffic in the area and said he felt no further development should occur in the area until the damage done by previous devel- opers is corrected. Gerald Haas, 9955 Pioneer Trail, expressed concern regard- ing the pond and the drainage of storm water in the area. Director of Public Works Dietz said that it might be possible to work some plans for drainage of the surrounding area into the master plan for drainage of the Hustad development. Discussion followed regarding the problems created by ero- sion around the park area and drainage from the future up- grading of Hwy #18. Rhoda Haas, 9955 Pioneer Trail, presented a petition from residents expressing concerns about development in the area. (Attachment A). She noted that their entire garden was lost due to flooding problems in the area. Bentley said that he felt this concern, while genuine, was not immediately rele- vant to the project, but suggested that staff could be directed to look into the matter and report back to the Council. Mr. Briggs, 9715 Pioneer Trail, expressed his opposition to the use of his land to extend the sewer line and roadway for the benefit of the developer. He also asked how the costs of the lift station would be allocated. Dietz said that the lift station was part of the original sewer master TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John D. Frane, Finance Director DATE: November 14, 1986 RE: Quail Ridge Multi -family Housing Bonds for: Quail 'Ridge- $5,565,000 - Resolution No.-86-285 This :project was approved for bonds in 1985 and is .located east � of the Edenvale Clubhouse. The bonds were to be insured.by.a mortgage insurance. company called Ticor. Ticor ran into financial difficulties with some insurance it had issued on some eastern projects and has been refrained from issuing the type of insurance it had promised for,Quail ` Ridge. I The bonds have been sold and the proceeds are in the hands of the trustee, First Trust of St. Paul. First Trust,. as trustee, has the duty to protect the bond holders and har started a legal proceeding to have the court affirm its position of not releasing the bonds proceeds to the developer because the promised insurance or an acceptable substitute is not in place: The trustee is going to court and is asking the court to either affirm its position against release of the funds or that the court order a mandatory redemption of the bonds: Something has to happen in order for the developer to proceed with permanent financing. Resolution No. 86-285 says that if the court orders and the trustee consents that the City does not object to the order. : JDF:bw 11/14/86 i `i / RESOLUTION NO. A Resolution Authorizing the Amendment of A Certain Trust Indenture Between the City of Eden Prairie and First Trust Company of Saint Paul Relating to the City's $5,565,000 Mutlifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Quail Ridge Apartments Project) BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden - Prairie, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: 1. Recitals. (a) Pursuant to the Trust Indenture, dated as of July 1, 1985 (the "Indenture"), between the City and First Trust Company of Saint Paul (now First Trust Company, Inc.), as Trustee thereunder (the "Trustee"), the City issued its Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Quail Ridge Apartments Project) (the "Bonds") for the purpose of assisting Eames Apartments Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership (the "Developer"), to construct the Quail Ridge multifamily residential housing project (the "Project") within the City. (b) The Bonds were secured in part by mortgage insurance commitments made by Ticor Mortgage Insurance Company (the "TICOR"). (c) Since the date of issuance of the Bonds, TICOR has encountered certain financial and credit rating difficulties, and in response thereto, the Trustee has instituted an action in Minnesota District Court, Second Judicial District, seeking, among other things, to obtain an order from the Court that the Trustee, in recognition of the difficulties encountered by TICOR, should not release to the Developer the proceeds of the Bonds. (d) If the Trustee does not release the proceeds of the Bonds to the Developer for the Project, which the Developer has represented to the City is now substantially completed and rented, the Developer will be without the permanent financing of the Project which the Bonds were intended to provide. (e) The Court has indicated that a preferable solution to this impasse would be that the Bonds should be redeemed. ei (f) The Developer has requested that the City and the Trustee amend the Indenture to allow the Developer the option to redeem the Bonds at par plus accrued interest at any time upon appropriate notice of such redemption given to all owners of said Bonds. - 1 - MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Development Commission SUBJECT: Changes to the Development Commission DATE: November 10, 1986 As requested by the City Council, the Development Commission discussed a number of issues which were raised at the Joint Council/Commission meeting held October 21. The unapproved minutes of this meeting are attached. The Commission recommends that the City affirm its decision not to pursue the Star City designation by the State. The experience of other metropolitan cities which have achieved this recognition appears to confirm reasons that Eden Prairie decided not to pursue designation. Commission members believe that pursuit of designation as a Star City does not appear to be a cost-effective effort. The Commission recommends that the City submit an application for an All - America City award, but to do so a few years in the future. The All - America City program has a greater benefit to the community than does a Star City designation. For this competition the City needs to focus its attention on social issues, such as the upcoming human services needs planning study, rather than dwelling on physical aspects of community ( development when preparing an application. It is suggested that the Council solicit ideas from other advisory commissions for this purpose. The list of items prepared by Councilmember Bentley are, with an exception, staff research functions. The Commission finds merit with Councilmember Anderson's suggestion that the Commission as a whole be dismissed and those members who have attended regularly be appointed to a re -organized Commission. The Commission currently has one vacancy and will soon have another when Jean Harris begins her term on the City Council. Two commissioners - Marvin LaGrow and Peter Stalland - have attended one meeting each of the last five Commission meetings. New commissioners need to be recruited carefully to assure representation of many spheres of interest. Council is to review the charge to the Commission as stated in the Ordinance Code at its November 18 meeting. The section of the Code (attached) is more appropriate for an economic development commission which is independent of the City Council. The Commission requests that the Council review be postponed until the re -organized Commission (with new appointments in January) has an opportunity to study and recommend changes to the Council. CWD:jdp Attachments - C- O L .+ d C •-i C U.O+N 0 Odym da �rdM •0rm a A O Oa .ru ad.aiw qOc Mpyp U d d04 LOa UL d0, da 0>�.Ymr 0,C O. N O ( pw q... HP.Ow d� g4d0 Q007 'Q~ EE"8d YEq 04 U 4 O a -0 U q —cc p q u 0 a u c d u P U a u m 0 O d 8 p m c Y r "- d d�, Liv YCq = cqG uu d..yy >E'O� O'O u.,C. .drr Oma •bd >`N Z.2 0�� dC "� Uw-0Ud .pO 4 Y Coy++ aoq ... 6 OLA;; m 5u „G,q CW Cd opgv.Ur gyYga cp d d Pu w00 o L CO Q dy A w�qc ..ci [Lm O 7 E w C O ,p V 'Ou uG O ..w..,G. L - dui w L d u�Ya ^� 9 N 7 GUdd 00 A Wu A •r pO a AY rW �y..„~.y >C� q d p p cd �q� '•.. T�ww d 7O p�y OG ..q. �,ru uc d �A .-i cL C AYq Uu i19 c 'O d1+ GQ+G 8 UL .,•G r qA E q Y 4 E;Ord 1 Yq uw p GW'^•O W C p4+ 'O V p cw 4 �u y A y'0 .� AW daN qq q0� ym m NL Y �m..10 .D O0 4 q d uqrZ q w C 4..r Owu L pO'dV i ~YCL '� C -c 'OC c�O.L�dOu Om ✓YOr 3wa u� .>i O.Wu wYO =�OYd uuq Cy•pl Q+w o ..I m..pi"�q�Qy Q�dVq Co UVu u-OI SA> 40i c q .�'O d d E wOEO o wV Vti =u'.• >�a Utip q uE ,p 0, q `O CW ydWd.r dE� yEy yU E'y dE �yq� OaEO w�p GCW uadw0 ddLL a tdm aw PAgyy ya p.aM UYtiq TY �NtlI (•1 rl ..UiO Ut'c E dU ,y O�q Yu� IiM LL u'�+� r0j „c• -•p,V AgUw 7..G. QQg sM Umq .ter o,,O OU U yyY �'ym OUG pd� pL.07q ,QG q 8u'0 M04 >m W5.�•.Oi>W">Uc++4 ,+ 4.t>uo" _ GU Gc c0 a... �p O, d E•r c CLAD u UuczW q.4 d qd q E dq m`... u yrr po Fu Fw06 E� FqE F„'a.02 Op,r F'd Fq0 p .r '�y0 cq�.Ya Y3 d WO yq cm c� �O [.w ..dl Ud 7.+ .Or"O aW. mO 4 No AOa mw�a U y c1u 0 f ra A 4+VL E d Oq .Gi .. d. Oq c.Ei C! COa �r aC a.r LL Eq 0 i Nqyq .^a0Ep1 d r. O U. VVo y ydL>Ady �P zL O cY L�wnd ."qV'r1 c pY LyyiMm LaAWNd0y 3, Oc qmq w>ErEpC C Oip ��y .00 c VW.0 qa Gd '.• >E amyCE O ..UiQ dy L 4 d T A V = aC d 4= YG 04 0 qu C3E0. >'O Uq 4 .,G�ypl . "O .p M C E'7L O'•+O OPw M�' U�+ OqC a U0L w. N m N L Wv J a C Y m 1 0 C t 4 w rL d 1 ` O E d W e m 0 O.;.L d E Ehu > 0 Y 1 O VVIC d U U C G y d d 'O >..w. du F C d > 0 A mQ.'rq w rr "Owdd•• w w C O'O 0, w d O 0, ud S L w m � M OS ,00 0 m O O O p O 1 N U .r EYmd c qe .r aoa'°.>. u d c 0 wcY 0.r dN o�u WYp m� �. .7 ail 0d ao.,a, 0 dO �j aW EG ... E d O 4 N C o0mU� N U nr E '00 1 N c�0 Vio � m "'� yucc w a .. > d E > d dL O a Q=lu L 1 O u M •O I W A O [rti O�-1 C C p ti. w O w >.w dV 4 O D O 'O u q, I.I-1.T>rY TT r •-1 C A C C C PI 1 G G"C C U , 11 'O..>�>O,yd.?�E.m Cu.T + - wW O ISO OY U ti y Y Nm G'O0WWm p@ ti�O :ry m U V u O . (y W Y 'O Y M .. m m... a y u t.. m- O E Ow > .Q ,,,.'O m .� .. u U dY yA W U C Am „�• m •�'. q. u ..yi 'p Y Wy U m � yi W 4dVa" u. J 4.. 1 .] W J d W YO .'•u c O mmC W O'O W JC V C.4 m.W c m v 'a"Yq..,.0 >. Ubmq V 9 r N C T YC. N .Y V wo mE q B, 4• ,O Gu V Yw td N u d c: d am CoV• C ti qm ..0 d. O.ti W U cic. O ...q �.N�W+. 'N..wYr•d.. ,'m.mi.H11011 T'EmWdO Cwy r. 'Ada:-yy.pc,�W .N�.- .ti�.>myyS, W,0WA>. Oi o OO E >aW- gm.o ^WW4 .. p W.�OOOWU, U>Or wwO y;W . N UM.O d oB4Y •CO'mmy m •Y4mG1 o U.tysCpa 4m OEO. CJ �yO O.WO .Ya.ECC.ioYy,v(yl UBW _,WJmcm ,• H 0L>, *Z":0YOptiu N0 A imWW .�.yfl �iWu(� O q >y U,y OMyu OT mC O 0C'00 EQAwA cdCCm-;a0 , v]•. c..,tic U�."A. U cWm C> o 7 Gp ,~0 ue 4'd OT.S.mi �m 4 mW� mmm°mewc,u,m Jo .1 L uowWWW a m ':cyeocd W C W Y fT 4 E V C'O .y d M .qCV 0, 0, EYG ,d,� 4W ® 9 D F .,. U C Cm U.qt M V 3YE h,JW"U UM.Wi O,V i>17 .a xgo'O UO,x Oro ,LWtid Uy.O.0 m tiN.W Vua .y W m.WEy w U WV'0.44 W.�.dq -.. W N 3 z < �o W c u d 8 y a p O E.p E OJ,'O.4 y �. Opp4J E J C O vl ,a'YyC rmm mi ,r EV �..E ti'CWV yE WUmu F 4m UyO N.m WC . p] >. ;p Om °F0 9Vq 'cOmU O W 0 O, V ��d yW titi O; UUmb wpW ._.,qBm--i1 i.. u .0 h .., 0 Y Q »i m4 •� CHp m b' ~ C m N W: •. E O. L 4 V E O Um . gw yE-dm�i .0 UgYd UEE �fONVO .Y OB 9N �ItJI a O 3uN,Cc9 m c O U m O V 'aO cU c p LE„W�,.,mV Nm.'.00OCmi C m d y W V Lyp m m • WY,OA WdO .p p w'oW CO ti O'COw W W M1Uq W ,.. .. •-+ V O m V m0. Ew d •~�uuu-�, .6 YYInO Lam. t. EtrnB _... E 0,..Y y C ... 7 x W V pp] U'p t u J N- O] V fA dmwmu m m c W L U S rn.E rv,4Y.pW p ..W...C...B U'+CU ' MINUTES DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1986 7:30 AM, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, SMALL CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Youngdahl Boline, Dr. Jean L. Harris, Don Opheim, and Walter Thompson MEMBERS ABSENT: Marvin LaGrow and Peter Stalland CITY STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie and Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson I. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Chair Opheim called the meeting to order at 7:40 AM. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Thompson moved and Harris seconded to approve the agenda as prepared. Motion passed,4-0. III. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 5 1986 MEETING Harris moved and Thompson seconded to approve the minutes of this meeting as presented. Motion passed, 4-0. IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Response to Council Direction Commissioners reviewed a memorandum which summarized the direction given from the Council to the Commission at the joint meeting held October 21, 1986. Star City Program Staff recounted the elements of the Star City program and the progess the City had made toward each. Staff also reviewed a memorandum summarizing discussions with the cities of Eagan, Woodbury, and Apple Valley about their experiences with having been designated a Star City. All of the cities related the benefits of having organized their planning data. All mentioned that benefits beyond that were non-existent, and that the annual recertification process represented a large and questionable commitment; in fact, Apple Valley was not going to pursue recertification. Opheim believed that these experiences confirmed the City's decision not to pursue Star City designation. He reiterated his misgiving about the appropriateness of committing to such efforts in a growing metropolitan community. He said that the information needed to attract development in this environment is best provided by private interests. -z- Harris could not see what advantage the program held for the City to gain designation. The City is doing most of the effort well now. To do the additional initial work and the on -going recertification did not present a positive cost/ benefit to the City. Boline moved and and Thompson seconded that the Commission take the following position regarding the Star City program: While several components of the Star City program which the City has completed - including assembly of a community profile, community fact booklet, five-year capital improvement program, and a slide presentation - are pertinent and beneficial, pursuit of the designation as a Star City does not appear to be a cost-effective effort. Motion passed 4-0. All -America City Staff distributed application materials and a copy of the application submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center which won its recognition as an All -America City in 1985-86 by the Citizens Forum on Self-Government/National Municipal League, Inc. Harris related that she had been involved with this program when the City of Richmond, Virginia won designation and related the experience on a larger scale there. She believed that a few issues needed to be focused on which the community has addressed and around which the City has been brought together. Opheim said he has taken pride in the City's achievements in transportation in the Major Center Area, improvements which should have been a State responsibility. Boline questioned whether these efforts have timeliness and whether they could be considered on -going. The City Manager questioned whether these accomplishments are sufficiently unique to meet the requirements of the competition jury. They appear to be things that government would normally do. Opheim thought that the program seemed to be oriented toward social issues. The City Manager suggested that the upcoming planning study of human services needs in Eden Prairie might better fit into the All -America City program; in fact, the study process could be oriented to fit into the criteria. Opheim said that the City does not have many problems which are visible, but that the City should do some further research. Boline thought that the City could be a leader in this area, too. Thompson believed that the City was "turning its back on" residents with human services and housing needs and related frustrations from his own experiences. He stated that -3- he sought appointment to the Commission to have residents with such needs have a voice in the development of the community He thought that the housing study issue 1 identified by Councilmember Bentley wa sone which should be addressed immediately. Boline said that efforts which build a sense of community need to be looked at as a focus for an All -America City application. Harris said that submitting such an application is at least a year in the future. Opheim noted that whatever is identified needs to be primarily community -based, not government based. Harris moved and Boline seconded that the Commission take the following position: The All -America City program has greater benefit to the community than does designation as a Star City. The City needs to focus its attention on social issues, such as the upcoming human services needs planning study, rather than dwelling on physical aspects of community development when preparing an application for the competition. It is suggested that the Council solicit ideas from other advisory commissions for this purpose. Motion passed 4-0. Councilmember Bentley List Commissioners reviewed a list of possible topics to pursue which had been prepared by Councilmember Bentley. They reached a consensus that all but item 5 - establishing specific development goals and priorities - are staff research functions. B. Other Opheim wondered if there were anything in th Ordinance Code which related to attendance and membership, noting that the two members absent had frequently been absent. He will call these members to determine if they have a real interest in continuing to serve. He said that the Commission needs to be careful in its recruitment in order to have many spheres of influence represented. Opheim stated that it might be easier for the Commission to continue by following Councilmember Anderson's suggestion that it be disbanded and then re -organized; Commissioners who have attended regularly would be appointed to the re- formed Commission. P Thompson moved and Harris seconded that those members who wish to remain on the Commission should be required to attend the joint meeting December 16, and that the Council would fill the remaining membership at its first meeting in January. 4 TO: Development Commission FROM: Craig Dawson SUBJECT: Star City Continuation DATE: November 6, 1986 At the joint Commission/Council meeting on October 21, the Council requested that the Commission re-evaluate the decision to drop out of the process for certification as a Star City under the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development program. In particular, other suburbs were mentioned as having earned this recognition; it was assumed that there was some advantage to having this designation in contradiction to the Commission's prior position that it had no advantage to metropolitan communities. During the past week, staff has contacted three suburbs to determine if this were true. Based on these discussions, it appears that the Commission's previous determination is still correct. The City of Eagan became interested in the program primarily to have an incentive to organize the planning information required. The payback to the City in terms of what designation promised has not been realized. MDEED does not push new business prospects toward Eagan; in fact, the Eagan sales team has never made a presentation. It is experiencing problems keeping its sales team interested in staying together. Eagan staff has attended seminars and conferences on the Star City program and has observed that most of the programs are directed toward free-standing out -state t cities having stagnant or negative growth. Working relationships between the City and MDEED staff have been marked with conflict because MDEEO is not willing to recognize distinctions between metropolitan and out -state circumstances. At this point, Eagan will stay with the program and provide the annual recertification required only to the extent that it will need to do no more data -gathering effort that would normally be done for general planning purposes. Eagan staff indicated that the City would probably reconsider its Star City pursuit if it had it to do over again. The City of Apple Valley will not be doing anything required for recertification this year. Staff informed the City Council that it did not appear to be worth the effort to be recertified. While the Council did not take a formal action on this matter, it said that it was OK not to proceed. The City of Woodbury staff echoed the sentiments of these other cities. It questioned the value of the recertification process. This process would require 40 to 1DO hours of staff time. The City also has a consulting firm to assist with marketing efforts, and the staff estimated that the update efforts would cost $1000 to $1500. All of these cities said that the only benefit to having the program, besides organizing sign•foEvenanning havingand thisther Stariiseanal uses, is to problem --many ofave ththeseeentry signsStar on thehaveCitybeenLim�stolen. a R CITIZENS FORUM ON SELF-GOVERNMENT/NATIONAL MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, INC. 55 West 44th Street, New York, New York 10036 (212) 730.7930 INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILLING OUT ALL-AMERICA CITY 1984 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AWARD ENTRY FORM PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS AND OTHER ENCLOSED MATERIALS VERY CAREFULLY. In many cases, when communities do not make finalist designation, it is because they have not responded in accordance with the points described in these materials. The official entry form is designed so you can present your community's case in a concise, readable, factual manner. If the questions are answered correctly and in accordance with the instructions here, the Screening Committee will have the proper information with which to judge your entry. Before filling out the form, we suggest you reread the "Invitation Brochure," After you have done this, study the entry form and make certain you understand each question before you begin filling in the answers. Also enclosed is a guide- line used by the Screening Conunittee for evaluating the entries. It will give you some sense of the indicators the conmltttee uses in making its decisions. There are uo trick questions or hidden meanings; for example, the conference theme is not indicative of what project emphasis should be. The entry form is flexible enough to meet hundreds of situations. Make sure you provide enough substantive information to support your statements. We must request that you ADD NO SUPPLEMENTARY PAGES OR ATTACH ANY ADDITIONS to the form. (See instruction No.9.) Every entrant receives two copies of the official form. If for some reason your copies should be defaced or otherwise damaged, write to the Citizens Forum on Self-Government/National Municipal League for additional forms. All entries must be submittec! on the official form. One copy of the entry form should be submitted to the CF/NML. The second copy should be retained for your records. The entry form of each city selected as a finalist will be electronically repro- duced and copies provided to the All -America Cities Jury. Therefore, to assure that the entries can be easily duplicated, please type out the entry! Any ap- plication that is handwritten or filled out in type smaller than that which is commonly used will be disqualified. 1 The reproduction of the finalists' entry Corns in sufficient number to supply copies to the Jury, League staff and field cuosultants entails almost 10,000 pages Of materials. Therefore, use a typewriter that has a good ribbon and be sure to observe the margins provided on each page. Material extending beyond the margins will not reproduce. ; It is advisable that your entry he forwarded to CF/NMI, well in advance of the deadline date, which is 1� r This allows more time to review -. - -1�r� . it thoroughly. Also, you wi 1 find tlftat yo )rave made a better application it you do not try to luirry through it at the last moment. If mailing the entry is delayed, please send by menus of all express. service. It must arrive in Lime to be considered by the Screening Conmuttee. COVER SHEET - Self-explanatory. Please fill in the h1anks. J -2- QUESTION 1 - The emphasis of the question should he on the substance of the citi- zens' efforts. In order to do this properly, try to concentrate on major projects (one to three) so that the significance of what was accomplished is clear to the reader. PROGRAMS DESCRIBED MUST RELATE TO BASIC ISSUES OR PROBLEMS EXPERIENCED IN THE COMMUNITY. You should state the issue or problem clearly at the beginning of your project or program description. Spend less space on describing projects that might have resulted as spinoffs of the major effort. There is opportunity to do that and elaborate on other aspects of your story in answer to Question 7. DO NOT INCLUDE AS PROJECTS THOSE THINGS TRAT—QUE XPECTS GOVERNMENT OR OTHER COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONS TO DO AS A PART 0 MEETING THEIR REGIIiM7H_ISSI0N1,unLess extraordinary circumstances exist, e.g.,. causing dramatic reductions in service delivery which are overcome by private and civic sector efforts or where particularly innovative techniques are used for carrying out a traditional function which enhances its quality and/or effectiveness. Please define the period under consideration. Major emphasis should be given to the events and accomplishment's during the last year. If your citizen effort has extended over a number of years 'reflecting a sustained drive toward community improvements, projects related to it must have originated within the past two years. In describing accomplishments, quantify results, e.g., how many and what kinds of people were assisted, how many units were built, etc. QUESTION 2 - Discuss how action was initiated and sustained, keeping in the mind the following points as you develop your reply: Although many programs are the result of a response to a critical situation, remember that the committee is look- ing for innovative preventative/proactive programs as well. Who led the effort -- existing organizations or did new organizations come into being? How was your activity financed --special fund drives and/or from a regular operating budget? Are the principal organizations involved permanent or were they designed to solve a problem and then cease operation? Be specific --generalities such as, ".There was a growing awareness," are not as helpful as a more detailed response. QUESTION 3 - Under this question please list some appropriate organizations which provided the leadership that made your successes possible. if yours was a ".team effort" and all organizations participated equally, please so indicate. The key word here is active. Enter the number of people who actually worked in organiz- ing, speaking, canvassing, fundraising, advertising or any other aspects of the civic effort. QUESTION 4 - It is not as important that established community organizations ac- complish projects for others as it is for them to encourage citizens to undertake the effort for themselves. Citizen participation means that the public must both be informed and be given the opportunity to consider and appraise various proposals so that they may he included in the (locision-making process. For example, in many instances, urban planning involves working with the community power structure so that both economic and social changes are brought abort with more community support. In what kinds of activities did the organizations or leadership engage to stimulate citizen interest and involvement^ Describe the techniques used, e.g., community forums, small group sessions, series of news articles, radio and TV broadcasts, house -to -house canvass, distribution of handouts, etc. Note, too, it applicable, whether any special efforts were made to involve traditionally underrepresented groups and, if so, what techniques were used to do so. R -3- QUESTION 5 - It is not necessary here to list people in their relative order of importance or to give more than five nannies. The list of names provides us with some idea of the kinds of community people representing the projects, as well as specific contacts for future inquiries. QUESTION 6 - Any innovative project which attempts to bring about change in the community wi.tl face definite opposition. It is vital for further progress that the source of such opposition be identified and other impediments (e.g., legal, traditional, practical) to progress noted. Indicate the degree to which projects/ action were opposed, from whom it came and how well organized it was, e.g., from government, existing community organizations ui new organizations that were created in reaction to your own group or from groups of individuals. What steps were taken to overcome the opposition? What do you regard as the most effective technique used in your situation in dealing with the opposition? QUESTION 7 - This gives you an opportunity to put the whole story down in one complete statement. Do not repeat points already made. Weave the responses to Question No. I into an overall framework that shapes citizen action in your community. (See attached exampl.e.) The first step of citizen participation is to identify the most serious problems of your community and how efforts have been directed toward their solution. Then, proceed to bring in unique aspects of the story that did not fit under one of the other questions, and put the whole situa- tion into a chronological pattern. Do not write about each project as a separate entity. Provide some insight into how the programs fit into the community --their impact, spinoff activity, etc. For example, if economic development and the creation of new jobs make up a project area, how does that project area relate or affect other phases of community life --how will new jobs affect housing, the environment, transportation and what provisions are made for their impact? Tell how the projects or issues described in answer to Question No. 1 combine with other actions to illustrate a commitment to enhancing the quality of life in your community. I£ it hasn't already been covered in connection with the question on organization, you might include in this summary statement a few sentences about organizational effectiveness, e.g., if a new organization was formed to meet the problem, why were existing organizations unable to cope with it. If groups of organizations formed a coalition Lo solve a problem, in what way has the coalition been used for defining and resolving other problems? QUESTION B - The All -America City Award is not a citation for community perfec- tion. We are interested in cities that have problems. Do not be afraid to admit your shortcomings. We are interested in whether or not you are doing something about them. Among residual problems might be inadequacies in local government services and organizations, problemw; of racial relaLions, environmental pollution, unchecked spread of blight and incompleLe plans for future development. QUESTION") - Think .,bout innovative pruredure.; used in plann ing, p g, implementation and evaluation, incLtding methods used to involve people, effective conmtunication techniques, acccxs to special resources like college/university personnel or facilities, ,Ifice heatlgaarters, etc. Again, please be specific --generalities such as, "Lots of citizen involvement," or "People working Logether," are not as helpful as a more detailed response. (If you need inure sp,)ce., please use only one side of one additional sheet.) -4- �` A REMINDER 1. All entries must be submitted on the official form. 2. Do not add any additional or supplemental materials except for QUESTION No. 9. " 3. Use a.typwriter (no smaller than type used here) in filling out - entry form. 4. Observe_ the: margins on each page. - 5. 'Give the approxmiate dates of all undertakings. 6. Type name under s,igrature. C 7,. _ If appropriate, please include business as well as home telephone number. 8. Many communities like to have their mayor or other,public official sign the entry. This if perfectly acceptable. However, we need to have the name, preferred mailing address and telephone number of a major contact person for ;"the entire program. There is quite a bit of-'follow-up.r_orrespondence, in addition to numerous telephone calls. ` 9. Be sure that leaders involved in the projects described know that an entry is being prepared. In some cases, we have spoken with people listed in the entry who were totally unfamiliar with the fact that their project or program had -been included; CF/NHL prefers that major community leaders, public and.private sector, ; be informed about the effort. 10. Send $15.00 filling fee with completed entry. Please make check payable to National Municipal League, Inc. 1 l 1 ' Example from Sunnyvale, California, entry 1980-1981 All -America Cities Award Program 7. Summarize your community situation' — Set the background for your community story. (1) the most basic problems and concerns of the community, (2) extent and nature of citizen participation. (3) degree of success attained, and f4t stress activity since 1978 *No- !re prnjecis jescrined n! 3 abnve but events which confnboted to and/or resuned from !hose projects. Sunnyvale's story is one in which the American dream was not deferred. It's a story of a community which in its early years welcomed those who sought its fertile ground to make their dream a realization -- $17.000 tract homes, good schools, clean air, open space and an overabundance of job opportunities. In 1959, the dream got a boost with the invention of a little device called the silicon chip. With it came a turning point for the world's electronics community and for the City of Sunnyvale. Santa Clara Valley became a bustling haven for hundreds of electronics firms grasping for their silicon dream and Sunnyvale proudly became its heart. Between 1950 and 1960, the City's i population increased by nearly 43,000. By 1970, the City had added another 42,000 residents. Fewer orchards dotted the .landscape, it took an extra few minutes to get to work and the $17,000 tract home was a fond memory. The decade of the '70's saw massive changes for the Cl.ty. It was clear that the rity's problems were catching up with its successes. Now the second largest city in Santa Clara County, there were obvious signs that the City was perhaps growing too fast;; homes wore becoming scarcer and more expensive for local workers; it now took two pay- checks in a family to meet basic living expenses; the surrounding hills were becoming visions of smog; and the commute on City streets was at a standstill. And while Sunnyvale's past and future was intertwined with local industries, at this time there was little or no partnership between the community and industry to address any common concerns. Perhaps most importantly the very identity of Sunnyvale. was being threatened. i There were. rumblings throughout the community that the City should move quickly and decisively to preserve the resources which initially attracted residents to Sunnyvale j as a unique place to live and work. In 1975, the idea of a heritage or historical zoning was first initiated by citizens) who looked around and saw the City's pasr discarded or forgotten. Later, in 1977, a group of 60 local residents organized to develop a comprehensive plan for the future of central Sunnyvale, the oldest residential area in the City. As a result of the citizens'; involvement and recommendations, the City made a commitment to preserve much of .the existing residential character of the central downtown area. In November, 1979, Santa Clara County released a study - "Living Within Our Limits"� which pointedly stated that Sunnyvale and other cities in the County would have to consider a substantial curtailment of industrial growth to preserve the quality of life for their residents. On January 9, lg9u, the City Council proposed a limited four -month moratorium on industrial growth to assess the future development of the community. One immediate result of the moratorium was a closer working partnership between the indus- trial community and the City. Soon afrer, iiewlert Packard, one of the nation's leading t electronics firms. loaned the services of one of its executives to work with the City for a year on energy conservation activities. Citizen involvement in Sunnyvale is viewed as an essential and successful tradition As a direct result of cirizen involvement. the City has raised its heritae_e to a level of public policy; is working wi.rh industry in providing much needed child care j facilities; and is eagerly following the lead of concerned citizens in the area of energy conservation. i Citizen involvement will continue to be an important key to upcoming activities such as the Murphy Avenue project - the revitalization and historical renovation of the , Cirv's oldest commercial corn; the development of a bicycle transporTation program; and an action plan identifying the needs of disabled citizens. As in most cities, citizen involvement in Sunnyvale is an on -going process and is usually there for rho asking. It's a ;.recess which has served Sunnyvale well and will ;_dn :rnortant_ 7rt of its fut%_r^. Att•AMIRI(A CITY OFFICIAL ENTRY 1985-1986 I hereby nominate Hr4gklyn Center fiennepin Mitutesota (community) (county) (state) ALL-AMERICA CITY AWARD for Citizen Action, Effective Organization and Community Improvement co -sponsored by Citizens Forum on Self-Govemment National Municipal League and USA TODAY For the information provided below. please indicate the year upon which the statistics are based. FORM OF GOVERNMENT rML— 1111j,-1_ POPULATION BREAKDOWN (if available) POPULATION 19M 31,230 below 18years ara7F ± PERCENT CHANGE 1970-1980. 12.6% 18-W 24 4 SgS �s_ia _ POPULATION DENSITY (per sq. mi.) ��'�f� ql� ?5-55 it 7 A91 1980 1474 Xy7W SS-F4 7 qR5 PERCENT MINORITY 4.5% Over65 Black 1 .7% EMPLOYMENT M emploXyed) Hispanic J.1 Manufacturing 23.99% Asian .9% Trade 24.6 % Other 1-0$Agriculture % MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME c?7 282 Service 25.218 % FAMILIES BELOW POVERTY LEVEL 4.6% AGE OF HOUSING STOCK 30-35 years _ UNEMPLOYMENT RATE -6-5 140. OF VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATIONS � (1984 County Average) — .:i, R 2. What prompted the citizen action and how was it organized? The concern over juvenile problems and domestic disputes led to the formation of a 35- member, broad -based task foroe charged with identifying solutions to such.pzoblems. One of their recamiendations was an alternative resolution process. A 15-member ad- visory board was then charged with developing and promoting a mediation process for the Community. churches, city governnent, schools and businesses provided space for training volunteers and holding mediation conferences. Donated promotional materials were distributed to all 13,500 households in the city. During the past two years, pre- sentations on the Brooklyn Center Mediation Project have been .made to more than 2,000 police, court services personnel, elected officials, neighborhood groups and civic or- ganizations. Peacemaker Center came about as a direct result of a need for offioe space for the Mediation. Project and a battered women's support group. It. was discovered that a church in the community owned a. vacant :house that it was willing to make available: A non-profit group was formed andopened offices in the hams after volunteers refur- bished and furnished it. out of a concern for problems relating to an aging population, ;a survey of more than 500 elderly residents was conducted and public forums were held to determine their needs and interests. survey results indicated the seniors wished: to stay in 'Brooklyn . Center; generally had the resources to live in un-subsidized housing; and wanted to escape the umintenanoe costs of owning a hoe. The Brooklyn Center Chamber of Carmerze, Ccnmunity Driergescy Assistance Program and city joined together to determine the scope of a housing project. A 25-member citizens' cortmittee was foamed to work with seniors, select a developer, determine financing options, review and select a site and recom- mend to the city a final development package. 3. List the principal groups and organizations and the number of members actively involved in these efforts. Include community action groups organized around the specific issues. Nome Aehv* mombwsh p COM-Outwn Municipality of Brooklyn Center 125 Administered the Brookwood development; refers clients to Mediation Project and battered woman's program Brooklyn Center Chamber of Clamnerce 200 Administered Brookwood task force and initiated develop- ment program plus providing mediation publicity Cannunity a eergency Assistance Program (CEAP) 375 Initiated Brookwood task force and project Rotary Club of Brooklyn Center 35 Provided Mediation Center publicity, furniture, re- furbishing and volunteers Brookdale Covenant Church staff and members 430 Provided financial support facilities and volunteer assistance for Mediation/ Peacemaker Center r_ c R 4. How did these groups attempt to involve the citizens directly affected by the projects and to what extent were they successful) More than 140 community volunteers (including attorneys, physicians and pastors) staff the Peacemaker Center and have made presentations to schools, social service qroups, city staff and court services personnel. From November, 1984 through July, 1985, 254 persons have used Peacemaker facilities. Mediation Project has been a grassroots effort from the start. Volunteers conceived it, established it and manage the organization. More than 25 volunteers have can- pleted mediation training and an additional 14 volunteers have ciompleted case developer training. Nearly 500 people have used mediation services during the past two years. Brooktiood area residents were surveyed during four informational meetings to deternune their questions and concerns. Results included more elaborate landscaping it the site, careful attention to traffic control, garden plots, undeground garages, handicapped - accessible units, low-maintenanoe interiors and screened porches. Realtors and financial institutions were persuaded to pramote the low-cost mortgages to young families. 5. Identify five individuals who were active leaders in the effort. (If possible. include leaders from both the public and private sectors.) Dr. Duane Ni�rn 5415'9"roc yyn BM. Physician Brookwood Sta°sk force Brklyn. Cntr., MN 55429 chairman (612) 533-8666 Philip Cohen 5302 Humboldt Av. N. Formes mayor & Brookwood collaboration Brklyn. Cntr., MN 55430 staff asst. to U.S. and support (612) 561-4441 Sen. Durenberger Dean A. Nyquist 5701 June Av. N. Mayor and Mediation/Peacemaker Brklyn. Cntr., PIN 55429 attorney Center organizer (612) 533-0774 Barbara Jensen 6539 Drew Av. N. Resident Mediation initiation & Brklyn. Cntr., MN 55429 (612) 341-2828 Peacemaker facilitator Richard P. Rabin 3201-68th Av. N. Pastor Peacemaker prcmter & 6. (a) What was the WjtJgbf @*'rOppMi�r iglh�WbA6jflW6itizensf"tvWat seg- ment of the community did this originate? The Mediation Project had to address concerned opposition from attorneys, court person- nel and city staff. All of these groups were very concerned how the process would affect their "turf". The Peacemaker project also ran into skepticism about its ability to achieve its purpose because of the possibility that one religious philosophy might take precedence over another. Opposition to the Brookwood project came from citizens concerns about traffic and land use problems, government involvettlent in assembling the site through condemnation and public financial assistance to the project. (b) How were the specific obstacles overcome? The Mediation project overcane its skeptics through a consistent and deliberate approach to development of the project. It dial not portray itself as a cure for all problems. Project supporters, in conjunction with skeptics, carefully defined its limitations and continued to be flexible in the inple- mentation of the program. This type of deliberate "soft sell" was exceptionally effec- tive. The Peacemaker Center delivered professional services without attempting to modi- fy clients' religious affiliations. It also involved all clergy and clientele in the canmtnity in the development and evaluation of its services. This has resulted in a very effective methodofaddressing the concerns of opponents to the project. Citizens who expressed concern and/or opposition to the Brookwood project were appointed to eQn- mittees and/or kept informed via news articles, neighborhood flyers and public meetings. A a 7. Summarize your community situation' — Set the background for your community story. (1) the most basic problems and concerns of the community, (2) extent and nature of citizen participation, (3) degree of success attained, and (4) emphasize activity since 1981 ' Not the protects desrnbed n t above, but events which conmbuted to andto, resulted from those protects. Brooklyn Center is located just north of Minneapolis On the vast bank of the Mississippi River. It has a population of 30,820 and will celebrate its 75th anniversary in 1986. The city operates sunder the council-manager form of governmrit. The mayor and four - member City Council are elected at -large and also serve as the city's housing and re- development agency. In the early 1980s, cities such as Brooklyn Center were affected by reductions in state and federal revenue sourtoes which resulted in a need to do more with less. This trend, coupled with the fact that Brooklyn Center is approaching total development, changed its foots toward more emphasis on social and redevelopment issues. To address these changes„ the city council established a Year 2000 Committee. The carmittee analyzed trends and concerns likely to affect Brooklyn Center in future decades. It also evaluated current efforts to meet future challenges. During its analysis, the committee found that the caamunity already was redirecting its focus on the future. Preliminary steps were being takes to address and solve sane elderly housing problems with the Brookwood housing pro- ject and through efforts by neighborhood advisory groups and community education projects to identify elderly housing and other service needs. The Mediation Services project was in its early stages of development and rapidly caning of age. Four school districts serving the oanninity were developing methods of solving school space shortages in one school district, and school space surpluses in another, through student exchanges and more efficient building utilization. An ad hoc citizen committee was formed to analyze and ret>omTend alternatives for restoration of the historically significant Earle Brun Farm site within the community's industrial and oamtercial core area. In 1980, the community voted to fund a $1.5 million bond issue for park inproveaents. This bond issue and the campletion of park improvements in 1986, will represent the cul- mination of a ten-year planning process. Because of citizen involvement in the planning process, Brooklyn Center is considered to have one of the finest park systems in the metropolitan area. In the early 1980s, an assistance program was developed to enable elderly persons living alone to call a special phone number daily to inform police department monitors of their status. If anyone involved in the program fails to call in, an officer is dispatched to check on their welfare. In 1982, citizens concerned about crime in the cammunity formed the Brooklyn Center (rime Prevention Fund. Representatives of 13 civic organizations and the general public serve on the fund's board of directors. honey raised is used for rewards, purchasing identification signs for neighborhood watch groups and other crime prevention efforts. Concerned over police handling of danestic abuse problems, interested citizens met with police and, in conjunction with the city's human rights commission, developed a domestic abuse program which is currently serving as a model in the State of Minnesota. This program uses a combination of volunteer counselors, professional counselors, and police officers to address needs of domestic abuse victims and perpetrators. The view of the future of Brooklyn Center, as addressed and confirmed in its Year 2000 Committee Peport, is indeed a bright and challenging one. The community is utilizing every networking opportunity available to anticipate and solve problems in advance of the crisis stage, N 8. What major problems remain unresolved in your community? (For example — in city government, human relations, municipal services, housing, etc.) What constructive steps have been taken toward their solution? The needs of an aging, inner -ring suburb within a large metro area will always exist. Aging housing, needs of seniors and low -inane families, lard availability for further development and heavy traffic are all elements of concern. Paint, code -established rehabilitation and energy -efficient improvement funds are available to haneoariers through innovative housing rehabilitation grants. Senior needs are met through I.leals on Wheels, and congregate dining in local schools. The Crime Prevention Fund, ori- ginated through the chamber of commerce and [rotary club and achinistered by the Police DeoartTent, raised more than $15,000 in less than three years. A redevelopment policy is naa being addressed by the city. After 20 years of planning, heavy traffic on the city's only bridge across the Mississippi River will be relieved in 1987 by another bridge. 9. Of the specific techniques that contributed to your success, which ones do you feel others might adopt? (If you need more space, for this answer, please use only one side of one additional sheet.) Public/privatepartnerships have contributed significantly to Brooklyn Center's civic successes. City administration, the business community, civic clubs, the school dis- trict and residents have initiated most projects; then cooperated to carry them out. This kind of interaction was recognized recently when the U.S. Conference of Mayors presented an alard to Brooklyn Center as one of 20 U.S. pilot cities in commitment to partnership. An example is the Community Partnership lbsk Force. Three years ago, in response to federal cutbacks in support, a 25-vxmber task force was formed to identify city problems and possible solutions. Out of this effort cane Job Training Partnership Act involve- ment to help train citizens for new jobs; the Mediation and Peacemaker Centers for (continued on additional sheet) Name Ilona McCauley Person to Contact Dean A. Ny4uist qnr a MI. Signed---�. �:_ I,�.. C Organization 44w,,Qr_r_4ity of ter Organization Rrrvnkls, rpnt�r ChanFor of Street Address 9617 Rrmklyo Anrlayanj_ CCmj_8r .ue. Oahe Atmist 29. 1985 (z po�o'Teephone (,6c12) 533-7272 'IPlISOn w . n.me .pp,.,, ., s.gnee o , no M.! Ip n, in. same .f Inc pi, o to oe Inc p,og,.m c nlacl I Please use preferred name, addreu and phone number of person who will be major contact throughout the competition. This entry blank should be completed and mailed to the All -America City Award Program. Citizens Forum/National Municipal League, 55 West 44th Street, New York, N.Y. 10036. at the earliest possible date but must be postmarked not later than September 3, 1985. Enclose S15.00 filing lee. A Screening Committee of public affairs experts will pick the finalists which will be invited to send representatives to appear before the All -America Cities jury at the National Conference on Government in Cincinnati, Ohio, November 15-18, 1985. to present the finalists' cases. The jury will then select the winners. 9. -- continued cammuuity family services; a Chemical People Minnesota Program, and a renewed ministerial association for networking by churches and pastors_ 'the city's 25-member Year 2000 Crnmittee concluded its year of study by publishing a 12 page booklet documenting potential problems, policy considerations, needed public service modifications and suggested options for delegating responsibility for further study and remedy.. This document will be reviewed biannually to determine what has ,changed — fore. better or worse --- and what needs to be modified. Neighborhood advisory groups representing all areas of the city have been used as "Sound- ing boards" on park development. They also meet regularly with the Planning. Commission to 'review proposed developments. 'the 14-acre historic site known as the Earle Brown Farm is a familiar set of ;red farm buildings cherished by city residents. To retain therm, the city recently purchased the site. its. cost-effective use was then brainstormed by a 15-member crnmittee which deter- mined that senior housing, apartment buildings and a senior services center could be }. built to include most of the original buildings. This camuittee will continue to pro- vide leadership as options for development are explored. Brooklyn. Center's declining school enrollment has-been uniquely addressed through pro- motion of adult education during regular school hours. 4b date, 500 cdmaunity-residents have taken advantage of this program. Cooperation with a neighboring school district provided: another response to the problem. Many Brooklyn Center students living in the vicinity of the local high school were bussed to other more distant schools. Subse� quen t to negotiations, the two school districts have allowed their students to attend either high school with state aid money following them. A program that touches almost everyone in the city at one time.or another -- either as muu- donors or recipients — is the Camity Emergency Assistance Program (LEAP), prI iously mentioned as a partner in the Brookwood project. This self-help organization was started several years ago by area churches when it was determined that a need for emergency food and clothing was peananent. Current donors include churches, businesses, individuals, the United Way, Hennepin County and area service clubs. In 1984, more than .20,000 families in Brooklyn Center and a neighboring suburb benefited from CFAP services which include emergency food, clothing and shelter financing as well as bane -delivered meals, chore services and transportation for the handicapped and elderly. ALL-AMERICAN CITY AWARD PROGRAM -- Candidate: Brooklyn Center, Minnesota f 4t MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services DATE: November 13, 1986 SUBJECT: Edenvale Park Trail System Early in 1986, the City Council requested staff to develop a trail system plan for the Edenvale Park area and review this system plan with the neighborhood prior to submitting it to the City Council for final review. At the May 19, 1986 Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission meeting the Commission gave a preliminary review of the plan and requested staff to notify the neighborhood of this plan and request their input at the July 7, 1986 Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission meeting. On July 7th, the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission reviewed the plan and heard testimony from residents (the majority from the east side of the creek) that opposed the plan based on what they believed to be an invasion of privacy and environmental concerns. At the July 7th meeting the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission took the following action: MOTION: Shaw moved, seconded by Cook, to recommend approval of the proposed Edenvale Park trail system through phase I of the project, which included the construction of an aglime trail around the perimeter of the entire marsh that would include a bridge at the end of Hillcrest Court, as well as a second bridge approximately 4500 feet south of the first bridge that would accommodate the loop trail around the marsh. Motion carried 5-1 with Joyer voting against the motion. This item was presented to the City Council at their August 5th meeting. At that meeting, the Council received the petition to the EQB from residents adjacent to Edenvale Park for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet and an Environmental Impact Statement on the Purgatory Creek trail system project. The petition described the project as one that would place the trail through the entire length of Purgatory Creek in Eden Prairie from Highway 101 to the Minnesota River. A copy of an August 27, 1986 memo, describing the petition and the rationale City staff and the EQB staff used to determine that neither an EIS nor an EAW was required by law, is attached. The Community Services Staff and the City Council heard numerous residents state their opposition to the trail and the Council took the following action: MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcok, to continue the item to the September 2, 1986 meeting of the City Council. Motion carried unanimously. At the September 2nd meeting the Community Services Staff submitted the August 27, 1986 memo with the recomendation that although the EAW was not mandatory for the project the Community Services Staff were recommending the EAW be completed on the proposed project to answer some of the questions raised and alleviate some of the concerns of the residents. Prior to the meeting, the residents submitted a letter dated September 2, 1986 from James P. Cullen and Charles K. Dayton requesting the City Council continue, until October 7, 1986 its consideration of a decision on their request and petition for the preparation and completion of an Environmental Worksheet Sheet on the Purgatory Creek corridor system project. At the September 2nd meeting the City Council continued the item to the October 7th meeting in order to give the residents an opportunity to discuss possible acceptable alternatives to the proposed trail system plan. On September 22, 1986 City staff met with reisdents oppsing the plan, in an attempt to determine if there was an acceptable alternative to the proposed trail and bridge location. At the October 7th meeting the Community Services Staff recommended the City Council adopt the following phased plan for development of the trail system within the Edenvale Conservancy Area: 1. Complete a survey of all residents within the service area of the Edenvale Neighborhood Park to determine the demand for the pedestrian access at the end of Hillcrest Court to the Edenvale Neighoborhood Park, as well as access from the east to west via Hillcrest Court. Upon receiving the results of that survey the City Council would then determine whether or not a bridge at the end of Hillcrest Court should be constructed at this time. 2. During the fall of 1986 begin mowing the trail corridor along the top of the interceptor to provide limited access to the creek valley for nature observation. L 3. After dredging as required by the DNR is completed, construct a woodchip trail to a nature blind that could be used to observe waterfowl and other wildlife in the marsh area. 4. Work with a professional naturalist on developing a proposed trail system that would provide access to the western part of the marsh with minimal impact on the resource of the marsh. As a part of this trail study, a naturalist would recommend the type of trail surface, location of the trail, and the conservation plans of the marsh, as well as a people management plan for controlling motorized vehicles ,etc. At the October 7th meeting, the City Council adopted the second, third, and fourth recommendations, but continued the first recommendation regarding the survey of the residents to determine the need of the bridge at Hillcrest Court. The Council also continued any action on the EAW and requested staff to ask the residents if they still wished the City to proceed with the EAW. These two issues were continued to the November 18th meeting. At the November 18th meeting, the City Council must address the following two issues: 1. Determine whether or not to proceed with the EAW as per the petition to the EQB. 2. Determine whether or not to accept the staff recommendation of a survey of the residents within the service area of Edenvale Neighborhood Park to determine the status of a prposed bridge at the end of Hillcrest Court. I MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Carl Jul lie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services 'Fdt.. DATE: August 27. 1986 SUBJECT: Edenvale Park Trail EAW At the August 5th meeting, the City Council received a petition to the EQ8 from residents adjacent to Edenvale Park for an environmental assessment worksheet and an environmental impact statement on a Purgatory Creek trail system project. The petition described the project as one that would place a trail through the entire length of Purgatory Creek in Eden Prairie from Highway lol to the Minnesota River. The petition described the proposed trail within the Edenvale Conservancy Area as a "portionrail ch is theately Edenvale9ht to be Conservanc Are pproved by the Eden Prairie trail on top of the intersceptor line west of Purgatory Creek,". describes the potential environmental affects that may result fromnthehprojectvases a follows:The petition 1. Disruption of sensitive wildlife habitat in bifurcation of several major ecological units. 2. Disruption of quietude by inserting active uses, including motorized vehicles into Presently quiet and wild area. 3. Disturbance of marshland and destruction of flora, including Liatris. 4. Construction of obstructions to the Pur bridges. 9 ator y Creek floodway in the form of 5. Filling of wet or marshy areas for trail use. The City staff have reviewed the criteria for a mandatory EAW and for an EIS with staff from the EQB that the proposed prjectnd EAW or an EIS; furthermore, that the proposed trailowithinoes thenot EdenvaletrirConservancrYArea is agree not either a related or Phased action of any other trail that may be constructed in the Purgatory Creek valley. Y Area s This trail is not considered a related action to any other trail within the Purgatory Creek valley for the following reasons: tI. There will not be a trail system following the entire Pur ator this was determined during the review process of the Purgatory Creek Study in 1976. � Y Creek valley; , 2. The trail system within the Edenvale Conservancy Area will any portion of the trail system north or south of the creek not connect off directly to the north by the railroad tracks and cut off to the south by the Edenvale !. Course.to 3. The development of any other segement of the City trail system within the Purgatory Creek valley is not related to :the. Edenvale Conservancy Area ;trail anymore than any other project within the City. :.For example, the trail proposed along County Road to be constructed in 1987, will connect to the trail in the_ Edenvale Conservancy Area but -is'not a related action. 4. Any other trail system within the Purgatory Creek valley would not be constructed { within a "limited period of time". Various trail systems that will be developed i` within the, Purgatory Creek valley will be developed over a 10-25 year periodand $ each trail system will ,serve short segements of the creek valley that basica ily relate to the significant, features of that section of the creek._ RECOMMENDATIONS Although an EAW is not mandatory for this proposed project, -the Commun"ity;Services Staff recommend that -an EAW be completed on the proposed project. 'The majority of -the concerns proposed by the residents relate to the environmental affects of this proposed project. An EAW may serve, to answer some of the questions:raised -and alleviate some of the concerns. It will:take the City staff several weeks to complete th EAW and submit it 'tothe,EQB. Once submitted` -to the EQB, it wi11.be,published and there will be a 30 day waiting; Period :for any responses to the EAW. Once the waiting period. is completed staff will report on the findings of the EAW. Staff would estimate this. report`,Should ` be ready by the December 2nd meeting. Upon 'review of the findings of the EAW the City Council may then wish to determine whether or not the trail is approved. I PEPIN DAYTON HERMAN GRAHAM & GETTS, P.A. - CNARLC3 K. DAYTON ATTORNEYS AT LAW MICNACL'L.BCKUL KICHAROO. Firm, JR. 930 LUMBER EXCHANGP. SUSAN K. fUMR JOHN H..HERMAN TEN SOUTH fICTH STREET. MINNEAPOL15. MINNESOTA 55302 JANICE I- COLOPIAN-CARTER KATHLEEN-M.. GRAHAM CI.LE.N G.-SAMYSOM PHIUP W. GETTS TIMOTUT WELCII JOHN C. KUCHN (612)339-7633 NORIAT ZLGLOVITCH BRADLEY J. GILLAM FEDFA A. LAKSGn: CAROLYN CHALMEKS JonanAn L nscnscaG MARYBCTN DORM JOSEPH F. GRINNELL I ' September 2, 1986 orcounsEL The Honorable Gary Peterson, Members of the Eden Prairie City Council and the City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 5534 Re: Petition for EAW Dear Mayor and Members of the The undersigned hereby request that the City of Eden Prairie continue, until October 7, 1986, its consideration of and decision on our request and petition for the preparation and completion of an environmental assessment worksheet on the Purgatory Creek Corridor System Project. To the extent ®>. necessary we hereby waive any rule or regulation which would require the City of Eden Prairie to render a decision on our request within thirty (30) days. PETITIONER'S PEPIN, DAYTON, HERMAN, GRAHAM 8 REPRESENTATIVE: GETTS, P.A.--- By ;me P. Cullen CharlesK.yt n 81 Creekside Court Eden Prairie, MN 55344 The City of Eden Prairie Dated: September , 198 i hereby agrees to the above request.: I_ 6 �c' Gary 70rson, Mayor A AA,? City Council Minutes '17' August 5, 1986 Peterson said he thought it would be important to write up a list of stipulations and conditions that would automatically exclude certain types of applicants. He asked if there were any other possible negative consequences. Frane said that we would be vulnerable to criticism from those who don't believe in such financing in the first place. Anderson asked about the legality of such a proposal. City Attorney Pauly said he would have some questions as to how to justify such a financing proposal. The consensus was to have them go ahead and present a proposal for consideration. C. Report of City Attorney City Attorney Pauly's report was given at the special session following the meeting. D Re t Or of Director of Public Works There was no report. E. Re ort of Director of Communi�Y Services 1. Edenvale Park Trail System Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson called attention to the many letters and petitions received both favoring and opposing the trail system. Director of Community Services Lambert referred to his letter of June 10, 1986 which was mailed to 700 residents in the vicinity of the Edenvale Conservancy Area, noti- fying them of the City's intention to develop a trail and describing the trail system planned for the area. Referring to the Staff Report of May 15, 1986 on the subject, he said that the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission reviewed the project at its July p, 1986 meeting and recommended approval of Phase 1 on a 5-1 vote. Lambert further noted that earlier today the City re- ceived a copy of a petition to the Environmental Quality Board for an Environmental Assessment Work - sheet (E.A.W.) on the proposed creek trail system. He said that, while Staff had earlier determined from a review of the regulations that no E.A.W. was required,, the Council might see fit to approve the request for an - E.A.W. since many of the concerns expressed by the City Council Minutes -18- August 5, 1986 residents have to do with the impact of the trail sys- tem on the environment. lambert reviewed the history and the purpose of the proposed trail system as well as the details of the development phases planned for the trail. He said that there appears to be three main areas of objection to the project: the negative impact on the wildlife; the fear of increased crime; and the invasion of pri- vacy for nearby residents. He said that Denis Hahn, director of the Richardson Nature Center, was present to address concerns regarding the environmental impact and Public Safety Director Walls and Captain Clark were present to address concerns of safety. Peterson suggested that members of the audience would be heard with the understanding that if we do order in the E.A.W. the next time comments will be received rela- tive to the E.A.W. only. The consensus of the Council was to agree with Peterson's suggestion. Tom Davis, 15440 Edgewood Ct., expressed concern about the costs for the project and distributed a map of the r Minn. Valley Wildlife Refuge located south of Eden Prairie. He said that he felt this project would be a duplication of that facility. Mike Arends, 15480 Edgewood Ct., said he thought the trail would present a security risk and that much of the proposed trail will be underwater so he was con- cerned as to how well it would hold up. He referred to a petition circulated among residents of Edgewood Court that dealt with several concerns including the difficulty of enforcing no snowmobiling in the secluded area. Gloria Cullen, 15381 Creekside Ct., expressed concerns about motorized vehicles having easier access from the trail system and that Public Safety could not control such activity along the trail. Jerry Johnson, 15801 No. Hillcrest Ct., said that he j opposed the trail system and said that he believed there are several inadequacies about the plan. He said he thought it was important to ascertain that there is a public need for this development and he didn't think there was such a need. He also opposed the development on the basis of its location in a floodplain and said { that there are enough trails underwater in the City. 1. City Council minutes _19- August 5, 1986 He was especially concerned about adverse changes to drainage in the area, particularly on his own lot. He said he thought the efforts would be better spent to save and maintain the existing trails, particularly those around Round Lake. He referred to the letter from Pepin, Dayton, Herman, Graham & Getts and read some of the comments regarding environmental concerns contained in that letter which opposed a trail in the Anderson Lakes area. Redpath noted that the City is in the process of spend- ing a considerable amount of money to take care of the problems with the water level in Round Lake and other lakes in the City. Judy Grimm, 15330 Creekside Ct., said that when she bought her property the land behind her belonged to the Homeowner's Association, but. it is now part of the City and she believed the homeowners should be able to have input on this question since it was not always, , City property, George Carlson, 16171 So. Hillcrest Ct., presented a petition from people in the Hillcrest area and other areas of the City who are in favor of the trail system. (Attachment A) He said that he uses the trail systems in Eden Prairie and other cities a lot and that he thought an outlet from No. Hillcrest Ct. was needed and that this proposal would provide that outlet. Kathy Gruidl, 7052 Springhill Circle, expressed con- cern regarding safety on the trails and related inci- dents of indecent exposure and sexual assault on a trail near her home. Jay Morgan, 15501 No. Hillcrest Ct., said that, despite his letter of July 1, 1986 in which he recommended the bridge across the creek, he is recommending that the City drop the proposed trail system. He said that there are other areas with nature trails in the City that should suffice. James Cullen, 15381 Creekside Ct.., said that he is opposed to the trail system and expressed concern about the wild animals in the natural portion of his property. He presented petitions from 154 people Opposing the trail system. (Attachment B) He described a recently formed organization called Preserve and Protect Eden Prairie (PEP) . He also referred to his experience with City Council Minutes -20- August 5, 1986 the history trail of the t i - system. proposed for the creek corridor. He expressed his dissatisfaction with the proceedings at the Parks Commission meeting dealing with this issue and said he believed that the Public Hearing process had not been followed properly. Pidcock asked City Attorney Pauly about the charge that the correct process for a Public Hearing had not been followed. Pauly responded that he was not aware of a special resolution on this issue, but that there. is no general requirement for a Public Hearing for the establishment of a trail. He said the E.A.W. process would provide a vehicle for a Public Hearing. Darlene Thoen, 1S361 Creekside Ct., said that she un- derstood the policy of the DNR was to not favor putting trails into wetland areas. Werner Schulze, 15501 No. Hillcrest Ct., said that he thought the trail system would be an asset and that there should be a connection from No. Hillcrest Ct. Carl Nelson, 15540 Edgewood Ct., suggested that Hill - crest Ct. could be accessed to Round Lake rather than Edenvale since Round Lake is closer to many of the residents on Hillcrest Ct. He also expressed concern about the safety issue since the trail is hidden from view in many places. Peggy Trager, 15341 Creekside Ct., expressed her opposi- tion to the trail and said that trees that actually were on her property line had been tagged for the trail. Ilene Dirlam, 15241 Creekside Ct., expressed her concern about fire and safety hazards created by the trail and that the issue of the trail had been pre -determined. Peterson responded that if it had been pre -determined the Council would not have spent the last two hours listening to the comments on the project. I_ Denis Hahn, Director of Richardson Nature Center, commenting from his experience with the Hennepin County wildlife areas, addressed the concerns expressed re- garding the disruption of the wildlife and the possible impact on the environment of the trail system. He said he thought it was important to give access to areas such as this with as little impact as possible to the environ- ment. He noted that his observation of the area indi- cated that it was in the stages of rapid "urbanization" i- ( and so it would be important to develop a people manage- ment plan to preserve the area as much as possible. City Council Minutes -21- August 5, 1986 He suggested that the limestone trail would not be the best surface for the trail and rather would suggest either mowing it or using a granite aggregate. He said that an E.A.W. might be beneficial since the area is changing and, further, that if a trail system is de- vised, a people management plan would be essential.' He then discussed several questions from the audience regarding his view of the trail system and preserving the natural areas. Redpath said that, in view of the lateness of the hour and the many concerns expressed by the audience, it might be best to go with the E.A.W. City Attorney Pauly noted that his understanding of the petition to the, E.Q.B. was for an E.A.W. on the entire Purgatory Creek corridor to the Minnesota River. He said the E.Q.B. will presumably transmit that petition to the.City and we will then have 15 days in which to respond and deter- mine whether an E.A.W, is appropriate or not.; He sug- gested that it would be appropriate to allow time for that process to occur and allow Staff time to review and make recommendations before the Council again re— views the issue. Peterson thanked those who had spoken on the issue and said it is obvious to him that the issue is much larger than just a trail around a small area in the City. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to accept the report of the Director of Community Services and the comments from the audience on the Edenvale Park Trail System and to continue the item to a later date. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Cullen asked how the people will be notified about the Staff determination on the E.A.W. Anderson asked if we could set a date. Pauly described the time re- quired for the process on a petition for an E.A.W. �- A discussion followed on how long the process would �. take. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to continue the item to the September 2, 1986 meeting of the Council. Motion carried unanimously, X. NFU, BUSZFIESS There was none. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services 0'-- DATE: November 13, 1986 SUBJECT: Uses Proposed for Existing City Hall Building When the City Council decided to transfer City Hall operations to a new location on Valley View Road, the Council requested the Community Services staff to report on recommended uses for the existing City Hall site. The Community Services Staff reviewed a number of potential users including the School District, PROP, Senior Citizens, Community Theatre, offices for the Southwest Area Transportation Program, neighborhood recreation center, etc. The School District has indicated a strong interest in renting the upper floor of the building and the old Council Chamber for their Family Education Center programs. This program is a highly successfull program presently being offered in the Administration Annex Building. The annex is needed for kindergarten space expansion. The Community Services Staff support the School District renting the upper floor and old Council Chamber for the Family Education Center program at this time. The Community Services Staff recommend designating the lower floor a Senior Center with facilities that will also accommodate the Historical Society record storage and a Community Theatre office. The Community Services Staff have formally surveyed citizens of Eden Prairie that are age 55 and older to determine their feeling regarding the potential move from the existing Center to this location. The vast majority of the Seniors supported the move to this location due to the additional space available, the potential for expanded programs, and the better accessibility of the facility. The major concern of the Seniors was that the new facility would lose the identity of a "Senior Center" that was really "their facility". The Community Services Staff indicated to the Seniors that the recommendation to the Council would be that the lower floor main user would be the Seniors, and they would have first priority for use of the facility; however, the Community Services Staff did indicate to the Seniors that until the Seniors were using the facility on a full-time basis, staff would be programming other users into the facility. Staff suggests the Community Theatre group be provided with an office to store all of their files of scripts, programs, etc. and that the facility become a "base of operations" for the Community Theatre. Hopefully, this would encourage the growth of community theatre within Eden Prairie. The Community Services Staff also recommend a secure office for the historical records storage. This would include a table and chairs, as well as file space for all historical records and a place where citizens could view those records in a supervised a rea . Attached to this memo is a report from Sandy Werts, Recreation Supervisor for Adult Programs. This report indicates the type of programs and services recommended at this facility. There would be some expenses incurred in development of this facility. Staff believes the majority of those expenses could be covered under an existing Community Development Block Grant of $8,000 that has been designated for Senior Citizen facility improvement. The expenses would include removing some walls in. the lower :.floor to provide larger rooms, painting of:wa'l'ls, some carpetreplacement, and the installation of a kitchen facility -that would accommodate the needs of the Senior -Center: If the Senior Citizen activities are transferred from the existing Senior Center on Staring -Lake, the obvious question is what to do with `that: facility.' Attached to this memo is a copy of two memos from Rick Bolinske, Superintendent of -Recreation`, that outline a number of ideas that provide potential programs for use of'_the existing Senior Center, The Community Service Staff will be :spending some additional time developing a recommendedprogramfor that bui.lding prior to making.any. specific recommendations. The building does have potential for providing a great summer day camp headquarters, as well as an additional picnic reservation facility. ,The Community Services Staff would.a)so recommend,that the Senior Citizens group continue. to use the facility ,on days reserved for Senior Citizen use' These` dates would coincide with past programs such as Friday evening potlucks, etc, held during the spring, summer, fall. Any program development for that facility must take into consideration the limitations of the facility: / 1. The existing sanitary sewer system is relatively unusable due to the high water table conditions in Staring Lake. These high water table conditions are projected to continue upon completion of the chain of lakes connection. 2. The existing facility is located within the 100 year floodplain and, therefore, no expansion of the facility should be planned. At this time, the Community Services Staff recommend approval by the City Council for leasing the upper floor and the old Council Chambers to the School District for the Family Education Center, and to designate the lower level a Senior Citizen Center with facilities for historical records storage and the Community Theatre office use. BL:md 11 3 MEMORANDUM T0: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services FROM: Sandra F. Werts, Recreation Supervisor DATE: November 13, 1986 SUBJECT: Relocation of Senior Center to City Hall Site Although the Senior Center opened in 1979 it has bascially remained a place for members of the Eden Prairie Pioneer Club to meet. In order for the new Center to grow successfully, we must reach beyond the members of the current Club and entice new participants. From talking to people and reviewing the recent survey that was sent, a lot of people consider themselves "too young" to use the Center. It seems as if there is some type of stigma attached to the Center. Our goals should be to program the facility as a Community Center for the adult over 55 years old. Data from the mid -decade census dated April 30, 1985 shows that there are: 1,957 residents 55 & older 1,277 residents 60 & older 750 residents 65 & older The population from which we are drawing is much smaller than other communities with successful centers. According to Steve Pieh, Director of the Minnetonka Senior Center, their population base as of 1985 was 7,000 for 55 and older and between 4,000- 5,000 for 65 and older. The survey showed that many people who do not currently use the facility at Staring Lake would be interested in using the new facility. I believe that easier accessibility has a lot to do with that, along with the possibility of expanded programs. PROGRAMMING The programs that can be included in the new Center will be limited again, only by the size of the building. A list of ideas will follow. It may be best to start with two to three days of programming and grow from there. Since April, I have been trying to get people to the current Center on Tuesdays. The most we've had has been 12-13 people. People claim they're too busy. When asked what type of programs and services they wanted at the new Center, survey respondents listed adult education porgrams as their second priority. Through adult education classes it would be possible to build the Center into the Adult Community Center I discussed earlier. The number one response was travelogues. It seems people must really enjoy armchair travel. The third priority for programs was the development of special interest groups. These could be in the areas of gradening, reading, bridge, ham radio, quilting and more. As long as there is an interest there is no reason why a group l cannot be started. a i Responses to question 36 in the survey, what types of programs would you like at the Center? are (in rank order): Travelogues 73 Adult Education 67 Special Interest Groups 64 Lectures 49 Exercise 45 Dances 37 Art Classes 31 Wood Working Classes 31 Standard programs such as card playing and bingo were not included. During a brainstorming session, the following ideas were suggested: Ballroom Dance Annual Meeting Octoberfest Children's Day Outreach to Community Senior Olympics Art Classes Senior Speakers Senior Theatre Flower Show 500 Garden Club Bridge Walking Club Volunteer Program Book Club Senior Advisory Committee Craft Classes Bird Identification Class Toy Workshop Pool Bridge Tournament Bridge Classes Picnic & Lawn Game Area a Square Dancing Meals are a social time and a good way to bring people together. Potlucks are usually one of the highest attended days at the Center. A class on making "summer salads" drew 21 participants this past June. The fee included sampling each of the salads or lunch! Starting last spring and continuing this fall dates have been set for eating lunch at the high school twice a month. There has been an average of 20 people each time. In discussing "Congregate Dining" with Steve Pieh, of the Minnetonka Senior Center, I learned that "Congregate Dining" has a welfare connotation. Most Congregate Dining sites that are funded through the Federal Government accept donations for meals. Even with the large numbers of people to draw from, the Minnetonka site averages about 40 diners a day. According to Steve, a program where the participants are required to pay are almost more successful because they do not have the negative stigma of being a welfare service. Bloomington has a successful dining program run by the City. According to Steve, they do have a fund to help people who cannot pay, otherwise all participants are required to pay a set fee. In my discussion with Herb DeRoma he could run a dining site for use as a satellite i from the high school kitchen, as all the other school programs are. The direct cost of the meals would be $I.25 at current rates. We would have to add additional to cover the costs for kitchen help, cleanup, etc. The number of times per week a person would participate are: .once 40 2-3 30 daily 4 don't know or occasionally 11 I would recommend that in the beginning dining be offered a maximum of three days per week, and build from there. The kitchen should be equipped with a regular stove, oven and microwave, besides the warming equipment needed for dining so that the Seniors can continue their potlucks, food classes and other programs where such facilities are needed. Facilities J In the survey a question was asked about the facilities they would like. The top two were: Library/Lounge 91 / Card/Game Room 90 I will review the other responses in the survey analysis. I do not feel a combination card/game/pool room would be compatible because of space needs, plus the men want a place where they can go off to smoke! Transportation I ' It was interesting to note that 125 people would drive their own cars, 28 would use i the van (about one-third of these people would drive their own cars in good weather and 10 would come with a friend or relative). (Some of these people would also drive or take the van). In my discussion with the Seniors about the move the most significant thing is the feeling of a loss of ownership, The Seniors worked hard to have the facility they have, it has a warm and homey feeling about it. They like it, they take care of it. I feel that the same feeling of ownership will be important to the success of a new facility. I feel the City should do its best to insure that happens. SFW:md ! 0 a 3 r 3 0 � a � a = y •f 3 N N v --i�i D D D 2 i 3 w l N Y V a pT d ° V x a Y yy� I CITY OFFICES / 8950 EOEN PRAIRIE ROAD / EOEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344.2499 / TELEPHONE 16121937-2262 To: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services From: Rick Bolinske, Superintendent of Recreation Date: Thursday, October 30, 1996 Subject: What to do with the existing Senior Center L J O P bran Bob, The following is a list of potential uses of the existing Senior Center. I will list existing programs within the Senior Center, that will remain there. Secondly, I will list maintenance needs on the building if it is to be programmed. And third, I will list the potential uses for the building and present site. I. Senior Citizen uses. 1. Summer Friday night picnics. 2. Seasonal potlucks. Possibly four or five per year, one summer, fall, spring and winter. 3. Access to the boats, the pontoons, the paddlewheels, and the fishing dock. 4. Special events such as birthdays, Oktoberfest, Christmas parties, New Year's Eve parties, beach or clam bake type parties, etc. 5. Nature studies which would include a walking club, a biking club, bird watching club, etc. 6. Continue to use the woodworking shop that is presently available. 7. Use the buildings for special crafts programs, with senior citizens, such as Christmas crafts, etc. B. Senior Citizen family picnics. II. Maintenance of the existing Senior Center. Bob, Sandy and I feel there must be a person who stays at the Senior Citizen Center the entire time a group is using the Center. Cost to pay for this person would come fro time the fees charged for groups who use it. The main reason for having a person there is because of the equipment that is present, such as stoves, dishwashers, fridges, etc. Another important consideration is the cleanliness of the building and the upkeep that the building is going to require if we have the many groups we have planned using the facility. The need for such a person will become clear as we make a listing of the potential uses for the building. -2- III. Potential uses, by the general public, of the existing Senior Center, on Starring Lake. 1. Youth outdoor education program (example is Memorandum No. 12, dated March 26, 1986). 2. Meeting place for the general public. 3. Picnics for the general public. 4. Weddings 5. Picture taking location, because of the beautiful setting. 6. Special events for all ages. 7. Arts programs and crafts classes. 8. city staff meeting place. 9. As a training facility for businesses, the school and the city. This training facility could be an oasis just minutes away from their offices. 10. A noon lunch picnic type program for businesses and neighbors. 11. Location for adult classes. 12. An adult nature study center, similar to the youth center, example of activities would be nature films, speakers, fish and wild life symposium, fishing classes, etc. 13. 'Mere is a potential for rental of outdoor equipment that would be used for the youth classes. Examples could be bikes, cross country ski equipment, canoes, etc. 14. Could be a kids outdoor camp, similar to what we have at Bryant Lake now. 15. It could be a location for special church services and church get- togethers for community churches. 16. Handicap center for summer mentally or physically handicapped Eden Prairie residents. This facility could be a great back up if the need for a handicapped program develops in Eden Prairie. 17. A tea house. This could be a meeting place for women's or men's clubs. 18. Could be an excellent classroom away from Central Middle School, for teachers and students. 19. A new exciting recreation program could be set up titled "Let us Plan Your Party". This program would include the following. a. Work with a catering service to provide food for groups such as anniversaries, graduation, birthday parties, etc. b. Provide a staff person who would lead groups in games, activities, etc. c. Contract with different entertainment organizations, to provide music and entertainment for groups, if they desire. d. Provide a listing of recreational services that our staff could provide to patrons, such as boating, canoeing, biking, juggling, clowns, nature studies, instruction in different activities, such as cross country skiing, etc. Bob, the most important thing is to set a strong base of programming before we ever open up the center. It is also important that we keep the building spotless and in A-1 condition, so that it will be appealing to groups. It would be worthwhile to involve the rest of the recreation staff in planning for the building, to insure that we come up with the best plan. If you have any further questions please get ahold of me. (�CE?RA— PmuM x.1.3 T0: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services FROM: Rick Bolinske, Superintendent of Recreation DATE: March 26, 1986 SUBJECT: Camping Program I would like to change the direction and emphasis of our summer camping t rrnrn from pushing hard Boundary Water Trips to starting a intensive camping Pr-uram within the city and then sending kids from that program to the boundary w-Aers. This change will not happen until the summer of 1987. The reason for suggesting the change is as follows. 1. The short -history of our Boundary water trips included: a. Intensive advertising and promotion. b. Even with this heavy promotion and effort only 2 of the eight trips planned went. Of the two that went one was an adult group of friends who could have gone without our program. The other was put together by a private individual after intensive effort. 2. I don't feel even with one year or experience behind us that more than two trips can be filled even doing equal or more advertising and effort. 3. My theory behind this is as follows: a. We haven't developed a solid base for a camping program in town. b. Our trips are in direct competition with groups such as boy scouts, etc. who have been doing this for a long time. c. Even boy scouts, Y's, etc. are having hard times filling up their camps and trips. So many outside influences now come into play before children decide to go on trips such as our Boundary Water Trip. d. Even though the idea is great, and children would gain a tremenitous amount of selr pride and enjoyment from a trip such as last year's and no matter how much I would like them to go, I feel the card:: are stacked against us ever filling more trips unless a strong program of over 100 children is built in an in town program. e. My Initial hunch when I noticed we offered the trips was they didn't fill. That hunch was backed up by the experience of teaching infp s of kids camping, hunter education, canoeing, outdoor education ;md sponsoring many trips similar. 4. I still support the effort to fill the trips for this and will do my I1";3t to do so. 5. Plans for the 1987 summer program would be as follows: a. The leader of the program is the key to its success. If he is ir"t a gem at working with kids and a person who deeply cares for them .rnd a person who kids respect and like, it won't work. b. We must tap into our playground program even deeper. We now have a day camp as part of playgrounds. The program I am talking about is a step higher and more specialized. We still have the day camp, in fact we try to expand it. From the day camp come the participants in the actual camping program. c. This program will gear itself to kids ages 12 to 18. The day c:3mp will gear itself to ages 6 to 8 in an introductory program and R-12 year olds start getting more intensive training which would be more inter -eating to them. 6. The 12 to 18 year old program will be year around and will include th(i following: a. Participants earn points by being part of the program. b. They raise their Own money to go on trips, etc. c. The leader determines trips and activities. d. Croup members are recognized by Jackets, etc. much as hockey children and their parents are recognized by hockey. Fund raisers are planned which give recognition and also provide recreation for the citizens of Eden Prairie. e. the program branches into many area's and interests. Some of r.lie idea's and branches include: 1. Canoeing classes 2. Camping classes 3. Hunter Education 4. Shooting of guns (riflery) 5. Snowmobiling 6. Bird watching 7. Trapping Education 8. Outdoor ethics 9. Youth outdoor Olympics both winter and summer games 10. Water skiing 11. Cross-country skiing 12. Downhill skiing 13. Marsh walking and interpretation 14. Ecology classes 15. Film symposiums (6. Trail indentification of plants, trees, flowers, etc. 17. Back packing, snowshoeing 18. Hunting 19. Trips to various areas such as Boundary Waters 20. Sailing 21. Fishing and boating 22. Outdoor lore 23. Bow use and hunting 24. Horseback riding 25. Youth gardening 26. Wildlife painting 27. Rock climbing 28. Biking and touring The list can go on and on. It only works with quality leadership and help from parents and many many volunteers. These volunteers include interested groups such as Ducks Unlimited or persons such as myself who would teach trapping ethics and methods plus lead marsh walks, etc.i TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager /� FROM: Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works '.�( DATE: November 12, 1986 �j RE: 2 A.M. - 6 A.M. Parking Restrictions The purpose of this memorandum and attachments is to request that City Council enact a year-round parking ban on all City streets between the hours of 2 A.M. and 6 A.M. Attached for your review and consideration are the following: A. Memorandum dated August 7, 1986 from Lt. Bill Blake to Captain James Clark; B. Memorandum dated November 13, 1986. from Lt. Bill Blake to Dietz; C. Survey of parking restrictions in selected Twin City suburbs; and D. Correspondance from the City of Burnsville regarding their parking ( restriction ordinance. t. As suggested in Lt. Blake's memorandum, we have made a number of attempts to reduce the problem of on -street parking during snow storms, but with very limited success. When we initially discussed this concept, we considered the overnight parking ban just during the snow removal season. However, after surveying a number of communities in the metropolitan area, we find that more and more cities are enacting year-round restrictions. For instance, Edina and Minnetonka both have 2 A.M. - 6 A.M., year-round restrictions. Bloomington had such a restriction for a number of years and recently repealed that segment of their ordinance and chooses instead to construct their city streets wide enough to accomodate on -street parking. After reviewing the information available, Public Safety and Public Works agree that the year -around restriction would be the best solution to our problems. The zoning section of the City Code provides for ample off-street parking in virtually all segements of our community. With that provision in mind, we have not constructed street pavements to a width necessary to accomodate on - street parking. Public Safety and Public Works personnel favor the ordinance primarily to accomodate snow removal during winter conditions and improving traffic flow conditions particularly for emergency vehicles. However, Burnsville notes additional benefits as follows: A. Minimizes auto thefts and facilitates discovery of stolen vehicles; B. Improves night time observation by police of homes abutting the street; C. Minimizes potential of children running out into traffic from between parked cars because streets will be cleared earlier (property owners are less likely to park on streets if they know they have to move their vehicles at 2 A.M.); and August 7, 1986 CTO: CAPTAIN JAMES CLARK FROM: LT. BILL BLAKE SUBJECT: SNOWBIRDS/PRESENT PROBLEMS - SUGGESTED CORRECTION PRESENT PROBLEMS Our present "snowbird" city code has proven to be ineffective as it does not assure the absence of parked cars on city streets during snow removal operations and it is difficult to enforce. The effect of these problems is to signifi- cantly increase the expense and time required to remove snow after each snowfall, hamper Public Safety enforcement efforts and cause considerable stress - and aggravation to citizens, Public Works and Public Safety personnel. The present city "anowbird" code reads as follows: Sec. 8.15. SNOW ACCUMULATION. It is unlawful for any person to park a vehicle on any street after a continuous or intermittent snowfall during which there has been an accumulation of two (2) inches or more of snow on any street, e and until the same has been plowed or removed to the full width of the roadway thereon. The main problem is that parking is not prohibited on city streets until a snowfall accumulation of two inches or more. Unfortunately, snow removal and sanding operations are frequently necessary when this standard has not been met: 1. freezing rain 2. drifting snow 3. normal uneven snowfall levels about the Metro area which result in "unofficial" snowfalls of 2 to 6 inches in Eden Prairie, but "Official" snowfall levels of leas than 2 inches as measured by the National Weather Service at Twin City International Airport. This problem is compounded as it requires motorists who park on the street to constantly monitor changing winter weather conditions but frequently "surprise" overnight snow storms occur while citizens are asleep and snow removal opera- tions are started while their cars are parked on the street long before they wake. The Public Works Department and the. Public Safety Department have worked together for the past several winters to address these problems without signifi- cant improvement. Our efforts have included: I. posting entry roadways into Eden Prairie and various collector ;1 roadways with notice of the parking prohibition after a snowfall of two inches or more. 2. newspaper public service articles on the problem. 1: 3. information card "blitzes" by Public Works and Public Safety to inform chronic violators. �';; Captain Clark August 6, 1986 Page 2 4. intensive storm -by -storm efforts to speak with owners of snowbirds blocking snow removal efforts. 5. last resort "tag and tow" efforts. Our combined results have been disappointing as typically there are 300-350 snowbirds citywide on the first snowfall of the season and typically there are about 70-80 snowbirds citywide after the last storm of the season in spite of intensive season long educational and enforcement efforts. It should be noted that efforts are costly as well as each snowbird can cause 5-10 minute delay by the snowplow driver as he initially breaks speed to plow around the car, perhaps place an informational card on it and/or call Public Safety to see to its removal. The snowplow driver then will lose additional time each time he has to circle back to the snowbird's location to clean up the ice/snow ridge that remains. It only takes the driver another 5-10 minutes to remove the snow/ice ridge, but he typically loses about 20 minutes in driving back to the location for a total average time loss per snowbird per snowplow driver of about 25 minutes. It costs about $70. per hour to operate a city snowplow so the estimated increased average cost per snowbird for public works is $29.00. There is a similar time investment per snowbird when a Public Safety officer is dispatched to see to its removal as his drive time is 5-10 minutes and another 15 minutes on average is spent locating and advising the owner. As it presently costs about $50. per hour to operate a patrol unit, the average cost to have a Public Safety officer effect the removal -of a snowbird is about $21.00. The average cost to Public Works and Public Safety per snowbird can be estimated at $50.00. Additionally, Dale Schmidt, Public Works Superintendent estimates that snowbird related problems presently prolong average snow removal operations by about 2 hours per storm. As the staffs at City Hall, Public Works and Public Safety are usually swamped by telephone calls and complaints about snowbird hazards, questions about snow depth, questions/complaints about snowbird removal efforts, snow removal and Public Safety operations are further impaired. There are many upset and angry citizens and city employees due to snowbird problems after each storm. SUGGESTED CORRECTIONS The most effective solution seems to be the 2:00 AM to 6:00 AM street parking prohibition in addition to our existing code adopted by most of the suburban cities surrounding Eden Prairie. In speaking with staff from neighboring cities who have implemented this parking prohibition, it has been learned that they have either eliminated or minimized the types of problems we are struggling with and significantly enhanced the efficiency and safety of their sanding and snow removal operations. I A I N T E R M E M 0 November 13, 1986 TO: Gene Deitz FROM: Bill Blake THROUGH: Jim Clark and Keith Wall SUBJECT: PUBLIC SAFETY SUPPORT FOR A YEAR ROUND 2:00 A.M.- 6 A.M. ON -STREET PARKING BAN Pursuant to our telephone call, the Public Safety Department does strongly support a year round 2:00 a.m. - 6:00 a.m. parking ban. As discussed in my August 7,1986 "Snowbirds" memo to Jim Clark, such an overnight parking ban would most greatly help the Public Safety and Public Works Departments in safely and efficiently conducting snow removal operations whenever the need to do so exists. However, a year round 2:00 a.m.-6:00 a.m. on street parking ban would also be helpful in the following ways. 1. Provide relief for residential neighborhoods like Leeward Circle which is experiencing chronic on -going "over flow" parking from a nearby apartment complex (which seems to have ample but under utilized parking on grounds. Reference citizen/neighborhood petition on this issue of May 1986 which is currently being addressed by staff including Craig Dawson, Jean Johnson and myself.) 2. Provide relief for serveral high density residential neighborhoods where chronic, on street parking congestion prevails. For example, Zenith Lane congestion problems have generated numerous complaints to both City Hall staff (focal point normally Gene Shurman) and Public Safety. Public Safety has specifically investigated the concern that emergency vehicles cannot travel this street during peak congestion times. Public Safety Sergeant Curt Oberlander (who is also a Fire Department Battalion Chief) handled this investigation. He concluded that fire apparatus could get through on this street, but with difficulty. He also found that no current parking codes were being violated by the congested parked cars he observed. continued) SURVEY OF PARKING RESTRICTIONS IN SELECTED TWIN CITIES SUBURBS Bloomington no restrictions for specific hours Brooklyn Center 4-hour limit in any one on -street parking spot Brooklyn Park 2:00'a.m.-6:00 a.m., Mov.-Apr. Burns.vi 11 a 2:00 a.m.-6:00 a.m., Year-round Coon Rapids 2:00 a.m.-6:00 a.m.,. Year=round i.Eagan odd -Even parking for snow emergencies Edina 12:00 midnight-6:00 a.m., Year-round MapleGrove 2:00 a.m.-6:00 a.m., Year-round Minnetonka- 2:00 a.m.-6:00 a.m., Year-round Plymouth 2:00 a.m.-5:00 a.m:, Year-round St. Louis Park no restrictions by specific hours i i City of BURNSVILLE GENERAL ORDER #84-003 MEMO DATE: March 27, 1984 TO: All Personnel FROM: Michael L. DuMoulin, .Chief of Police SUBJECT: 2-6 A.M. Parking Ordinance The current 2 a.m. - 6 p.m. parking ban will be. enforced. as it has sincethe beginning of 1984. Police Officers will issue citations on their, own initiative only when no other duties command immediate attention: The, only time a citation will not be issued is -when, in the officer's' judgment, temporary weather conditions exist which ;make it impossible for` the vehicle to be parked in the driveway or be driven Into the garage. Please see the attached Policy Report. i MLD:llk Attachment `I j t t n� U City Of BURNSVILLE Background POLICY REPORT Report No. 84-09 Agenda Item Norksession Meeting of 3/21/84 2 A.M. - 6 A.M. PARKING ORDINANCE The Burnsville City Code currently prohibits on -street parking between 2 a.m. - 6 a.m., with an exception for physicians and emergency calls. (Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 3(K).) In the past, strict enforcement of the Ordinance was not a high Police Department priority and citations were generally issued only after receipt of a complaint from the public. The need for a change in this practice arose in the Fall of 1983 because of a personal dispute between two Burnsville neighbors. One of the pair incessantly called for strict enforcement of the Ordinance against his neighbor's Sears van. In discussions on how to handle the matter, Vance Grannis, Jr. warned that the City's past practice was dangerously close to selective enforcement (unfair discrimination). After staff review, a new enforcement approach was inaugurated: Police Officers issue citations on their own initiative but that activity is undertaken only when no other duties command immediate attention. Bright orange warnings were placed on offending cars during December, 1983. In January, 1984, the new enforcement approach began. As of February 29, 1984, 234 citations have been issued. There have been complaints about this enforcement. Complaints have been received from five (5) identifiable households. The essence of all of the complaints is that the Ordinance is too rigid because it does not recognize and accomodate the special circumstances that require their cars to be parked on the street between 2 a.m. and 6 a.m. Mark Lawler and Steve King viewed each of the five sites and photographed the off-street parking facilities (driveways and garages). These visits were two days after a 10-inch snowfall, but before any thaw. Observations from this inspection are collected in the attached table. The purpose of this Policy Report is to consider whether enforcement of the Ordinance should continue as it has been done during the first two months of 1984. POLICY REPORT NO. 84-09 PAGE TWO Considerations Public Safety, Public Works, and Aesthetics are the primary purposes said to be addressed by the Ordinance: 1) A standard Burnsville street is 30 feet wide, unlike the 36 foot width of other communities (i.e., Bloomington). Each parked car occupies approximately 10 feet of the street width. If cars are parked on both sides of a Burnsville street, only a narrow corridor of 10 feet optimally remains in the middle for the passage of public safety vehicles and general traffic. This condition is hazardous but is nevertheless tolerated for the 20 hours of the day not covered by the Ordinance; 2) Street plowing and sweeping can be done quicker and more thoroughly when cars are not parked on the street. Chuck reports a significant improvement in snow plowing speed and effectiveness since the Ordinance began to be regularly enforced in January, 1984; 3) Zoning, Building, Subdivision, and other land use regulatory mechanisms incorporate and reflect aesthetic values of the community such as peace, quiet, and visual beauty. Banning parked cars from City streets during the middle of the night was deemed a reasonable way to partially realize these ideals. The Burnsville City Code prohibits, by a separate Ordinance, on - street parking that interferes with snow removal or street maintenance. (Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 2.) The Burnsville City Code regulates the presence of inoperable vehicles on a resident's private property but this provision does not appear to pertain to inoperable vehicles parked on a public street. (Title 10, Chapter 7, Section 26.) The Zoning Title of the Burnsville City Code specifies standards concerning the design and maintenance of off-street parking areas but apparently does not require that driveways be capable of functional use under any and all weather conditions. (Title 10, Chapter 7, Section 26(D).) Bloomington recently repealed an ordinance that prohibited on - street parking between 3 a.m. - 5 a.m. and during the months, November 1 to March 1. In substitution, a new ordinance forbids on -street parking for 24 hours following any snowfall of a least 2-inches. Other cities control on -street parking by allowing it on only one side of a street. Property owners generally have no greater legal right to on -street parking space in front of their homes than does the general public. Parking permit systems that operate to confer preferential access to on -street parking in favor of neighborhood residents are therefore generally illegal. They have been allowed only under extremely limited circumstances for specific, limited geographic areas that qualify as critical parking areas. Minneapolis has such a zone in the residential area immediately adjacent to the Boulevard Theatre but the zone is confined to a very narrow geographic area. The five complaints are described and summarized in the attached table. staff measured the degree of slope in the Olson driveway (21.46%) and compared it to the slope of staff member John Hiebert (20.66%). Hiebert has indicated that he has always been able to get his car off of the street, albeit not always up to his garage. The Ostby, Anderson, and Peter driveways had only slight inclines and it was the staff's view that there should be no physical barriers to use of the driveways. Each of the five properties has a double garage and, with the exception of Clausen, have a driveway capable of holding another four cars. Dave Clausen is a renter within the single family home of Wayne G. Aman. Aman uses the garage for his own car and as a machine shop. Alternatives 1. Change the standard width of a Burnsville street from 30 feet to 36 feet (alike Bloomington). Allow on -street parking but only on these wider streets. 2. Through amendment and/or enforcement, create standards and procedures that ensure the future construction of useable off- street parking facilities. 3. Keep the current 2 a.m. - 6 a.m. parking ban and enforce it as it has been since the beginning of the year. Have staff work with specially impacted properties to devise a means for off-street parking. 4. Repeal the 2 a.m. - 6 a.m. parking ban and instead, rely on Ordinances directed at specific, problem -causing behaviors. (i.e., obstructing/interfering with snow removal or street maintenance; abandonment of vehicles on public streets.) i POLICY REPORT NO. 84-9 PAGE FOUR 5. Repeal the current 2 a.m. - 6 a.m. parking ban and adopt an alternative method of general parking control: (i.e., Bloomington's 24 hours snowfall ban; one -side of the street parking). Recommendations It is recommended that the current -2 a.m. - 6 a.m. parking ban be continued and enforced as it has been since the beginning'.of the year.: Staff should be instructed to work with the small number of households that may have a periodic inability to get their cars off of the public street. Staff would suggest corrective measures and alternatives. With enforcement experience, police would develop -a_ common-sense judgment as to when temporary weather conditions make it impossible for a resident to comply with the parking ban. This recommendation corresponds to ' Alternative 3 It is .also recommended that future construction of useable off-street parking facilities be ensured by.enacting, or amending appropriate ordinances. This recommendation corresponds to Alternative 2. Continuation of the current method of enforcement is recommended because there have been relatively few complaints and Public Works reports a significant improvement in the ability to plow streets. There have also been comments that the streets have appeared much neater since enforcement began. Furthermore, none of the conceivable alternatives provide -a solution that -is any better than the current method of operation. In the final analysis, there will always be a degree of tension between the Ordinance (as a reflection of community standards) and the individual desires of a few Burnsville residents. Submitted by: Reviewed by: /,/fl / //p�[ James K. Spore, Cty'Manager Date. 311Date: u 0 u rnv 0 D . � rob N. •,� a7 -Aroro l4 $4 U HH. ro pJ-b -.1>. 3 -A ro z U) O N o to r r•) 0 u .-a w rl w ro +) -4p I) .4-,4 m 0 C" ; ro a3i •a) $4 3> c +� go W .0 0 U .1 r :5 to O Y 0.4 i '�••�-> E+ O b, ro, ro U CO .0 >v u .54 ) U 0 to a.0 U. u> -A cd 0 ro.al -1 43 >$4 .q •i •o 0 ro A ; N CO v +) 0 . to w � x o r 4 A N .0 >F H 0 it A Uro +)gw •rt ••+ a ro ro HNN0 3> 3 0. 1 -0 s,N ws, w N 0 $4 34 #0 CV to o 3 •CV L4' N w L7 al b� 0 >. • 00 •rf lD w A 'O .0 al 0 b� 0 >r .0 0 C bra al 4A 3 w >..0 H 3 �-•rf W .0 > w C.. A w O . -A .� r JC ro to C +� 3 �- a•rl r •./.. •.•1 lD r� A H 3 � ro _ C. b�•.# a• 91 3 ro 3. > - [A 2 0o cu>.>.2)►4 •U •.•1 C ro .-. k 4U U Y rf al _d.- U E C ro U O' $4 •./ - to •rf 3 rourroo,tow .4>>.wro rowv>1>.•rf $4 to cv CO •U 0 6 N . rf Y ./ .4 ro R w ro , 0 -w +) +) w H •rt w w w Cn N -A w sa 0 ro V M N N 3 •rl A bar +) a 6. 0 'C a) 0 U .0 0 10 +C> ro rnoa C >0 O JC .Cc - a) o TUC u-A ro>.+) ao+ aU JC 43.N4>ro a w $4 O �U xro :ro0) F P. - .•rl 1) •'1 a•r) a to -I k a U U) 0 i) H 4J •rl r a r•1 H'C M.HWr R 00 •rl- U a a H H -Cro K to a) o ••I a) .w •.i a - .cG>•,+�4 to 0 0% U >r-:a 0 .4 ro row 0-rl w 0 0 N o a) 3:w 0 - U > Z - 3 a) 3 •o 0 z til nl :to toOD - w 0 Oi .0 c�nbA cro 'Oto 0.0 ww F-.0 Nul 1•r>i Vu 'rU Nro F W o w w w .a o 3 M$4 V ar C a)0 row w :z>w aw< O ow �v )rw H.iroo OD -A ,�� °V w Q W z 'r a U) -1 N .. rp N V OD 1 v Jroi CUi . O u �ui�mm -r.,4iw �� �O�u . aororo:n, OD $4 -,iom �•6A0 �c ��a %D to N'a.w O L) .`p)A,N ro .-).uae)9 wwa • o 43 tiro , a)t � a) U C al u a) to V) $4 �� � .. a) 4:C � 1 .U. Tl C -A •rl � A o C 0 4) 11 ro 'b 0 4) U -A N rr ro U re u1.'A U r U .r r..-�. - r•) a) N ro w ro.ro tit•nwZ rJ0 tilt' w w Ur1 UN -A oUto 'O w u vNi a 4 p A tn A (a Q O eti rt r co .-) N r)11 (9 0 a obi �� co WN 14 Qo ron >CO(D.3 x v > co o, o ")o ...) o� rio 0o OOovroE vrm Nm NCO C:."—.0 l0 coo -4-4 0 cc � a w E. to o 1, m W fi X V 0 C z r. .7 cn N 0 N V 0 W P. O$4 C 9 F0 >' .r) a) V V _ �A 0 u a r � � rro, o ro a m ro 40 a wa a o�- I� SURNSVILLE William 2001 Bic 6ak Burnsville, -MN 55337 Dear Mr. Myrvold: Mayor Morrison has asked me to respond to vour recent letter to Police Chief DuMoulin on Burnsville's 2 a.m. to 6 a.m, on -street parking prohibition. I am sorry that you were unaware of the Ordinance. The 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. parking ban is not a new regulation. It was originally adopted in 1980 and has been. actively enforced since the Fall of 1983. Prior to that time, citations were. issued only after receipt of a complaint from a resident. On the advice of legal counsel, the City had to abandon that practice because it constituted an imper- missible form of "spot" or "selective" enforcement of a regulation. i Since the onset of active enforcement, the City has issued several press releases that describe the Ordinance and its provisions. Both of the local papers have provided prominent space to articles on the subject. Additionally, the City included a substantial article on the Ordinance within the winter edition of the 1984 Burnsville Bulletin, a quarterly community newsletter that the City distributes to all households in Burnsville. The City also intends to continue periodic notice of the Ordinance in the local papers and within City publications. The City Council reviewed and discussed the Ordinance at length during its Worksession meeting of March, 1984. The Ordinance was retained because it helps accomplish the following desirable objectives: * Provides for free -flowing traffic, including emergency vehicles, particularly fire trucks. * Accomodates snow removal. * Minimizes auto thefts and facilitates the discovery of stolen vehicles. * Improves nighttime observation by police of homes abut- ting the street. • Minimizes the potential of children running out into f- traffic from between parked cars because streets will be cleared earlier. (Property owners are less likely to park on streets if they know they have to move their vehicles at 2 a.m.) * Enhances the appearance of the community. i i ,_acne _. c:-e -3c - n anc i:c_i;iiac cocr a,._re-'s a t car garage and. a double- r _nor. a,, They dezerm2nec that these _ecu-•-ements afforded amole opoortunes cents _o net tre_r _ the public 'st_ee-t . The City Council has also exp lored the legality of pro aiding a -..permit" system to enable limited or temporary on=street. parking during the 2 a.m.."to 6 a.m.'time period. It,appears that we cannot easily provide .such a system that would favor residents over non-residents. Because the. streets are public, we are forced to treat everyone equally; and therefore could not provide parking access 'to some individuals, but hot others. Unfortunately, the fact is that ownership of.a.home adjacent to a public street does not create any greater rights to use of the public streets. I understand .your consternation .with the Ordinance.:_ You are not alone :in your complaintabout:enforcement of the. ban. - Please.:under- stand,,however, that our police officers do not attempt to issue these tickets in large numbers. Enforcement of the .Ordinance is, instead, one of the lower priorities for officers who work the 2'a.m.. to. 6.a.m shift. The officers also exercise reasonable discretion when exten- uating circumstances seem to explain the vehiole's presence on the street. Your letter has been brought to the Council's attention. If you have further comments or questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, CITY OF BURNSVILLE Stephen P. King Administrative Assistant SPK/dj i 11 City of l`BURNSVILLE DATE: October 24, 1985 TO: Linda Barton, City Manager 1I11 FROM: Michael DuMoulin, Chief of PolicAly� tt SUBJECT: 2-6 A.M. Prohibition of On -Street Parking Ordinance MEMO Since the Department began enforcing the "2-6 A.M. Ordinance", a total of 3,064 citations have been issued. A breakdown by date and number issued is: • From January 1, 1984 through December 31, 1984: 1,511 citations, or 4.5 per day • From January 1, 1985 to September 30, 1985: 1,553 citations, or 5.8 per day The number per day for 1985, maintaining the present rate of issue, indicates a total of 2,077 citations could be written by the end of this year, which represents a 37.4% increase over 1984. This is not a significant increase when considering there are many more violators being observed this year over last. * As a result of enforcing the 2-6 A.M. Ordinance, numerous complaints have been received. It is very difficult to estimate a close approximation in terms of the amount, due to the complaints being filed by phone, in person (at the police station and on the street), and by letter, many of which have been anonymous. Complainants usually state they were not aware of the ordinance, then go on to criticize the Police Department and City Council. It should be noted, generally speaking, the complainants do not accept the City's rationale for legislating or enforcing the law. Police Department staff have been following the City Council's policy guideline reference the enforcement of the ordinance, i.e., it is not a high priority enforcement function and discretion is utilized whereby people are allowed to park on the street when they are having their driveways resurfaced, or have guests over night, etc. A brief summary of the problems experienced by the Police Department relative the "2-6 A.M." ordinance include: * This increase will not be achieved as there is presently a moratorium restricting the issuance of citations for 2-6 A.M. parking until the street signs are posted. a / <- : ! 2-6 A.M. Ordinance October 24, 1985 Page 2 • A perception by the officers that the Chief of Police may be indicating preferential or discriminatory treatment of the violators when officers are directed not to enforce.the ordinance or that certain individuals have permission to park on the street. This is a 'very sensitive area! • A voluminous amount of staff time is spent in dealing with `the public over. the.ord'inance. • Some people do not know the ordinance exists. Even though, the City and Department -has attempted to "educate the community" `by`means of newspaper Articles and by, placing warning: flyers on violators' vehicles. A critical:analysis of the education process'utilired to date.is it has - not worked very well! Subsequently.: the enforcement action taken has upset many people; our residents as well as visitors. ' Constructively, the best education effort that we can X out forward at ; this time is about to be undertaken, i.e., thepostingof' signs prohibiting - On -street parking from 2-6.A.M. I feel this measure should assist in reducing the amount of complaints. Additional information: It has been stated or rumored that the court is dismissing 2-6 A.M.. citations. This is not correct. The City Attorney has been contacted j and informs me that the judges are asking violators to promise in the future not to park on the street in violation of .the ordinance. If the violator so promises, the judge will "suspend" the fine and the iconviction stands. MLD:llk f L� City 0i BURNSVILLE 1313 East Highway 13. Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 6121890.4100 December 27, 1985 Donald C. Severtson 11420 Galtier Place Burnsville, MN 55337 Dear Mr. Severtson: Mayor Morrison has asked me to respond to your recent letter on Burnsville's 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. on -street parking prohibi- tion. As you must know, enforcement of the ordinance has generated much debate and discussion during the past few years. The 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. parking ban is not a new regulation. It was originally adopted in 1972 and has been actively enforced since the fall of 1983. Prior to that time, cita- tions were issued only after receipt of a complaint from a resident. On the advice of legal counsel, the City had to abandon that practice because it constituted an impermis- sible form of "spot" or "selective" enforcement of a regula- tion. The same legal difficulties would seem to apply to your suggested use of a "case -by -case" approach to at- taining the goals of the ordinance. The City Council has reviewed and discussed the ordinance at length on several occasions. The ordinance has been retained because it has been judged to be an effective tool for achieving desired objectives. The Council's de- cision was partially influenced by the fact that Burns- ville's zoning and building codes require a two -car garage and double width driveway. They determined that these requirements, '(plus the opportunity to construct additional off-street parking spaces), afforded ample opportunity for residents to get their cars off of the public streets. The City' Council has also directed Staff to explore the possibility of providing a "permit" system to enable limited or temporary on -street parking during the 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. time period. Staff will soon be returning to the Council with information on the legality and administrative practi- cality of such a system. I can tell you that legal counsel has already outlined a number of very substantial problems: that would be -associated with the implementation of a "per- mit" system. They also noted that when Apple Valley at- tempted to provide hardship exceptions to a similar ordi- nance, a court eventually found the ordinance void for being arbitrary and unreasonable. I 'understand your consternation with the ordinance. You are not alone in. your complaint about enforcement of the +j ban. Please understand, however, that our police" officers i do not attempt to issue those tickets in large numbers. Enforcement oftheordinance is, instead, 'one of the lower . priorities for. officers who work`tha 2 A m.,to`fi a.m. shift. The officers also exercise_ reasonable discretion when ex- tenuating :circumstances seem to explain the vehicle's' presence on the street. Your letter has been brought to _the Council's attention. If'` you have further comments or questions, feel free to con- tact us. Sincerely, Stephen P. King Administrative Assistant City of Burnsville SPK/ba cc Mike DuMoulin li CITATIONS ISSUED JANUARY-DEC EMBER, 1985 • Parking Citations . . . . , , . 2.314 (6.3 per day)' Includes 1,859 2-6 a.m. citations and i other parking violations. • Hazardous Citations . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,316 (6.3 per day) Includes all moving violations from misdemeanor DWI, stop sign, speed, careless, reckless, following too closely, etc. • Non -Hazardous Citations . . . . . . . . . 1,144 (3.1 per day) Includes all drivers license violations, registration of vehicle violations. TOTAL 1985 CITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,774 (15.7 per day) i Lew OMCYS GRANNIS. CAMPBELL, FARRELL & KNUTSON 1)s v,n 1. GItAMNM . IAi \.1YNI P.OIfSfMNsI A.AOCIATIO.'I Iis \'IRII:N.,.'NM, J. 19t0.19M P—OI1K rM$7 R. G.,\NNIN Q3 "O. BAN. RVII. vsq B. GI ..m J. rw." J. Gu'flty 1{I NMTN coKb.o C.tltANCt PATtIR'II A F"Rat SOUTH ST. PAU" MINNESOTA 55075 ,)AZ lG.A MRI .... .... .,, .. .. ... .... ,4*M N. Kwmf Bl2.15i166i TIpMAt ►/: 3C r. M... S. vwo " December 11, 1985 T„ v L CauNnNa . a Michael DuMoulin Chief of Police BURNSVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT 14011 Surnhaven Drive Burnsville, MN 55337 RE: Hardship permits for on -street parking between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. Dear Chief DuMoulin: Although the City Council has the authority to issue permits to allow on -street parking between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m., for the reasons discussed below we believe such permits would create more problems than they would solve. As I understand it, these permits would be issued on a "hardship basis." In issuing these permits, the Council must either pass upon each request for a permit, or draw an Ordinance so specific as not to delegate their decision making authority to a non -elected official. In either case, the City would have to set up a permit application process. The applicant for a permit would file, with the appropriate City official, a request for a permit stating his or her reasons for the request, and a list of the vehicles which he or she wishes to park upon the street. The police department could then run registration checks on these vehicles to be -assured that the vehicles in question are owned by individuals living at the residence of the applicant. I assume that most requests fall into two categories: (1) too many vehicles to park off the street, and (2) unsafe off-street parking, i.e. a steep driveway. The Council would need to define what constitutes a hardship for the Ordinance, and would also need to set policy guidelines to determine qualifications for the permits. The definition and policies would need to statep( the number of vehicles necessary , or the slope of a driveway necessary to 1-, 4_ �r Decemoer 1!.. 1985 qualif:. for the issuance of a permit. I believe that various individuals would contest their citations for violation of the t Ordinance, claiming that their hardship was greater than someone who was issued a permit. This individual could claim that he was not afforded a full hearing upon his request for a permit; that he was unaware that he could have applied for a Permit; or that the Ordinance defines hardship in a limited manner. I forsee not only the issue of a homeowner who has three or four children in college driving their own cars requesting a permit, but individuals who rent a home or apartment who have more vehicles than the off-street parking provided requesting a permit. we are finding more and more individuals who are sharing expenses in living together and they normally have their own vehicles. I believe that if the City establishes a hardship poli, the enforcement of a 2:00 a.m. - 6:00 a.m. parking ordinan e would be much more difficult. We have to rationalize and justify to the Court on each and every citation that was challepermitnged as to why the defendant did not qualify for a As you know, we have had some problems with the Court's application of the present Ordinance. To date we have always been able to argue the parking prohibition applies to everyone, with no exceptions. Once the door is opened I forsee the Court second guessing the Council on what constitutes a "hardship.,, For example, if the Council defines hardship to mean five licensed drivers in the same family living at a residence with five vehicles, is it any less of a hardship if (1) there are four licensed drivers, but they have five vehicles, one of which is a business car, (2) the five individuals are not all members of the same family, (3) the size of the lot and/or garage is such that it is more of a problem for a family of four than for the family of five, and (4) three individuals with a total of three cars share an apartment parking for only two vehicles. with off-street When Apple Valley attempted to provide exceptions, the Court Found that the exceptions were so many that it proved there was no need for the Ordinance, or that the Ordinance was arbitrary, unreasonable and, therefore, void because it I recognized only certain hardships and not others the Court considered equally deserving of an exception. The rationale behind the Ordinance obviously looses its persuasiveness when the City provides For a number of exceptions to the Ordinance. The next problem is if our home with five vehicles gets a permit, which car parks on the street? I forsee any or all five cars ending up on the street and a defendant claiming his brother who had the street permit had parked in the driveway so the defendant had to park on the street. The Court will most likely say, "What's the difference? The Cit car to park on the street anyway." y had authorized one i i ;�� I i Cityof C BURNSVILLE MEMO �J DATE: March 11, 1986 TO: Linda Barton, City Manager FROM: Michael L. Du Moulin, Chief of Police SUBJECT: 2-6 A.M. On -Street Parking Ordinance - Update Since my memo of October 24, 1985, referencing the 2-6 A.M. Parking Ordinance, please note the following statistics through February, 1986: • 1984: January 1st through December 31st 1,511 citations (or 4.5 citations per day) • 1985: January 1st through December 31 1,859 citations (or 5.1 citations per day) (+23.0%) It should be noted that citations were not issued between October 8th and November 20, 1985, which was the period during which the street signs were ordered and installed. • 1986: January 1st through February 28th 4 316 citations (or 5.3 citations per day) Since the installation of the street signs, we have been able to make the following observations: d • Officers working between 2-6 A.M. are reporting that they have a perception that fewer and fewer vehicles are now parking on -street at night. They feel that the purposes for which we have the ordin- ance are being reached; that is, the free flow of traffic, emergency vehicles, improved night-time observation, general safety, etc. • According to the Public Works Department, maintenance of the streets and the removal of snow has been made easier since the enforcement of the ordinance began in late 1983. The Public Works Department feels strongly that the ordinance is an asset to the City, and is currently working very well. • It appears that the number of both written and phone complaints that were being received from numerous individuals on a regular basis at the Police Department has declined sharply. Since the