HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 12/02/1986 AGENDA
C EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1986 7:30 PM, SCHDOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
BDARDROOM
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
l II. CONSENT CALENDAR
t A. Final Plat approval for Alice Barney Addition (Superamerica Page 2997
Station at Hwy. 169/CSAH 11 Resolution No. B6-2B6
B. Final Plat approval for Prairie View Center (N.E. corner of Page 3000
Prairie Center Drive and TH Resolution No. 86-287
C. Approve plans and specifications and authorize bids to be Page 3003
received for Homeward Hills Road connection, I.C. 527037A
(Resolution No. 86-290T
D. SUPERAMERICA ty Superamerica Stations, Inc. 2nd Reading of Page 3004
Ordinance No. 55-B6, Rezoning from Rural to C-Highway and
Zoning District Amendment within the C-Highway District;
Approval of Developer's Agreement for SuperAmerica; and
Adoption of.Resolution No. 86-296, Authorizing Summary of
Ordinance No. 55-86 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary.
1.06 acres for service station/retail use. Location: East of
Highway #169, north of County Road #1, west of Pioneer Trail.
(Ordinance No. 55-86 - Rezoning; Resolution No. 86-296 -
Authorizing Summary and Publication)
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. TECHNOLOGY PARK 7TH by Technology Park Associates. Request for Page 3010
Zoning District Amendment within the Office District on 3.74
acres for construction of 27,7D0 square foot office building.
Location: East of future Golden Triangle Drive, north of
Nine Mile Creek (Ordinance No. 56-86 - Zoning District
Amendment within Office District) Continued from November
18, 19B6 Council meeting
City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,December 2, 1986
B. WELTER'S PURGATORY ACRES by Crow/Chasewood Minnesota. Request Page 3015
for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-135. on 52.4 acres
and Preliminary Plat of 52.4 acres for single family lots.
Location: North of County Road 1, west of Bennett Place, south
of Olympia Drive. (Ordinance No. 57-86 - Rezoning; Resolution
No. 86-291 - Preliminary Plat)
C. MEADOW PARK 3RD ADDITION ty J B & D Inc. Request for Page 3033
Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Public Open Space to Low
Density Residential on approximately 13.5 acres, Zoning District
Change from Rural to R1-13.5, and Preliminary Plat of 31.5 acres
into 29 single family lots and one outlot and road right-of-way.
Location: Northwest quadrant of Homeward Hills Road and
Sunnybrook Road. (Resolution No. 86-292 - Comprehensive Guide
Plan Amendment; Ordinance No. 58-86 - Rezoning; Resolution No.
86-293 - Preliminary Plat)
D. PRAIRIE ACRES ty Michael N. Sutton. Request for Zoning District Page 3048
Change from Rural to R1-13.5 and Preliminary Plat of 6.24 acres
into 13 single family lots and road right-of-way. Location:
Southwest quadrant of County Road 1 and Bennett Place. (Ordinance
No. 59-86 - Rezoning; Resolution No. 86-294 - Preliminary Plat)
E. WILLIAMS MINI-STORAGE ty Finn Daniels, Inc. Request for Zoning Page 3054
District Change from Rural to 1-2 Park on 2.67 acres, Preliminary
Plat of 2.67 acres into one lot for construction of a storage
complex. ,Location: East of Highway #169, south of the Modern
Tire complex. (Ordinance No. 60-86 - Rezoning; Resolution No.
86-298 - Preliminary Plat)
F. EXCESS RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION - CUMBERLAND ROAD WEST OF ANDERSON Page 3065
LAKES PARKWAY (Resolution No. 86-288)
G. EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION FOR SUPERAMERICA STATION Page 3068
AT T.H. 169 AND CSAH 1 (Resolution No. 86-289)
IV. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS Page 3072
V. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
A. Resolution No. 86-296, amending Resolution Nos. 85-224 and Page 3079
85-225 regarding Multi-Family Housing Bonds for Prairie Village
Apartments increasing amount of bond issue t15,750,000
from $4,452;000
VI. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
VII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
A. Human Rights & Services Commission _ Recommendation on Page 3087
facilities for PROP
VIII. APPOINTMENTS
IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,December 2, 1986
B. Report of City Manager
C. Report of City Attorney
D. Report of Director of Community Services
E. Report of Director of Public Works •
X. NEW BUSINESS
XI. .'ADJOURNMENT
_i .
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-286
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF
ALICE BARNEY ADDITION
WHEREAS, the plat of Alice Barney Addition has been submitted in a manner
required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under
Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had
thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the
regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and
ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. Plat approval request for Alice Barney Addition is approved
upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's
report on this plat dated November 21, 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 December 2, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST SEAL + `'
John D. Frane, Clerk
f_
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 21, 1986
SUBJECT: ALICE BARNEY ADDITION
PROPOSAL:
Super America Stations, Inc., has requested City Council
approval of the final plat of Alice Barney Addition. The
addition, consisting of 1.06 acres, is located in the
northeast quadrant of the T.H. 169-212 and Pioneer Trail
intersection in the North 1/2 of Section 27. The plat will
consist of 1 lot and 1 outlot derived from the combination of
Lot 1, Block 1, Augusta Addition, the vacation of a portion of
Old Pioneer Trail and part of an adjacent unplatted parcel.
HISTORY:
The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on
November 4, 1986 per Resolution 86-273.
The second reading by the City Council of reading Ordiance 55-
86, zoning the property to Highway Commercial District, is
scheduled for December 2, 1986.
The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report is
scheduled for approval on December 2, 1986.
VARIANCES:
All variance requests must be approved by the Board of
Appeals.
UTILITIES AND STREETS:
Utilities necessary to serve this site will be extended by the
Developer in conformance with City standards.
A public hearing to consider the vacation of part of Old
Pioneer Trail (Vacation Request 086-12) is schedule for the
December 2, 1986, City Council meeting. Authorization for
this vacation must be granted prior to release of the plat.
Sufficient easements covering utilities owned by Minnegasco,
Northern State Power and Northwestern Bell fast be provided on
the plat. The developer will be responsible to coordinate
these easement needs prior to release of the plat.
Additional roadway improvements will not be necessary to
service this site.
)
Page 2, Final Plat Alice Barney Addition 11/21/86
PARK DEDICATION:
Park dedication will conform to the requirements of the .
Developer's Agreement and City Code.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval of the final plat of Alice Barney Addition
subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's
Agreement and the following:
1. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $563.
2. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $250.
3. City Council authorization for the vacation of part
of Pioneer Trail.
4. Satisfaction of utility company easement needs.
5. Satisfaction of bonding requirements.
• 6. Second reading of Ordinance 55-86.
7. Execution of the Developer's Agreement.
DLO:sg
cc: Daniel R. Tyson, Gustafson & Tyson, P.A.
Ron Krueger, Krueger & Assoc.
Roman Mueller, Super America
. I
„':LI
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-287
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF.
PRAIRIE VIEW CENTER
WHEREAS, the plat of Prairie View Center has been submitted in a manner
required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under '
Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had
Thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the
regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and
ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, .THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. 'Plat approval request for Prairie View Center is approved upon
compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's
report on this plat dated November 24, 1966.
B. Variance is herein granted from City Code 12.20 Subd.2.A.
waiving the six month maximum time elapse between,the approval
date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat as
described in said engineer's report.
C. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified
copy of this Resolution to the owners and subdividers of the
above named plat.
D. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to
execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City
Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions.
ADOPTED by the City Council on December 2, 1986.
Gary 0. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST SEAL
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
(r 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 24, 1986
SUBJECT: PRAIRIE VIEW CENTER
PROPOSAL:
The developers, Prairie View Associates Limited Partnership,
have requested City Council approval of the final plat of
Prairie View Center, a 16.17 acre site intended for commercial
use. The site was previously unplatted and is located east of
Prairie Center Drive and north of State Highway 5 in the South
1/2 of Section 10.
HISTORY:
The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council February
4, 1986, per Resolution 86-10.
Second reading of Ordinance 4-86, changing zoning from Rural
to Commercial-Regional-Service District, was finally read and
approved at the City Council meeting held March 25, 1986.
The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was
executed May 2, 1986.
VARIANCES:
All variance requests not covered in the Developer's Agreement
must be processed through the Board of Appeals. A variance
from City Code 12.20 waiving the 6 month time elapse between
approval of the preliminary plat and filing the final plat
will be necessary.
UTILITIES AND STREETS:
All municipal utilities are available to serve this site. All
interior utilities and streets will be privately owned and
maintained.
Prior to release of the final plat, drainage and utility
easements shall be revised to show 1D' in width abutting
right-of-way and 5' width abutting lot lines while maintaining
existing easements as shown on plat.
Page 2, Final Plat of Prairie View Center 11/24/86
PARK DEDICATION:
The requirements for park dedication are covered in the.
Developer's Agreement.
BONDING: �.
Bonding will conform to City Code requirements.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval of the final plat of Prairie View Center
subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's
Agreement and the following:.
1. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $1617.
2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $1741.
3. Revision of drainage and utility easements.
JJ:sg
cc: Curt Johnson, Prairie View Associates
Tim Reiner, Weis Builders
John Karwacki, Schoell & Madson
C
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 86-290
RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the
following improvements to wit:
I.C. 52-033A, Homeward Hills Road Connection
and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file for public
inspection in the City Engineer's office, are hereby approved.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official
paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon
the making of such improvement under such approved plans and
specifications. The advertisement shall be published for 3 weeks,
shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids shall be
received until Thursday, January 15, 1987, 10:00 A.M., at City Hall
after which time they will be publically opened by The Deputy City
Clerk and Engineer, will then be tabulated, and will be considered by
the Council at 7:30 P.M., Tuesday, January 20, 1987, at the Eden
Prairie School Administration Building, 8100 School Road, Eden
Prairie. No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the
clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond or
certified check payable to the City for 5% (percent) of the amount of
such bid.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on December 2, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
SuperAmerica
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 55-86
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY DF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be
removed from the Rural District and be placed in the C-Highway District. -.-
Section 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the iand shall be,
and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the
C-Highway District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to
in City Code, Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and are
amended accordingly.
Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicabie to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted _ in their
entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of December 2, 1986, entered into
between SuperAmerica, a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie, which
Agreement is hereby made a part hereof.
Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the 4th day of November, 1986, and finally read and adopted and ordered
published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 2nd day of
December, 1986.
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
PU8LISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
•
•
Exhibit A
Lot 1, Block 1, AUGUSTA ADDITION, and that part of the North
half of the South half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 27, •
Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as
follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of Lot 1, Block 1,
AUGUSTA ADDITION; thence on an assumed bearing of South 71
degrees 13 minutes 58 seconds West, along the North line of
said Lot 1, a distance of 236.34 feet to the Northwest corner
of said Lot 1; thence North 42 degrees 12 minutes 27 seconds
• East, along the Northeasterly extension of the Northwesterly
line of said Lot 1, a distance of 136.03 feet; thence North 71
degrees 13 minutes 58 seconds East a distance of 206.58 feet to
the Northwesterly line of Pioneer Trail as now laid out and
established; thence southwesterly along the Northwesterly line
of said Pioneer Trail along a non-tangential curve concave to
the southeast, having a radius of 209.16 feet, a central angle
of 30 degrees 45 minutes 26 seconds, a chord bearing of South
34 degrees 43 minutes 39 seconds West and a chord of 110.95
feet, a distance of 112.28 feet to the point of beginning.
Also that part of the Northeast Quarter of Section 27, Township
116, Range 22, described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the southeasterly right of way boundary
of Trunk Highway No. 5, distant 116.2 feet northeasterly of the
termination of the following described 29 degrees 00 minutes
curve; thence southwesterly along the southeasterly right of
( way boundary of Trunk Highway No. 5 to the northwesterly
boundary of the following described strip; thence northeasterly •
along the norhtwesterly boundary of said first described strip
to the end of the first described 8 degrees 00 minutes curve;
thence northwesterly to place of beginning.
STRIP DESCRIPTION
Beginning at a point on the west boundary of the Northeast Quarter
of Section 27, Township 116 North, Range 22 West, distant 1374.6
feet south of the northwest corner thereof; thence run in a
southeasterly direction at an angle of 71 degrees 40 minutes with
said west boundary for a distancte of 995.9 feet; thence deflect
to the left on an 8 degrees 00 minutes curve, delta angle of 38
•
degrees 18 minutes for a distance of 478.3 feet; thence on tangent
to said curve for a distance of 240 feet, more or less, to the
east line of the above mentioned West Quarter of the East Half of
the Northeast Quarter, and there terminating.
CURVE DESCRIPTION
Beginning at a point on the semi-tangent of the first described 8
degrees 00 minutes curve, distant 66.5 feet southeasterly from the
beginning of said 8 degrees 00 minutes curve; thence deflect to + '
the left on an 89 degrees 00 minutes curve, with a delta angle of
87 degrees 05 minutes for a distance of 231.3 feet, and there
1 terminating.
SuperAmerica
Highway 169/County Road #1
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1986, by
SuperAmerica, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer,"
and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"City:"
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Comprehensive Guide Plan
Amendment from Fire Station to Neighborhood Commercial of approximately 1.06 acres,
Zoning District Change from Rural to C-Highway for 0.38 acre and Zoning District
Amendment within the C-Highway District for 0.68 acre, and Preliminary Plat of
approximately 1.06 acres into one lot, with vacation of road right-of-way, for
purposes of construction of a service station/retail store, situated in Hennepin
County, State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and
made a part hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred to as "the property;"
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance #55-86,
Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, development, and maintenance of
said property as follows:
1. Developer shall develop the property in conformance with the
materials revised and dated December 2, 1986, reviewed and approved
by the City Council on November 4, 1986, and attached hereto as
Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided
herein. Developer shall not develop, construct upon, or maintain
the property in any other respect or manner than provided herein.
2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by
Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of
all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in
( Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. Prior to issuance of any building permit upon the property,
Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and receive the Ci
Engineer's approval of plans for streets, sanitary sewer, water,
storm sewer, and erosion control for the property.
Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall construct, or
cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said
plans, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit
C, attached hereto.
4. Prior to issuance of any building permit upon the property,
Developer shall submit to the Director of Planning and receive the
Director's approval of:
A. Revised landscape and grading plans which provide for two
berms, one five-feet in height, the other, ten-feet in
height, both adjacent to Highway 169, in the location
depicted in Exhibit D, attached hereto and made a part
hereof. The landscape plan shall'.be modified to include one
additional four-inch caliper shade trees and three
additional twelve-foot coniferous trees where shown in
Exhibit D, attached hereto. The plans shall be modified to
include a continuation of the existing eight-foot wide
bituminous trail through the site where shown in Exhibit D,
attached hereto.
B. Samples of the exterior building materials for the
structure.
Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer agrees
to implement, or cause to be implemented those plans and
materials listed above, as approved by the Director of
Planning.
5. Developer shall notify the City and the Watershed District 4B hours
prior to any grading, tree removal, or tree cutting on the property.
j
SuperAmerica
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-296
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY
OF ORDINANCE 55-86 AND ORDERING THE
PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 55-86 was adopted and ordered published at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 2nd day of December,
1986;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 55-86, which is
attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said
text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said
ordinance.
B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie.News in a
body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in
Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07.
C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for
inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office
of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance
shall be posted in the City Hall.
D. That Ordinance No. 55-86 shall be recorded in the ordinance book,
along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein,
within 20 days after said publication.
ADOPTED by the City Council on December 2, 19B6.
i. .
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
•
SuperAmerica
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 55-86
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99,
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Summary: This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located east of
Highway 169, north of County Road #1, and west of Pioneer Trail, known as
SuperAmerica, from the Rural District to the C-Highway District, subject to the
terms and conditions of a developer's agreement. Exhibit A, included with this
Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property.
Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication.
rr ATTEST:
/s/John D. Frane /s/Gary D. Peterson
City Clerk Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1986.
(A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.)
STAFF REPORT
(
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: October 24, 1986
PROJECT: Tech Park 7th Addition
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER: Hoyt Development
LOCATION: East of Golden Triangle Drive, south of West 76th Street, north of
Nine Mile Creek
REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Amendment within existing Office District on
3.7 acres.
Background n,T�,.�� /�. WNW
k `� w�„ s 80-13 /
This site is currently guided G r ; 1'2P Y' c
Office. The site is zoned Office 77 9 a
according to a 1985 PUD and Zoning , • /� 1
District Change approved by the City 8 i(
Council as part of the Technology 40 - �T _ (.i
Park 5, 6, and 7, Planned Unit l 8044 —
Development. Surrounding land uses 'ry i 83-84 '1_2
are planned and developed as office a ; - rn
on-
and industrial uses. The proponent ".. 1 • . ma
is requesting an amendment to the ��,1, 1 I-2P. � ►`N
existing office zoning district to '
allow a change in the site and FP ,. (25-84 90-84
building plans from a five-story, .' *Y...;. =;-2 i•'' 1-2PRK trill.
58,000 square foot building to a ,_
three-story, 27,700 square foot 4 PROPOSED SITE'•,
office building. <
Site Plan b. (\ N a
14V, j� tv 3
The site plan proposes a 27,700 `'"'�'''" N.t.,i
square foot office building at a "nr'� , .'.'--=Alift.� "..402 i1��'•. �: .
0.17 Floor Area Ratio (FAR). The 'rs• ?. . — A I—
•��
current site plan compares with the
previous approved plan as follows: • -'� o� a
i 17 5384
pE(j��.AN� j 1r2P.RK CIE
:,7 -
�l am" �J
( N AREA LOCATION MAP
Tech Park 7th Addition 2 October 24, 1986
1985 Approval Current Proposal
Square footage 58,000 square feet 27,700 square feet
Height Five stories Three stories
FAR 0.33 0.17
Setbacks 35 feet 35 feet
Shoreland Setbacks 100 feet 150 feet
Parking 240 spaces 140 spaces
The current proposal is an improvement from the original proposal in the following
ways:
1. The reduced building height and smaller building relates better visually to
the creek and the oak wooded knoll.
2. The reduced building square footage and smaller footprint reduces grading
and saves more trees along the slope behind the building.
3. There is an additional 50 feet of setback from Nine Mile Creek which allows
for more of the natural vegetation to be retained.
The plan meets all applicable setbacks for the office zoning district.
Grading
Though overall grading is extensive, it is considerably less than previously
approved plan and saves more of the oak wooded knoll. Less filling is required
along the creek. All slopes are at a 3/1 slope or less. Retaining walls are
necessary to accommodate parking and save more trees. The height and extent of
retaining walls are considerably less than the previous proposal. Since the
building is tucked into the hill and the lower portion of the building wall also
serves as a retaining wall.
Landscaping
The landscaping ordinance outlines a caliper inch requirment based on the size of
the building square footage and a screening requirement of loading facilities and
parking from Nine Mile Creek and from Golden Triangle Drive. The landscape plan
screens parking areas and loading areas effectively from Golden Triangle Drive but
does not do an adequate job from Nine Mile Creek. The shareland ordinance requires
that loading and parking areas be screened with natural vegetation. The landscape
plan should be suplemented with heavy landscaping of lowland vegetation types along
the slopes adjacent to Nine Mile Creek. In addition, the slopes along the creek can
be increased to a 2'i/1 slope which would allow for a small berm to be constructed at
the top of the slope, thereby doing a more effective job of screening.
Tech Park 7th Addition 3
October 24, 1986
Architecture
The three-story building proposes the use of four primary materials including brick,
glass, copper metal panel, and decorative rock face block. Mechanical equipment is
proposed to be contained within the building with the exception of a storage tank to
be located outside of the building. The exact location has not been determined.
The proponent should submit a screening plan for the round mounted storage tank.
The storage tank should be conpletely enclosed and materials should be
architecturally integral with the building.
Sidewalks/Trails
As part of the Golden Triangle Drive construction, there will be a five-foot wide
concrete sidewalk along the east side and an eight-foot wide bituminous trail along
the west side. The site plan should be revised to include a five-foot wide
pedestrian connection between the building and the sidewalk on Golden Triangle
Drive.
Signage and Lighting
The proponent should submit an overall signage plan with details for review. The
proponent should submit an overall lighting plan with details for review. The
lighting standards should be of a consistent size and style with the standards
proposed in the Tech 6 and 7 project.
Traffic
The 1985 BRW Traffic Study commissioned by the City assigned a total of peak hour trips to the entire 68.4-acre Tech Park PUD. A 20% reduction of,
the p m
peak hour traffic would be 3,888 trips. The p.m. peak hour p.m.
office/warehouse buildings under construction, plus the current
terprpn for the two
1,454 trips. This means that 2,434r proposalallocated would be
balance of undeveloped land within the p.m.
hpPark PUD trips
hcoisd be aily to the
Golden Triangle Drive. primarily west of
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
i-`
The Staff would recommend approval of the request for Zoning District Amendment
within the Office Zoning District based on plans dated October 24, 1986, subject to
the recommendations of the Staff Report dated October 24, 1986, and subject to the
following recommendations:
1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall:
A. Provide additional lowland plantings adjacent to Nine Mile Creek to
screen parking and loading areas. Revise the grading plan to
indicate a 2.5/1 slope adjacent to Nine Mile Creek.
B. Modify the site plan to indicate a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk
connection between the building and the sidewalk in Golden Triangle
/ Drive.
Tech Park 7th Addition 4 October 24, 1986
2. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
B. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance
of grading.
C. Stake the proposed grading limits with a snow fence and submit a
detailed tree inventory within 25 feet of the outside of the grading
limits for review. Any trees lost outside of the grading limits
shall be replaced on an area inch per area inch basis.
D. Submit sanples of proposed exterior materials for review.
E. Submit detailed mechanical equipment screening plans for review.
F. Submit detailed signage and lighting plans for review.
1
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
Planning Commission Minutes 2 November 10, 1986
F. TECHNOLOGY PARK 7TH, by Technology Park Associates. Request for
Zoning District Amendment within the Office District on 3.74 acres
for construction of a 27,700 square foot office building. Location:
East of future Golden Triangle Drive, north of Nine Mile Creek. A
public meeting.
Proponents had requested continuance of this item in order to rework plans
for the exterior materials and the tree replacement requirements for the property. Staff recommended continuance to the November 24,1986, meeting,
noting that these changes by the proponent would eliminate any need for
variance for the property.
MOTION:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to continue consideration of
the Technology Park 7th Addition proposal to the November 24, 1986, Planning
Commission meeting pending revisions to the plans and Staff review.
Motion carried--5-0-0
ii
f:.
Ji,,
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #86-291
( RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF WELTER'S PURGATORY ACRES FOR
CROW/CHASEW00D MINNESOTA
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Welter's Purgatory Acres for Crow/Chasewood Minnesota,
dated October 20, 1986, consisting of 52.4acres for single family lots, a copy of
which is om file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions
of the Eden;Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is
herein_approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 2nd day of December, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
j
l
1
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director
DATE: November 28, 1986
SUBJECT: Purgatory Acres Rezoning and Preliminary Plat
There were five main issues that were raised by the Planning Commission at the
November 10, 1986, Planning Commission meeting, including road connections and
traffic, sidewalks, tree loss, construction traffic, and trails and easements.
1. Road Connections and Traffic
Neighborhood residents were concerned about the amount of traffic that would
utilize Olympia Drive and Bennett Place. Although the number of trips are
consistent with typical single family neighborhoods, and the capacity of the
roadway is adequate to handle the traffic, the Commission requested Staff to
look at alternative ways of providing a road connection either to Sunnybrook
Road or to Homeward Hills Road. Attachment A indicates two alternative ways
of providing a road connection out of the project primarily in the northwest
corner. By extending the cul-de-sac to the north property line (Alternative
e B), it is possible to run a roadway across the high point of the adjoining
property and loop back to Sunnybrook Road with an opportunity for single
family lotting patterns on either side of the roadways. Alternative A
crosses the creek at the lowest possible point, with minimal grading on
either side of the creek and with the installation of a box culvert, a creek
crossing could be made without significantly altering the land on either
side of the creek. Alternative B would be the preferred alignment since it
does not alter as much of the natural character of the land. Alternative A
would cross an area of floodplain of approximately 150 feet wide.
2. Sidewalks
Because of the increase in the amount of traffic, the Commission felt that
it would be appropriate to have a sidewalk along one side of all of the
major streets within the subdivision and a connection from this subdivision
up along Olympia Drive to Mount Curve Road.
3. Tree Loss
Although the total tree loss is extensive, it should be pointed out that the
type of trees are primarily scrub or lowland vegetation and are not in the
same category as a major tree stand which might consist mostly of oak,
maple, and basswood trees. the grading plan has been revised per the Staff
Report to tighten up, where possible, all grading adjacent to the lowland
areas, such that the character of the natural landscape can be retained.
Memorandum
November 28, 1986
Page Two
l
4. Construction Traffic
Since there are 96 new single family lots proposed in this subdivision,
several neighborhood residents were concerned about the amount of
construction traffic down Olympia Drive and Bennett Place. They suggested
that an easement occur with Mr. Welter so that construction traffic;would,go
south to County.Road #1 or_to the southern most tip of Bennett Place. Staff
has analyzed the existing topography and it appears that there is no
topographic or vegetative reason why construction traffic could not utilize
portions of the Welter property to the south.
5. Trails/Easements
The Commission recommended that the floodplain be dedicated along with this
project. They also recommended that the Staff look intothe possibilities
of trail easements within this corridor. Commission was concerned however,
with establishing trail easements and building the trails at a later point
in time referring to public opposition to trails going in elsewhere in the
community. It was suggested that perhaps the alignment for the trail be
posted with a sign saying, "Future Bituminous Trail".
I
'i r 4:
Y .c i.
ate\ \r�\1 % '.J� ' ,
w,IS:,S,\'''l '4\kT 4:''''. \\\\ ,
}
\ - It'ers— I'"'.-7-a0 '
NN •^...• 61,,,,,,,„,,-. ;r,,, .. .,k,„.‘,‘—iir......\:,,, . ___._._ _____
/ i ` t- s. ;� it. ,, ';:4,4 a:- -Via'
y b W �� '�'I �
,tgii, .
•INIII ..1-tils.Aliii0°.."1 ' . 's C z...."•t*it,.. 410141*i iii'' .' '
._7__ *.)4,,,1 g....___11111_6111........41117 -,.,,,,,,--,.,.-2,.,,,k8, ‘.: N...., :„...., i 13 p / a -
l „NI(,Ni‘ ,., -..2,) y ,y4ri
I 1.\c-......,._„0""- -- . ,w..,._.....4,........11,.. ,,,,111,,,,....", '4 ''11,1%,.,._ ,,*,s‘,,.,..., ,..•i r,' il.1144' -or kv,,4x,....,_...b.\,......__1141 crofflilift I 1---1.*2; ,!:%1;, 1
--)( I i j.---'-'/".' \ :7,-‘.,f.. g4',^s:..-._1`5'7,`:;•2. - 4i4,.`!., , t':0.‘,1,.-' "Z.,.47 ,I. 0,,,,, '
� 1, �. r �'l= 4 'k
1 IAl
.,
1 I Road'Connections
Attachment A
(
MEMORANDUM
TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
r FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
l
DATE: November 12, 1986
SUBJECT: Purgatory Acres
Attached is a copy of the October 24, 1986 Planning Staff Report regarding
this project. The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission will
note the major issues relating to parks, recreation and natural resources are
as follows:
. grading
. the Purgatory Creek floodplain and shoreland
. pedestrian walkways
GRADING
The Planning Staff Report describes the proposed grading plan and indicates
this project will require significant alteration of the existing topography
and massive tree loss.
Due to the rolling wooded character of this site, massive grading is required
in order to develop this area as single family residential, and the
significant trees (as defined by the tree replacement policy) will be required
to be replaced.
The two wetland areas will be retained; however, the majority of the natural
vegetation around the edge of these wetlands will be removed due to grading of
building pads.
SHORELAND MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE AND PURGATORY CREEK FLOODPLAIN REGULATIDNS
The Shoreland Management Ordinance affects lots number 17-28, as those lots
are within the shoreland management profile and abut Purgatory Creek, which is
classified as general development waters.
Lots abutting general development waters with public sewer and water are
required to have the following minimums:
. lot size 13,500 sq. ft.
. 120' width at building
. 120 foot width at the ordinary high water mark
. minimum setback from the ordinary high water mark of 100 feet
The following lots do not meet the minimum width at the building line: Lot
20, Lot 21, Lot 26, Lot 27, and Lot 28. Several lots do not meet the minimum
width at the ordinary high water mark including the following: Lot 21, Lot
26, and Lot 27.
All lots appear to meet the other requirements of the Shoreland Management
Ordinance.
The plan does not depict any grading within the floodplain of Purgatory Creek.
The City of Eden Prairie has been consistent in requesting all development
adjacent to any of the major creek bodies to plat the floodplain in a separate
outlot. The purpose of this request is to ease the management of the creek
floodplains. In nearly all cases, the outlot containing the floodplain is
ultimately dedicated to the City for maintenance and management to insure
preservation of these creek vallleys. The Community Services Staff recommend
the Developer redesign the lots abutting Purgatory Creek to depict the rear
lot line located outside of the hundred year elevation.
If the lots do not abut the creek they are not required to meet the Shoreland
Management Ordinance minimum width, etc. The Purgatory Creek Study provides
the following recommendations for the Sunnybrook sector.
POTENTIAL USE
"Trails close to the creek fnr the first half of this section would serve to
link existing and future development in the area. At a point approximately
halfway through this section, the character of the creek changes dramatically,
the adjacent slops steepen, vegetation becomes dense, fewer and fewer homes
can be seen. This charactertistic continues throughout the remaining length
of the creek. It is at this point that the corridor use also changes. Until
now, accept for the upper most reaches of the creek, the use of the corridor
has been for more active recreation. Now the trail will become more
primitive, less refined, fewer points of access, and longer distances between
points of access."
"The trails for hiking will be located in the ravine adjacent to the creek and
designed to move from side to side as major obstacles are encountered."
"Other trails associated with the residential development, may be located on
the "rim" above the valley floor to take advantage of scenery."
"The bicycle and other vehicles, motorized and non-motorized, should be
excluded from the creek edge routes."
MANAGEMENT
"The wild character of the area should be maintained. Setbacks should be
strictly enforced and access limited."
PEDESTRIAN TRAILS
The Community Services Staff recommend a 5' concrete sidewalk on the west and
south side of Bennett Place/Olympia Drive. This is the main through street
for this subdivision and although sidewalks have not been constructed on
portions of this street today, a sidewalk should be developed from Sunnybrook
Road, south to County Road 1 along this street to provide safe pedestrian
access to the trail along Sunnybrook Road and the trail along County Road 1.
The Community Services Staff recommmend approval of Purgatory Acres as per the
Planning Staff recommendations in the October 24 report, plus the following:
1. Developer redsign the lots abutting Purgatory Creek to keep all of the
lots out of the hundred year floodplain.
( 2. The Developer construct a 5' wide concrete sidewalk on the south and west
side of Bennett Place/Olympia Drive.
BL:md
STAFF REPORT
(
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
HROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: October 24, 1986
PROJECT: Purgatory Acres
LOCATION: North of County Road #1, west of Bennett Place, south of Olympia
Drive
APPLICANT: Crow/Chasewood
FEE OWNER: Ray Welter
REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 51.7 acres.
2. Preliminary Plat of 51.7 acres into 96 lots.
Background 9 ,fir 1
P/l
/' The Comprehensive Guide Plan depicts "e•� cA r is'
:
a Low Density Residential land use
for this site for up to 2.5 units
per acre. Surrounding land uses are PI
guided as Low Density Residential to °" PROPOSED SITE 9
the north and east of the site and Jam
Low Density Residential and Open ;l.I,
,,
Space to the south and west of the : �0. tor
�rsite.
I if
Site Plan . ,�a • 4..••000�.••o•)••o.••o+••.o0.i••:•i�O," R
The site plan depicts the sub- cw ;.!.�;•;•;•.�;••.�;p•:o��
division of 51.7 acres into 96 PUB \4a�` !!;O;•;►;.•o••••••••••;;..
single family lots at a gross " " `-. :,,y' ....- ' ';••00:400
density of 1.86 units per acre. The • ::::4;•'; t.
lot sizes range in size from 13,5D0 "••^ 0W .,.•.••.'�..
�.�. °
square feet to 55,328 square feet •. /e 82-17 ni '
with an average lot size of 19,920 ' Nun ME : RI-13.5 I7
square feet. All of the proposed 11111 yat
oi
lots meet the minimum street ' MA '$
frontage and lot size requirements OMB 1 •
for the R1-13.5 zoning district. ? •W �fr.e co.o,
All lots meet the minimum require- $� 'r t •C 1
ments of the shoreland ordinance. iI ,�i� •:••: �.��;{� .1
( • ' ���� 1
1J11 - l 1 �. �u a '"
- AREA LOCATION MAP r
I 3. 1 1 ,
Purgatory Acres 2 October 24, 1986
Access to this site will be from Olympia Drive and Bennett Place which are temporary
cul-de-sacs at this time. A road connection is proposed through this site to
connect both of these temporary dead-end streets. Staff has studied the possibility
of making cul-de-sac U extend to the northwest property lines to allow for through
traffic on the site to the north. After an analysis of topography on the adjacent
property and the impact of the conservancy area of Purgatory Creek, it was
determined that extension of the roadway would alter too much of the land character
and would not result in an efficient lotting pattern. Since the amount of road
frontage on Sunnybrook Road is extensive along the land area to the north, it is
anticipated that a loop road system could connect future Homeward Hills Road and
Sunnybrook Road.
There are many lots that abut Purgatory Creek. All of these lots have a portion of
the property within the conservancy area. Prior to the final plat approval, the
proponent must submit conservancy easements for review by the City which preserve
this area in its natural state. The conservancy easements should also permit City
access to construct trails. Access points to conservancy area should be provided in
appropriate locations where determined by the Parks, Recreation, and Natural
Resources Commission.
Traffic
The proponent has submitted a traffic analysis of the proposed subdivision. The
traffic analysis does not indicate the total trips during the p.m. peak hours.
Typically, a.m. and p.m. peak hour total traffic would be 10% of the total daily
trips. This would mean that the total a.m. peak hour traffic would be 134 compared
with 96 as indicated by the proponents analysis and the p.m. traffic would be 134 as
compared to 96. The trip distribution plan would indicate that 28% of the traffic
would go north to Olympia Drive, 30% of the traffic would flow towards Bennett Place
at exit B, and 41% of the traffic would utilize exit C to Bennett Place.
Typical residential streets are designed to accommodate between 1,500 to 1,800 trips
per day. Existing homes on Olympia Drive and Bennett Place should also be included
in the calculation o` the total daily traffic. This would mean an additional 300
total trips. Thus the total daily traffic that could be travelling on Olympia Drive
and Bennett Place would be 1,641 trips per day. Circulation through this project
would be circuitous due to the intersections and curving roads. This tends to
discourage through traffic and reduce speeds.
Grading
With the exception of the conservancy area along Purgatory Creek, within which no
grading is allowed, the entire site will be graded to accommodate road construction
and building construction. Cut and fill will vary between 5 to 15 feet in various
locations of the site. The net effect of the grading on the property will result in
a significant alteration of the natural character of the land and extensive tree
loss. An approximate estimate of the total tree coverage on the site would be about
20 acres. Of this tree mass, Staff expects that a majority of the trees would be
lost due to construction. It is important to point out that, although the tree mass
is extensive, the majority of the trees within this area are elm, box elder, and
poplar. It is not a major wooded area as compared with Shady Oak Ridge and
Bluestem, in which the primary tree types were maple, oak, and basswood, with large
amounts of trees over 12 inches in diameter. There are a number of significant
trees which will be lost due to construction for which the proponent will be
Purgatory Acres 3 October 24, 1986
responsible for tree replacement. Total significant tree loss is 392 inches. The
tree replacement formula would require 392 inches of tree replacement. The
proponent must submit a tree replacement plan for review prior to Council review.
There are lots adjacent to Purgatory Creek for which no grading has been depicted.
While.Staff expects that these would be custom houses as well as the balance of the
property, it is important to know the extent of grading to evaluate the impact upon
the creek and additional tree loss. The grading plan should be revised to indicate
building pad locations and grading limits.
There are ways in which additional trees can be saved on-site through changes in the
grading plan. There are areas adjacent to ponding areas where grades can be
tightened up from 3/1 to 2/1 slopes. This will allow for more of the natural .
vegetation along the ponds edges to be retained. The grading plan has already been
changed prior to Commission review in the northeast corner of the site. Adding a
cul-de-sac and permitting steeper slopes fills less of the pond and saves more
trees.
Utilities
Sewer, water, and storm sewer are available by connection to existing facilities in
Olympia Drive and Bennett Place. The overall storm drainage plan utilizes the
existing ponds which are also connected to the City's overall storm drainage system.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
�^ Staff would recommend approval of the Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5
and a Preliminary Plat of 51.7 acres into 96 single family lots based on the Staff
Report dated October 24, 1986, and based on plans dated October 17, 1986, and
subject to the following recommendations:
1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall:
A. Modify the grading plan to tighten the grades adjacent to all
ponding areas to a 2/1 slope in order to save more trees. Submit a
tree replacement plan for review by Staff. Indicate grading and
building pad locations on all lots adjacent to Purgatory Creek.
B. Submit a tree replacement plan for 392 caliper inches with no tree
less than three inches in diameter.
2. Prior to Final plat, proponent shall:
A. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for
review by the Watershed District. 4
B. Submit detailed storm water run-off, utility, and erosion control
plans for review by the City Engineer.
C. Concurrent with final plat approval, vacate additional right-of-way
at the cul-de-sacs on Olympia Drive and Bennett Place.
3. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
Purgatory Acres 4 October 24, 1986
B. Notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours in advance of
grading.
_ C. Stake the proposed grading limits with a tree fence and submit_a
detailed tree inventory within 25 feet of the outside of the fence
for review by Staff. Trees lost due to construction outside of_the
grading limits will be replaced on an area inch per area inch basis.
•
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
Planning Commission Minutes 2 November 10, 1986
(
•
B. WELTER'S PURGATORY ACRES, by Crow/Chasewood Minnesota. Request for
Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 51.7 acres and
Preliminary Plat of 51.7 acres for 96 single family lots. Location:
•
North of County Road #1, west of Bennett Place, south of Olympia
Drive. A public hearing.
Mr. Jim Ostenson, Crow/Chasewood, reviewed the site characteristics and the
proposed development with the Commission. He noted that the Welters owned
approximately 108 acres in this area; however, at this time, proponents were
requesting review of only 51.7 acres.
Mr. Ostenson pointed out that the property was generally wooded, but that
many of the trees were poorer quality tree, such as elm and boxelder. He
stated that there were also areas of higher quality trees, which included
oaks and ironwoods as examples.
1. .
Planning Commission Minutes 3 November 10, 1986
The development was designed at a density of 1.85 units per acres, with an
average lot size of 20,000 sq. ft. and a minimum lot size of 13,500 sq. ft.
Mr. Ostensen stated that there were no variances being requested for the
development of the property as shown, and he added that the project had been
designed in compliance with the requirements of the Purgatory Creek Study
with respect to transition and conservancy areas.
Mr. Ostenson stated that the homes in the proposed development would be
valued between $250,000-$500,000. In terms of phasing of the development,
he stated that first to be developed would be the northeasterly 30 lots,
then the southeasterly 30 lots, and finally the westerly 30-35 lots. He
added that the covenants and restrictions to be placed on the homes would be
very similar to those which already existed in the developed portion of this
area for purposes of architectural controls, etc.
Planner Franzen reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff
Report of November 7, 1986, regarding the development. He discussed the
tree removal proposed for the property and explained that several different
lotting arrangements had been reviewed between the proponent and the Staff
for purposes of saving as many trees as possible. Based upon this review,
one change was made to the northeast corner of the development, thereby
saving more trees and eliminating the need for as much grading as was
originally shown in this area. Planner Franzen stated that, in several
areas, changes had been made to the grading plan in order to preserve more of the vegetation. He stated that the common change was to allow for 2-1
t. slopes in areas that had been proposed for 3-1 slopes in order to save
trees.
The Staff Report recommendation was for replacement of approximately 400
caliper inches of trees on the property based upon the number of "quality"
trees which would be removed by development, in accordance with the City's
tree replacement policy. Planner Franzen stated that the priority for
location of the replacement trees would be in areas where large tree stands
had been eliminated due to construction. A secondary priority for location
would be along proposed street boulevards.
With respect to the Purgatory Creek Study, Planner Franzen explained that
the area designated as a conservancy area was intended to be a "no building,
no grading" area. He noted that the proposed development adhered to this
requirement. With respect to the area designated as a transition zone by
the Study, Planner Franzen stated that intention in these areas was to
develop with more sensitivity to the natural features inherent on such
property; for example, slopes would be protected, but development would be
allowed to take place. Planner Franzen stated that the proposed development
also adhered to this requirement of the Study.
Planner Franzen stated that traffic would be increased in the existing
neighborhoods surrounding this development. However, he pointed out that it
would be typical of other single family neighborhoods in the City. He noted
that the proposed density of this development was 1.85 units per acre, but
that many single family neighborhoods had been developed at a density of 2.5
units per acre, the maximum allowed in a Low Density Residential area as
designated by the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Therefore, the conclusion was
that traffic would not be as great as if the neighborhood were proposed for
Planning Commission Minutes 4 November 10, 1986
development at the maximum allowable density. Planner Franzen stated that
it was anticipated that approximately 50% of the traffic from this proposed
development would be northbound, and approximately 50% of the traffic would
be southboud. He added that there should not be more traffic from this
subdivision than in the existing Mount Curve neighborhood.
(Ruebling arrived at 8:00 p.m.)
Anderson asked about sidewalks within the proposed development. Mr.
Ostenson responded that the proponents would be looking for a recommendation
from the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission on this issue.
Planner Enger stated that, in discussions with the Community Services Staff,
it had been suggested that there be sidewalk located along one side of the
Olympia Drive/Bennett Place connection road and along one side of the looped
road within the proposed development.
Anderson stated that he felt the sidewalks were important for the safety of
children. He asked about a trail system along Purgatory Creek. Planner
Enger stated that the 1974 Purgatory Creek Study contemplated a trail along
the creek at some point in the future. However, it was not intended that it
be done as part of any individual development. He stated that the City was
in the process of "collecting" trail easements as various parcels along
Purgatory Creek were being developed.
r Anderson asked about anticipated 50-50 split of traffic north and south
l bound from the development. Planner Franzen explained the traffic study in
greater detail and the assumptions made which led to this conclusion. Mr.
Ostenson explained that the general question asked of the traffic consultant
was "where do people go in the morning and how do they get home at night
from this neighborhood." He added that the upgrading of Homeward Hills Road
was assumed to be completed for the purposes of the study.
Acting Chairman Hallett asked if there had been an exact count of the number
of trees on the property by species. Planner Franzen stated that there had
been an inventory completed for all trees that were twelve inches in
diameter, or greater. Mr. Ostenson explained that, due to the density of
trees on the property in certain areas, the tree inventory for any trees
smaller than twelve inches in diameter was done on an area basis. He
referred to the plan showing the tree inventory which had been included as
part of the submission for the proposed development.
Acting Chairman Hallett asked if the Staff was comfortable with receipt of a
scenic easement adjacent to Purgatory Creek with respect to the future trail
that was referred to in the Purgatory Creek Study. Planner Franzen stated
that this was what had been requested of other developers with property
adjacent to the Creek.
Planner Enger stated that the difference between this proposed development
and several others that had received approval in similar situations was that
the proponent was not planning to dedicate the flood plain to the City at
this time. It was possible that the dedication of this area would be
forthcoming with a subsequent phase of development of the property.
Acting Chairman Hallett stated that he was concerned that the flood plain
•
Planning Commission Minutes 5 November 10, 1986
area be dedicated at this time, especially if a trail was to be part of that
area in the future. He noted that there were several examples of
developments where the City had not received dedication of the area planned
for future trails at the time of City review, and that when it came time to
build the trails, the then-established neighborhoods were against the
construction of the trails, thereby actually eliminating pieces of the trail
system plan.
Acting Chairman Hallett stated that he felt situations such as this placed
the City in an awkward position--that of sticking to already approved plans,
while trying to also appease a neighborhood which did not exist at the time
of the decision. He stated that by not allowing the trails to be built in
designated locations, the City would not be providing for access to such
scenic areas for all of Eden Prairie's residents, as was originally
intended. He asked Staff if there was some way to prevent this happening on
this development. Planner Enger stated that the flood plain portion of the
property could be dedicated at this time and that it could be covered with
an easement benefitting the City. Commissioner Anderson stated that he
concurred in Acting Chairman Hallett's concerns and felt that the flood
plain area should be dedicated at this time.
Acting Chairman Hallett suggested that the City consider using signs in
areas like this, as was currently being done with temporary cul-de-sacs, to
inform the public that a trail would eventually be located in this vicinity.
He stated that this would serve as warning to anyone planning to purchase
property in the area that a trail would eventually be constructed.
Mr. Bruce Medvic, 9348 Olympia Drive, stated that he felt it would be
important for the covenants and restrictions for this property to be similar
to those of the existing neighborhood. He stated that he felt the most
significant impact of the development on the existing neighborhood would be
traffic. He added that he also felt construction traffic could be a
difficulty. Mr. Medvic stated that he felt there must be another way to
access the property, rather than connecting to the existing neighborhood.
Planner Enger responded to questions about traffic. He noted that there
would be less than 500 trips, or less, per day through the existing
neighborhood from this development.
Mr. Medvic stated that there were no sidewalks along the streets in his
neighborhood currently, and he questioned whether there would be room to add
sidewalks in the future. He asked about the status of the improvements to
Homeward Hills Road and whether the proposed development could be accessed
via Homeward Hills Road, instead of through his neighborhood. Planner Enger
responded that there was adequate right-of-way within which to locate a
sidewalk along one side of Olympia Drive, if it was determined that one
should be installed. He added that Olympia Drive was of adequate design
capacity to handle the projected traffic from the proposed development, in
addition to the traffic already on the road. With respect to accessing the
development from Homeward Hills Road, Planner Enger stated that it was
possible to provide for extension of the street system to Homeward Hills
Road. He stated that Staff would have to review the possibilities of doing
so due to different ownerships of properties in that vicinity and other
issues, such as adequacy of soils, etc.
f Planning Commission Minutes 6 November 10, 1986
Anderson expressed concern about the traffic for the general vicinity. He
stated that he felt it was more likely that the majority of the traffic,
more than 50%, would be northbound due to the ease of accessibility of the
roads in that direction. He pointed out that there would be less stop
lights encountered and there would also be the possibility of avoiding
County Road #18.
Bye stated that it was apparent that development patterns indicated more
development to the south in Eden Prairie and in communities south of Eden
Prairie, therefore, in the future, even more traffic from the development
would likely be southbound. She added that she shared concerns about the
need for sidewalks in the development.
Gartner asked when Homeward Hills Road would be completed from its current
terminus at Sunnybrook Road, south to County Road #1. Planner Enger
responded that it was planned to be completed by Fall, 1987. She stated
that she felt the development should at least contemplate the possibility of
connection to the northwest toward Homeward Hills Road and Sunnybrook Road
by providing for adequate right-of-way at the property boundary for
connection in the the future.
Mr. Ostenson stated that the northwesterly most cul-de-sac had not been
extended all the way to the border of the property because of topographic
considerations. He added that the property to the north of the proposed
development in the direction of the extension of Homeward Hills Road was
also difficult due to topography. Mr. Ostenson added that the proponents
were willing to construct a full road right-of-way toward the northwest for
a future connection to that area as far as their property line.
•
Gartner stated that she felt the preservation of trees for this development
was commendable, but that the first consideration should be for safety.
Terry Johnson, 9378 Olympia Drive, stated that he felt traffic was
northbound most of the time out of the existing neighborhood. He also
expressed concern with respect to construction traffic resulting from this
development. He suggested that construction traffic find an alternative
route to access the development, rather than through the existing
residential neighborhood.
Jim Lexcen, 9354 Olympia Drive, stated that he concurred with the concerns
of his neighbors with respect to traffic. He questioned whether the streets
were of adequate size to handle the resulting traffic volume from the
proposed development. Mr. Lexcen pointed out that there would soon be an
elementary school opening in this area, as well, and emphasized concern for
children walking to the school given the potential traffic resulting from
this proposed development, and other development taking place in this
vicinity.
Anderson stated that he felt a traffic light at Anderson Lakes Parkway and
Homeward Hills Road (the intersection at which the elementary school was
located) would only encourage traffic to circumvent this route and use
Preserve Boulevard, instead. Acting Chairman Hallett stated that the School
District currently bussed children across busy thoroughfares like this, even
though they may be close to an elementary school. As an example, he noted
Planning Commission Minutes 7 November 10, 1986
that children from the Cardinal Creek neighborhood were bussed across Baker
Road to Forest Hills Elementary School due to traffic considerations.
Dodge asked what would be involved if access was required from this
development to the northwest, instead of through the existing neighborhood.
Planner Enger explained that the two major considerations would be
topography and the fact that the proponent did not control all the property
to Homeward Hills Road, but that there were several other property owners
involved.
Dodge stated that she, too, was concerned that sidewalks be available for
pedestrian circulation through the development.
Gartner asked if there was adequate room within the rights-of-way proposed
for this development for inclusion of sidewalks. Planner Enger responded
that there would be room for sidewalks on at least one side of each of the
rights-of-way within the development. He pointed out that the right-of-way
would need to be 60 feet in width to allow for sidewalks on both sides of
future streets.
Mr. Medvic asked if it would be possible to construct a bridge for
automobile traffic across Purgatory Creek in this area. Mr. Ostenson stated
that this would be an expensive proposition. He added that he would work
with the property owner toward establishment of a construction traffic
access that would keep such traffic out of the existing residential
neighborhood.
Ruebling stated that he felt the possibility of accessing Homeward Hills
Road from this development should at least be considered.
Anderson asked if the City had any policy regarding the cleaning of roads
which had been used by construction traffic. Planner Enger responded that
there was a City Code provision for cleaning the roads in such situations
and that this provision was called out in each developer's agreement for
development of property.
Mr. Ostenson expanded on the consideration of a bridge to cross Purgatory
Creek. He stated that the area to be crossed would likely be about 400 ft.
over an area which varied 20-40 ft. in topographic changes. By comparison,
he noted that this would be roughly equal to the bridge crossing Purgatory
Creek at Anderson Lakes Parkway. Mr. Ostenson stated that this idea had
been originally proposed at the first neighborhood meeting held by them with
the neighborhood. Upon review, he stated that it had become obvious that
there would be significant environmental damage, if such a bridge was
constructed. Also, the costs were prohibitive.
Planner Enger stated that Staff had not recommended the crossing of
Purgatory Creek for access to Homeward Hills Road by this development,
noting that it would be contrary to the basic principles of conservation of
the Purgatory Creek area. He added that it may be possible to access
Sunnybrook Road, directly, and that Staff could pursue this with the
proponents.
Acting Chairman Hallett asked Staff whether the issues of the road
Planning Commission Minutes 8 November 10, 1986
connection to the northwest, the trail along Purgatory Creek, an alternate
construction traffic access, and sidewalks could be handled prior to Council
review of the development. Planner Enger stated that the trail along
Purgatory Creek would be referred to the Parks, Recreation, and Natural
Resources Commission for their action. With respect to the alternate
construction traffic access and the sidewalks, he stated that Staff was
prepared to make recommendations at this time that an alternative route for
construction traffic be established and the sidewalks be located along one
side of the Olympia Drive and Bennett Place connections and along one side
of the loop road through the property. Planner Enger stated that the one
matter which could not be immediately resolved was that of the road
connection to the northwest. He noted that it would be necessary to meet
with the proponents to work out a solution prior to the Council meeting.
Otherwise, all other issues raised could be handled at this time.
Mr. Ostenson stated that, with respect to the road connection to the
northwest, all proponents would be able to do would be to build a road to
the edge of their property. He reiterated that they agreed to this and were
willing to amend their plans to reflect such a change.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Anderson,to close the public
hearing.
Motion carried--6-0-0
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Crow/Chasewood for Zoning District change
from Rural to R1-13.5 on 52.4 acres for Welter's Purgatory Acres, based on
plans and written materials dated October 20, 1986, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated October 24, 1986, with the
following additions: Under #1. add C. Amend the plans to reflect an future
road connection to the north/northwest toward Homeward Hills Road as
extended, or Sunnybrook Road; D. Amend the plans to reflect the addition of
sidewalks along one side of the Olympia Drive and Bennett Place connections
and along one side of the loop road through the development; E. Provide for
an alternative access to the property for purposes of construction traffic
in order to avoid the need to for construction vehicles to go through the
existing residential neighborhood to the north; and F. Amend the plans to
reflect dedication of the flood plain area to the City.
Acting Chairman Hallett asked whether requiring dedication of the flood
plain would guarantee the City that there would be no difficulty in having a
trail built in this area. Planner Enger stated that it would guarantee the
City's ability to use the property, but that a situation could arise just as
in the neighborhoods mentioned earlier where neighbors would be against the
trail if it were not built at this time. He added that he was unaware of
l any funds currently available for construction of the trail along Purgatory
Creek. Acting Chairman Hallett stated that he felt it would be important
for the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission to understand
that the Planning Commission recommendation on this would be that the trail
Planning Commission Minutes 9 November 10, 1986
be dedicated at this time and that some form of designation of a future
trail, like signage used for temporary cul-de-sacs, be installed to avoid
the problems of the neighborhood being against it in the future when it came
time to build. Other Commissioners concurred.
Mr. Ostenson stated that he was not certain that he would be able to obtain
an easement for construction traffic from the land owner, but he added that
he would try to work this out prior to Council review.-
Motion carried--4-1-1 (Acting Chairman Hallett against; Ruebling abstained)
Acting Chairman Hallett voted against stating that he felt the issues should
be worked out with the Staff, not become a part of the requirement for
approval of the proposed development.
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Crow/Chasewood for Preliminary Plat of
52.4 acres for Welter's Purgatory Acres, based on, plans and written
materials dated October 20, 1986, subject to the recommendations of the
Staff Report dated October 24, 19B6, with the following additions: ` Under
#1. add C. Amend the plans to reflect an future road connection to the
north/northwest toward Homeward.Hills Road as extended, or Sunnybrook Road;
P. Amend the plans to reflect the addition of sidewalks along one side of
the Olympia Drive and Bennett Place connections and along one side of' the
loop road through the development; E. Provide for an alternative access to
the property for purposes of construction traffic in order to avoid the need
to for construction vehicles to go through the existing 'residential
neighborhood to the north; and F. Amend the plans to reflect dedication of
the flood plain area to the City.
Motion carried--4-1-1 (Acting Chairman Hallett against; Ruebling.
abstained)
Acting Chairman Hallett voted against stating that he felt the issues should
be worked out with the Staff, not become a part of the requirement for
approval of the proposed development.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-292
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE
COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted the Comprehensive
Municipal Plan ("Plan"); and,
WHEREAS, the Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review
and comment; and,
WHEREAS, the proposal of J B & D, Inc., for development of Meadow Park 3rd
Addition for Low Density Residential use requires the amendment of the Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, the City Council of Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, hereby proposes the amendment of the Plan as follows: approximately 13.5
acres located at the northwest quadrant of Homeward Hills Road and Sunnybrook Road
be modified from Public Open Space to Low Density Residential.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 2nd day of December, 1986.
L:
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor.
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #86-293
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF MEADOW PARK 3RD ADDITION FOR
J B & D, INC.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Meadow Park 3rd Addition for J B & D, Inc., dated
November 25, 1986, consisting of 31.5 acres into 29 single family lots and one
outlot and road right-of-way, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found
to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning •and Platting
ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved.
ADOPTED.by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 2nd day,of December, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
4. `
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
ii
c !
Gm
GME CONSULTANTS, INCEai.CONSULTING ENGINEERS
2083 East Center Circle/MinneapoIis.MN 55441 /612/559-1859 ieeer
November 20, 1986
Mr. Peter Bishop, P.E.
James R. Hill, Inc.
8200 Humboldt Avenue South
Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 GME Project No. 1186-1159
RE: Test pit exploration in wetland areas of the Meadowpark
Third Addition in Eden Prairie, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Bishop:
Following your verbal authorization on Tuesday, November 18, 1986,
we have completed this phase of the site exploration. Enclosed
please find the results of our field work.
We excavated six test pits on the site. A test pit was dug at each
of the residences where the site plan indicates encroachment into
the wetland, as well as in the right-of-way of "C" Street which
crosses a swale in the wetland, at about station 4 + 100. The test
pits were excavated to depths ranging from 8 to 12 feet with a JD
450 dozer/backhoe. A Field Engineer operated the backhoe and
logged the test pits. The Engineer obtained samples of the various
soils encountered in the test pits. These samples were
preliminarily classified in the field and returned to our
laboratory for examination and classification by a Soil Engineer. •
In our laboratory, an Engineer examined each of the samples to
determine the major and minor soil components. The Engineer then
visually/manually classified the samples on the basis of texture
and plasticity in accordance with the Unified System. The letter
symbol shown in parentheses on the test pit logs is the estimated
group symbol based on this system.
The Field Engineer noted groundwater levels in the test pits.
These water level readings and a description of the rate of entry
of the groundwater into the test pits, are shown on the logs.
The test pits indicate that approximately 5 to 8 feet of organic
soil and soft saturated silts or clay were found from the surface.
Underlying the organic soils and soft layers, we encountered stiff
gray and green gray silty sandy and clayey till. This material
was found to extend to the end of the test pits.
Based on the conditions found in the test pits, it appears that
soil correction is feasible at the house pads and to prepare the
pavement subgrade. We will schedule drilling exploration near the
GEOTECHNICAL•MATERIALS•ENVIRONMENTAL SOILS
WILLIAM C KWASNY.P E THOMAS P VENEMA.P E WILLIAM E.BLOEMENDAL.E.LT..
_
.
Mr. Peter Bishop 2 November 20, 1986
•
wetland to determine whether a "double bottom"- condition exists,
with:additional buried layers of organic soil. Considering on the
amount and rate of water inflow to the test pits, the earthwork
contractor should be fully prepared to pump water out of the
excavations the while the soil correction is being carried out.
Placement of fill under water, even clean granular fill, should not
be permitted. Rather, the contractor should have an adequate •
number of pumps and a dewatering plan .to remove water from the base
of the excavation, to allow observation and testing of the bottom
and to prevent unsuitable soils and soft and disturbed clay from
being trapped under the new fill.
The field exploration by borings is scheduled for this site. Upon
completion of the borings, we will submit the subsurface
exploration report to you. If you have any questions regarding
this letter, please contact us.
Sincerely,
Aiamc.
CONSULTANTS,` INC.
"Kwasn •
Principal Engin
Enclosures: Test Pit Location Diagram (estimated locations)
Test Pit Logs
WCK:kdk
f,�vJ
I
'' ff
i \~ `` d f1 4,4s'
r \ ;1 -� .
Y 1 'i
1 ` o i
/ I `�� o .` ` ` fY
/ f ..
/ \\, % �' �'' 4'�� 7Q8 0 \ 4 '
- .1 4 / w .' •h,�'U
w- 4 f '1..--. , Ai/�ry �f
4 TP-6 0 •� y
1'1 //,
I o . j :
no
o ''717 ://;
k:/
C r w
TP-4 ��
O �'1 �.r " , y TP-j ° •
O }lJ o .� TH,+• .� o t� O .r..
•
�-- 4°1 k i� I.
TP-2 ` '
.J r.-�~ l rf 5
C I t.,L 0 _ w
t.
-- - I ( is- �s �' ' ,;r -
„...,___. _r- I.P0 I i 957‘-•=---- tyi "i :.
i I 1 -c = /gy_. ' s3
f .r _ -1 Q : 'r ADPROXIMAIT
.} ���� ' SCPJ,c
1 , ~I ..I �,,11 I 1
.....„ 1 1 s p o � I + 11 Io' so'
TEST PIT LOCATION DIAGRAM
MEADCA4 PAR!{ THIRD ADDITION GME CONSUL IANTS, INC.
HOMEWARD HILLS ROAD & SUNNYBROOK RD 2083 EAST CENTER CIRCLE
EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA MINNEAPOLIS.MINNESOTA 55041
11TIN l'iCK 11-24-86 1186 ;7
•
IIACKHOE TEST PIT LOGS
MEADA4 PARS THIRD ADDITION
CEDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA
TP-1
O -0.5' Brown organic silty tine to medium sand, fibrous - wet- (OL-Pt)
0.5- 3.0' Black silty fine to medium sand, trace roots-wet- (SM; trace
OL)
3.0-8.0' Gray and dark yellow-brown silty clay, trace roots -wet -
(CL-0L)
8.0-12.0' Dark yellow-brown mottled fine sandy silt, trace clay -moist to
wet- (MI.)
End of Test Pit at 12.0 feet
Water at 4.0 feet depth after digging
TP-2
O -0.1' Brown organic silty fine to medium sand, fibrous-wet- (OL-Pt)
0.1 - 1.0' Dark gray organic sandy, silty clay and silty sand; seams gray
sandy silt -wet - (CLOL)
1.0- 3.0' Black silty, clayey sand, trace fine roots-vet - (SC-94)
3.0 - 7.0' Gray silt, trace roots-wet - (ML-OL)
7.0 -8.0' Gray and black fine sandy silt; seams brown silty sand-moist to
wet-(HL; seams SM)
End of Test Pit at 8.0 feet
Water at ground surface
O - 1.0' Black organic silty fine sand, fibrous -wet- (OL-Pt)
1.0- 5.5' Black clayey fine to medium sand, trace organics -wet- (5C)
5.5-10.0' Gray fine to medium sand, trace silt- wet- (SP-SM)
�..� End of Test Pit at 10.0 feet
Water at ground surface
O - 1.0' Dark brown organic fine sandy silt, fibrous-wet - COL-Pt)
1.0- 3.0' Black silty fine sand, trace roots-vet - (5N; trace OL) •
3.0-6.0' Gray fine sandy silt -wet- (MI)
6.0-10.5' Gray and dark yellow-brown fine sandy silt -moist to wet - (ML)
End of Teat Pit at 10.5 feet
Water at ground surface
TP-5
O - 1.0' Black organic fine sandy silt, fibrous-vet- (OL-PL)
1.0-5.0' Black slightly organic silty fine sand -wet- (SM-OL)
5.0-8.0' Cray and brown fine sandy silt, trace gravel -suist to wet -
(ML)
8.0 -10.0' Dark yellow-brown clayey fine to medium sandy silt -moist - (ML)
End of Test Pit at 10.0 feet
Water at ground surface
TP-6
O - 2.5' 81ack organic fine sandy silt, fibrous -wet - (OL-Pt)
2.5 - 5.0' Black slightly organic clayey fine to medium sand, trace gravel.
roots-wet- (SC-OL) _.
5.0 -8.0' Cray and dark gray fine to medium sandy silt-wet - (NL) •
8.0-11.0' Gray silty fine to medium sand and dark yellow-brown:sandy.
clayey silt -moist to wet- (SM L 14.) •
Ind of Test Pit at 11.0 feet
Groundwater at 2 inch depth
NOTE: Test Pits excavated and backf tiled on November 19, 1986 with John Deere
450 dozer.
Frost to 2 inch depth in each Test Pit. ., - '
GME Proi ct No. 1.186-1157 • -
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: November 7, 1986
PROJECT: Meadowpark 3rd Addition
LOCATION: West of Homeward Hills Road, north of Sunnybrook Road
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER: J B & D, Inc.
REQUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Public Open Space to
Low Density Residential on approximately 13.5 acres.
2. Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on
approximately 13.5 acres.
3. Preliminary Plat of 31.5 acres into 29 single family lots,
one out lot, and road right-of-way.
(
Background __- .,.�N
aill
This site is currently designated on o..,MM. ry?�:T:
the Eden Prairie Comprehensive Guide �i ;E$;' .,�
Plan for Low Density Residential and 4 v ;4
Park property. Surrounding prop- ON
erties in all directions are also ��■ � gI� I. —
guided for Low Density Residential W i Vat■>f%•ni ; ovsno' €, _ A
with the wetland area to the north ; ; ■ mom►`�1� ��F1 r.
and south guided for Park property. 1� - .... smmrzri, . 1Jlf. -40111h41
Specific land uses in this area 295 •' iI��arftlr
include the Meadowpark 1st and 2nd R ,�<�,. e gge_gi'�E t
Addition, zoned R1-13.5 and the " � r
proposed Fire Stat ion, zoned Public PROPOSED SITE— •••••••••'••4 `n a /fir'
to the east; a wetland area, zoned �.•••.Q•.•.!, .,�:
Rural to the north; and, large lot ':• •••::'••+
Wesingle family development, zoned 4 •-••. .
Rural to the south and west. 111111111100r
p• .
The
proponent is requesting a
Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from
Park to Low Density Residential and L_ IR
'� `
Zoning District Change from Rural to 7•-3.R1-13.5 to allow for the con- RI + . ` A a°struction of 29 single family units. e � O _ ai�� Rip IP
116..'''''Kiti.Mrik-Vtf :4
'1.4"4'......\r"11*116..71.irillil III: ' PU.-8'-—1 K3.1-‘211:4"fr.r...A3 -4:-'
AREA LOCATION MAP
1 A Ctt Wg_a .- .. III 1 -....
Meadowpark 3rd Addition 2 November 7, 1986
Comprehensive Guide Plan
The proponent is requesting a Conprehensive Guide Plan Change from Park to Low
Density Residential on approximately 13.5 acres to allow for the construction of 29
single family units. This Conprehensive Guide Plan Change is in the southern
portion of the site located at the corner of Sunnybrook Road and Homeward Hills
Road. The purpose of the parkland designated area of the Comprehensive Guide Plan
was to allow for the maintenance of the lowland area which is currently used to
retain storm water run-off from adjacent subdivisions. The high water elevation of
this lowland area, designated as Outlot A on the preliminary plat, is at the 816
contour elevation. The southern-most portion of the site where the Comprehensive
Guide Plan Change is being requested, has elevations generally greater than the 816
contour elevation.
Site Plan/Preliminary Plat
The proposed site contains approximately 31.6 acres with a proposed subdivision into
29 single family lots. The gross density of the site will be approximately 1.09
units per acre. With the dedication of Outlot A which contains approximately 18.1
acres, the net density of the site would be approximately 2.1 units per acre.
Lot sizes within the subdivision range from a maximum lot size of 29,924 square feet
to a minimum lot size of 13,550 square feet. The average lot size within this
subdivision is approximately 17,378 square feet. All of the lots in the subdivision
meet the requirements of the R1-13.5 zoning district with the exception of Lots 1
and 2, Block 1. The exceptions in this case are lot frontages which are 75 feet for
( Lot 1 and 80 feet for Lot 2. The minimum lot frontage requirement in the R1-13.5
zoning district is 85 feet. The proponent shall revise the plans to reflect the
minimum frontage requirement for those lots.
The preliminary plat depicts Outlot A, which contains approximately 18.1 acres, to
be used for storm water retention and dedicated to the City for this purpose. In
addition, there is a drainage and utility easement located within the center of
Block 2 which is also part of the storm water system in this area.
Access to this site will be provided off Homeward Hills Road and Sunnybrook Road by
the extension of residential collector streets measuring 50 feet in right-of-way.
Street A is designated on the preliminary plat and shows a connection to the
northwest which allows for access to the adjacent site and is consistent with the
concept plan for the Williams Mini-storage project. Because Sunnybrook Road is
currently unimproved, the proponent will be required to upgrade this street to the
western property line. The proponent has stated that he will petition the City for
this upgrading. The effect of this petition would include the levying of
assessments against the adjacent properties. If required, the proponent shall
submit a petition for the upgrading of Sunnybrook Road prior to Council review.
Grad ing
Overall grading on this site is limited to the southern portion of the site
generally above the 814 contour elevation. The site ranges from a high point of 854
located in the northwest corner of Block 1 adjacent to Lots 1 and 2, and in the
northeast corner at a contour elevation of approximately 830. Low points exist at
the 814 contour elevation adjacent to Outlot A and within the drainage and utility
easement within the center of Block 2. Maximum cut on this site is approximately
Meadowpark 3rd Addition 3 November 7, 1986
11 feet adjacent to the western property line of the site where cul-de-sac B is
located to allow for the construction of the cul-de-sac and adjacent building pads
and fill of approximately 11 feet adjacent to Outlot A where Block 3, Lot 5, is
located. The natural slope on this site runs primarily towards the east through the
center portion of Block 2 at a slope of approximately 12%. The grading plan takes
into consideration the slope of the site by utilizing a number of walk-out units
throughout the subdivision.
Because of the proximity of the subdivision to the wetland area to the north, Staff
has expressed concerns regarding soil conditions on this site. In order to ensure
that the subdivision, as designed, can be built, the proponent shall submit soils
information for that area of the site on which development can occur. This
information will be required prior to Council review.
Utilities
Water and sanitary sewer services are available to this site. Connections for these
services shall be within Homeward Hills Road and within the sanitary sewer easement
located in the center of the site. Extensions for these services will be to
Homeward Hills Road through Streets A, B, and C, and stubs for services shall be
provided within Sunnybrook Road.
Storm water drainage is proposed to drain from Outlot A through the drainage and
utility easement located within Block 2 and to the south through the culvert beneath
Sunnybrook Road. Storm water drainage shall be collected within the subdivision
through a catch basin system located at the intersection of Street A and cul-de-sac
B and also a catch basin system located within Street C. Detailed storm water run-
off plans shall be provided for review by the City Engineering Department and the
Watershed District.
Pedestrian Systems
The proposed trail system plan shows trail/sidewalk connections to the west through
Block 3 and along the north side of Sunnybrook Road. Proponent will be required, at
time of construction, to install a five-foot concrete sidewalk along the north side
of Sunnybrook Road and along the north side of Street C. The purpose of the
connection is to allow for pedestrian access between the proposed neighborhoods.
The City Council is considering the possibility of requiring sidewalks along both
sides of residential streets in all subdivisions and may do so in reviewing this
subdivision.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff would recommend approval of the Comprehensive Guide Plan Pmendment from Park
to Low Density Residential on 13.5 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-
13.5 on 13.5 acres and the Preliminary Plat of 31.6 into 29 single family lots, one
outlot, and road right-of-way, based on plans dated October 31, 1986, subject to the
recomnendations of the Staff Report, dated November 7, 1986, and subject to the
following conditions:
1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall:
A. Revise the plans to reflect the minimum lot frontage requirement in
the R1-13.5 zoning district for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1.
Meadowpark 3rd Addition 4 November 7, 1986
B. Revise the plans to reflect a five-foot concrete sidewalk along the
north side of Street C and along the north side of Sunnybrook Road.
C. Submit a.petition for the upgrading of Sunnybrook Road.
D. Submit soils information for that area of the site on which
development can occur to insure that the subdivision, as designed,
can be built.
2. Prior toFinal Mat, proponent shall:
A. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for
review by the Watershed District.
B. Submit detailed storm water run-off, utility, and erosion control
plans for review by the City Engineer.
3. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
4. Prior to Grading permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance
of grading.
B. Stake the construction limits with erosion control fencing.
l`-
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
•
Planning Commission Minutes 10 November 10, 1986
D. MEADOW PARK 3RD ADDITION, by J B & D, Inc. Request for
Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Public Open Space to Low
Density Residential on approximately 13.5 acres, Zoning District
Change from Rural to R1-13.5, and Preliminary Plat of 31.5 acres
into 29 single family lots, one outlot, and road right-of-way.
Location: Northwest quadrant of Homeward Hills Road and Sunnybrook
Road. A public hearing.
Planner Enger explained that the development was proposed on property which
was "high and dry" and not within a designated wetland area. He added that
the proponents had requested that the City install utilities for the
property.
Mr. Harold Peterson, Jim Hill and Associates, representing proponent,
reviewed the site characteristics, indicating that the southern 13.5 acres
was the "high and dry" area and the location of the proposed development.
Planning Commission Minutes 11 November 10, 1986
The remaining acres acted as a stormwater holding area and would be
dedicated to the City for that purpose. Mr. Peterson stated that there was
a trunk sanitary sewer line running through the property. In addition, the
Northern States Power (NSP) power line was located over the property.
Access to the property would be from Sunnybrook Road and Homeward Hills
Road. Mr. Peterson pointed out that access would be provided for the
property to the west, as well, in order to prevent it from becoming
landlocked by development and dedication of this property.
Planner Uram reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff Report
of November 7, 1986, with the Commission. He pointed out that proponents
would be requesting several variances for the project as designed; however,
Staff was recommending that the plat be redesigned to meet all minimum
zoning district requirements for the R1-13.5 District. The Staff
recommendations also included a five-foot wide, five-inch thick concrete
sidewalk be installed along Sunnybrook Road up to "Street C". Other than
the standard recommendations regarding utilities, grading, and park
dedication, the following conditions were also recommended as part of the
approval of the development were the submission of a petition for the
utility and street improvements for the property and submission of soils
information for the property, specifically for several of the perimeter lots
to the north and northwest.
Ruebling asked about the discrepancy between the Comprehensive Guide Plan
and the proposed development with respect to the amount of property within
the area referred to as a storm water holding area. Planner Enger explained
that, at the time of the hearings for the Comprehensive Guide Plan, the
information for this property was known in a general format, as was true of
many properties. In the case of this property, specific soils and
topographic information indicated that the Comprehensive Guide Plan
designation for so much of the area to be Public Open Space was too broad,
and could, indeed, be pulled back to allow for development of the property
to its highest and best use. Based on the general information available at
the time, the Comprehensive Guide Plan designation included more property
than necessary within the Public Open Space area. Specific information as
presented by the proponent was adequate to allow for the amendment.
Anderson stated that at a previous public hearing for development of the
Fire Station site in this area, one of the neighbors had raised a question
with respect to drainage in the area. He asked if this matter had been
cleared up. Planner Enger stated that Staff had referred the issue to the
Public Works Department for review. Also, it would be considered as part of
the design of utilities for this, and future adjacent, property. Mr.
Peterson explained the drainage for the general vicinity in greater detail.
He noted that the final details on this would be worked out with the City
engineers prior to construction.
Ruebling asked about the cutting and filling shown as part of the grading
plan for the property. Mr. Peterson stated that the soils information
requested by the Staff would provide more specific information about the the
needs for replacement of some of the poor soils in the northwest area of the
proposed development. He pointed out that the cut and fill was the minimum
necessary for streets and house pads, with the exception of replacement of
the poor soils. Planner Uram stated that it was Staff's opinion that the
Planning Commission Minutes 12 November 10, 19B6
soils information was necessary in order to determine how much of the poor
soil was within the area to be developed and how much would require
replacement because of it.
Ruebling asked what would happen if the determination was made that a
portion of the property were unbuildable because of poor soils. Mr.
Peterson stated that the soils were not anticipated to be that bad in this
area; however, it may be necessary in a "worst case" situation to eliminate
one, or more, lots from the development if the soils could not be corrected.
Acting Chairman Hallett asked if the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources had reviewed the proposed development. Mr. Peterson stated that
they had been sent a copy of the proposed plat. Planner Uram stated that
the north portion of the property was not a designated wetland, nor a
classified public water.
Acting Chairman Hallett asked if it would be necessary to eliminate a lot in
order to meet the minimum City Code requirements for the zoning district
proposed. Mr. Peterson stated that this should not be necessary. Staff
concurred. Acting Chairman Hallett stated that he agreed with the Staff
recommendation that the proponent meet all Code requirements for the
district.
Mr. Steve Birke, 9059 Larkspur Lane, asked about the price of the proposed
lots. Proponents responded that the lots would be between $40-50,000. Mr.
Birke stated that he did not feel this would be true based on the location
of the lots under the power line, next to the fire station and on a through
road. Mr. Birke asked about the completion of improvements to Homeward
Hills Road, such as the curb and gutter that had not been installed since
the road was first installed three years ago. He noted that portions of the
road flooded now during heavy rain and snow melt. Mr. Birke asked if the
lowland area to the north would ever be developed if it were dedicated to
the City.
Planner Uram explained that the City needed the area at the north end of the
property for purposes of a storm water holding area. He stated that even if
the City no longer needed it at some point in the future, the soils in this
area would likely be too poor to develop. Planner Uram also explained that
the access to the fire station was not directly across from the access road
to Homeward Hills Road from this property, but that the two points were
offset approximately 150-200 ft. With respect to the final upgrading of
Homeward Hills Road and the installation of curb and gutter along the
bituminous area already installed, Planner Uram stated that he was unaware
of the schedule for completion of this work. He stated that he would find
out and inform Mr. Birke as soon as possible.
Jeff Lentsch, 9017 Larkspur Lane, asked if the City controlled the value of
homes. Acting Chairman Hallett stated that this was not something the City
could do, except with respect to such things as lot size. Generally, the
smaller the lot, the smaller the price for the property. Planner Enger
explained that the R1-9.5 Zoning District, for example, was designed more
for use by starter homes, which were usually lower in price than homes on
larger lots.
Planning Commission Minutes 13 November 10, 1986
Mr. Birke stated that he was concerned that the value of the homes within
this proposed development would be less due to their location and that the
lesser value of those future homes may devalue his home in the adjacent
neighborhood.
Anderson stated that he lived within the Preserve, which had many
requirements for homes built within the Association boundaries, but that it
was difficult for the Preserve Association to control the housing cost, even
as strict as the covenants and restrictions were for the properties
involved.
Mr. Lentsch stated that his greatest concern was for traffic. He asked when
traffic would be dealt with in this general area and pointed out that there
was alot of development taking place on several parcels in the area. He
expressed concern, in particular, for children crossing Anderson Lakes
Parkway to access the elementary school located on the north side of the
road. Acting Chairman Hallett stated that it would likely require the use
of adult supervisors in order to provide for safe crossing of the street by
the children during school hours. He noted that this method was implemented
at several schools at this time.
Mr. Lentsch asked if some sort of bridge, or underpass was possible.
Planner Enger explained that a portion of an underpass had been installed in
this area, but was never completed. Since that time, there were many
concerns from the Public Safety community across the country regarding the
potential for crimes to take place in such underpasses. They had been
determined unsafe. Therefore, the use of such underpasses was not pursued
further.
Gartner stated that it was likely that children would be bussed in the
future.
Dodge stated that this type of problem existed in many parts of Eden
Prairie. She stated that, in her neighborhood, the stop lights and stop
signs were often ignored by automobile drivers, as well.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Bye, seconded by Gartner, to close the public hearing.
Motion carried--6-O-0
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Bye, seconded by Ruebling, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of J B & D, Inc., for Comprehensive Guide
Plan Amendment from Public Open Space to Low Density Residential for
approximately 13.5 acres for Meadow Park 3rd Addition, based on plans dated
October 31, 1986, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated
November 7, 1986, with the added condition that should the results of the
soil tests indicate substantial change to the plat, the proponent shall
return to the Planning Commission for review.
Motion carried--6-O-0
Planning Commission Minutes 14 November 10, 1986
C
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Bye, seconded by Gartner, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of J B & D, Inc. for Zoning District Change
from Rural to R1-13.5 for 29 single family lots known as Meadow Park 3rd
Addition, based on plans dated October 31, 1986, subject. to .the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated November 7, 1986, with the added
condition that should the soil tests indicate substantial change to the
plat, the proponent shall return to the Planning Commission for review.
Motion carried--6-0-0
MOTION-4:
Motion was made by Bye, seconded by Gartner, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of J 8 & 0, Inc., for Preliminary Plat of
31.5 acres into 29 single family lots, one outlot, and road right-of-way for
the Meadow Park 3rd Addition, based on plans dated October 31, 1986, subject
to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated November 7, 1986, with the
added condition that should the soil tests indicate substantial change to
the plat, the proponent shall return to the Planning Con,nission for review.
// Motion carried--6-0-0
) .]
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #86-294
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PRAIRIE ACRES FOR
MICHAEL N. SUTTON
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Prairie Acres for Michael N. Sutton, dated October 10,
1986, consisting of 6.24 acres into 13 single family lots and road right-of-way, a
copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the
provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments
thereto, and is herein approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 2nd day of December, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
STAFF REPORT
(
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner
HR UGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: November 7, 1986
PROJECT: Prairie Acres
LOCATION: Southwest quadrant of County Road #1 and Bennett Place
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER: Mike Sutton
REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 5.D4 acres
and from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 1.2 acres.
2. Preliminary Plat of 6.24 acres into 13 single family lots
and road right-of-way.
Background / i,—•', -
The Comprehensive Guide Plan cur- R-
rently depicts this site as guided ,...:'. \\\
for Low Density Residential. Sur- '�`
rounding properties to the north, : : ..
south, east, and west, are also `\ ;;..a, 4 F
guided for Low Density Residential. , fF 4
Specific land uses in this area ; ' '+y.
include Creekview Estates, zoned RI- / 82-17 pi/.;
13.5 to the south and east; the RI-13.5
proposed Prairie Lutheran Church, �' L• �*
zoned Public to the west; and County rPRUPUSED SITE (al
Road #1 to the north. t';+ 0...
' R�-
R:P° ♦ '' co, ,
The proponent is requesting a zoning �� ' N� `/: .•i �'�.
district change from Rural to R1- :;."-*
13.5 to allow for the construction di*_.- P, /-
of 13 single family homes which is �. • 1po0CIG0I �� ,
consistent with the surroundin 4i' �`"`�' , 05•••_-1 wia
+
neighborhood. 9 ��77 W
.c., RI-22 /t
Site Plan/Preliminary Plat *, 2�-I 7
The site plan depicts the division i .It
�I 22 1 C
of a 6.24-acre tract of land into 13 �\
single family lots. Lots within the .. i
subdivision range from a maximum lot _ .. • ; 7
j%AREA LOCATION MAP
..%./ '�t9y-.L_VI-13.5` • ----- 1Q7 4N. :
Prairie Acres 2 November 7, 1986
size of 22,265 square feet to a minimum Tot size of 14,310 square feet. The average
lot size is 16,965 square feet. All of the lots meet the minimum requirements of
the R1-13.5 zoning district.
Access to this site would be off Bennett Place with the proposed extension of
Purgatory Road. The existing temporary cul-de-sac within Creekview Estates shall be
eliminated in conjunction with this development project.
As part of the platting process, the proponent is dedicating the required 13.5 feet
of right-of-way to complete Bennett Place. In addition, the County is requiring
that the proponent dedicate any additional right-of-way along County Road #1 to make
the right-of-way 50 feet from the center line. Revised plans shall reflect any
additional right-of-way.
Grading
The proponent had requested a grading permit for this property which was approved by
the City Council on May 6, 1986, and by the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff-Creek Watershed
District on May 7, 1986. This site has been graded in conformance with the approved
plan and has been restored at this time.
Prior to grading, this site sloped naturally to the north, east, and west, from a
high point of 848 along the south property line to a low point which exists in the
northwest corner of the site. The natural slope on the site was approximately 11%.
The approved grading plan was designed primarily for the construction of building
pads and to allow for the extension of Purgatory Road. This plan required
approximately six feet of fill in the southwest corner of the site to approximately
eight feet of cut within Purgatory Road. Because the site has been previously
graded, Staff expects minimal additional grading to complete construction within
this area.
Utilities
Water and sanitary sewer service are available to the site with connections in both
Purgatory Road and Bennett Place. These utilities shall be looped through Purgatory
Road with connections made to County Road #1.
Storm water run-off shall be collected through a catch basin system located at the
intersection of Purgatory Road and Bennett Place and the catch basin system which is
located just west of the proposed project. The proponent shall provide detailed
storm water run-off plans for review by the City Engineer and Watershed District.
Shore land Ordinance
Because portions of this project are located within 300 feet of Purgatory Creek,
they will be subject to certain additional zoning requirements. These zoning
requirements are as follows:
1. Structure shall not exceed 30 feet in height.
2. Impervious surface shall not exceed 30%.
3. Structures shall be placed at an elevation two feet of the 100-year flood
level.
Prairie Acres 3 November 7, 1986
( In addition, according to the Purgatory Creek corridor study, portions of Block 1,
Lots 1 and 2, and Block 2, Lots 1 and 2, are considered within the designated
transition zone. Because these lots are within this zone, special consideration
shall be given to the natural site characteristics during construction.
Pedestrian Systems
The City Council is considering requiring sidewalks on both sides of streets in
residential. subdivisions and may do so when reviewing this subdivision. As part of
the overall trail system for the City of Eden Prairie, the proponent will be
required to install a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk along the west side of
Bennett Place. In addition, the trail system shows a proposed eight-foot wide
bituminous trail along the south side of County Road 1. To facilitate the
installation of the trail, the proponent shall grade a ten-foot level area for the
path, restore the site and provide a twenty-foot easement for this trail.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff would recommend approval of the request for a Zoning District Change from
Rural'to.R1-13.5 on 5.40 acres and from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 1.2 acres and the
Preliminary.Plat of 6.24 acres and 13 single family lots and road right-of-way based
on plans dated October 10, 1986, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report
dated Noveniter 7, 1986 and subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall:
A. Modify the grading plan to a reflect a 10-foot graded area for the
proposed eight-foot bituminous trail and a 20-foot easement along
the south side of County Road #1.
2. Prior to Final Plat approval, proponent shall:
A. Submit detailed utility, storm water run-off, and erosion control
plans for review by the City Engineer.
B. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for
review by the Watershed District.
3. Prior to Building Permit issuance, proponents shall:
A. Notify the City Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance of
grading.
B. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
'.1
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
Planning Commission Minutes 9 November 10, 1986
•
C. PRAIRIE ACRES, by Michael N. Sutton. Request for Zoning District
Change from Rural to R1-13.5 and Preliminary Plat of 6.24 acres into
13 single family lots and road right-of-way. Location: Southwest •
quadrant of County Road #1 and Bennett Place. A public hearing.
Planner Uram reviewed the proposed development with the Commission. He
noted that the property had already been graded according to a grading plan
approved by the City Council earlier in the year. Planner Uram explained
that the County was requiring adequate right-of-way dedication from the
developer to construct a trail along the south side of County Road #1. It
had also been suggested that the trail be graded as a ten foot wide strip in
( order to provide some visual identification of the fact that a trail would
be located at the back yards of the lots backing up to County Road #1.
Planner Uram stated that the proponent was planning to connect the
development to Purgatory Road to the west.
Planning Commission Minutes 10 November 10, 1986
Gartner asked if any of this property was in a designated flood plain. I'_
Planner Uram stated that a portion of the property was within the flood
plain, but he added that the development was not negatively impacted by
this.
Ms. Sue Boutin, 11407 Creekridge Drive, asked about traffic in the area and
the proposed turn lane on Bennett Place for a right turn onto County Road.
#1. Planner Uram explained that there was a feasibility report in progress
to determine the needs for turn lanes in this area onto County Road #1.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Anderson, to close the public
hearing.
Motion-carried--6-0-0
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by •Bye, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Michael Sutton for Zoning District Change
from,Rural to R1-13.5 for the Prairie Acres Addition, based on plans dated
October 10, 1986, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated
A October 24, 1986.
Motion carried--6-0-0
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Michael Sutton for Preliminary Plat of
6.24 acres into 13 single family lots and road right-of-way for the Prairie
Acres Addition, based on plans dated October 10, 1986, subject to :the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated October 24, 1986.
Motion carried--6-0-0
1.J�
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #86-298
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF WILLIAMS MINI-STORAGE FOR
FINN DANIELS, INC.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Williams Mini-Storage for Finn Daniels, Inc., dated
October 10, 1986, consisting of 2.67 acres into one lot for construction of a
storage conplex, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in
conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances,
and amendments thereto, and is herein approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 2nd day of December, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
STAFF REPORT
(
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Michael 0. Franzen, Senior Planner
HR UGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
OATE: November 7, 1986
PROJECT: Williams Mini-Storage
LOCATION: East of Highway #169, approximately one-quarter mile south of the
intersection of Anderson Lakes Parkway and Highway #169.
APPL ICANT/
FEE OWNER: Robert Williams
REQUEST: 1. Rezoning from Rural to I-2 Park on 2.98 acres.
2. Preliminary Plat of 2.98 acres into one lot.
Background / r
1,6
The Comprehensive Guide Plan depicts ► '
this site for an Industrial land 6)01, .
. .
( use. Land to the north and south of ` r����
this site are also guided In- ��dustrial. Land to the west acrossi i , ' _• Phi
Highway #169 is currently guided I air[� Oval ;
Office, while land area to the east r .'
of the site is currently guided Low ., ��i``� Ifl -
Density Residential. :_.-vieoji. am al
-.5
14
The Commission will note that -
III/1164,111,1 °
attached to this report is a revised ?_
rill site plan which has been prepared in . "'"
response to Staff concerns regarding (DARNEL
building setbacks, transition, and 1 •I29534 ..
exterior materials. The major RI-K• 130-135 4
changes in the site plan would be: 1...: ;;.;. I
t:
1. A 50-foot setback to parking ` ;.
along Highway #169 as PROPOSED SITE P
compared with 20 feet on the t
previous plan. ,
2. Brick exteriors are now . I ;!
proposed on portions of the ;
exterior elevations fac ing(
,Ti
Highway #169 and future �� L- I �.
residential areas. 0 ��
AREA LOCATION MAP
Williams Mini-Storage 2 November 7, 1986
3. Additional screening walls proposed along the east property line to provide
for a visual transition to future residential uses.
Overall Development Plan
The overall development plan depicts the potential development for the balance of
the property. The overall plan is submitted for review purposes to evaluate how the
balance of the property might develop in an orderly and appropriate way. The
development plan proposes uses for the balance of the property as single family and
medium density residential. The densities for the proposed multiple family areas at
six units per acre and ten units per acre are high. Densities should be limited to
three to five units per acre with special attention given to building designs which
are residential in character and help reduce the overall building mass, a site plan
which provides an appropriate visual transition to the future residential areas, and
heavy landscaping and berming for screening and visual appeal.
The overall plan should be revised according to Attachment A in order to provide a
road connection into the proposed Meadowpark 3rd Addition. This will provide a loop
road connection from Anderson Lakes Parkway to Homeward Hills Road.
The depths of the rear yards proposed off the cul-de-sacs are shallow and should be
increased in order to provide a better setback transition to the adjacent future
multiple family land uses.
Site Plan
The site plan involves the construction of 47,720 total square feet of building area
at an overall Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.32. Phase I development is proposed at
32,920 square feet at a 0.21 FAR. The proposed overall FAR at 0.32 exceeds the
ordinance maximum of 0.30. This is a variance from the City Code. The proponents
are currently asking for zoning across the entire property including Phase II so the
FAR variance applies at this time. Since this site is undeveloped, and a new
project is proposed at this time, there is no apparent reason why the site cannot be
developed in terms of the ordinance.
Building and parking areas meet the minimum setback requirements from Highway #169.
When the through street south of the project is constructed, the building proposed
adjacent to the street frontage would not meet the minimum 50-foot setback. The
development plans for Phase II should be revised to meet this minimum ordinance
requirement. Phase II should not be allowed to proceed until this road is
constructed in order that a second access be provided because of the steep 8%
internal grades.
Grading
The existing topography slopes in a westerly to easterly manner from a high point at
elevation 870 adjacent to Highway #169 to a low point at elevation 848 along the
eastern border of the property. Due to the change in site elevation from Highway
#169, many of the buildings will not be visible. The site is proposed to be
terraced to work with the grades and minimal cut and fill is required. The site
section indicates proposed building elevations in the future development area as
they relate to proposed grading with this request. While the site section suggests
that the views of the eastern-most buildings would be blocked by the screeninn wall
from future residential areas, it should be pointed out that buildings to the west
Williams Mini-Storage 3 November 7, 1986
will be approximately 20 feet higher and it is likely that approximately two-thirds
of the western portion of the project would be visible to the future single family
areas. These views can be blocked by the construction of berming and heavy
plantings in the proposed 100-foot buffer areas.
Architecture
The proposed one-story buildings are to be constructed primarily of rock face block
and brick. The brick areas are shown on the development plan facing Highway #169
and the residential properties to the east. The proponents have previously agreed
to change the exterior materials within the interior courts from plain concrete
block which is not allowed per ordinance to rock face block. Colors anticipated at
this time would be medium warm brown tones. The overhead doors should be painted to
match.
Landscaping
The landscape ordinance is based on a caliper inch requirement and a screening
requirement for the loading and parking areas. Although the site plan meets the
minimum caliper inch requirement, the proposed landscape plan does not effectively
screen loading and parking areas from Highway #169 or from future residential land
uses to the east. The overall site plan will be developed at approximately 70% hard
surface area which is about 20% higher than the typical industrial proposal. It is
therefore important that the perimeter of the sites be augmented with heavy
landscaping to offset the increased hardsurfaced area. The landscape plan would
benefit from the following revisions.
1. Construction of berming between six to nine feet in height along Highway
#169 supplemented with heavy conifer plantings.
2. Construction of berming between ten to fifteen feet in height within the
100-foot buffer zone along the east property line with heavy landscaping.
3. Where buildings do not screen the interior court areas, the plan should be
revised to include heavy conifer plantings of at least eight to ten feet in
height.
Berming and plantings with the 100-foot buffer zone should be constructed concurrent
with building construction.
Utilities
Water service is available by connection to an existing water line along Highway
#169. Sanitary sewer is not immediately available to the site and is some 1,500
feet north of the property within Darnell Court. The proponents are asking the City
to permit development of the property with a septic tank. The developer should be
required to hook up to City sanitary sewer prior to any further development of the
property. The developer should also enter into a special assessment agreement to
cover the cost of sewer extension.
The storm water run-off plan proposes the use of holding ponds to retain water from
the project but does not indicate how the ultimate discharge from these ponds would
connect to nearby existing City storm sewer facilities. The proponents must supply,
for Engineering review, detailed drainage calculations to indicate the ability of
the pond to retain the amount of water run-off proposed from the project.
Williams Mini-Storage 4 November 7, 1986
1 Lighting
Lighting is proposed to be affixed to the building. The proposed lighting must be
down-cast cut-off luminars. The proponent should supply glare contour maps showing
that all of the glare can be contained on-site. If berming and heavy plantings are
constructed along the east property line, glare can be downplayed to the future
residential areas to the east.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
The Staff would reconmend approval of the request for rezoning from Rural to I-2
Park and a Preliminary Plat of 2.98 acres into one lot, based on plans dated October
10, 1986, and revised plans dated Novenb er 7, 1986, and based upon recommendations
in the Staff Report dated November 7, 1986, and subject to the following
recommendations:
1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall:
A. Revise the site plan to meet the 0.3 FAR requirement and the 50-foot
setback requirement from the future street to be constructed south
of the project.
B. Revise the landscape plan to include substantial berming along
Highway #169 and along the east boundary of the site. Both proposed
berming areas should be suplemented with heavy plantings. Conifer
plantings should be proposed within the gaps in order to block site
lines into the court areas.
C. Submit an overall lighting plan with details and glare contour maps
showing that glare will be contained within the boundaries of the
site.
0. Revise the overall development plan to indicate the street
connection to the proposed Meadowpark 3rd Addition. Revise the
densities to three to five units per acre in the proposed multiple
family areas and increase the rear yard building setbacks from
future Darnell Court extension for the single family lots.
2. Prior to Final Plat, proponent shall:
A. Submit detailed storm water run-off plans for review by the
Watershed District.
B. Submit detailed storm water run-off, erosion control, and utility
plans for review by the City Engineer. Utility plans should include
drainage calculations which indicate a total amount of water run-off
and that the ponds are proposed at the appropriate size to handle
the amount of run-off.
3. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
•
• Williams Mini Storage 5 November 7. 1986
•
( B. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance
of grading.
C. Submit plans for review by the Fire Marshal. •
4. Phase II should not be allowed to proceed until the road is constructed from
Highway #169 past the southern boundary of the.site.
•
•
•
,,//' /\13 \, N -,
! ,
,y 2 12 \
- ,, ,,, , ,p< /�� a�i
A1 i. ,
JCJ/� •
--.."-1 i!,
U 4 1.--
j_e .. , .
......._____/ /I,.
lr� Y� - 1-..._ (_____ �'-�" 1 6 5 O
V `
-- ice' I /�
i• -- "-E. S 11K+� 6 I M.MMMa.a...MrHM / '25 I, -
r
I 1 7 f • . i 2 1 .
, I I a
- -1 1- l - - ---
I I
riTt
a
1 -- - -- y � i r
,
1_ .- I J il.._-
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
Planning Commission Minutes 14 November 10, 1986
c
E. WILLIAMS MINI-STORAGE, by Finn Daniels, Inc. Request for Zoning
District Change from Rural to I-2 Park on 2.67 acres and Preliminary
Plat of 2.67 acres into one lot for construction of a storage
copmplex. Location: East of Highway #169, south of Modern Tire
complex. A public hearing.
Mr. Dan Finneman, Finn Daniels, Inc., representing proponent, reviewed the
characteristics of the property with the Commission. He noted that the
Minnesota Department of Transportation had already granted proponents
approval of an access to Highway #169. Mr. Finneman stated that each of the
individual structures was 2,000 sq. ft., or smaller. Fire truck access had
been provided for as requested by the City's Fire Marshal. Also, each two •
-
story element was to be sprinkled for fire safety purposes.
Mr. Finneman explained the screening on the property. He noted that there
would be adequate landscaping to screen the use from views at the perimeter
of the property. He added that the proponents would work with Staff to
mitigate the concerns regarding floor area ratio for the property.
Planner Franzen discussed the concerns of the Staff Report regarding this
project. He stated that one of the issues of importance was that of a
street connection to the east to Meadow Park 3rd Addition. He added that
another issue of concern was that of transition between the proposed
development and the single family uses to the east. He stated that Staff
was not convinced that multiple family was a correct use of the property
between the I-2 Park zoning proposed and the existing and single family uses
proposed. Planner Franzen stated that it was possible that a plan with
multiple residential units may work as a transition, but added that there
would be many factors to consider.
•
Planning Commission Minutes 15 November 10, 1986
Dodge asked about the proposed chain link fence. Mr. Finneman stated tha
it was being proposed for purposes of screening. He stated that the type ()-
vinyl strips suggested use with the fence would provide for a 90% opaquf
condition, which would provide more than adequate screening of the uses fror
the adjacent properties. Mr. Finneman explained how the vinyl strips would
be woven into the chain fencing.
Bye asked Staff for more explanation of the fencing materials proposed
Planner Enger stated that Staff was uncomfortable with the use of suct
materials as they were often found broken, damaged, or destroyed over
short period of time. He stated that the materials used for weaving betweer
the chain links could be broken by being "bumped," therefore leaving ar
unsightly appearance, instead of a good screen.
Mr. Finneman stated that new and better materials were available for weavinc
into the chain links. Bye asked if the material could be submitted to the
Staff and City Council for review prior to final approval of the
development. Mr. Finneman stated that he was willing to cooperate and that
he would provide the materials to the Staff.
Dodge asked about alternative methods of screening. Planner Enger state(
that the use could be screened with a berm and plantings, a wing wall, or
structure materials of other types.
Ruebling asked for explanation of the proposed "buffer zone." Planner
Franzen stated that the original concept of a buffer zone in this area hat
been initiated for purposes of providing a transition to the residential
areas to the east. He noted that the existence of a buffer along the east _
side of other properties facing Highway #169 had more, or less, set
precedent that this continue along the remaining frontage. Planner Franzer
stated that it was Staff's opinion that the buffer should be built as part
of this project and that plans for the buffer should be presented prior tc
City Council review of the proposed development.
Acting Chairman Hallett asked how wide the buffer area would be. Mr.
Finneman responded that it was approximately 100 ft. wide.
Ruebling stated that he concurred with the Staff's comments about the chain $ '`
link fencing with respect to the vinyl slats which were proposed to be
weaved into the fencing. He stated that he did not want this to become an
unsightly screen when other methods were available.
Acting Chairman Hallett asked proponent if they felt this matter could be 1
worked out with the Staff. Mr. Finneman stated that he was willing to work
with Staff to mitigate this issue.
Mr. Dan Stromquist, 8984 Darnel, presented the Commission with a letter
regarding his concerns. He stated that he would like to see conditions
placed on the development of the remainder of the property so that residents
would know what would be developed in that area. He stated that he did not Y .'
( want to see the I-2 Park Zoning District expanded any closer to the existing
residential area than shown at this time.
Mr. Everett Gonzalez, 8522 Darnel Road, stated that he liked the buildings.
Planning Commission Minutes 16 November 10, 1986
He expressed concern about the impact of the proposed development upon the '
storm water retention for the area. He also stated that he concurred with •
the concern of his neighbor regarding further encroachment into the existing
residential neighborhood by any 1-2 Park uses. Mr. Bob Williams, proponent,
stated that there would be homes built between the proposed mini-storage
facility and the existing single family neighborhood.
Gartner asked if the 100 ft. wide buffer zone was part of this proposed
development. Planner Enger responded that it was.
Acting Chairman Hallett asked about the Comprehensive Guide Plan designation
for the remainder of the property owned by Mr. Williams to the east of the
proposed mini-storage site. Planner Enger responded that the property was
guided for Low Density Residential development and that a Comprehensive
Guide Plan Amendment would be required for construction of multiple family
residential units, or for construction of 1-2 Park uses.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Anderson, to close the public
hearing.
Motion carried--6-0-0
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to reconmend to the City
Council approval of the request of Finn Daniels, Inc., for Zoning District
Change from Rural to I-2 Park for 2.67 acres for Williams Mini-storage,
based on revised plans dated November 6, 1986, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated November 7, 1986, with the
addition of item le., That a masonry wall be built between the buildings on
the south side of the structure for screening purposes.
Ruebling expressed concern about the aesthetics of the durability of the
proposed fencing. Dodge and Bye stated that they would prefer the use of a
brick wing wall to the vinyl weave in the chain link fencing. Planner Enger
stated that it would not be unreasonable to require brick in this location '
due to the amount of brick being used on the remainder of the structure.
Mr. Finneman stated that he had recommended the vinyl weave to the
proponent. He stated that the materials were much better now than in the
past and offered to bring samples to the Staff and to the City Council i
meeting.
Motion carried--5-1-0 (Acting Chairman Hallett against) !
Acting Chairman Hallett stated he voted against the motion as he felt it would be more appropriate for Staff to review the proposed materials for the
vinyl weave in the chain link fencing before such a firm recommendation for •
an alternative method of screening were made to the Council.
~,v a
Planning Commission Minutes 17 November 10, 1986
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Finn Daniels, Inc., for Preliminary Plat
for Williams Mini-storage for 2.67 acres into one lot, based on revised
plans dated November 6, 1986, subject to the recommendations of the Staff
Report dated November 7, 1986, with the addition of item le., That a masonry
wall be built between the buildings on the south side of the structure for
screening purposes.
Motion carried--5-1-0 (Acting Chairman Hallett against)
V. OLD BUSINESS
None.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. Wendell A. Phillippi--Grading in Shoreland Area
Planner Enger reviewed the proposal of the proponent to excavate fish ponds
on his property. He noted that the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources, the Watershed District, and the Parks, Recreation, and Natural
Resources Commission of the City had already reviewed the proposed
rr excavation and had recommended approval.
t..
There were no questions, or comments, from members of the audience.
MOTION:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Wendell A. Phillippi for grading in the
shoreland area based on plans and written materials reviewed by the
Commission on November 10, 1986, subject to the recommendations of the
appropriate state agencies.
Motion carried--6-0-0
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
None.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION TO ADJOURN was made by Gartner, seconded by Anderson.
Acting Chairman Hallett adjourned the meeting at 10:55 p.m.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-288
VACATION OF PART OF CUMBERLAND ROAD
IN RIDGEWOOD WEST
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has certain right-of-way described as
follows
See "Exhibit A"
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on December 2, 1986, after due notice was
published and posted as required by law;
WHEREAS, it has.been determined that the said right-of-way is not necessary
and has no interest to the public, therefore, should be vacated.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
• 1. Said right-of-way as above described is hereby vacated.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare a Notice of Completion of the proceedings
in accordance with M.S.A. 412.851.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on December 2, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
•
John D. Frane, Clerk
That part of Cumberland Road as dedicated in'RIDGEWOOD WEST, according
to the plat of record thereof Hennepin County, Minnesota,'described as
follows:
Conmencing at the northeast corner of.Lot 45,.Block.5 of said.RIDGEW00D
WEST; thence South 58°-37'36" West, assured`bearing, along the southerly
right-of-way line of said Cuunberland Road, a distance of 26.54 feet to
the beginning of the tract to be described; thence continuing southwest
along said right-of-way, a distance of 74.12 feet; thence northeasterly,
a distance of.71.84 feet along a non-tangential curve, concave to the northwest,
having.a central angle of 13°-00'-24", and a radius of 316.48 feet, the
chord of said curve bears North 52°-07'-24"East; thence South 51°-00'-00".
East,,a distance of 8.62 feet to the point of beginning.
"EXHIBIT A"
'
..0 ••••"!' \ ...,'
V
........•Ci‘CP, .:.v. ,•-t,,,,,--""-' oot . \
''' V ,
: cP' \ , r
• .... /
•••: 15. \ ,.. •i2. di
• \41
• ...a \e, „e s.0• i
4 : 1e'
( )6 o• -4z ...
------ \
%Z• .! OJ .-- \*-.
k
-1 ....
' ,
• / /
44 4 '\
* ,
: :6/ \ •
,..... \ ..; /
/
\
•-•• 3P.
4 / •
'`.
‘
\ y•\\ / : / /O \•'• . '
•3 it,„/
4. •/ooc /i \•,... 0, c
•
) ,— ——— '‘.,11)Zip,, Y •)'' **" ''-' '' /6•••
/ / 3.62.CO wt.N .,.... 4,. cs \-'4, cr. ",„,-.14,s.
SI. V w \ ,
° 4 ..j .....
\ ' *-
% 4+ N ,f,
/ / ,. \ \ \
, 17 /•
• /•• .\
.14/4 / ' \ \.%0. e.j..,, -s•
1..,2._.Z.,'.r'.,_ ,.r/N,i,t.',---_._s-i,• , 0 o •,,/0..n`'c.'P,7.•-4•/:4
•1If•.a 4\••.4-.•"•'•,wN..•\'.'\',-''-t—t
'l;,t.—/7•'../ ‘2
4 - i •.'4.,t 14..•,-•4.'•.-.e
—•
N-'
17°1.3_2__3_041i1} L
/ /cr . e
- & 4 .• ‘/ C % 1- c0. .
/7 0 : ' , 9. 0 . 'E
-.. e• .•,4 N. . .6t ' e 0
/ .'", .•'s, ••••,„4.
6 1 6.. •scb ,
..„."..."/ WS. N `•••As• Nr i \";•-
... \
46
A \0. .'•*„N N *-
I , \ '"rig &N N
N N 4.t.'°‘/& ‘4:. \cliA ..
1
(0 . , al\ \---- ••.,„ '/ N,• 0 41'..6 . I
*I gt 0° te •
•.
...- •
Ir.„ 49.` ,rt.11.12.,•••L•P4••••vr.re• tom. q..•••;•••=11". , =X'....,-...•.t. -..t... ... . 7.......
14,. s•
/ l' ......, I..-.. "•- st. is/0 .71'
• '
?''- • #' nC) / \ 467d
0 •• .
/ a / / 4 .i 4 .
.. .... 44.C: t,i / + #A N. i r% ,(i
. Z ;'' . 41/ g:' e, ,.... ......
1.4 e•
. 41. / 0 •
, 4`
r.' - t.
/ / •' ......,„ 47. , _
4'• .?
r
. (21
' /1, • °, 4;/ ‘Z 4\ CV s
4. 4'
''''',41,'' 4 ,,N.. ,,,• tb
' A i •/4 4,, z
a i
44' 42.4144.\ • (..0 le 4...-4 .. 1 i
•Ns,..,..ty‘ 41 1 Cr 41' 4i
4 • ., 6
• 1 ..''''.• ••••• 0* '
/ tIlt ce•;"
..00 0 #-P s...„4.,, OP• •
.;•' ... 0,, .I. , • a
.. ... -.v., . ,
.. , . '+'• R' •. ,
: f-... 1 -P„. 6 • . - -•--;it., ..
-• - '/ '• 6. o 4 .ciE, 4,* . ae.'•
1114d ,
.1.' . • •
,... / / .....4.
•,..o gb. 4 ' ,'
4 '•?#
.' •-• .%• •/ /4 `,.. # • , .
4 ,.t),\.. • I
-.I I
••.„,
1,i3t/ eA
C3
.f.;
VAC 86-12
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 86-289
VACATION OF A PART OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY
FOR PIONEER TRAIL (OLD COUNTY ROAD 1) AND
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS OVER LOT 1,
BLOCK 1, AUGUSTA ADDITION
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has certain right-of-way described as
follows:
Refer to Attached "Exhibit A".
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has certain drainage and utility easements
described as. follows:
Drainage and utility easements as dedicated over Lot 1, Block 1,
Augusta Addition, according to the plat of record thereof,
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on December 2, 1986, after due notice was
published and posted as required by law;
WHEREAS, it has been determined that the said right-of-way and drainage and
utility easements are not necessary and have no interest to the public,
therefore, should be vacated.
NOW, THEREFDRE, BE iT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
1. Said right-of-way and drainage and utility easements as above
described are hereby vacated.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare a Notice of Completion of the proceedings
in accordance with M.S.A. 412.851.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on December 2, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
"EXHIBIT A"
Parcel No. 1:
That part of the North half of the South half of the
Northeast Quarter of Section 27, Township 116, Range 22,
Hennepin County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning
at the Northeast corner of Lot 1, Block 1, AUGUSTA ADDITION;
thence on an assumed bearing of South 71 degrees 13 minutes
58 seconds West, along the North line of said Lot 1, a
distance of 236.34 feet to the Northwest corner of said Lot
1; thence North 42 degrees 12 minutes 27 seconds East, along
the Northeasterly extension of the Northwesterly line of
said Lot 1, a distance of 136.03 feet; thence North 71
degrees 13 minutes 58 seconds East a distance of 206.58 feet
to the Northwesterly line of Pioneer Trail as now laid out
and estahlished; thence southwesterly along the Northwest-
erly line of said Pioneer Trail along a non-tangential curve
concave to the southeast, having a radius of 209.16 feet, a
central angle of 30 degrees 45 minutes 26 seconds, a chord
bearing of South 34 degrees 43 minutes 39 seconds West and a
chord of 110.95 feet, a distance of 112.28 feet to the point
of beginning.
Parcel No. 2:
That part of the North half of the Southwest quarter of the
Northeast quarter of Section 27, Township 116, Range 22,
Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as lying northwesterly
of the southwesterly extension of the northwesterly right of
way line-of old County Road No. 1 as formerly laid out and
traveled; lying southeasterly of the southeasterly line of
U.S. Highway No. 169-212 and its southwesterly extension as
described in Final Certificate Document No. 1632163, Parcel
213, and lying southwesterly of the northeasterly line of a
described triangular piece of land per Book 1097 of Deeds,
Page 605, office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
Parcel No. 3:
That part of the East half of the Northeast quarter of
Section 27, Township 116, Range 22 lying west of the West
line of Registered Land Survey No. 791 and between the
Southeasterly line of U.S. Highway No. 169-212 and the
Northwesterly line of County Road No. 1, which lies West of
a line drawn from a point on the Northwesterly line of said
County Road No. 1 distant 82.23 feet Southwesterly from the
Southeast corner of the above described tact; thence
Northwesterly at right angles to the Northwesterly line of
said County Road No. 1 a distance of 107.0 feet; thence to a
point on the Southeasterly line of said U.S. Highway No.
169-212 distant 142.03 feet southwesterly from the Northeast
corner of the above described tract; and that part of the
East half of the Northeast quarter of Section 27, Township
116, Range 22, described as lying Northwesterly of the
Southwesterly extension of the Northwesterly right of way
line of old County Road No. 1 as formerly laid out and tra-
veled; lying Southeasterly of the Southeasterly line of U.S.
Highway No. 169-212 and its Southwesterly extension as
described in Final Certificate Document No. 1632163, Parcel
213 and lying Southwesterly of the Northeasterly line of a
described triangular piece of land per Book 1097 of Deeds,
Page 605, office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
p aU1III1ii
-
yid 17$i qp` ,1,1 _ ± �3.1_;14 {; i a • jk *Ii! tel!ai 1 !1 ! !' 1 ; �! i;i Ili 3a � a . 4 1 _
yl+,t a i '_ e!i! B i .i .. _ llIti !
ll
l adl- 31l?. G I !�a 11a.4.1 _ !tit S I .'1);;;.""".'_. I tI
S! ' f '1 !=a ° . __i [i s s
I2, 1l4 j;a.a i . -, op e „ a13 a. f s+glf - , 3i a i +' 1 +
V .1!1'! 4;1i ' i 4a; a ;I 1 .l. illi . j ! Y
:44C
4 l ! 1�_ Ulina =• :! .. - =s a = aii
Z I.t!a "1_=1= _!i-lhiliji k :isiiiiii
o 1 n. i s dI =i: !if; t! 1 E � p i
11
.111.11j
0 i Ili;iil- 11,ya p I ,a fit ii j1i Di. I,t! 4!: !:ri gli
;..
W Q !1.3ii- aai= ji • aj to Y1 q �4 ifi; lili fi a r tr i i 1 N i t-i-; I i 1- fj!!({fit i!it at-i a!!! alIiiia
a a I!i!!}!!a�"I!#!r tee u"3=li ii=I :l3!! i!E.2 I1 �! I"1 -°+IW =!l ea33olt
NM� i�G .`� \ _ I�Z • lb.3l N�O��W I�.. _=� \q� -�• ..t __::,__,,..,,;_i
�, --fit=
'R �\ \apt ��' i IA .r.,-. I°
Z I \� � i 74
U � II
Cr • 8ii
; •. /
e i s► r r 1
c
-.a r
Q. Z ..; J
H Z o uj ill Ili
0 m a U U 0
W id. sum
o a w
ei
III a.
Z 2 Q v R I
p 0 > Q 4Wi I i - .
a Cr
•
,� Y �.� ,,rt v a.
`_�j �:• "gyp'• �"iAS -v.,t, g m
•
7.tr -- t. -/ Y.SP-j I �Z
i$ e,! Li,I NI '9, ZOOCN •
w�
L tZ' F6� O O. C
O\ - - - y.
•%0 5',Ft 0 - -►�—__ __ O' 'O,
Y_S• . .( `� D y
o w o. aS'Te; • �� < Y w.
`�. litV 4
A �� I �.
ate"" e- - :.. •
e
i' W 1 •'�yy. a tt .:\ I c t:.
z 0 Z ti. '" s• y ! c O. u
oZh6 t, s +b� S6 • i;wc X II
a j °:
pia O •"cam 4 2310 .V F '•'--
z.
W`i3 to ao I :. :Q..
QapO -L ^ Yc.s\ ai •• re
Qa .4, - i• '�'�„ J I / _
nn I 3 1QI" 7,3/ _`"• �J ,f .' Oe'� 'o 'o,�
0 Q ,1 y \ U u . I
WZ ?e `a zy J L Y1J J aW �i 'C,o h c�
~4ZWQ ZIC11 r\• \` 'm.. s i� •
W 3• z•u o .0 z•
hW4� W �Q xvi i mU
1-
IRz 0 z ~'9 a "��
ZI�Z�7 Q in
� wi i eI
1 �OJ�K O 9 O[ faA • is
1
7 _
DISTRIBUTIONS BY FUND
10 GENERAL 240834.97
11 CERTIFICATE OF INDEBT 5171.47
15 LIQUOR STORE-P V M 41068.21
17 LIQUOR STORE-PRESERVE 30382.85
,2'` TRANSIT SYSTEM 4854.21
3PARK ACQUIST & DEVELOP 22712.69
3 UTILITY BOND FUND 5534.63
51 IMPROVEMENT CONST FD 36824.85
57 ROAO IMPROVEMENT CONST FO 8118.32
73 WATER FUND 23181.98
77 SEWER FUND 432.04
82 FIRE RELIEF FUND 49957.00
$469073.22
l �
•
DECEMBER 2,1986
30848 VOID OUT CHECK 162.05-
094 VOID OUT CHECK 60.00-
_101 VOID OUT CHECK 1500.00-
31240 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 15191.57
31241 KATE-LO TILE-PARK MAINTENANCE 45.14
31242 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE LUNCHEON FOR PLANNING SESSION-CITY HALL 6.00
31243 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 699.40
31244 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 1711.83
31245 EAGLE DIST CO LIQUOR 7219.64
31246 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR 8805.27
31247 QUALITY WINE CO WINE 5476.74
31248 TWIN CITY WINE CO WINE 12987.66
31249 PAUSTIS & SONS CO WINE 111.50
31250 THORPE DISTRIBUTING CO WINE 16.95
31251 MARK VII SALES WINE 675.00
31252 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING CO WINE 623.92
31253 ASSOC OF METRO MUNICIPALITIES -MEETING EXPENSES-CITY MANAGER & COUNCIL 26.00
MEMBER
31254 BOARD OF ASSESSORS LICENSE FEE-ASSESSING DEPT 6.00
31255 ERIK ABRAHAM REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 8.75
31256 BEVERLY BENTLER REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 13.00
31257 CARRIE BROOKS REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 16.00
31258 JEREMY EARL REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 15.00
31259 NICKOLAS HILL REFUND-KIDS KORNER 13.50
31260 MISSY HOFFMAN REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 16.00
31261 GEOFF HOLTGREWE REFUND-KIDS KORNER 13.50
31262 ROBIN JENSEN REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 10.25
63 ANNIE KELCHNER REFUND-KIDS KORNER 13.50
si264 ESTHER PRUDEN REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 12.00
31265 MARY ROTHSTEIN REFUND-AEROBICS CLASS 19.00
31266 HOLLY RUUSKA REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 15.75
31267 DARYL SMITH REFUND-SMACQUETBALL LESSONS 5.00
31268 CITICORP INDUSTRIAL CREDIT MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY HALL 656.81
31269 ICMA RETIREMENT GROUP 1 YR SUBSCRIPTION-CITY MANAGER 55.00
31270 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 6277.24
31271 EAGLE DIST CO LIQUOR 7051.68
31272 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 1505.35
31273 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR 11068.65
31274 QUALITY WINE CO LIQUOR 7103.66
31275 TWIN CITY WINE CO LIQUOR 5096.56
31276 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING CO WINE 246.43
31277 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE PAYROLL 12.D1
31278 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE OCTOBER 86 FUEL TAX 404.09
31279 E P VOLUNTEER FIREMAN'S RELIEF AS I986 CITYS CONTRIBUTION 49957.00
31280 AT & T INFORMATION SYSTEMS SERVICE 1939.58
31281 AT & T INFORMATION SYSTEMS SERVICE 94.10
31282 AT & T COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 126.10
31283 ATRIUM CAFE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAM/FEES PD 305.94
31284 JUNIOR LEAGUE OF MINNEAPOLIS FESTIVAL DF TREES/FEES PD 111.00
31285 MET SPORT CENTER ICE FOLLIES/FEES PD 695.50
31286 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 162.73
31287 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO SERVICE 13D8.27
""88 TOTAL ENTERTAINMENT -SOUND & LIGHT SHOW FOR JR HIGH DANCE- 125.00
COMMUNITY CENTER
31289 PETTY CASH EXPENSES-CITY HALL 57.12
14661184
DECEMBER 2,1986
31290 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE-CITY HALL 27989.25
31291 ERIK ABRAHAM REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 10.00
(292 DANNY BRUNBERG REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 4.00
293 JESSICA CARLSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 8.50
1294 MARGE CHRISTENSEN REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 18.00
31295 MELANIE DEDE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 8.50
31296 DUSTIN FOSSEY REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 17.50
31297 NIKOLAS GLOVER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 10.00
31298 MYRTLE HOLASEK REFUND-SENIOR CITIZENS 4.50
31299 MICHAEL JUBERT REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 10.00
31300 LAURA JOHNSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 8.50
31301 NATHAN LARSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 6.50
31302 ANDREA LEFFLER REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 13.70
31303 ANDREA LEFFLER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 16.40
31304 DREW & ADAM LOMEN REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 37.50
31305 SUSAN MITCHELL REFUND-RACQUETBALL LESSONS 10.00
31306 RITA NELSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 18.00
31307 EMILY PAUMEN REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 10.00
31308 JACOB PETTIPIECE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 18.75
31309 MOLLY ROGERS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 9.00
31310 JOHN SVOBODNY REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 16.00
31311 JONATHAN SYBILRUD REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 8.50
31312 LAURA THORSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 17.50
31313 THOMAS WEHRLE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 8.50
31314 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK PAYROLL 11-14-86 24269.45
31315 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 11-14-86 10325.69
31316 DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS PAYROLL 11-14-86 17888.06
31317 DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS PAYROLL 11-14-86 144.30
� 118 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM PAYROLL 11-14-86 10.00
..s19 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 11-14-86 5033.00
31320 ICMA RETIREMENT CORP PAYROLL 11-14-86 785.00
31321 PERA PAYROLL 11-14-86 20812.09
31322 UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS PAYROLL 11-14-86 217.50
31323 CITY-COUNTY CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 11-14-86 2363.13
31324 JENNIFER DRESSEN -PORTABLE RADIO FOR AEROBIC CLASSES- 129.99
COMMUNITY CENTER
31325 GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE CONFERENCE-MAYOR 80.00
31326 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-UTILITY BILLING 453.04
31327 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO SERVICE 18.66
31328 DOUGLAS EDWARD ANDREWS FIREMAN CALLS 795.00
31329 LANCE MICHAEL BRACE FIREMAN CALLS 725.00
31330 DUANE JAMES CABLE FIREMAN CALLS 490.00
31331 SPENCER LEE CONRAD FIREMAN CALLS I77O.00
31332 GENE EDWARD DAHLKE FIREMAN CALLS 855.00
3I333 RICHARD RAYMDND DEATON FIREMAN CALLS 1500.00
31334 FRANKLIN PAUL ELLERING FIREMAN CALLS 475.00
31335 CHARLES ANTHONY FERN FIREMAN CALLS 1235.00
3I336 CHARLES ARTHUR GOBLE FIREMAN CALLS 500.00
31337 ROBERT RICHARD GRANT FIREMAN CALLS 1015.00
31338 RICHARD HAMMERSCHMIDT FIREMAN CALLS 1090.00
31339 ROBERT HAUGEN FIREMAN CALLS 595.00
31340 JOHN THOMAS HOBBS FIREMAN CALLS 1365.00
31341 WALTER CHARLES JAMES FIREMAN CALLS 635.00
31342 DUANE LEWIS JOHNSON FIREMAN CALLS 865.00
43 JAIMES GLEN JOHNSON FIREMAN CALLS 870.00
12563121
DECEMBER 2,1986
31344 MICHAEL WAYNE JOHNSON FIREMAN CALLS 500.00
31345 RONALO OLE JOHNSON FIREMAN CALLS P980.00
(^1346 DAVID T KING FIREMAN CALLS 1305.00
.347 PENNY ELLEN KING FIREMAN CALLS 770.00
31348 MARVIN ALLEN LAHTI FIREMAN CALLS 960.00
31349 SANORA ANN LANDUCCI FIREMAN CALLS 400.00
31350 MAILAND EARL LANE FIREMAN CALLS 450.00
31351 BRAOLEY EARL LARSON FIREMAN CALLS 870.00
31352 JAMES WILLIAM LINDGREN FIREMAN CALLS 670.00
31353 ROBERT PAUL LISTIAK FIREMAN CALLS 520.00
31354 LOWELL OENNIS LUNO FIREMAN CALLS 1285.00
31355 REGAN LAWRENCE MASSEE FIREMAN CALLS 815.00
31356 PHILIP GEORGE MATHIOWETZ FIREMAN CALLS 1140.00
31357 JAMES LEE MATSON FIREMAN CALLS 750.00
31358 BRIAN GILL MCGRAW FIREMAN CALLS 8Q0.00
31359 GARY LEE MEYER FIREMAN CALLS 1590.00
31360 RAYMONO IRWIN MITCHELL FIREMAN CALLS 870.Q0
31361 THOMAS HAMILTON MONTGOMERY FIREMAN CALLS 1780.00
31362 CURTIS REEO OBERLANOER FIREMAN CALLS 1980.00
31363 KATHLEEN O'CONNOR FIREMAN CALLS 1375.00
31364 KEITH ANOREW OLSON FIREMAN CALLS 1145.00
31365 WANOA OVERBEY FIREMAN CALLS 1080.00
31366 JOHN EOWARO PAFKO FIREMAN CALLS 1500.00
31367 JAMES PELTIER FIREMAN CALLS 1085.00
31368 TIMOTHY JOHN PELTIER FIREMAN CALLS 1655.00
31369 DOUGLAS LEE PLEHAL FIREMAN CALLS 1830.00
31370 GARY LEE RAOTKE FIREMAN CALLS 1100.00
31371 JOHN OAVIO RIEGERT FIREMAN CALLS 1310.00
1 172 STANLEY ADOLPH RIEGERT FIREMAN CALLS 945.00
373 JOHN OAVIO ROCHFORO FIREMAN CALLS 1160.00
31374 MICHAEL JOHN ROGERS FIREMAN CALLS 2010.00
31375 NORBERT HARRY ROGERS FIREMAN CALLS 1445.00
31376 TIMOTHY ALLEN SATHER FIREMAN CALLS 895.00
31377 CHARLES CLARENCE SCHAITBERGER FIREMAN CALLS 1680.00
31378 HARVEY HERMAN SCHMIDT FIREMAN CALLS 525.00
31379 LEE ALLEN SCHNEIDER FIREMAN CALLS 1200.00
31380 GERALD MATHEW SCHWANKL FIREMAN CALLS 1325.00
31381 T000 SKATRUO FIREMAN CALLS 1120.00
31382 JOHN JOSEPH SKRANKA FIREMAN CALLS 1210.00
31383 GENE RAYMOND SPANDE FIREMAN CALLS 780.00
31384 BURTON LEE SUTTON FIREMAN CALLS 1540.00
31385 MARC LEWIS THIELMAN FIREMAN CALLS 1655.00
31386 THOMAS DEFOREST WILSON FIREMAN CALLS 1060.00
31387 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 335.28
31388 ADDRESSOGRAPH FARRINGTON INC EQUIPMENT REPAIRS-ELECTIONS 33.30
31389 AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INDUSTRIAL S 1987 MEMBERSHIP DUES-POLICE DEPT 55.00
31390 AMEX TIRE TIRE DISPOSAL-STREET MAINTENANCE 377.50
3I391 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC SIGNS-STREET MAINTENANCE & PUBLIC SAFETY 1545.30
31392 ART MATERIALS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-PARK PLANNING 11.83
31393 ARTSIGN MATERIALS CO OFFICE SUPPLIES-PARK PLANNING 15.18
31394 ASSOCIATED ASPHALT INC ASPHALT-STREET MAINTENANCE & PARK DEPT 350.19
31395 PATRICIA BARKER MILEAGE 8.00
31396 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC -POWER STEERING FLUID/LAMPS/HOSE CLAMPS/ 264.13
-WHEEL WEIGHT/SIGNAL MIRROR HEAD/SIGNAL
( LAMP/PISTON-STREET MAINTENANCE
5404071
DECEMBER 2,1986
31397 BUREAU OF BUSINESS PRACTICE FILM RENTAL-FORESTRY 36.12
31398 TIM BLOCK BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 54.00
31399 BLOOMINGTON LOCKSMITH CO LOCK REPAIRS-PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 1445.75
f 400 LOIS BOETTCHER -PARK & REC COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 54.00
0. FOR 11-17-86
31401 MIKE BOGDER BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 156.00
31402 BRADY OFFICEWARE OFFICE SUPPLIES 3.00
31403 LEE BRANDT HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD 166.00
31404 BRAUER & ASSOCIATES LTD OCTOBER 86 SERVICE-MILLER PARK 6500.00
31405 ANDREA BROSCH RACQUETBALL INSTRUCTOR/FEES PD 118.00
31406 BRAO BURTON FOOTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 65.00
31407 CARGILL SALT DIVISION SALT-STREET MAINTENANCE 6785.84
31408 CITY OF CHASKA -SEPTEMBER & OCTOBER 86 SERVICE-TRANSIT 4854.21
STUDY
31409 CLAREYS SAFETY EQUIPMENT INC REPLACE BRASS FITTINGS-FIRE DEPT 590.95
31410 CLEVELAND COTTON PRODUCTS PAPER TOWELS-STREET DEPT 253.14
31411 COMMUNICATIONS CENTER RADIO & ANTENNA-FIRE OEPT 987.03
31412 CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY INC EXTINGUISHER/HYDRANT WRENCH-FIRE DEPT 43.40
31413 BARBARA COOK SCHOOL-ASSESSING DEPT 85.00
31414 COUNTRY CLUB MARKET INC EXPENSES-PUBLIC SAFETY 63.92
31415 CROWN RUBBER STAMP CO NOTARY STAMP-FINANCE DEPT 19.15
31416 CULLIGAN WATER SOFTNER-STARING LAKE PARK BUILDING 12.55
31417 CURTIS INDUSTRIES -NUTS/WASHER LOCKS/CAP/LUBRICANTS-WATER 111.56
DEPT & STREET DEPT
31418 CUTLER-MAGNER COMPANY QUICKLIME-WATER OEPT 6937.95
31419 SANDY DANIELSON EXPENSES-BUILDING DEPT 29.34
31420 DATASOURCE COMPUTER SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 74.75
31421 DIXIE PETRO-CHEM INC CHLORINE-WATER DEPT 677.00
3 1422 DONS SOD SERVICE -SOD-PARK MAINTENANCE-RED ROCK/EDEN 12815.50
VALLEY/FRANLO/STARING LAKE/ROUND LAKE/
WOODLAND HEIGHTS
31423 DOYLE LOCK SUPPLY 25 KEYS DUPLICATED-POLICE DEPT 66.23
31424 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 178.88
31425 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU SUPPLIES-SENIOR CENTER 77.53
31426 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 15.92
31427 EAGLE SNACKS INC SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE 50.8E
31428 EARL'S ART & DRAFTING SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES-PLANNING DEPT 59.74
31429 EDEN PRAIRIE TRASHTRONICS TRASH PICKUP-CITY HALL 345.00
3143D CHRIS ENGER NOVEMBER 86 EXPENSES 165.00
31431 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC PIPE-DRAINAGE DEPT 105.0D
31432 FISHER SCIENTIFIC HYDROMETER/CYLINDER-WATER DEPT 113.57
31433 FOUR STAR BAR & RESTAURANT SUPPLY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE 248.80
31434 JOHN FRANE OCTOBER 86 EXPENSES 165.00
31435 GREG FRAZEE ASSOCIATES REFUND-BUILDING PERMIT 300.00
31436 G & L CONTRACTING INC SERVICE-9717 DORSETT 541.43
31437 GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS INC RADIO REPAIRS-POLICE DEPT & FIRE DEPT 283.06
31438 GILBY SOAP & CHEMICAL CO DEGREASER-STREET MAINTENANCE 222.50
31439 GME CONSULTANTS INC -SERVICE-WYNDHAM KNOLL/HIDDEN GLEN 3RD 5295.80
ADDITION
31440 GOODYEAR TRUCK TIRE CENTERS TIRES-STREET MAINTENANCE & FIRE DEPT 5357.06
31441 W W GRAINGER INC EQUIPMENT PART-STREET DEPT 74.54
31442 DOUG GREEN HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD 3B.00
31443 GROSS OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES/FILE CABINETS-POLICE DEPT 627.45
31444 MICHAEL HAMILTON VOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 115.00
('145 CHUCK HARDY VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 52.00
5743755
IL:
DECEMBER 2,1986
31446 HARMON GLASS MIRRORS/WINDOWS-STREET MAINTENANCE 114.16
31447 ROGER HAWKINSON BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 81.00
31448 HENNEPIN COUNTY SEPTEMBER 86 BOARD OF PRISONERS 929.75
149 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER -SEPTEMBER & OCTOBER 86 EQUIPMENT RENTAL- 2679.16
FORESTRY DEPT
31450 D C HEY CO INC COPIER REPAIRS-CITY HALL 102.20
31451 EUGENE A HICKOK & ASSOC OCTOBER 86 SERVICE-PURGATORY REC AREA 3552.19
31452 HOKANSON PLUMBING REFUND-SEWER & WATER PERMIT 20.50
31453 CITY OF HOPKINS 1987 MEMBERSHIP DUES-BUILDING DEPT 25.00
31454 HUDSON MAP COMPANY 1987 STREET ATLASES-WATER DEPT
31455 IBM 81.00
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY HALL 181.00
31456 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST #272 -OCTOBER 86 CUSTODIAL SERVICE/RENTAL OF 3138.79
-AUDITORIUM/LUNCHES-ELECTIONS/COMMUNITY
CENTER & CITY HALL
31457 INTL SDCIETY OF FIRE SERVICE INST 1987 MEMBERSHIP DUES-FIRE DEPT 60.00
31458 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 219.60
31459 JET PHOTO LABS PRINTS-ENGINEERING DEPT & ASSESSING DEPT 79.50
31460 CARL JULLIE NOVEMBER 86 EXPENSES 96.75
31461 JUSTUS LUMBER CO LUMBER-PUBLIC SAFETY 50.04
31462 RAY KERBER BALES-PARK MAINTENANCE 120.00
31463 KROY INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 70.43
31464 ROBERT LAMBERT OCTOBER & NOVEMBER 86 EXPENSES 330.00
31465 LANCE SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE 51.25
31466 LANG PAULY & GREGERSDN LTD SEPTEMBER 86 LEGAL SERVICE-LANDFILL 794.10
31467 BOB LANZI FOOTBALL & VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 198.00
3I468 LOFFLER BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC -TAPE RECORDER/MINI-CASSETTES-ENGINEERING 2D6.00
DEPT & CITY HALL
31469 LYMAN LUMBER CO LUMBER-STREET MAINTENANCE 53.80
31470 MIKE MARUSHIN WRENCH/PRY BAR SET/SOCKET SETS-STREET DEPT 223.65
•71 MASYS CORPORATION -DECEMBER 86 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT- 914.00
PUBLIC SAFETY
31472 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC EXPENSES-PUBLIC SAFETY 29.30
31473 MEDICAL OXYGEN & EQUIP CO OXYGEN-FIRE DEPT 995.40
31474 METRO PRINTING INC ENVELOPES-POLICE DEPT 91.00
31475 MIDAS MUFFLER MUFFLER-STREET MAINTENANCE 56.95
31476 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP BLACKTOP-STREET MAINTENANCE 126.B4
31477 MINNESOTA SUBURBAN NEWSPAPERS INC ADS-LIQUOR STORE 75.66
31478 MPLS TECHINCAL INSTITUTE SCHOOL-SENIOR CENTER 292.50
31479 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP NOVEMBER 86 SERVICE 37.75
314B0 MINUTEMAN PRESS PRINTING-WATER DEPT 55.00
31481 MODERN TIRE CD WHEEL ALIGNMENT-STREET MAINTENANCE 19.95
31482 MOON VALLEY AGGREGATES GRAVEL-STREET MAINTENANCE 48.00
31483 MPH INDUSTRIES INC TEST RADAR-POLICE DEPT 15.00 i
31484 GREGORY J MUELLER VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 156.00
31485 WM MUELLER & SONS INC SAND-PARK MAINTENANCE 220.B4
31486 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOC SUBSCRIPTION-FIRE DEPT 247.50
31487 ART NAUSTDAL SEWER SERVICE-PUBLIC WORKS DEPT 330.00
31488 J P NOREX INC CURB BOX REPAIRS-WATER DEPT 325.00
31489 NORTHWOOD GAS CO SERVICE 363.75
31490 OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC -DRILL BITS/ALLOY CHAINS-PARK DEPT & 83.57
STREET DEPT
31491 HARRY ORTLOFF HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD 3B.00
31492 PDQ FOOD STORES REFUND-ON SALE BEER LICENSE 50.00
31493 CATHY PERIA MILEAGE 9.75
( '94 PET CREMATION SERVICE SERVICE-CANINE UNIT 5.00
1798785
DECEMBER 2,1986
31495 PETTY CASH-PUBLIC SAFETY DEPT EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 44.85
31496 POWER BRAKE EQUIPMENT CO -AIR DRYER/STROBE LIGHT-FIRE DEPT & STREET 719.86
MAINTENANCE
(" 497 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING PRINTING-POLICE DEPT & PLANNING DEPT 319.95
`.1498 RIEKE-CARROLL-MULLER ASSOC INC -OCTOBER 86 SERVICE-HIDDEN GLEN 3RD 39263.62
-ADDITION/WYNDHAM KNOLL/PRESERVE BLVD/
TECHNOLOGY DRIVE
31499 ROAD RESCUE INC 1ST AID KIT/LIGHT-FIRE DEPT 155.78
31500 ROOS FRICK -PAINT EXTERIOR/REPLACE WINDOW GLASS AT 3608.00
MORE HOUSE-PARK MAINTENANCE
31501 RICHARD RUFF REFUND-BUILDING PERMIT 30.00
31502 RYDER TRANSPORT INC TRANSPORTATION-SENIOR CENTER 112.50
31503 SCHMIDT READY MIX INC BLACKTOP-STREET MAINTENANCE 369.23
31504 STEVEN R SINELL NDVEMBER 86 EXPENSES 179.25
31505 SNAP ON TOOLS CORP SOCKETS/CHISEL/BULBS-STREET MAINTENANCE 57.87
31506 SNAP PRINT-WEST PRINTING-COMMUNITY CENTER-FIRE DEPT 264.26
31507 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC EMPLOYMENT ADS-COMMUNITY CENTER 70.00
31508 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC OCTOBER 86 LEGAL ADS 625.07
31509 SQUARE CUT CABINET & COUNTER TOP-POLICE DEPT 453.74
31510 STANDARD SPRING CO CAR SEAT REPAIRS-STREET MAINTENANCE 88.60
31511 DONNA STANLEY ELECTION JUDGE 11.25
31512 STREICHERS PROFESSIONAL POLICE EQ -BULLETPROOF VESTS-$2636.00/EMERGENCY 2701.80
LIGHTS- UBLIC SAFETY
31513 STS CDNSULTANTS LTD SERVICE-WATER TREATMENT PLANT ADDITION 5534.63
31514 NATALIE SWAGGERT NOVEMBER 86 EXPENSES 165.00
31515 TARGET 22D -CALCULATOR/SUPPLIES-ASSESSING DEPT & 152.49
COMMUNITY CENTER
3I516 TENNESSEE CHEMICAL CO FLUORIDE-WATER DEPT 4608.97
d11517 TRIARCO ARTS & CRAFTS SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 14.98
318 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO OXYGEN-STREET MAINTENANCE 60.54
31519 R A UNGERMAN CONST REFUND-OVERPAYMENT ON BUILDING PERMIT 11.70
31520 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS-FIRE DEPT 306.55
31521 UNITED FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION 1987 MEMBERSHIP DUES-FIRE DEPT 25.00
31522 UNITED LABORATORIES INC -CLEANING SUPPLIES/LUBRICANTS-WATER DEPT & 452.04
STREET DEPT
31523 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC CHAIN HOIST/NUTS-STREET MAINTENANCE 262.56
31524 YAUGHNS INC FLAG REPAIR-PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 12.00
31525 VIDEOTRONIX INC -REPAIR VIDEO EQUIPMENT-PUBLIC SAFETY 293.03 I
BUILDING
31526 REBECCA WARNER MILEAGE 8.75 1
31527 WATER PRODUCTS CO -12" FLOW METER TEST & REPAIRS $890.04/130 3129.90
-GASKET PIPE/SLEEVE COUPLINGS/6 1 1/2"
100D GAL METER @$295.00/C0IL SEAL WIRE
3I528 SANDRA F WERTS EXPENSES-COMMUNITY CENTER 79.13
31529 WESTERN DESIGN & PRINTING BUSINESS CARDS-POLICE DEPT 59.00
31530 WILSON TANNER GRAPHICS TROPHIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 22.00
3I531 THE WINE SPECTATOR SUBSCRIPTION-LIQUOR STORE 60.00 31532 XEROX CORP MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT/REPAIRS-CITY HALL 183.00
31533 ZIEGLER INC -NUTS/DIP STICK TUBES/BOLTS/WASHERS/SNOW 2609.66
PLDW CUTTING GES-STREET MA
31534 KAY ZUCCARO AQUA AEROBICSEINSTRUCTOR/FEESNPDNANCE
6736406 217.50
$469073.22
( f1
IL
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John D. Frane, Finance Director
DATE: November 25, 1986
RE: Prairie Village Apartments - Resolution No. 86-296
The proponents of Prai•ri.e Village Apartments are asking the
City to increase the amount of the bond issue to $5,750,000
from$4,452,000. The additional money to be used for higher
than anticipated construction costs, to prepay the credit en-`
hancement and to fund a reserve of 1 years interest.
They are also requesting an increase in the maximum amount
of tax increment from $78,000 per year to $124,000. The
additional increment would be used to further lower rent in
the project.
A public hearing will have to be held to amend the Tax Increment
Plan. The purpose of the resolution at this time is to enable
them to get in line at the state for funding in time to close
this year. A public hearing to amend the Tax Increment Plan i,--
tehedol-ed-fa4,-9eoerxbe+---46;-i9$b,.
See attached letter.
JDF:tz
11/25/86
II
•
S
DERRICK COMPANIES .
Rral Eslale Developer,
24 November 1986
Mr. Chris Eiger
Planning Director
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
Subject: Prairie Village Apartments
Dear Chris:
IDSI and Firemans Fund Insurance have agreed to finance the debt for
the Prairie Village apartments in the amount of $5,750,000. To
acccrplish this financing and because of the 1986 Tax Reform Act, the
Management Agreement will have to be amended. As we discussed, the
following will have to occur for the project to proceed:
1. The number of subsidized units will have to be increased to 45
units from 27 units as previously agreed to. •
2. The rents on the subsidized units will have to be drastically
reduced from $406 per month to $369 per month for the one
bedroom, one person unit; and from $438 per month for a one •
bedroom den to $422; and $574 per month for a two bedroom, two
person occupied unit.
3. The federal government is requiring that the low income units be
maintained and serviced for 15 years which fits the previous 18-
year agreement.
4. The total annual subsidy of $124,000 will be needed to accomodate
the additional subsidized units and reduced rents. As before,
the Prairie Village apartments will pay all of the tax increment.
In addition, the total amount of loan tax increment funds will
decrease from $179,000 to $136,000.
r. The state will have to approve an allocation of Tax Cxemot
V�usinq Revenue P-nd finar,cinn. We will submit fr;r etate
: .proval --, 7ecem,nnr It is necessary to submit by Decneber a
,e rr . ye_is end. The City will have tc,
_ f%1 .... ;,;.ion. I am forwarding the comp -_.
cilocation forms tinier separate cover. There appears to i n
/ problem in receivinn the allocation. I have discussed the
4 allocation with out `and attorney and IDBI.
C
I have revised Exhibit A and Exhibit C of the Management Agreement to
reflect the additional tax increment, the previously agreed to lower
amount of tax increment funds, and the lower rents. In addition, I,
have reviewed the Tax Increment Plan to be certain that no additional
amendments are necessary to the Plan. I have discussed this situation
with Rick Rossow and John Frane and have included one proposed
revision to the Interest Rate Reduction Program as follows:
Page 19, Paragraph 4, should be amended to increase the maximum
from°$78,000 to $124,000.
We are requesting that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority approve
the amendment to the Management Agreement and TIP'Plan and that the
City Council act on the new Inducement Resolution and allocation
request. It is important that this be accanplished at,the December 2,
meeting so that we may apply for an allocation of Tax Exempt Financing
the following Monday.
In addition, I am enclosing a revised proforma and a revised Tax
Increment Schedule for your review. You will note that on the revised
proforma, we are prepaying the Housing Revenue Bond Credit
�`. Enhancement to Firemans Fund Insurance. Also, we are required to
provide a one year's debt service reserve to Firemans Fund Insurance.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
wh,M Q 4141
Richard C. Krier, AICP
Vice President
Derrick Companies
RCK:clb
encio::ures
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John D. Frane, Finance Director
DATE: November 25, 1986
RE: Prairie Villaae Apartments - Resolution No. 86-296
The proponents of Prairie Village Apartments are asking the
City to increase the amount of the bond issue to $5,750,000
from $4,452,000. The additional money to be used for higher
than anticipated construction costs, to prepay the credit en-
hancement and to fund a reserve of 1 years interest.
They are also requesting an increase in the maximum amount
of tax increment from $78,000 per year to $124,000. The
additional increment would be used to further lower rent in
the project.
A public hearing will have to be held to amend the Tax Increment
Plan. The purpose of the resolution at this time is to enable
them to get in line at the state for funding in time to close
this year. A public hearing to amend the Tax Increment Plan is
scheduled for December 16, 1986.
See attached letter.
JDF:tz
11/25/86
4
o
DERRICK COMPANIES:
Real(-stale Developers
24 November 1986
Mr. Chris Enger
Planning Director
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
Subject: Prairie Village Apartments
Dear Chris:
IDBI and Firetnans Fund Insurance have agreed to finance the debt for
the Prairie Village apartments in the amount of $5,750,000. To
accomplish this financing and because of the 1986 Tax Reform Act, the
Management Agreement will have to be amended. As we discussed, the
following will have to occur for the project to proceed:
1. The number of subsidized units will have to be increased to 45
units from 27 units as previously agreed to.
2. The rents on the subsidized units will have to be drastically
reduced from $406 per month to $369 per month for the one
bedroom, one person unit; and from $438 per month for a one
bedroom den to $422; and $574 per month for a two bedroom, two
person occupied unit.
3. The federal government is requiring that the low income units be
maintained and serviced for 15 years which fits the previous 18-
year agreement.
4. The total annual subsidy of $124,000 will be needed to accomodate
the additional subsidized units and reduced rents. As before,
the Prairie Village apartments will pay all of the tax increment.
5. In addition, the total amount of loan tax increment funds will
decrease from $179,000 to $136,000.
C. The state will have to approve an allocation of Tax Pxempt {'
Nousinq Revenue p^nd financing. We will submit for state
approval -,r. Decem:'r °. It is necessary to submit by Decmeber R,
=e year's end. The City will have to rya..:.
Ic,r . . ..cation. I am forwarding the comp'.etc=
allocation forms under separate cover. There appears to be no
problem in receiving the allocation. I have discussed the j
allocation with out bond attorney and IDRI. `
a_.(J
I have revised Exhibit A and Exhibit C of the Management Agreement to
reflect the additional tax increment, the previously agreed to lower
amount of tax increment funds, and the lower rents. In addition, I
have reviewed the Tax Increment Plan to be certain that no additional
amendments are necessary to the Plan. I have discussed this situation
with Rick Rossow and John Frane and have included one proposed
revision to the Interest Rate Reduction Program as follows:
Page 19, Paragraph 4, should be amended to increase the maximum
from $78,000 to $124,000.
We are requesting that the Housing and Redevelopnent Authority approve
the amendment to the Management Agreement and TIF Plan and that the
City Council act on the new Inducement Resolution and allocation
request. 'It is important that this be accomplished at the December 2,
meeting so that we may apply for an allocation of Tax Exempt`Financing
the following Monday.
In addition, I am enclosing a revised proforma and a revised Tax
Increment Schedule for your review. You will note that on the revised
proforma, we are prepaying the Housing Revenue Bond Credit
Enhancement to Firemans Fund Insurance. Also, we are required to
provide a one year's debt service reserve to Firemans Fund Insurance.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
I1
Richard C. !trier, AICP
Vice President
Derrick Companies
RCK:clb
enclosures
2
RESOLUTION NO. —a 9 N
Councilmember introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE
BONDS OR NOTES PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES,
CHAPTER 462C, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING A
MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT; GIVING
PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE DEVELOPMENT.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota (the City), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals
1.01. On October 1, 1985, the City adopted Resolutions 85-
224 and 85-225 (the Resolutions), pursuant to which, among
other things, it (i) adopted multifamily housing programs for
Prairie Village Apartments, Phases I and II (the Programs),
after holding a duly notice public hearing thereon; (ii)
authorized transmission of said housing programs to the
Minnesota Housing Finance Agency; and (iii) preliminarily
approved two bond issues for Prairie Village Apartments, Phases
I and II (herein collectively referred to as the "Projects" or
the "Project"), each in the amount of Two Million Two Hundred
Twenty-six Thousand Dollars ($2,226,000).
1.02. The Programs were submitted by the City to the
Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for review and approval, and
on December 19, 1985, the Board of the Minnesota Housing
Finance Agency adopted Resolution No. MHFA 85-71, in which it
was stated that the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency had failed
to reject the Programs, resulting in approval of said Programs,
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.04, subd. 2.
1.03. The Resolutions provided that all commitments of the
City stated in those Resolutions were subject to the condition
that by October 1, 1986, the City and Mandara Company, a
Minnesota corporation, or a limited partnership of which it
will be the general partner (Mandara) must have agreed to
mutually acceptable terms and conditions of the Loan Agreement
pursuant to which Mandara was to agree to pay to the City
principal, premium, if any, and interest on the bonds or notes
pursuant to which the Projects were to be financed, and of the
other instruments and proceedings relating to said bonds or
notes and their issuance and sale.
1.04. No such agreement was reached among the City and
Mandara, and no extension of the October 1, 1986, date was
approved by the City. It is, therefore, necessary for the City
to approve the proposed bonds and notes to finance the Projects
and to approve a revised housing program (the Amended Program)
relating to the financing of the Project, after a duly noticed
public hearing relating to the adoption of said Amended
Program.
1.05. At the time of adoption of the Resolutions, Mandara
contemplated the Project would be developed in two phases, one
phase of market rate rental housing, and one phase of housing
for elderly persons. The development of the Project in two
phases as provided above depended upon whether Mandara could
obtain approval from the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency
(MHFA) to include one of the two phases of the Project in a
MHFA Bond issue. Mandara has not obtained such approval from
the MHFA, and now intends to finance Phases I and II of the
Project with only one issue of bonds or notes. Prairie Village
Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership (the
Developer), whose general partner is Mandara, intends to
develop the Project.
1.06. Under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, as amended
(the Act), the City is authorized to issue and sell revenue
bonds or obligations to make or purchase loans to finance one
or more multifamily housing developments within its boundaries.
1.07. Representatives of the Developer have advised this
Council that the Developer proposes to construct a multifamily
residential housing development on approximately eight and one-
quarter acres of land owned by the Developer, located just east
of the northeast corner of the intersection of Highway 5 and
County Road 4 in the City, composed of 112 apartment units and
other functionally related and subordinate facilities and to
operate the facilities as a multifamily housing development
under the Act, to be known as Prairie Village Apartments.
Either (i) at least twenty percent (20%) of the units will be
specifically reserved for tenants whose incomes are no greater
than fifty percent (50%) of the area median income; or (ii) at
least forty percent (40%) of the units will be specifically
reserved for tenants whose incomes are no greater than sixty
percent (60%) of the area median income. Determinations as to
whether a unit meets the requirements of (i) or (ii), above,
will include adjustments for family size. Development and
financing costs of the Project are presently estimated by
representatives of the Developer to be approximately Seven
Million Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($7,200,000).
1.08. Representatives of the Developer have requested that
the City issue its revenue bonds or other obligations in the
approximate aggregate face amount of Five Million Seven Hundred
Fifty Thousand Dollars ($5,750,000) (the Bonds or Notes),
pursuant to the Act, and make a loan of the proceeds of the
sale of the Bonds or Notes to the Developer for the acquisition
of land for and the construction and equipping of the Project,
subject to agreement by the Developer, or other persons or
institutions, to promptly pay the principal of, premium, if
any, and interest on the Bond or Notes.
2.
1.09. The City has been advised by representatives of the
Developer that conventional commercial financing of the costs
of the Project is available only on a limited basis and at such
high costs of borrowing that the economic feasibility of the
Project would be significantly affected, but that with the aid
of municipal financing the Project will be more economically
feasible.
1.10. This Council has been advised by representatives of
The Chicago Corporation, representing the Developer, that on
the basis of information available to them, the Project is
economically feasible, and the Bonds or Notes could be
successfully issued and sold.
1.11. Neither the full faith and credit nor the taxing
powers of the City nor any property of the City will be pledged
to the payment of the Bonds or Notes. The Bonds or Notes are
to be paid from the revenues of the Project.
1.12. The applicant has agreed to pay, directly or through
the City, any and all costs incurred by the City in connection
with the Project, whether or not the Project is carried to
completion; with the Project whether or not the Project is
approved by the City; and whether or not the Bonds or Notes are
executed and issued.
1.13. The adoption of this resolution does not constitute a
guarantee or a firm commitment that the City will issue the
Bonds or Notes as requested by the applicant. The City retains
k the right in its sole discretion to withdraw from participation
and accordingly not issue the Bonds or Notes should the City at
any time prior to the issuance thereof determine that it is in
the best interest of the City not to issue the Bonds or Notes
or should the parties to the transaction be unable to reach
agreement as to the terms and conditions of any of the
documents required for the transaction.
1.14. All commitments of the City expressed herein are
subject to the condition that by December 2, 1987, the City and
the applicant shall have agreed to mutually acceptable terms
and conditions of the Loan Agreement pursuant to which the
Developer will agree to pay to the City principal, premium, if
any, and interest on the Bonds or Notes, and of the other
instruments and proceedings relating to the Bonds or Notes and
their issuance and sale. If the events set forth herein do not
take place within the time set forth above, or any extension
thereof, and the Bonds or Notes are not sold within such time,
this resolution shall expire and be of no further effect.
1.15. The City has caused to be prepared the Amended
Program for the proposed Project under the Act which will be
presented to this Council on December 16, 1986, and which
contains information demonstrating the need for the Project,
3.
stating the method of financing proposed and that the Project
is to be constructed and equipped pursuant to Subdivision 2,
Section 462C.05 of the Act.
1.16. Pursuant to the requirements of the Act and Section
147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the
Code), a public hearing will be held relating to the Program
proposed by the Developer under the Act, including the proposed
issuance of the Bonds or Notes, after proper publication of
notice of the public hearing in accord with the requirements of
the Act and the Code.
Section 2. Approval and Authorization
2.01. It is hereby found and determined based upon the
information presented to this Council by the representatives of
the Developer that it would be in the best interests of the
City to issue the Bonds under the provisions of the Act in
order to finance costs to be incurred by the Developer in the
acquisition, construction, and equipping of the described
facilities. The City hereby gives its preliminary approval to
the issuance of the Bonds or Notes in the approximate aggregate
face amount of not to exceed Five Million Seven Hundred Fifty
Thousand Dollars ($5,750,000) subject to the City, the
Developer, and the purchaser of the Bonds or Notes reaching
definitive agreement and the provisions for their payment.
2.02. The City Attorney, the Mayor, the City Manager and
other officers, employees, and agents of the City are
authorized, in cooperation with bond counsel, to initiate the
preparation of such documents as may be appropriate to evidence
the terms of all agreements for payment of the Bonds or Notes,
and the provisions for payment of the principal of, the premium
if any, and interest on the Bonds or Notes.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, this 2nd day of December, 1986.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
The Motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was
•
duly seconded by Councilmember , and
4.
upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
Whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted
and was signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk.
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed
Clerk of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, hereby certify
that I have carefully compared the foregoing resolution adopted
at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on
December 2, 1986, with the original thereof on file in my
office, and the same is a full, true, and complete transcript
thereof.
Witness, my hand officially as such Clerk and the corporate
seal of the City this day of 1986.
John Frane
City Clerk
(SEAL)
{
5.
SOK:CT8
MEMORANDUM
ir
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Natalie J. Swaggert, Director of Human Resources /J,
FROM: Elizabeth Kelly, Chairperson
Human Rights and Services Commission
SUBJECT: Human Rights and Services Commission Recommendation:
Space 'In Kind' - PROP
DATE: November 20, 1986
At our November Commission meeting, Gerry Beckman, Director of PROP,
made a presentation on the organization's role and contributions in
the community of Eden Prairie and provided us with a tour of PROP's
facility.
The major reason Gerry met with us was to ask for the Commission's
consideration of her request to help procure or locate improved
facilities for the PROP operation.
The space currently in use by PROP is provided 'in kind' by the School
District in the School Administration Building and has served PROP's
needs reasonable well for the past three years. PROP, however, has
grown both in the services it provides and in the number of clients it
serves. As a result, the space is no longer adequate to sustain
present operations effectively or allow for program expansion. In
addition there are several limitations to the present space including:
1) No handicap access;
2) Not accessible to public transportation;
3) Limited access (PROP office hours must coincide with the School
Administration Building hours which particularly create a
hardship during food drives which are sponsored by churches on
Sundays);
4) No level space (three-tier room, formerly a bandroom, greatly
reduces storage, work space capability and increases chances of
accidents);
5) Minimal security (area is not secured from back entrance in
order to maintain necessary emergency exit);
6) No access to running water; bathrooms are inconvenient and
virtually inaccessible to handicapped clients; and
f1 `
7) Personal security of volunteers is a concern because there is no
visible way (window or vantage point) of knowing when a client is
corning into the PROP office.
In consideration of PROP's long-standing commitment to providing many
needed human services in Eden Prairie and in recognition of the problems
and limitations of its present space, the Human Rights and Services
Commission herein makes the following recommendation:
That the City of Eden Prairie as a demonstration of a
creative partnership provide 'in kind' space for
PROP beginning January 1, 1987, in the City-owned
"Schultz property" at 8000 I4itchell Road and that
consideration also be given to providing utilities
for the building,
We understand from City Staff that the out-of-pocket costs to the City are
estimated to be $6,500 per year (net rental income and utilities). PROP
would have to carry contents' insurance as it deems appropriate. We
further understand that the present renter of the Schultz house is moving
so the house will be vacant and available as of January 1, 1987.
- I