Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council - 10/18/1988
AGENDA HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1988 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7600 Executive Drive HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEMBERS: Mayor Gary D. Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Jean Harris, and Patricia Pidcock HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, Finance lirecter John 1. Frane, City Attorney Roger Pauly, lirecter of Planning Chris ./, . Enger, and Recording Secretary Deb Edlund PLEDGE DF ALLEGIANCE , ; ROLL CALL 1 I. CALL MEETING TO BRIER II. RESOLUTION NI. HRA 11-11 APPROVING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN Page 2339 FOR ELIM HOMES, INC. (ELIM SHORES PROJECT) III. ADJOURNMENT. AGENDA EVEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, BUSIER 11, 19SS IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING HOUSING L REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING City Hall Council Chambers 7611 Executive (rive CIUNCILMEMIERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Jean Harris, and Patricia Pidcock CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig lawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance lirecter John 1. Frane, lirecter of Planning Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & • Natural Resources Robert Lambert, lirecter • of Public Works Eugene A. lietz, and Recording Secretary Deb Edlund ROLL CALL I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS II. MINUTES A. City Council Meeting of Tuesday, August IL. 1988 Page 2360 City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,October 18, 1988 III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List Page 2387 B. Final Plat Approval for Birchwood Labs (located south of State Page 2388 Highway 5 and east of County Road 4JResolution No. 88-208 C. STARRING LAKE 2ND ADDITION by Red Rock Heights Partnership. Page 2390 Approval of Developer's Agreement for Starring Lake 2nd Addition. 8.3 acres into 13 single family lots within the R1-22 District. Location: North of County Road 1 between Eicholts Addition and Starring Lake 1st Addition D. Final Plat Approval for Starring Lake 2nd Addition (located Page 2394 north of Pioneer TraTT—between Staring Lane and Sunrise Circle) Resolution No. 88-22D E. Final Plat Approval for LaVonne Industrial Park 4th Addition Page 2397 (located south of Edenvale Boulevard east of the Chicago & Northwestern Railroad) Resolution No. B8-235 F. Approval of Extinguishment of Access to T.H. 5 of City Dwned Page 2400 Property at Round Lake Estates Resolution No. 88-236) G. Approval of Extinguishment of Access to T.H. 5 of City Owned Page 2401 Property Dutlot C Gonyea 4th Addition—(Resolution No. 88-237) H. Resolution of Approval for Metropolitan Council Arts Grant Page 2402 Agreement TResolution No. 88-238) I. Approval of Settlement Agreement with Layne-Western for Well Page 2405 Construction, I.C. 52-D72B IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CARDINAL CREEK 3RD ADDITION by Gustafson & Associates Company. Page 2410 Request for Zoning District Change from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 on 1.67 acres with front yard setback variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, for construction of 4 single family lots. Location: 6801-05, 6855-59, 6871-75, and 6887-91 Stonewood Court. B. VACATION 88-08 VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS IN Page 2417 FOREST KNOLLS (Resolution No. 88-215) C. VACATION 88-D9, VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS IN Page 2418 COACHMAN'S LANDING 5TH ADDITION (Resolution No. 88-216) V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS Page 2418E VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS A. Resolution No. 88-234, Ordering Special Assessment of Delinquent Page 2419 Utility Accounts City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,October 18, 1988 B. Resolution No. 88-239 Calling for a Public Hearing on the Tax Page 2428 Increment Financing Plan for December s 1988 for Elim Homes, Inc. (Elim Shores, Inc.) C. Resolution No. 88-240, Preliminary Resolution A rovin Issuance Page 2429 of Housing Revenue Bonds for Elim Homes, Inc. Elim Shores, Inc.) VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. Request from Douglas Reuter regarding Special Assessment Policy Page 2444 VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS IX. APPOINTMENTS X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members B. Report of City Manager C. Report of City Attorney D. Report of Director of Planning E. Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources 1. Acquisition of Riley Lake Park Page 2450 F. Report of Director of Public Works G. Report of Finance Director IX. NEW BUSINESS X. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL & TIMBER LAKES HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION BOARD TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1988 6:00 P. M. CITY HALL 7600 EXECUTIVE DRIVE COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Gary D. Peterson, Richard Anderson George Bentley, Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Robert Lambert, and Recording Secretary Deb Edlund 6:05 I. INTRODUCTIONS 6:10 II. REVIEW OF EXISTING SCENIC EASEMENTS A. Review of Entire Shoreline & Any Scenic Easements to Page 2334 Date B. City Scenic Easement C. Homeowner's Association Scenic Easement ( 6:20 III. DISCUSSION OF EXISTING PROBLEMS WITH SCENIC EASEMENTS 6:40 IV. DISCUSSION OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS PLANS FOR ENFORCEMENT OF EASEMENT 7:10 V. DISCUSSION OF ORIGINAL GOALS FOR PROTECTION OF SHORELINE & PDSSIBLE CHANGES OR MODIFICATIONS OF GOALS FOR PROTECTION OF SHORELINE ALDNG UNDEVELOPED PORTION OF LAKE 7:25 VI. ADJOURNMENT A MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources-ir-- DATE: October 12, 1988 SUBJECT: Special Meeting with Timber Lakes Homeowner's Association Board of Directors Attached is a June 29th memorandum providing background on the scenic easement policy for the City, and in particular the Mitchell Lake shoreline development and scenic easement. Also, attached is a September 8th letter to Robert J. Hult, Chairman of the Timber Lakes Homeowner's Association Board of Directors, relating to the October 18th special meeting of the City Council to discuss the scenic easement and shoreline preservation on Mitchell Lake. Staff has also attached a proposed agenda that the City Council may, or may not, complete in the hour and a half time period from 6 P.M. until 7:30 P.M. Mr. Hult has indicated that 8 members of the Board of Directors will be in attendance and the City staff have had several residents from the area that have indicated they will be in attendance, and wish to participate in the discussion. The purpose of the meeting is simply to state the problems the City sees with the existing scenic easements and to hear the Board of Directors' point of view regarding the Homeowner's Association scenic easement, and perhaps to discuss some of the goals for shoreland protection of that lake. There will not be time in a hour and a half period to attempt to resolve any of these difficult issues but, hopefully, this meeting will provide the Council with input directly from the Homeowner's Association Board of Directors regarding their intent to enforce their scenic easement. This information will no doubt directly affect any future decisions the City Council makes on methods of preserving shoreline along the undeveloped portion of this lake. BL:mdd yS5 a3344 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Planning Commission Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources c_ DATE: June 29, 1988 SUBJECT: Review of Scenic Easement Policy In June of 1988, the City Council received a request from Earl Ingram to allow him to maintain a lawn area, sand beach, and dock at his residence at 17064 Weston Bay. Mr. Ingram had already removed the natural vegetation between his house and the lakeshore in the process of removing trees that had died along the lakeshore due to the previous high water conditions. As a part of the Weston Bay Subdivision, a 75' wide scenic easement, measured from the shoreline was filed on all lots within Weston Bay. This scenic easement required a permit to remove any live vegetation within the scenic easement, and prohibited docks or sand beaches. The scenic easement was recommended by City staff and approved by the Commissions and the Council because this condition was consistent with a scenic easement that had been approved on all the previously developed eastern shoreline of Mitchell Lake. The major difference, however, was that the Timber Lakes Subdivision scenic easement was controlled by the Timber Lakes Homeowner's Association; whereas, the Weston Bay Subdivision scenic easement was controlled by the City of Eden Prairie. Earlier this year the Timber Lakes Homeowner's Association became aware of several violations of the scenic easement. When the Homeowner's Association requested the property owner to restore the property, the property owner indicated that he would pursue the matter in court. The Homeowner's Association decided not to enforce the scenic easement. Since that time, there have been several additional' docks installed and some additional clearing within the scenic easement in the Timber Lakes Subdivision. Much of the tree removal was initiated when the lake began receding and property owners began removing dead trees along the shoreline. Once the trees were cut down, in many cases, heavy equipment was brought in to remove the stumps. Several individuals then had sand hauled in to create a beach where the dead trees had previously been standing. At the June 21st meeting, the City Council reviewed the permit request for Earl Ingram and a June 15th memo suggesting the Council consider reassessing the desire for a scenic easement around the entire lakeshore at Mitchell Lake. The memo pointed out that the north shore has been developed for many years with large lots that have full use of the lakeshore and that unless the Timber Lakes Homeowner's Association changes their mind and decides to pursue the enforcement of the scenic easement, it may not make sense to continue to require a full scenic easement on additional shoreline around Mitchell Lake. • • d�?S - The City Council was very concerned about the precedent that may be set by simply eliminating a scenic easement as soon as someone decides to violate the scenic easement. The Council requested staff to review the scenic easement policy with the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and the Planning Commission prior to taking any action with changes to scenic easements on Mitchell Lake. RECOMMENDATIONS ON SCENIC EASEMENTS The purpose of a scenic easement is to insure preservation of unique natural features. Scenic easements are most generally used along steep wooded slopes, creek valleys, bluffs, marshlands, or lakeshores. In the past, staff have delineated areas within subdivisions where a scenic easement line should be drawn; however, there have been no restrictions on how close a house could be constructed in Weston Bay, the hhouse nwas eplaced twithin 5'1 ofmthea scenic e cses, sea�sem easement lth Mr. ine. In many other cases, especially along Purgatory Creek, homes are constructed within 5-1D' of a scenic easement line and sooner or later an individual wants to build a deck into the scenic easement or a swimming pool or simply develop a small backyard. Staff would recommend a minimum of a 30' setback from a scenic easement line. If homes are allowed to build right up to scenic easements, the City will be constantly faced with requests to intrude into the scenic easement line and many of the requests might have to be considered a reasonable use of an Individuals property. The number of requests to extend into the scenic easement and the unauthorized violations would be significantly reduced, if not eliminated. When individual property owners purchase an expensive lot on a lake, they will continue to push to have access to the lake through the use of docks and to maintain some manicured access to the lakeshore. Scenic easements should work satisfactorily when properties are abutting natural creek valleys, when the incentive of the property owner is to preserve the natural feature that gives value to the property; however, the majority of lakeshore property owners would prefer to develop their lakeshore lot all the way to the lakeshore, and to have use of the lake. Staff would recommend that in the .future, if the City wishes to preserve lakeshore in it's natural condition, the City either negotiate for the acquisition of a stripe of land along the lakeshore for City ownership, rather than relying on scenic easements; or strictly adhere to the Shoreland Management Ordinance regarding setbacks and lot widths. The most affective method for preserving wooded lakeshore is to adhere to the Shoreland Management Ordinance, as the majority of lakeshore lots are developed with large expensive homes, it does not make since to give lot width or setback variances if the goal is to preserve the wooded character of the lakeshore. MITCHELL LAKE SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT Staff would recommend the City Council request a meeting of the Timber Lakes Homeowner's Association to determine their intent of (or lack of) enforcing the scenic easement along the lakeshore. The City should then decide to what extent shoreland development will be regulated around the remaining shoreline of Mitchell Lake, and what restrictins are reasonable within Weston Bay. c2 3(1 If the Homeowner's Association would decide to enforce the scenic easement, the City could continue with the previously planned policy of a 75' wide scenic easement around the entire shoreline. If the Homeowner's Association decides not to enforce the scenic easement, the City should determine to enforce the Shoreland Management Ordinance around the remaining portion of the lake without any variances in order to preserve the wooded;.character_of_the_Mitchell_ Lake shoreline. The Weston Bay Subdivision was granted shoreland variances mainly due to the commitment of the scenic easement. Staff would recommend that even if there is-not to be a scenic easement around the remaining portion of Mitchell Lake, the scenic 'easement in Weston Bay remain in place and that the City staff review each lakeshore parcel within Weston Bay prior to approving any grading plans':•--All.'grading_plans=would require preservation of at least 40% the scenic easement in its natural condition, and restrict removal of any vegetation above 4' in diameter within the scenic easement in order to maintain the natural character of the wooded shoreline. Staff would further recommend that no sodded lawns be allowed within 10' of the lakeshore in order to reduce the amount of fertilizer running directly into the water. Under these conditions, staff would also recommend removal of the dock restriction, but that all docks conform to the Shoreland Management Ordinance regarding location, size, etc. The City staff does not believe this particular situation sets any precedent for eliminating or changing any of the other scenic easements within the City of Eden Prairie. There are so many altered conditions to Mitchell Lake that this one scenic easement does warrant reconsideration; however, all of the other scenic easements along creek valleys, etc are controlled by the City of Eden Prairie rather than any private Homeowner's Association that may decide not to enforce the scenic easement. Staff would recommend that the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission review this analysis of our scenic easement policy and forward recommendations to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission would then forward recommendations to the City Council for review of the scenic easement policy. Staff would then recommend the City Council call for a meeting of the Timber Creek Homeowner's Association and the Weston Bay Homeowner's Association, as well all other property owners on Mitchell Lake to discuss the future of shoreland development on Mitchell Lake. BL:mdd a 3?J"1 I eP City of Eden Prairie edam t ^�Offices ^ .0 Executive Drive • Eden Prairie,MN 55344-3677• Telephone(612)937-2262 prairie. September 8, 1988 Robert J. Hult 7970 Island Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55347 Dear Mr. Hult: This letter is to confirm the request of the City Council to meet with the Timber Lake Homeowner's Association Board of Directors at a special meeting of the City Council at 6 P. M., October 18, 1988, at the City Hall Council Chambers. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss the future of scenic easements and shoreland preservation on Mitchell Lake. Although this is a public meeting, the City Council has specifically requested that the meeting be with the Board of Directors to discuss this issue. Several other residents from the area have indicated an interest in this discussion and will be attending that meeting. As this is a 6 P. M. meeting, the Council will provida a box lunch for members of the Board that will be in attendance. Please call to confirm the number of Board members which expect to attend that meeting, so we may order the proper number of box lunches. I look forward to seeing you on the 18th. Sincerely, Robert A. Lambert Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources RAL:mdd • • • .. 3 UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, AUGUST 16, 1988 7:30 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7600 Executive Drive COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Jean Harris, and Patricia Pidcock CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, City Attorney Roger Pauly, , Director of Planning Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary Deb Edlund PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: A11 members present. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley to approve the Agenda as published. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: ITEM X.A.1, Peterson to report on Hennepin County Recycling Advisory Committee Meeting. ITEM X.A.2, Harris requested status of water ban. ITEM X.A.3, Pidcock to report on Revenue Committee Meeting. ITEM X.B.4, invitation from BFI to tour landfill. Set a meeting date for Monday, August 22, 1988 at 3:00PM. ITEM X.F.3, move Item J, Grading Permit for Lee Johnson, from the Consent Calendar. CONSENT CALENDAR CHANGES: ITEM H, FAIRFIELD, add Resolution No. 88-181 to approve PUD. ADD ITEM K, Resolution No. 88-182 to approve Final Plat for Technology Park 5th Addition. 3( a City Council Minutes 2 August 16, 1988 Move ITEM J to ITEM X.F.3 as previously noted. Motion carried unanimously. II . MINUTES Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, July 5, 1988 MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the Minutes of the City Council Meeting held Tuesday, July 5, 1989. CORRECTIONS AS FOLLOWS: Page 5, Paragraph 2, change feel to perception. Page 5, Paragraph 5, change trying to put in place to considering. Page 7, Paragraph 2 should read: Anderson asked Pauly if the Council had given him the proper direction. Pauly replied he did understand the direction the Council desired. Bentley suggested that the Ordinance be combined from p. 1459 subjection B, C & D adding section C & D from F. page 7, Paragraph 4 should read: from significant numbers of residents. .. Motion carried unanimously. III . CONSENT CALENDAR A. Final Plat Approval for Mel Hansen Addition (located north of Pioneer Trail and east of Staring Lane_West. Resolution No. 88-169 B. Final plat_Approval_.for Blossom Rid.ae_Second Addition (.located south ofBlossom_Road and east of Bennett Place. Resolution No. 88-170 C. Final Plat_Appr..ova,lfor Bluffs East Sixth Addition (located south of Pioneer Trail and west of County Road 18.1 Resolution No. 88-157 D. Approve Cooperative._Agreement with Hennepin County, for Design of.._T H. 5 from CSAH4 to CSAH 17_ (Resolution No. 88-165) E. Receive Petition and Order.,_Feasib_i1.itStudy. for the Extension of Medc_om Boulevard east to Franlo Road, 52-150 (Resolution No. 88-166) • •1X0' r City Council Minutes 3 August 16, 1988 F. Receive Feasibility_Study for Watermain Extension on Pioneer Trail (CSAH No. 1) from Mitchell Road west to. St3r_in_q._Lake 2n�._Addition and_.Set Publl,c,_H.earing Date I C___52-199 (Resolution No. 88-167) G. WDDDFALE CHURCH. 2nd Reading of Ordinance #15-88-PUD-2- 88, Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment within the Public Zoning District on 31 acres with waiver for structure height to 200 feet; Approval of Supplement to Wooddale Church Developer's Agreement; and Adoption of Resolution #88-117, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance #15-88-PUD-2-88 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 2000,000 sq. ft. of church and educational uses. Location: Southwest corner of Shady Oak Road and Bryant Lake Drive. (Ordinance #15-88- PUD-2-88, PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution #88-117, Authorizing Summary and Publication) H. FAIRFIELD, by Tandem Properties. 2nd Reading of Ordinance #29-88-PUD-8-88, Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and R1-9.5 on approximately 30 acres; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Fairfield Phase I; and Adoption of Resolution #88-171, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance #29- 88-PUD-8-88, and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. Approximately 30 acres into 68 single family lots, outlots, and road right-of-way. Location: West of County Road 4, southeast of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railroad. (Ordinance #29-88-PUD-8-88, PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution "188-171, Authorizing Summary and Publication), Resolution # 88-181 to approve PUD I. Resolution No. 49-179,_..,Appointing Election Judges f2r the Primary Election J. Approve Grading Permit for Lee Johnson Property ad1acent to Franio_Road, South of Prairie Center Drive (P.I,D. 19- 1.16 2-93 (1010) for Disposal of Excess Material from, Franlo Road Improvement Project (I.C. 52-132) K. Approve Final Plat for Technolog Park 5th Addition, Resolution No. 88-182 MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Anderson to approve the Consent Calendar as published and amended to Remove Item J. Motion carried unanimously. IV. PUBLIC_HEARINGS A. RED ROCK RANCH by Robert H. Mason Homes, Inc. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential on 9.2 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on City Council Minutes 4 August 16, 1988 approximately 150 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on approximately 52 acres with waivers and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on approximately 52 acres with Shoreland variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Preliminary Platting of 150 acres into 62 single family lots, 5 outlots and road right-of-way. Location: West of Mitchell Road, east of Red Rock Lake. (Resolution k88-172, Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment; Resolution t88-173, Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment to Overall Red Rock Ranch Planned Unit Development Concept; Ordinance t35-88-PUD-9-88, PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution #88-174, Preliminary Plat) City Manager Jullie reported that notice of the Public Hearing was sent to 104 surrounding property owners and was published in the August 3, 1988 addition of the Eden Prairie News. Randy Travalia, representing Mason Homes, presented a history of Mason Homes and its previous projects in Eden Prairie. Travalia said that the project had not officially been named Red Rock Ranch and hoped to have the official name within 30 days. Travalia proposed to start the project with Phase I consisting of 61 homes. He said that Mason Homes had dedicated a 4-acre park on the bay and a 40'-wide outlot on the north of the property. He said the outlot would allow for a connection to the Staring Lake recreational area. Travalia stated that the road had been moved south and the cul-de-sac had been changed to reduce tree loss. Travalia concluded by stating that Mason Homes had always tried to develop its projects in a responsible and intelligent manner and would continue to do so. John Uban, representing the proponent, presented the changes that had taken place in the project following discussions with the Planning Commission. The changes are as follows: 1) added buffer area to the south 2) provided for trees throughout the unwooded areas 3) trees would be added along collector road in accordance with the tree replacement policy 4) rearranged the lots to reduce variance requirements from 17 originally proposed to 2 variances necessary 5) furnished Staff with a detailed analysis of tree cover for each lot 6)placed homes on lots to save trees 7) adjusted the slope and the road to move away from the trees 8) adjusted the cul-de-sac. Uban also said that originally some multi-family homes were considered, but the plan had been changed to all single-family homes and low density. Uban believed that all the Planning Commission's concerns had been addressed. Enger reported that this item had been reviewed by the Planning Commission at the June 27, 1988 and the July 25, City Council Minutes 5 August 16, 1988 1988 meetings. The major concern of the Planning Commission was how the design of the subdivision impacted the wooded areas. Enger stated that based on the information presented, Staff had estimated a 50% loss in the wooded area. He said the Planning Commission denied the project at the July 25, 1988 meeting on a 5-0 vote; however, Chairperson Bye concluded that if the tree loss could be handled in better manner, the project would be supported according to Staff recommendations for collector road design, road phasing, Street E as a through street, and use of a private road. Enger reported that the proponent had been working with Staff and had made changes in the road alignment to reduce the impact to the trees. He said that greater detail of the character of the wooded area had been provided to allow a better analysis of the impact to the trees. Enger stated that Mason Homes tree replacement plan was far in excess of the City's requirements, but the Planning Commissions concern was related to the impact the design of the subdivision was making to the wooded area. Enger said that the 44% tree loss had indicated to the Planning Commission that the subdivision needed to be readjusted. He said that the realignment of the road had reduced the tree loss to 25-33% and the Planning Staff recommended approval of the project based on the new information and subject to the July 22, 1988 Staff Report. Enger stated that this item could be acted upon without referring it back to the Planning Commission if the Council so desired. Enger summarized the project, stating that Mason Homes would begin the project by Red Rock Lake which would require 3000' of road. Enger said that Mason Homes had agreed to a temporary construction loop, which would provide two ways in and out of the project for emergency purposes, and to the continuation of a minor collector road through the site. He said that Mason Homes was concerned, however, about the period over which the assessments for the roads would come due. He said the road was proposed to go in two phases and would be ordered in at the start of the project. Lambert reported that this item was reviewed by the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission at the August 15, 1988 meeting and recommended approval on a 5-0 vote. He said that the 4-acre park would be dedicated to the City in lieu of park fees for the first phase development. Lambert stated that the trail to the north of the property was to am 8' asphalt trail down a wooded hill, the need for stairs would be determined during construction. He said that the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission was comfortable with the tree preservation. He reported that the Commission suggested that the City Council consider two items in the near future: 1) a surface management ordinance for Red Rock Lake 2) whether City Council Minutes 6 August 16, 1988 alcohol should be allowed in the park area, with the Commission recommending to not allow alcohol. Several Council members asked for clarification on road alignment. Uban replied that discussions had taken place with Staff as to whether the extension at Mitchell Road should flow thru the site or T into the existing Mitchell Road alignment. Uban stated that the City Engineering Staff preferred the free flow and that Mason Homes preferred the T. Peter:iion asked Uban to explain the internal road flow. Uban said there would be a split boulevard with a loop system and a temporary connection, there would be a cul- de-sac, a private road for the oversized lots on the peninsula and another loop system on the other side of the boulevard. Harris asked how many lots were on the private road. Uban replied 4 lots. Anderson asked about the phasing of the project. Uban replied that the major collector road with utilities would be installed this fall. He said that the request for early grading permits would be necessary to accomplish the road work. Bentley asked why the density had been reduced to approximately one-half of the original PUD. Uban replied that the market had changed. Harris asked the price range of the homes. Travalia replied $300,000 and up for the home and the lot. Pidcock asked about the buffer zone in the southwest area of the project. Uban replied that first there was a physical separation with additional landscaping being provided. Pidcock said that the developer was not proposing to construct a berm at this time, but to use what was naturally there. Uban said that was correct, but if a berm was determined necessary it would be constructed. Pidcock asked how the road alignment would be handled if Seiffert did not sell his property. Uban replied that if Seiffert did not sell he would probably develop the property and that if the land did remain undeveloped Mason Homes could construct a cul-de-sac. Mr. Eickholt, 15380 Pioneer Trail, stated concern about the density of Phase 5. Eickholt questioned why this Phase had a higher density than the other phases and believed that the density of the whole project should be determined now. Uban said that changes in the density of that area had not been made from the original PUD already approved. Travalia said that this would be the last phase aJo.> City Council Minutes 7 August 16, 1988 of the project and would be several years away and that at that time there would be another Public Hearing. Travalia said that Phase 5 would probably be smaller single-family homes and would be at a lower density. Eickholt stated concern about the project being compatible with the existing neighborhood. Peterson stated that the Council understood his concerns, but the Council did not have the authority to request the developer to answer tonight how the property would be developed for that phase. Bentley stated that the developer would be required to meet very specific criteria and that the development would conform with the surrounding area. Virginia Gartner, 15701 Cedar Ridge Road, asked for more information on the 4-acre park. Lambert replied that the park would be developed next year. He said the park would consist of a public lake access with 6 trailer parking spaces, playground, tennis courts, picnic area, and a sand beach area. He said that heavy berming and screening would be provided to separate the single-family homes from the park. Lambert said that the park was being proposed as a passive park. Lambert reported that the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission suggested that a residents committee work with Staff to draft an ordinance for review by the City Council to restrict the motors on the lake to electric trolling motors or a maximum 10- horsepower motor. Peterson asked Lambert when he projected the drafting of the ordinance would occur. Lambert replied that the process should be initiated now, so that potential buyers would be aware of the proposed use of the lake. Anderson commented that it was important to have an ordinance in effect by the time residents moved in. Pidcock stated concern about the possibility for duplication of street names and the confusion which could occur. Gartner asked if the public would be notified when the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission would discuss the development of the park. Lambert replied that notice would be published in the newspaper. Peterson suggested that notice be mailed to the same residents that were notified of tonight's hearing. Dave Kraemer, 9010 Mitchell Road, asked if there would be grading in the buffer zone area. Uban commented there would be a physical separation and the transition zone would be buffered with landscaping and/or berming. He said that grading would not occur in the area until sewer and roads were installed. Kraemer asked who would maintain this buffer zone. Uban replied that the buffer zone would be owned and maintained by the Multiple Development and the Association. City Council Minutes 8 August 16, 1988 Ron Rasmussen, 15436 Village Woods Drive, asked where the trails would exist and if there would be a walkway along the lake. Uban replied that the proposed trails would connect to existing trails and would connect with sidewalks to access the park. Rasmussen asked if the land was too steep for a walkway around the peninsula. Lambert replied that the area was steep and heavily wooded which make development of the trail difficult. Lambert further commented that the City would have to purchase the lakeshore, which would be very expensive. Eickholt stated that the strip of land designated for high density would be appropriate for park use because of its accessibility. Eickholt stated a concern about the high density. Peterson stated that the Council appreciated the concern; however, he believed that the Council and City Staff of Eden Prairie had shown a sincere concern to provide suitability of the proposed development to adjacent existing homes. Peterson further commented that the City did not have a history of placing large multiple units in single-family neighborhoods. Bentley asked about the concern raised by the proponent regarding the phasing of assessments for the roadways. Dietz replied that the recommendation was to construct the balance of Mitchell Road through the property. Travalia stated that he was not opposed to the location or the size of the road, but was concerned about the economics In regard to the timing of the road construction. Dietz replied that a feasibility study would be required because others would also benefit from the road construction. Dietz proposed a 20-year payback period with the first payment due in 1992. Pidcock asked if the park was the trade-off for trails not being constructed along the lake. Lambert replied that when the PUD proposal was approved it was decided to accept land in lieu of park fees. Lambert said that the City had decided it was important to have public access to Red Rock Lake. Pidcock asked why if the park was in lieu of cash park fees for the 1st phase, trails were not going on the peninsula. Lambert replied that the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission recommended to take the 4-acre park rather than a 50'-wide strip. Lambert explained that the City could take land or cash park fees and the City had taken the land. Pidcock stated that she believed it was the City's policy to have trails around all the lakes. Lambert replied that while it was a policy to obtain trails around lakes wherever feasible, there are a lot of lakes that do not have trails around them. Peterson commented that in some areas it was not feasible to have trails and that it was not the policy of the City to get trails around all the lakes in Eden City Council Minutes 9 August 16, 1988 Prairie. Lambert commented that the whole west shore of Red Rock Lake did not trails. Bentley asked Uban to explain what the green strips on the plan indicated. Uban replied that the green strips Indicated where variances would be necessary. Bentley asked if the land was platted down to the lakeshore and there would not be scenic easements or dedication along the lakeshore. Uban stated that this was correct. Bentley believed that the park should not be developed until the Surface Management Ordinance was in place. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to close the Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No. 88-172 for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to adopt Resolution No. 88-173 for PUD Concept Amendment. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 35-88-PUD-9-88 for PUD District and Rezoning. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to adopt Resolution No. 88-174 approving the Preliminary Plat and to direct Staff to prepare a Development and Special Assessments Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to authorize Staff to issue a Grading Permit prior to the 2nd Reading of the Rezoning Ordinance and that the developer understand that he would be proceeding at his own risk. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to authorize Staff to initiate the development of a Surface Management Ordinance in conjunction with interested residents and that the park not he developed for use until a Surface Management Ordinance was in place. City Council Minutes 10 August 16, 1988 Peterson asked if a separate motion would he made to deal with the recommendation from the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission relating to alcohol use in the park. Bentley suggested a separate motion to prohibit the use of alcohol in the park. Anderson asked if the trail system would be phased in with the lot Phase of the project. Lambert replied that the sidewalk would go in conjunction with the streets and the trail within the outlot to the north would he part of the 1st Phase. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to direct Staff to prepare a Code Amendment to prohibit alcoholic beverages in the designated park area. Motion carried unanimously. B. LAVONNEINDUSTRIAL PARK BUILDING IV by LaVonne Industrial Park Partnership TV. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Industrial on 4.53 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on approximately 33 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on approximately 33 acres with waivers, Zoning District Amendment within the 1-2 Zoning District on 4.53 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to I-2 on 0.14 acres, and from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1 acre, Preliminary Plat of 7.66 acres into one lot and one outlot for construction of 60,000 square feet of office-warehouse use. Location: South of Edenvale Boulevard. (Resolution #88-175, Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment; Resolution 888-176, Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment to Overall Eden Prairie Industrial Park Partnership Planned Unit Develop.ent Concept; Ordinance N36-88-PUD-10-88, PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution #88-177, Preliminary Plat) Jullie reported that notice of this Public Hearing was sent to owners of 43 surrounding properties and published in the August 3, 1988 issue of the Eden Prairie News. Jim Noreen presented the project for the proponent. Noreen stated that the project would consist of 60,000 square feet of office/warehouse space divided into two buildings of 30,000 square feet each. He stated that the southern portion of the project was heavily wooded. Noreen said that the proposed site would be developed as industrial with a small outlot that would be developed into a single-family residence. Noreen stated that the concern of Staff and the neighborhood was to protect the wooded area. He said to protect the wooded area a drainage and utility easement had been established to City Council Minutes 11 August 16, 1988 prevent any development of the natural wooded area and additional landscape screening would be provided along the woods, along the eastern edge of the property and around the single-family residence. Noreen stated that there would be a continuation of the existing fence along the eastern and southern borders of the property for security and screening purposes. Noreen requested a 25-foot front yard setback in lieu of a 50-foot setback to help maintain the wooded area and the easements. Enger reported that this item was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its July 25, 1988 meeting and recommended the Comprehensive Guide Plan change from low-density residential to industrial. He stated that the majority of the property was currently zoned industrial. Enger stated that a .14-acre area would be zoned from rural to R1-13.5. Enger said that the single-family residential site would be platted at a later date. The Planning Commission recommended approval on a 5-0 vote per Staff recommendations of July 22, 1988 report and the following: 1) One residential lot 2) a permanent 250-foot easement to the back of the property 3) a 75-easement along the east portion of the property 4) a buffer along the southwest portion of the property. Enger stated that Staff would investigate a cul-de-sac or private drive to provide access to Canterbury Lane. He stated that retaining walls were to be constructed to reduce tree loss. Enger said that all existing wells were to be removed and capped and all septic systems were to be removed. Lambert reported that the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources did not review this issue; however, the connection of a trail from Canterbury Lane to Edenvale Boulevard should be addressed between 1st & 2nd Reading. Pidcock asked Noreen when the house would be built. Noreen replied that this would be a future development. Pidcock then asked how the street would be made into a dead end. Enger replied that originally two lots were proposed at the end of Canterbury Lane, but now it was only one lot. He said that Staff was still contemplating if a cul-de-sac should be continued or if there should be a driveway to the single lot. He said that Staff also recognizes problems with having a private drive coming off a deadend street. Pidcock stated that something should be planned now to deal with the problem. Enger stated that the requirement of a cul-de-sac would correct the current situation. Pidcock was concerned that using the existing trees would not provide adequate screening. Noreen replied that the developer would be working this fall with the neighbors and with Staff to work out the best locations for additional trees and shrubs. e/6 ti a City Council Minutes 12 August 16, 1388 Harris asked Noreen to describe the fence. Noreen stated that the existing fence was a basket weave structure and proposed to continue this design. Anderson asked Enger if the City had any policy or ordinances in place at this time to protect residential neighborhoods from the noises of industrial area. Anderson commented that this was a unique situation in that a residential neighborhood was adjacent to an industrial area. Enger replied that the City did have a section in the City Code which lists performance standards that does not allow vibration, noise, glare, or odor to go beyond the site. Anderson asked if the City could make an agreement with the developer regarding the emission of noise. Anderson asked how having an industrial area next to a residential neighborhood would affect the value of the adjacent residential properties and what could the City do to protect the value of that property. Pauly replied that specific noise standards could be provided in the Code which would require a Code Amendment. Pidcock asked if the noise level standard could be handled as part of the development agreement. Pauly believed that the City could not create standards for each development and that the standards should be set in the Code. Bentley stated that the industrial designation was overstated and that the actual intent for this area would be a high tech office. Bentley believed that the City had a list of standards for a high tech zone and that the ceiling height restriction was part of the list, which would structurally limit industrial use. Enger replied that part of the list of standards for high tech office did include a 14-foot maximum ceiling height. Bentley asked Pauly if the high tech designation could be imposed or the developer could volunteer to agree to. Pauly replied that restrictions could be placed on the property; however, the law now states that such restrictions would terminate after 30 years. Pauly stated that after looking at the City Code he did find that specific provisions are established for decibel levels and there are hourly restrictions for construction noise. Pauly said that he was not certain where the decibel level range had been derived. Enger believed that the restrictions were modeled after a Bloomington ordinance. Peterson stated that the question before the Council now was whether or not the present Code stipulation sufficient to address the concerns of the Council regarding noise for this project. Pauly believed that to obtain answers it would require technical expertise from someone in the sound field. Pidcock suggested a two-week continuance until further information could he obtained regarding the sound issue. Noreen stated that the ceiling height of this project was maximum height of 13'-6" and this would preclude any large amount of heavy industrial machinery. He stated that the nature of the development was a front door type of office complex a371 City Council Minutes 13 August 16, 1988 structure. Noreen stated that there were not docks around the edge of the building. Noreen stated that the low ceiling height, the front door structure and the limited dock space would preclude any industrial use of the site. Jullie stated that in 1982 when the Ordinance relating to noise levels was developed, Councilmember Tangen had a lot of input into the Ordinance and Dr. Tangen was knowledgeable in the field. Jullie further commented that the City had not had any noise complaints of this nature. Peterson pointed out that this was a unique situation and that the Council needed to take adequate precautions and that after hearing the information presented tonight he believed that the residents would be sufficiently protected. Bentley asked Enger when this parcel had been rezoned to I-2 and was this done in conjunction with the POD. Enger replied that the rezoning had occurred possibly 25 years ago to I-2. This parcel was being review because it was not in compliance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan and approximately 5 years ago the proponent requested a site plan review within the I-2 District and as a result there was a requirement each site was to be reviewed on an individual basis, this being the last site. Dietz stated that the cul-de-sac issue did need to be resolved and recommended a terminus on that cul-de-sac. He said that the City did need a place to turn around for snow plows and emergency vehicles. Dietz stated that the construction of the cul-de-sac should be part of the Preliminary Plat. Peterson asked if the cul-de-sac would be constructed entirely on this property or would part of it he on the property to the south. Dietz replied that Staff recommended the cul-de-sac be constructed entirely on this property. Anderson stated that a trail system for pedestrians should be looked at. Peterson asked about the closing of the wells and the restrictions placed on capping these wells. Enger replied that whenever there had been any type of buildings on a site the Building Inspections Department recommends this as a requirement as a method to alert the developers and make them aware of the strict State restrictions and guidelines for capping the wells. Anderson asked if there was not more fill in this area than was originally proposed. Noreen stated that the grade was currently 907. Anderson said that the floor level was set at 911. Anderson asked if the floor level could be lowered to 908. Noreen stated that if the floor level was changed he could not match the ingress and 372 City Council Minutes 14 August 16, 1988 egress. Enger stated that this wao addressed in the August 11, 1988 memo. Jim Cnitecki, 14250 Stratford Road, stated the he and other neighbors had met with the developer and were generally in favor of the development. He said that the developer had been considerate of most of the neighbors concerns. Cnitecki stated favor of the permanent easements of 250 feet and 75 feet, the conversion from 2 residential lots to 1 lot, the variance for parking reduction, and the 25-foot setback. He stated that neighbors were =cod to the cul-de-sac and would prefer the private drive. He said that the neighbors appreciated the developer's cooperation in working for better screening of the area. Gnitecki stated that overall the neighborhood supports the proposal. Peterson commented that it was refreshing to hear positive feedback from a resident and also to hear that the developer worked conscientiously with the neighbors. Dr. Roger Sandvick, 14280 Stratford Road, stated that the developers were very cooperative. Sandvick asked Enger if the floor elevation was lowered to 910 what would the slope of the driveway be. Enger stated that the City did not like to be 10% above grade and preferred to have a flat spot before coming on to the road. Sandvick stated concern about the noise levels that possibly could be generated from the site. Sandvick said that dropping the extra foot would provide extra shielding. Enger said that unless the developer had an objection, dropping the extra foot would not create a problem. Noreen said the grade at the road edge was 913 and the building was at 911, there would only be 35 feet to accomplish a 2-foot drop. Bentley suggested that this issue be resolved between the developer and Staff and placed as a condition of 2nd Reading. Richard Mavison, 6613 Canterbury Lane, stated that he was not in favor of extending Canterbury Lane. Mavison said that if a house was built he believed that a cul-de-sac would be necessary and was opposed to a private drive. Mavison was concerned about the sewer connection to the house and suggested that it be connected from Edenvale rather than be brought up hill to connect from Canterbury Lane. Marshall Schwartz, 6530 Leesborough Avenue, asked for assurance that the fence would be a continuation of color and style of the existing fence, that the landscape screening would include raising the berm and would prefer the plantings to be evergreen to provide for winter screening, and that the screening take place at the start of the project. Peterson stated that he believed that all a3'73 City Council Minutes 15 August 16, 1988 of these issues had been explicitly addressed. Enger stated that a conclusion had not been determined to have the landscaping and screening to occur at the start of the project. Noreen stated that he had agreed to do the landscaping and screening at the front of the project with the neighbors. Phil Maller, 14202 Stratford Road, stated that he was concerned that the 250-foot buffer be retained and that the landscaping be provided as proposed. He said that he was pleased with the proposal. Harris asked Diet:: who was responsible for the inspection of the capping of the wells. Dietz replied that the Building Inspections Department was responsible. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to close the Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No. 88-175 for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to adopt Resolution No. 88-176 for PUD Concept Amendment. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to approve 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 36-88-PUD-10-88 for PUD District and Rezoning. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to adopt Resolution No. 88-177 approving the Preliminary Plat and to incorporate a cul-de-sac for the outlot to be a terminus to Canterbury Lane. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations and Council conditions as follows: 1) The fence be a continuation of existing fence. 2) Landscaping would occur at the beginning of the project. 3) Evergreen style vegetation would be liberally used in the screening process. 4) Trail system extension would be resolved prior to 2nd Reading. 5) Height of flour elevation be resolved prior to 2nd Reading with the elevation to leave adequate and legal egress for access to City Council Minutes 16 August 16, 1988 the building. 6) Specify the exact location of the berm. Motion carried unanimously. Anderson requested more detail on the Noise Ordinance. C. NORSEMAN_INDUSTRIAL F'I\RK_ 6Tla_._ADDITTDN by Eberhardt/Hoyt Development. Request for Zoning District Amendment within the 1-2 Zoning District on 4.5 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to I-2 on 4.3 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals. Preliminary Plat of 24.2 acres into one lot, 2 cutlots and road right-of-way for construction of a 90,600 square foot building addition. Location: South of W. 74th Street, east of Golden Triangle Drive. A public hearing (Ordinance #37- 88, Rezoning; Resolution #88-178, Preliminary Plat) Jullie reported that notice of the Public Hearing had been sent to 12 surrounding property owners and was published in the August 3, 1988 issue of the Eden Prairie News. Brad Hoyt presented that project. Hoyt said that two parcels would be combined. He stated that part of the existing buildings would be demolished. Hoyt said that two variances would be necessary. He said that this project would be a warehouse distribution center. Hoyt proposed a 14-foot-high berm be provided to screen the loading docks from Golden Triangle Drive. Enger reported that this item was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its July 25, 1988 meeting and recommended approval of the project with the variances on a 5-0 vote per Staff report of July 22, 1988. Enger stated that a 5' concrete sidewalk or an 8' bituminous trail to be constructed on the east and west side of Golden Triangle Drive should be added to the plans. He said that variances to allow a Base Area Ratio to exceed 30% and to allow a loading facility on a street frontage in the I-2 Park Zoning District should be applied for and received prior to Council review. Enger said that detailed storm water run-off, erosion control, and utility plans were to be provided prior to final plat approval. Bentley asked why the loading docks could not be on the north side of the building. Hoyt replied that the docks would face West 74th Street and that 1t was more efficient to have all the loading docks in one location. Hoyt said that the west end of the building was the practical location. Herleiv Helle, 6138 Arctic Way, Edina, stated that there was a duplication of the name of the development. Helle was concerned about the screening to hide the loading docks. Helle said that he did not believe that the screening to the north of the building was adequate. City Council Minutes 17 August 16, 1988 ( Helle suggested putting a privacy fence on top of the berm to provide immediate screening. Helle was also concerned about where the extra trailers would be parked. Peterson asked Enger if the vegetation on top of the berm was required for screening or if the berm itself would provide adequate screening. Enger replied that if large plantings are placed on top of a berm they usually die. He said that a 10-foot berm was on the west side of the building and was supplemented with 12--foot-high evergreens. Enger suggested discussing with Hoyt the possibility of reducing the size of the evergreens 2 to 3 feet and providing a 2-to-3 foot high fence on top of the berm to provide immediate screening. Anderson suggested that if sprinkling systems were put in the berms the vegetation would not die. He suggested that a sprinkler system be installed in the berm for this project. Peterson asked Anderson if he was suggesting that Staff and the Council review the requirement of sprinkling systems. Anderson suggested that the Council recommend it be part of the developers agreement. Hoyt stated that putting in a sprinkler system would not be a problem. Bentley said that he shared Anderson's concerns; however, he was also concerned about making a mandatory requirement for installation of sprinkler systems. Bentley did not believe that this was the type of requirement that the City had the right to impose and that water resources would become precious. Bentley said that even though the intent was to preserve screening that the Council would be sending out the wrong message. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to close the Public Hearing and approve 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 37-88 for Rezoning. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to adopt Resolution No. 88-178 approving the Preliminary Plat. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to direct Staff to prepare Development and Special Assessments Agreements incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations and Council concern to include voluntary installation of a sprinkling system. Bentley asked Enger what type of restrictions the City had for the parking of tractor trailers in general parking City Council Minutes 18 August 16, 1988 areas. Enger replied that the City Code did have a provision that prohibits the parking of greater than a 3/4-ton vehicle from parking in the general parking lot, but that this was difficult to enforce. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley to authorize Staff to give a recommendation on requirements for sprinkling on commercial and industrial properties within the city. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to direct Staff to provide information and suggestions for possible Code changes regarding the enforcement of truck and trailer parking in the general parking areas. Motion carried unanimously. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve Payment of Claims No. 44372 to No. 44640. Roll Call Vote: Anderson, Bentley, Harris, Pidcock, Peterson all voting "Aye". Motion carried unanimously. VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS A. 1st Read.ilgof Ordnance._No.__ 30-88,_Amendi.ng_City. Code Chapter 2 by Adding New Section 2.32 Relating to Authority to Issue Citations, and Adopting By Reference City Code Chapter _1, Except Sections 1.03, 1.06 and 1.09 MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Anderson to approve 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 39-88. Pidcock asked for justification for doing this. Pauly replied that changes in the State Law that require that persons other than peace officers must be given specific authority by the employer municipality to issue citations in lieu of arrests. Pidcock asked if situations could arise where employees' actions would extend beyond their authority. Pauly replied that the employees would be given training. Motion carried unanimously. VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS . a 7) City Council Minutes 19 August 16, 1988 VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS IX. APPOINTMENTS X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS,_ HOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members 1. Peterson's report on Hennepin County Recycling Task Force Meeting. Peterson reported that a subcommittee had submitted a list of recycling goals to recommend to Hennepin County Commissioners. He said that 16% source separation recycling and 4 % waste reduction abatement goals by 1990 be maintained. Peterson stated that the majority of the discussion related to residential recycling. He said that the committee recommended that cities deal only with residential recycling and not get involved with commercial recycling. Peterson stated that more information was needed regarding mechanical separation. He said that progress was being impeded because representatives for the Metropolitan Council had failed to attend the meetings. Peterson said that a motion was passed requesting the Metropolitan Councils attendance again. He reported that definitions were hard to nail down and there were a lot of major questions that needed to be answered. Peterson said that he would keep the Council updated. 2. Update on water situation. Harris asked Dietz to update the Council on the waterban situations and if the current ban could be lifted. Dietz replied that after the heavy rainfalls of the last two weeks the City was pumping approximately 4 million gallons a day but was currently pumping approximately 11 million gallons. Dietz recommended leaving the watering ban in place at this time. He stated that Eden Prairie had a mechanical restriction and that Minneapolis/St. Paul had a source restriction. Jullie concurred with Dietz that changes in the ban should not take place per comments received from residents. 3. Pidcock's report on the AMM Revenue Committee. Pidcock reported that Minneapolis would like to get together with Eden Prairie to discuss tax increment financing. Jullie stated that he and Mayor Peterson had been invited to meet with Mayor Fraser. B. Report of City Manager 1. Set Date for StrategicPlanning Meeting a3�� City Council Minutes 20 August 16, 1988 Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock to set Mid-year Strategic Planning meetirg for September 27, 1988 from 5 PM to 9 PM. Motion carried unanimously. 2. RepurtonPre_posal to Move the Prairie Village Mall Liquor Store (continued from July 19, 1988) Jullie reported that the owners of the Prairie Village Mall had asked to negotiate with the City on the following items: 1) substantial rent reduction 2) a condominimizing proposal similar to the one proposed by the other center 3) a free standing building on the site. Jullie recommended continuing this time for 30 days to obtain further information from the Prairie Village Mall on these items. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to continue this item for 30 days. Peterson asked Jullie about a community survey being done this fall and if a decision regarding the purchase of space and/or leasing would be necessary before the survey was done and it was determined if the City wished to continue in the liquor business. Jullie replied that the survey would not be done until next year. Jullie believed that the two items were separate issues and that the City would be in a better position if it owned space. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Report of Formation of Waste Management Commission (continued from August 9, 1988) Peterson wished to compliment Assistant City Manager Dawson on his work on this project. Peterson asked if the charge was built into the ordinance. Pauly replied no. Peterson suggested there be a modification to the first sentence of the Charge to the Commission to read as follows: The City of Eden Prairie wished to have a responsible and effective system to manage solid waste, including the capture of hazardous compounds, and recovery of recyclable materials, and minimize the amount of waste to be placed in the sanitary landfills. Peterson believed that hazardous compounds and the recovery of recyclables to be of major concern. Peterson suggested that the same wording be incorporated into the ordinance. He wished Subd. 2. A. to read: ..and other wastes, and review and make recommendations related to resource recovery (recyclables). a379 City Council Minutes 21 August 16, 1988 Peterson suggested that the Section 1. subd. 1. to read: .. .composed of seven (7) member, with a minimum of 5 Eden Prairie residents, is hereby Peterson believed that there should be an allowance for some non-residents to serve on this committee. Bentley said that this would not mean that there had to be non-residents, but left the option open. Harris believed that someone with expertise in this field would he beneficial. Pauly stated that the charge should go under duties. Bentley stated that the charge should be separate from the ordinance and was intended to give a direction to start. Peterson believed that the duties a,b,c,and d were a reordering of the charge. Pauly replied that the duties of the commission are set forth in the code itself. Bentley suggested increasing to areas of conservation and the potential energy conservation. Peterson suggested that at the beginning the Commission should focus on waste management for a year or two and then could broaden to areas of conservation. He said that in the beginning there would be a lot of work to do. Anderson asked if this would be an on-going committee. He said that the City had a Development Commission. Anderson asked if the City would not be better off having a standing committee for a certain period of time. Peterson believed that this would be an ongoing task and challenge for the City. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson to adopt Ordinance No. 34-88 as amended. Harris stated that originally she believed that this should be a task force to evaluate the issues placed upon it at designated times; however, now she believed that waste management would be the issue of the remainder of this century. Bentley stated that if people are appointed to a Commission they are more committed than if just a member of a committee which would have a beginning and an end. He said that a Commission was considered to be an official organization of the City. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION; Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to pass along the charge as amended to the Commission as a guideline for direction. Motion carried unanimously. c23GU City Council Minutes 22 August 16, 1988 4. BFI Invitation. Jullie reported that the Council had been invited to tour the BFI facility on Monday, August 22, 1988 at 3:30 PM and that this should be set up as a special meeting. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Peterson to schedule a Special Meeting of the City Council for Monday, August 22, 1988 at 3:30 PM to tour the BFI facility. There was a discussion regarding the open meeting laws. Motion carried unanimously. C. Report of City Attorney D. Report of Director of Planning E. Report of Director of Community Services 1. Review Bids for Staring Lake Park Improvements MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock to reject all bids. Motion carried unanimously. • Lambert commented that the Commission was disappointed and was concerned about this item being put on a referendum. Peterson agreed that this should not be put on a referendum. Lambert said that the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission would like to see this developed next year and that cash park fees should be available. He said that the Lioness Organization and Historical & Cultural Commission would like to have an indication if the Council supported this item. F. Report of Director of Public Works 1. Award Contract for the In tdllation of Four (4) Traffic Signal Systems on Prairie Center Drive (at Valley View Road; at Viking Drive; at West 78th Street; and at Preserve Boulevard) I_C_52-1 4 (Resolution No. 88- 168) MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to adopt Resolution No. 88-168 to award the contract for Project I.C. 52-134. Motion carried unanimously. a'37l City Council Minutes 23 August 16, 1988 2. Approve Pol_icy Regarding Water_Pressure .Booster Systems. for Single Family Homes Located in Isolated Areas of High Elevation and Experiencing Low Water Pressure Dietz reported that the proposal was for water pressure booster systems to be installed for structures located at elevations of 950 or above. He stated that the cost to the City would be $685 per unit and that the homeowners and/or developers would be responsible for the installation. Dietz believed this to be the least expensive way to resolve the problem. Peterson asked Dietz what different obligation the City would perceive in providing water at a certain elevation and sharing the costs instead of the increased cost that a developer might incur because of elevation which require special grading to get a house on top of a hill. Dietz replied that there was probably not any difference; however, at Bryant Lake the City did not know exactly what the pressures would be. Harris asked Dietz who would be responsible for maintenance. Dietz replied that Staff was proposing that the homeowner be responsible for maintenance. Peterson asked Dietz if there was any problem with maintaining pressure to the fire hydrants in this area. Dietz replied that after discussion with the Fire Marshal it was believed that pressure was satisfactory. Bentley commented that when property owners buy a home they should be able to expect the same level of City service as any other property owner in the City. Bentley was concerned that residents were being penalized because they built on a hill. Dietz replied that the City collected approximately $450 per lot for the trunk water system and would now be paying out $650. Dietz clarified that the City would pay for the entire unit and the homeowner would be responsible for installation. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Harris to approve Staff recommendation for Water Pressure Booster System Installation. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Approve Grading Permit.__for Lee Johnson Property a9 scent to Fr.anlo 8.cle4 South _of_Trairie Center Drive (P_I_D. 14-116-22-43-0010) for Disposal of Excess Material from Franlo Road Improvement Protect (I.C. 52-1321 MOTION: `) City Council Minutes 24 August 16, 1988 Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley to move Item X.F.3 forward in the agenda to he reviewed at this time. Motion carried unanimously. Dietz explained that Johnson owned the triangular piece of property adjacent to Franlo Road and as the plans for improvements to Franlo Road were reviewed it became apparent that several mature oaks would he lost. Dietz said that it could be possible to save the oak trees if changes were made in the grades, which would generate more fill material. He said that this plan seemed to fit with Johnson's plans to fill his property to allow future development of the property. Dietz stated that a great deal of the side slope would be disturbed as a result of the road construction and that Johnson's property would be a good location to dispose of the excess fill. Dietz said that this proposal could benefit both Johnson and the City as well as the other property owners along Franlo Road as it would reduce the overall costs of the project. He stated that a City engineering technician had presented the proposal to the adjacent property owners. Dietz said that only willow and ash trees would be affected as a result of the new plan and that none of the trees affected would be part of the tree replacement policy. Lee Johnson stated that he had been asked for a slope easement for the Franlo Road project. Johnson believed the slope and the oak trees would be the buffer for his property and wished to save the oak trees. Johnson had met with the City Consulting Engineer and Johnson believed that it would be better not to fill in the area around the oaks. He said that by filling in the other area of the property the side slopes would not be disturb, making restoration costs lower. Peterson asked for clarification on what was being proposed. Dietz replied that Johnson had presented to the Council what was requested of him for the temporary slope easement. Dietz said that the grading permit request was for a guard rail system to be installed around the curve, to steepen the slopes, and to dispose of the fill in the triangular portion of the property. Dietz stated that some trees would still be lost; however, these trees would be the ash, willow and boxelder. Bentley asked for clarification on why this matter was being reviewed. Dietz replied that Staff felt uncomfortable with making this as a Staff change and so it was being presented tonight as a grading permit. Joanne Syverson, 11912 Joy Circle, stated concerns about the approximate 20 trees that would be lost and the potential for the Johnson property to become a weed patch without trees after the fill was brought in, which would completely alter the appearance of the land. She believed that the City was only looking at this as being an inexpensive way for the City • C City Council Minutes 25 August 16, 1988 to dispose of the extra fill and to benefit Johnson without regard to the change in appearance. Syverson did not believe that they were given sufficient notice of the proposed charges. She said that the changes were first presented to them on Friday night. Syverson asked if consideration had been given to possible drainage problems. She said that they currently had water problems and were concerned about the change in grade and how this would affect their lot. Syverson also wanted to know where the floodplain would end up and whether it was actually feasible to develop Johnson's property. She questioned if this natural area should be destroyed for a plan that might never be. Syverson stated concern about what might be dumped in this area besides dirt. She said that after the big flood large chunks of concrete were dumped into another lot in the neighborhood. Syverson asked that this item be postponed until answers to her questions could be obtained. Bentley asked Dietz if a decision had to be made tonight in order to continue the construction of Franlo Road. Dietz replied yes. Ray Hovland, 11924 Joy Circle, stated concern about this being a safe solution. He said that there was currently a drainage problem and questioned the possibility of erosion problems. He said that his home was in the low spot and was concerned about the affect the grading would have on his property. Hovland stated concern about the weeds that would replace the natural marsh land. He was concerned about the area looking decent and if the Johnson property was developable. Hovland concurred with Syverson about the chunks of concrete dumped into the other lot in the neighborhood and did not wish to see the Johnson property become a landfill. Peterson asked Dietz if Staff had answers to any of the concerns. Dietz replied that the drainage situation would be improved. He said that storm sewer and curb and gutter would be installed along Franlo Road. Dietz said that the Watershed District was currently reviewing Lake Eden. He said that the drainage would run westerly and did not anticipate drainage problems due to the grading. Dietz said that erosion could be a problem and that erosion control fencing would be installed. He said that erosion would he a problem no matter which plan was followed. Dietz did not believe that whether the land was developable or not was relevant to this issue. He said that the City would be responsible for the restoration of the property and that prairie grass could be planted. Dietz said that the comments were true about the concrete in the fill; however, he was not aware of any complaints. Dietz said that because the project was under way it would be desirable to make a decision tonight. Harris asked Dietz to explain more about the possibility of erosion. Dietz replied the new plan would fill in Johnson's City Council Minutes 26 August 16, 1988 property approximately 7 feet and would create a flat plain where there was a valley before. Dietz stated that the area up to the berm would be filled in to the elevation of the berm. Johnson said that the berm was not on his property; therefore there would be an area between the berm and his property that would not be filled creating a route for the drainage between the properties. Harris said that in essence a gully would be created. Harris asked where the drainage would go. Dietz replied the drainage would flow west toward Eden Lake the same direction that it currently flows. Hovland stated concern about the drainage and the gully being created, because the gully would be at the back of his property. Dietz said that the fill would go from 0 to 7 feet close to the property line. He said that the berm would be higher than the fill. Dietz stated that there would be an opportunity to provide for screening when Johnson would come before the Planning Commission with definite plans for the development of the property. Anderson asked Dietz if the potential was present to push the drainage onto the adjacent properties. He commented that the natural drainage was being altered. Dietz replied that he did not believe this would push the drainage onto another property. He said that the drainage channel was being moved to follow along a property line and that the City had drainage and utility easements to allow for this. Harris asked Dietz if the proposal did pass if the City would restore the area with prairie grass. Dietz stated that he believed this to be a commitment the City should make. Harris asked Dietz what was going to be done to cover up the concrete in the other lot. Dietz replied that the City did not have any further plans for that lot at this time. Bentley believed that the real issues were: 1) could the City preserve the oak trees 2) could the plan be accomplished with less disruption of the area. He commented that Johnson's plan would allow for these items to take place. He believed that the grading permit should be issued. Peterson believed that the Council had been assured that the adjacent properties would not be adversely affected and he would support a motion. Dietz stated that the majority of the trees in the area would be lost, but the City would try to move some of the smaller willow trees. Dietz stated that all of the trees could not be saved, but possibly six could be saved. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to issue the grading permit with the stipulation that the area be restored with ES City Council Minutes 27 August 16, 1988 prairie grass and that the City save the trees where possible. i Motion carried unanimously. G. RePort o.f Finance _Di_rect�r., XI . NEW BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adiourned at 12:,00 AM. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST October 18, 1988 CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) GAS FITTER M. G. Astleford Company, Inc. Pfiffner Heating & Air Conditioning Bisliglia Construction Co. Wm. F. Ridler Plumbing & Heating Kelley Peters Construction Reiling Construction, Inc. S & B Partners HEATING & VENTILATING O'Brien Sheet Metal CONTRACTORS (1 & 2 Family) Pfiffner Heating & Air Conditioning DeVaan Development Corp. John Klingelhutz Co. PEDDLAR Merchants Maintenance J. Uzzell Builders The Ranger Flying Association (Christmas Trees at the Eden Prairie Center parking lot) PLUMBING Wm. F. Ridler Plumbing & Heating Robillard Plumbing & Maintenance Spartan Mechanical, Inc. These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. (:)1•4 ‘L-{-L—Q Pat Solie Licensing CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 88-208 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF BIRCHWOOD LABS WHEREAS, the plat of BIRCHWOOD LABS 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 BIRCHWOOD LABS is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated OCTOBER 7, 1988. 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 OCTOBER 18, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk • :2 32 2 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager Alan D. Gray, City Engineer FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician • DATE: October 7, 1988 SUBJECT: BIRCHWOOD LABS PROPOSAL: The Developers, Birchwood Laboratories, Inc., have requested City Council approval of the Final Plat,of Birchwood Labs, an 1-2 Industrial Park located south of Highway #5, east of County Road 4 in the North 1/2 of Section 17. The plat contains 16.5 acres to be divided into four (4) lots. The Prairie Green Mini-Storage is contained on Lot 1, Lot 3 is occupied by Birchwood Labs, and Lots 2 and 4 are unoccupied and will be retained by the Developers for future development. HISTORY: The Preliminary Plat was approved by the City Council February 3, 1987, per Resolution 87-28. Zoning to I-2 Industrial Park was approved in 1969. The Developer's agreement referred to within this report is scheduled to be executed at the April 19, 1987 City Council meeting. VARIANCES: A variance from the requirements of City Code 12.20, Subd. 2.A, waving the six-month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat will be necessary. UTILITIES AND STREETS: Existing municipal utilities are available to serve this plat. Individual engineering review of sites will be required prior to issuance of building permits or replatting. PARK DEDICATION: The requirements for park dedication are covered in the Developer's Agreement. BONDING: Bonding will conform to City Code and the Developer's Agreement. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the Final Plat of Birchwood Labs subject to the requirements of this report and the Developer's Agreement. JJ:ssa cc: Birchwood Labs HTPO j Starring Lake 2nd Addition DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1988, by Scenic Heights Investment, a Minnesota general partnership, 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 Preliminary Plat of 8.3 into 13 single family lots within the R1-22 District, 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 Resolution #88-67, 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 September 29, 1988, reviewed and approved by the City Council on May 17, 1988, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. Developer shall not develop, construct upon, or maintain the property in any other respect or manner than provided herein. 2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 3. Prior to release by the City of the final plat for the property, Developer agrees to execute a Special Assessment Agreement for watermain improvements to County Road #1. Developer acknowledges that the property will benefit from said improvements. 4. Prior to release by the City of the final plat for the property, Developer agrees to submit to the Director of Planning, and to obtain the Director's approval of, revised plans for the property which provide 10 ft. setbacks from the drainfield for the sanitary sewer/septic system from all lot lines on the property for Lot 2, as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. • )L Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer agrees to construct, or cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above, as approved by the Director of Planning, in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 5. Prior to release of the final plat for the property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's approval of plans for streets, sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, and erosion control for the property. Said plans shall include detailed information regarding the forced pump for storm sewer on the property. Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall construct, or cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said plans, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit C, attached hereto. 6. Developer agrees to notify the City and the Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance of any grading, or tree removal, on the property. 7. Developer has submitted to the City, and obtained the City's approval of a tree replacement plan for 73 caliper inches of trees on the property, in accordance with the Tree Preservation Policy of the City, attached hereto as Exhibit D, and made a part hereof. Prior to release of the final plat by the City, Developer shall submit to the Director of Planning, and obtain the Director's approval of surety for the replacement of said 73 caliper inches of trees in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit D, attached hereto. Upon approval by the Director of Planning of said surety, Developer agrees to implement, or cause to be implemented, said tree replacement plan, in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit D, attached hereto. 8. Developer agrees to implement erosion control measures and adequate protective measures for areas to be preserved and areas where grading is not to occur, and to receive City approval of said measures. Developer agrees that said protective measures shall include, but not be limited to: A. Grading shall be confined to that area of the property within the construction limits. B. Snow fencing shall be placed at the construction limits within the wooded areas of the property prior to any grading upon the property. C. City shall perform an on-site inspection of said protective measures on the property by the City. Developer shall contact City for said inspection. Developer agrees that defects in materials and workmanship in the implementation of said measures shall then be determined by the City. D. Defects in materials or workmanship, if any, shall be corrected by Developer. Developer agrees to call City for reinspection of the implementation measures, and to receive approval by the City prior to issuance of the grading permit by the City. Approval of materials and workmanship may be subject to such conditions as the City may impose at the time of acceptance. 9. Prior to issuance of any grading permit, Developer shall submit to the Director of Planning and receive the Director's approval of a tree inventory of those trees within 25 ft. outside of the construction area, which are not planned to be removed by construction on the property as approved by City, indicating the size, type, and location of all trees twelve (12) inches in diameter, or greater, at a level 4.5 feet above ground level. If any such trees are removed, damaged, or destroyed outside of the construction area, Developer agrees that prior to issuance of any building permit for the property, Developer shall: A. Submit to the Director of Planning, and receive the Director's approval of a reforestation plan for all trees removed, damaged, or destroyed outside of the construction area. Said plan shall indicate that the trees shall be replaced by similar tree species and that the trees used for reforestation shall be no less than six inches in diameter. The amount of trees to be replaced shall be determined by the Director of Planning, using a square inch per square inch basis, according to the area of the circle created by a cross sectional cut through the diameter of a tree as measured 4.5 feet above the ground. B. Prepare and submit to the Director of Planning, and receive the Director's approval of a written estimate of the costs of the reforestation work to be completed. C. Submit a bond, or letter of credit, guaranteeing completion of all reforestation work as approved by the Director of Planning. Developer agrees that the amount of the bond, or letter of credit, shall be 150% of the approved estimated cost of implementation of all reforestation work and shall be in such form and contain such other provisions and terms as may be required by the Director of Planning. Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer shall implement, or cause to be implemented, those improvements listed above in said plans, as approved by the Director of Planning. 10. Developer agrees to obtain an access permit to County State Aid Highway #1 (County Road #1) for road and driveway access for the property from Hennepin County Department of Transportation. Upon approval by Hennepin County Department of Transportation of said permit, Developer agrees to provide proof of said permit to the City prior to release of any building permit on the property. f): 11. Developer acknowledges that no direct access to County Road #1 shall be allowed for Lot 13, as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. Developer further agrees that, prior to issuance of any building permit for Lots 12 or 13, as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto, Developer agrees to submit to the City an executed easement agreement which provides for the following: A. A 20 ft. wide driveway easement for access from Lot 13, across Lot 12 to the public road on the property, all as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. B. The term of said access easement shall be permanent, until, and unless, improvements are made to County Road #1 which would provide for safe sight vision distance for access to County Road #1 for said Lot 13, and a direct access permit is approved for said Lot 13 by the Hennepin County Department of Transportation. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA { RESOLUTION NO. 88-220 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF STARRING LAKE 2ND ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of STARRING LAKE 2ND ADDITION has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder, and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. Plat approval request for STARRING LAKE 2ND ADDITION is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated October 7, 1988. 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 October 18, 1988. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk • 7. ".t �3LL CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager Alan D. Gray, City Engineer FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician \ DATE: October 7, 1988 SUBJECT: Starring Lake 2nd Addition PROPOSAL: Red Rock Heights Partnership is requesting City Council approval of the final plat of Starring Lake 2nd Addition. The plat is located north of Pioneer Trail between East Sunrise Circle and West Starring Lane in the south half of Section 21. The plat contains 8.26 acres to be divided into 13 single family lots, one outlot and right-of-way dedication for street purposes. Outlot A contains 0.46 acres. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on May 3, 1988 per Resolution No. 88-67. This property was zoned R1-22 per Ordinance No. 135 in 1969. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report is scheduled for execution October 18, 1988. VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: Since City sanitary sewer is not immediately available to serve this project, individual septic systems would be utilized. Currently there is an improvement contract that has been ordered by the City Council that will bring City watermain along Pioneer Trail past this project, thus making City watermain available to serve this site. Prior to release of the final plat the Developer shall enter into a Special Assessment Agreement with the City outlining the Developer's portion of construction cost for this watermain project. All municipal utilities, streets and walkways will be installed by the Developer in conformance with City Standards and the Developer's Agreement. PARK DEDICATION: Park Dedication will conform to the requirements of City Code and the Developer's Agreement. ,2B95 • Page 2 BONDING: Bonding for municipal utilities and streets must be provided prior to release of the final plat and conform to City Code and the Developer's Agreement requirements. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Starring Lake 2nd Addition subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement and the following: 1. Receipt of street fee in the amount of $174.OD. 2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $1,620.00. 3. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $520.00. 5. Satisfaction of bonding requirements. 6. Surety for replacement of 12B caliper inches of trees based on the tree preservation policy. JJ:ssa cc: Red Rock Heights Partnership Ron Krueger & Associates CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 88-235 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF LAVONNE INDUSTRIAL PARK SECOND ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of LAVONNE INDUSTRIAL PARK SECOND 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 LAVONNE INDUSTRIAL PARK SECOND ADDITION is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated OCTOBER 11, 1988. 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. ADDPTED by the City Council on OCTOBER 18, 1988. Gary D. Peterson, I4ayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager Alan D. Gray, City Engineer FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician DATE: October 11, 1988 \J SUBJECT: LAVONNE INDUSTRIAL PARK SECOND ADDITION PROPOSAL: The Developer's, LaVonne Industrial Park Partnership, have requested City Council approval of the final plat of LaVonne Industrial Park Second Addition. Located south of Edenvale Boulevard and east of the Chicago and Northwestern Railway, the plat contains 7.66 acres to be divided into one (1) lot and one (1) outlot. Outlot A contains 1.0 acres and will be retained by the developers for future development. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council August 16, 1988 per Resolution 8B-177. Second reading of Ordinance 36-B8-PUD-10-B8 was finally read and approved at the City Council meeting held September 20, 1988. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed September 20, 1988. VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: Municipal utilities are currently in place within Edenvale Boulevard and are available for extension into this project. All utilities within this site will be privately owned and maintained. As described in the Developer's Agreement, the developer shall provide the City with a written scenic easement over the easterly 75 feet and the southerly 250 feet of the plat and make the corresponding revision on the graphic portion of the plat. In addition, the developer shall provide the City with a 20-foot wide trail easement as described in Item 5 of the Developer's Agreement. Prior to release of the final plat the developer shall petition the City for vacation of the drainage and utility easements on the underlying portion of this property. '�"C C Page 2 LaVonne Industrial Park Second Addition The developers have indicated that they are the owners of a 25-foot wide spur along the Chicago and Northerwestern Railway on westerly portion of the plat. This spur should be included as a part of the plat. PARK DEDICATION: Park dedication shall conform to the requirements of the City Code and Developer's Agreement. BONDING: Bonding shall conform to City Code and the Developer's Agreement requirements. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of LaVonne Industrial Park Second Addition subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement and the following: I. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $216.00. 2. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $766.00. 3. Satisfaction of bonding requirements. 4. Revision of plat to include 20-foot wide trail easement as per Item 5 of the Developer's Agreement. 5. Receipt of scenic easement documents and corresponding revision to the plat as per Item 3 of the Developer's Agreement. 6. Receipt of petition requesting vacation of underlying drainage and ( utility easements. 7. Revision of plat to include additional property owned by the developer along the Chicago and Northwestern Railway. JJ:ssa cc: LaVonne Industrial Park Partnerships Coffin and Gronberg a3�9 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 88-236 EXTINGUISHMENT OF ACCESS TO T.H. 5 PARK, ROUND LAKE ESTATES WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has prepared plans for the improvement of T.H. 5 adjacent to that parcel of property described as Park, Round Lake Estates; WHEREAS, the safety of the public is best served by terminating access from that parcel of property described as Park, Round Lake Estates to T.H. 5; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie that Extinguishment of Access for Park, Round Lake Estates to T.H. 5 is hereby approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the "Extinguishment of Access" agreement on behalf of the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on October 18, 1988. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk aye CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 88-237 EXTINGUISHMENT OF ACCESS TO T.H. 5 OUTLOT C, GONYEA 4TH ADDITION WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has prepared plans for the improvement of T.H. 5 adjacent to Outlot C, Gonyea 4th Addition; WHEREAS, the safety of the public is best served by terminating access from Outlot C, Gonyea 4th Addition for T.H. 5; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie that Extinguishment of Access for Outlot C, Gonyea 4th Addition to T.H. 5 is hereby approved. 8E IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the "Extinguishment of Access" agreement on behalf of the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on October 18, 1988. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk (2(101 t MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Sandra F. Werts, Recreation Supervisor DATE: October 12, 1988 SUBJECT: Resolution 88-238 Metropolitan Council Arts Grant Agreement Recently, the City received notification of the award of a $1,000 grant from the Metropolitan Council/Regional ARTS Council. This past May staff submitted an application seeking a grant to help bring the Minneapolis Chamber Orchestra to Eden Prairie for the grand opening of the Staring Lake Amphitheater in 19B9. Although the amphitheater project has been delayed a year, the deadline for completing the proposed grant project can be extended to 1990. In order to receive the check for the amount granted, Council must adopt the attached resolution to authorize execution of the agreement. SFW:mdd 152(ICU RESOLUTION NO. 88-238 RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FOR ARTS GRANT WHEREAS, The City of Eden Prairie (name of organization) desires to seek a grant from the Metropolitan Council for state funding to carry out bringing the Minneapolis Chamber Symphony to Eden Prairie for the arand opening of the Staring Lake Amphitheater in 1990 (brief description of project) t and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council requires that all grantees authorize and specify by resolution of their governing body the individual to apply for and execute the grant agreement on behalf of the organization. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: THAT, Carl Jullie • city Mana.@n (name of individual) (title) is authorized to apply for and execute on behalf of the City of Fden Prairie (name of a grant agreement with the organization) Metropolitan Council for musical entertainment fnr the grand opening (brief description of program) of the Amphitheater at Starina lake Park • Adopted this 18th day of October , 19 88 Secretary Chairperson or President of City Council CERTIFICATION: Deb Edlund Secretary of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie (name of organization) certify that on October 18, 1988 at a meeting of the (date) governing body of City of Eden Prairip (name of organization) the attached resolution was adopted in accordance with the bylaws of the organization by a vote of in favor and opposed. DR0448 Secretary • METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre - 230 East Fifth Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 612-291-6303 REQUEST FOR PAYMENT OF GRANT-IN-AID Metro Account Number: 4728114 Amount of Grant: $1,000.00 Application Number: MD-05-4-P Date Contract Sent: Please fill ir. the information below and return this form and two contracts, signed by an authorizing official, to Kate Houston at the Metropolitan Council. Verification that the person signing the form and contracts is legally authorized to bind your organization must be included. +If a fiscal agent is being used, checks must be made out to the fiscal agent; therefore, name and address of the fiscal agent must be indicated below. Make check payable to: Name City of Eden Prairie (name of organization) Address 7600 FxPrutive frivp City Fden Prairip_ Minnpcnta State Minnesota Zip Code 55344 Authorizing Official's Signature Date DR0447 DJDE C ; DJDE END; agog - MEMORANDUM - TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Eugene A. Dietz, P.E. Director of Public Works DATE: October 12, 1988 RE: SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH LAYNE-WESTERN 52-072B Well Drilling Contract Attached is a proposed agreement between the City of Eden Prairie and Layne- Western Company regarding settlement of the cost associated with late completion of the well drilling portion of the water system expansion project. Briefly, Layne-Western executed a contract with the City to provide the augered wells for the City to construct well houses upon by approximately July, 1987. The City had an additional contract with Barbarossa and Sons to complete the well houses by Spring, 1988. Because of Layne-Western's inability to complete the wells on time, we were forced to pay Barbarossa and Sons additional fees to construct the well houses in winter conditions so that they would be ready in a timely manner. The contract with Layne-Western provided a liquidated damages clause of $450.OD per day, which amounts to approximately $55,000.00 of the amount both parties have agreed to as settlement of the outstanding issues. Additionally, the City incurred approximately $31,O00.00 of other costs as a result of their contract, which brings the total amount to $85,975.00 that Layne-Western agrees to pay the City for damages as a result of their construction work on the four (4) wells. Although the City incurred additional costs 'beyond the amount of this settlement, our attorneys have reviewed the issues and find that this is a reasonable amount that we could expect to collect if we were to pursue the matter through the court system. I concur with that finding. I therefore recommend that the City Council approve the agreement by simple motion and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the settlement agreement. EAD:ssa aUCE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT is made by and between Layne-Western Company, Inc., 1900 Shawnee Mission Parkway. Mission Woods. Kansas 66205 (hereafter referred to as "Layne") and the City of Eden Prairie. Minnesota. 8950 Eden Prairie Road. Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 (hereafter referred to as "the city"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, on or about February 17, 1987, Layne and the City entered into a contract (City Project No. 52-072B, Contract No. 2 - Water Supply Improvements, Section I, Water Well Construc- tion) under which Layne was to construct a certain number of water wells (hereafter referred to as "the Contract"); WHEREAS, Layne and the City are currently involved in a dispute wherein the City alleges (among other things) that Layne failed to construct the wells in a timely manner and that Layne's actions caused the City to incur additional costs; and wherein Layne alleges (among other things) that it is entitled to additional compensation for extra work caused by unforeseen circumstances and delays caused by others; WHEREAS, Layne and the City each deny the allegations made by the other; WHEREAS, the City is currently withholding payment of One Hundred Eighty-nine Thousand, Fourteen Dollars and Thirty-three Cents ($189,014.33), which Layne claims it is due under the terms of the Contract; and the City has refused to pay Layne these funds due to the disputes described above; - 1 - aur� =. WHEREAS, Layne and the City both desire to compromise and resolve these disputes in a manner which avoids time-consuming and expensive litigation; NOW THEREFORE. based on the mutual covenants and legal consideration expressed herein, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1. Layne agrees that the City may retain Eighty-five Thousand, Nine Hundred Seventy-five Dollars ($85,975.00) of the amount currently being withheld. 2. The City agrees to accept the consideration set forth in paragraph i, above, as full and final settlement of all claims it has against Layne arising out of: (1) liquidated damages on account of the City's allegation that Layne failed to perform the Contract in a timely manner; (2) additional overtime costs of Black & Veatch in the amount of Eight Thousand Four Hundred One Dollars and Seven Cents ($8,401.07); (3) costs associated with the relocation of Well No. 7 in the amount of Twenty-Three Thousand One Hundred Sixty-Nine Dollars and Sev- enty-Six Cents ($23,169.76); (4) all damages the City alleges it suffered as a result of damage to the softball field adjacent to the wells; and (5) all additional costs which the City alleges it incurred as a result of Layne's late completion of the Con- tract. 3. The City agrees to pay to Layne within ten (10) days after the complete execution of this Settlement Agreement, the sum of One Hundred Three Thousand, Thirty-Nine Dollars and - 2 - Thirty-three Cents ($103,039.33). 4. Layne agrees to accept the payment described in para- graph 3 above, as full and final settlement of all claims it may have against the City arising out of Layne's performance under the Contract. 5. Layne and the City agree that upon the complete execu- tion of this Settlement Agreement and the receipt of the payment called for in paragraph 3 above, both Layne and the City mutu- ally release, covenant not to sue, and discharge the other (and their respective officers, directors, employees, agents and representatives) as to all claims against the other which are waived by the making and acceptance of final payment under paragraph 14.11 of the General Conditions of the Contract. Each ( party represents to the other that it knows of no facts which would give rise to a claim against the other. It is hereby agreed by the parties that Layne's work was substantially com- plete on January i, 1988. 6. The City agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Layne, its officers, directors and employees from and against any claims or actions asserted against Layne by Barbarossa & Sons, Inc., STS Consultants, Ltd., and Black & Veatch, and which relate directly or indirectly to the disputes compromised and settled herein. 7. By entering into this Settlement Agreement, neither Layne nor the City admit any liability, breach of contract or wrongdoing whatsoever. - 3 - 8. This Settlement Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their predecessors, successors, assigns, trustees or any other related or affiliated entities as well as their respective officers, directors and employees. 9. This Settlement Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. However, all such counterparts shall constitute one and the same instrument. 10. The undersigned hereby warrant and represent that each has the actual authority to bind the entity they represent, as indicated below. 11. The parties to this Settlement Agreement have read it, have had legal counsel review its terms, understand it and have voluntarily executed it. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Layne and the City have caused this Settlement Agreement to be executed on the dates indicated below. LAY -WESTERN COMPA Y, INC. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA By: By: Tit] :�� �� Title: Date: /0(-3(P By: Title: Date: - 4 - STAFF REPORT f k TO: Planning Commission FROM: Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: September 23, 1988 PROJECT: Cardinal Creek 3rd Addition LOCATION: Lots 1, 6, 7, 8, Block 2, Cardinal Creek 3rd Addition APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: Gustafson and Associates Company REQUEST: Zoning District Change from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 on 1.67 acres with front yard setback variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals. Bac kground In 1982, Gustafson and Associates .. .^. V,, • applied for platting and zoning on ', . this piece of property for 17 duplex /, _� • •'` ', ^'':r ,,s r lots and 1 triplex lot to be known - `,,,1�` R f2�. `'4``' i as Cardinal Creek 3rd Addition. The \ , �; i> ?'•` preliminary plat and zoning district �'° > ' ' change were approved ' ` ' 9 by Resolution P UB . , / , �.� \\ : f-1., e 82-100 and Ordinance 82-11. Two of r ,\ -F' Cl the lots in the subdivision were illv • unbuildable due to their �- , �'\� aP ,'q.'`'. proximity �` `\� _� ti to Nine Mile Creek and the r,:- ,. • ;•• requirement for a 150-foot setback 4 " \ PROPOSED SITE from the Normal Ordinary High Water Mark of the creek. Because of this, .Gustafson and Associates applied for jp-• � / ``• ! ,';� a rezoning of Lot 1, Block 1, and ��L ,,,„ Lot 17, Block 2, to R1-13.5 in 1983 " ,� '`' '��p,y , (see Attachment A). The zoning . ,,v` r-- . s: ;�\ 7zt-iLi district change was approved from ' .// ^ ��11 ' RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 by Ordinance 29- \11 •• —i 4 =\ r:: "J .. � , \;,� 83. The reason for the approval was lJ .1 1:�3 3 �� ` ` ' �\..\ that these lots were somewhat I) ,• ,,,, . '„s separate from the interior portion TT; r \,, • \-- .�'<•• - ' of the project and that they are I �\ �'' "�' • _.cn"- . located on the main road frontage '�_-_.�.��ti. � I , .r... ;;; which extends through the Cardinal j Creek 1st and 2nd Additions. Also, J)i!.•/Z' I) ",?„�' '" I I_ the single family land use proposed Y�/,' «S 1 were consistent with the uses �"-. ' occuring on the adjacent properties. , C Lu — "- . 1`,, • AREA LOCATION MAP 2(JlO Cardinal Creek 3rd Addition 2 September 23, 1988 The proponent is currently requesting the rezoning of Lot 1, Block 2, which is on Cardinal Creek Road and Lots 6, 7, and 8, which is within the interior portion of the project from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 to allow for the construction of 4 single lots. Analysis 1. Guide Plan Designation This property is currently guided Low Density Residential which would allow both zoning classifications subject to the density requirements of 21 units per acre. The proposal, as submitted, meets the density requirement. 2. Zoning Classification - R1-13.5 vs. RM-6.5 Chapter 11 states that the purpose of the R1 zoning district is to "reserve appropriately located areas for single family living at reasonable population densities." The purpose of the RM zoning district is to "reserve appropriately located areas for family living in a variety of dwellings." The current proposal would create an R1-13.5 "island" within an RM-6.5 zoning district. Historically, with an inclusive zoning ordinance, single family homes would be allowed in multiple family zoning districts. However, because of the perception of incompatible land uses, exclusive zoning ordinances were developed. Eden Prairie's zoning ordinance is exclusive which does not allow uses from one zoning district in another zoning district. Thus, single family homes are not allowed in the RM zoning district. 3. Current Housing Market The developer is requesting the zoning district change because of his ability to sell single family homes at this time in a strong single family home market. While market conditions should be taken into consideration, land use statistics compiled by City Staff, has indicated that there are 120 vacant lots for single family development in Sector 6 which includes Cardinal Creek. Overall, there are 1,194 vacant single family lots within the City of Eden Prairie as of April, 1988. Based on these figures, approved single family lots are available for development at this time in this general location. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Alternative #1 If the Planning Commission feels that the rezoning of Lot 1, Block 2, to R1-13.5 is acceptable based upon the compatibility of adjacent land uses, the consistency of the zoning districts, and the background of the overall project but that the rezoning of Lots 6-8, Block 2, is not acceptable for the exact opposite reasons, the appropriate action would be to approve the Zoning District Change for Lot 1, Block 2, only. Alternative #2 The Planning Commission could conclude that the developer is requesting something that may not be perfectly compatible but that single family homes do not pose an �LJII Cardinal Creek 3rd Addition 3 September 23, 1988 adverse impact upon surrounding duplexes, and therefore could be allowed. The risk of single family buyers complaining later about imcompatibility of single family homes being designed for single occupancy but later being converted to duplexes may to minimal or of little consequence if it does occur. Staff recommends Alternative Al subject to the following conditions: 1. Construction of home on Lot 1, Block 2, shall be consistent with all portions of the City Code. 2. Pay the Cash Park Fee. aura. • . 4• , I ey a µ 3". ' u I •o, (20) °$ 56.•,..:.s?. (451n ' • (21)4". .T 3 (22) ,. 1/3 'tt 11. ' (46) • 10 su9. 1 1• �, (23) a • 65•I;...• let. Z oun9T A `t • \ (52) -4 (2o4)03 Sr. (u4e7g.6 T) .� •\ (25) ' ' (48) - r (17) M3Bs .-(a, ' mu.11 14539 OIILOTe .17 t• 8. _Qe1.•il_' o (26) (49) (5.3) i'4_-4, 196.13 ''3'u e 4.35.44 .F a '�' (27)1422 1, 1469.21.064E -i 44'---163:4 (6 , Isi.s3 a 194.37 (50) J „tv. ..:,..4 9 167,49 • 9 .i. 1406.06,E .aa �.•' �28 23 (22)--t,�. 1 'e ,3 r 'ore - (Si) '4'6'•:, e•,' •. - N67.23.OTr 3 2 3 Q g44 .O.a ,a 4 ye,44.:. i ®,�j (2I)�`; I(3) (4) 4 ofJ(tl I) 1 do'. - (9) • (4) �.A a•1 (5) (8) •ss.w� a ae Q;; d4 .s' #a;4.j, , 4134,E • R' .' 2 (12) io.., '- -- : Ae - ' C-- t8 -- 4, . (13)-'4 K g (50 4,co F s 7 1 ' 4 C..- 1 I.1 1 8i 4.T� °'1,a'oy .?:,100.93 • .9 its (2t3 (4)_ .•� °t , ...(51)4(5 •2 ''- .,4. 4. 15`� T RD c'?:y' e E R '1 / IT IIo.�S (iii 'o 23 A.J'�J(5)'y ''e 63 Y. 1O6 9.5 `� (46) 56).31T' •4 • 5 l''_ 3 ti Sy6 • �l a.24 (3) °tie 'esm 159) '!01 . (33) • A8 rn g`6s, 1 7 P` t. wj 4.3/1,8g13 n (25) m (6)V 26oz° o S( '2 "Y (41). C (35) ' ?, :to t0"'(24) O (7)21' ,t1 s 160.62 i 6,4". :4.46 r fit', 0p"(57) -" (36) 1 10.45••6 a� 1os2 �s ' Ito(9) (271 5: (64)1f " iPp 4 7r r�, H 17:. Wt.(22) t 9 tl; 1i' 1 4q••:14;i•\ 2at. (49) ,,� '� y . (10) - ?e (° M54);'Io- 9(60) • j' 16 . « Co 14. \�� :(53)': (b. (21) 'b $,�, 8 '>„ r(61) ao Q«, '' • •EP IS `• 'y(11) •I .'•34.96 (20) ..,g Qr g 't 13 isle `':'2 • . Z i • �(I9) (12) 4y 'r' � o1nLOT c 0.2 - r 4 `,: (47) 13 J '! (28) 4f a`, a `.' (17) 1 ATTACHMENT A .� 4 eo4rs6c Iep1 °. \l'a 01- (4N.06.3)•..... . • 9 .• EXISTING CONDITIONS •. 294.31 351 1469. .334E 2 1469.55.314E 265.71 294.31 •, l 2/ (y-�' CARDINAL CREEK lEe 49'13.275 AM 100.03:J • «/ -. 1 J Eden Prairie Planning Commi,sion Meeting Minutes September 26,1988 Page 4 • C. CARDINAL CREEK 3RD ADDITION,by Gustafson&Associates Company. Request for Zoning District Change from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 on 1.67 acres with front yard setback variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals,for construction of four single family lots. Location: 6801-05, 6855-59,6871-75, and 6887-91,Stonewood Court. A public meeting. Ron Krueger,representative for the proponent,spoke about the rezoning request from duplex to single family lots. He did not have a copy of the preliminary plan,but the proponent was planning to • attend this meeting and bring the preliminary plat. Don Uram reported that the request for rezoning from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 was unusual in that the properties were not contiguous. Although there are merits for rezoning from multiple to single family, this action of rezoning may have an adverse effect on the surrounding duplex properties. The people in the duplex,at this time,do not have a problem with single family homes in the neighborhood. He concluded to the Commission that the Staff was recommending Alternative#1 whereby rezoning be approved for Lot 1,Block 2 only. In view of the fact that the proponent himself is not present for questions and comments,it was noted that he could appeal to the City Council if he was unhappy with the Commissions decision. Richard Anderson arrived 8:05 pm Uram stated that other similar requests have been denied in the past. In regards to site grading, either land use would preserve the same site characteristics. Schuck summarized that with the proposed change,single family homes and twin homes would be side by side. The Commission normally approves the two when they are back to back,visually breaking the two. Anderson reminded those present that approving multiple and single family homes together would be precedent setting and create many problems in the years to come for the Commission. MOTION 1: Motion was made by Dodge and seconded by Schuck to recommend approval of the request of Gustafson and Associates for rezoning of 6801--05 Stonewood Court from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 within the Cardinal Creek 3rd Addition,based on the findings in the Staff Report dated September 23, 1988. Motion carried 5-0-0. Eden Prairie Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 26, 1958 Page 5 MOTION 2: Motion was made by Dodge and seconded by Schuck to recommend to the City Council denial of the request of Gustafson and Associates for rezoning of 6855-59,6871-75 and 6887-91 from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 within the Cardinal Creek 3rd Addition,based on the findings in the Staff Report dated September 23,1988. Motion carried 5-0-0. • • aat� VAC 88-08 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 88-215 • VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS OVER PARTS OF LDTS 1 AND 2, BLDCK 1 FOREST KNOLLS WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has certain drainage and utility easements described as follows: That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Forest Knolls, lying East of a line parallel to and five feet West of the Easterly boundary thereof, as measured perpendicular to said Easterly boundary; That part of Lot 2, Block 1, Forest Knolls, lying West of a line parallel to and five feet East of the Westerly boundry thereof, as measured perpendicular to said Westerly boundry; All located in Township 116, Range 22 West,,Hennepin County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 18, 1988, after due notice was published and posted as required by law; WHEREAS, it has been determined that the said drainage and utility easements are not necessary and have no interest to the public, therefore, should be vacated. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: 1. Said 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 October 18, 1988. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL A John D. Frane, Clerk aurl VAC 88-09 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 88-216 VACATION OF A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS OVER PARTS OF LOTS 6 AND 7, BLOCK 1 COACHMANS LANDING FIFTH ADOITION WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has certain drainage and utility easements described as follows: A 20.00 foot wide easement for drainage and utility purposes over, under and across Lot 6, Block 1, Coachmans Landing Fifth Addition, according to the record plat thereof, drawn from a point on the west line of said Lot 6 distant 95.00 feet south of the northwest corner thereof to a point on the northeasterly line of said Lot 6 distant 15.50 feet southeasterly of the northeast corner thereof; and A 20.00 foot wide easement for drainage and utility purposes over, under and across Lot 7, Block 1, Coachmans Landing Fifth Addition, according to the record plat thereof, drawn from a point on the westerly line of said Lot 7 distant 15.50 feet southeasterly of the northwest corner thereof to a point on the eastline of said Lot 7 distant 40.00 feet southwesterly of the northeast corner thereof. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 18, 1988, after due notice was published and posted as required by law; WHEREAS, it has been determined that the said drainage and utility easements are not necessary and have no interest to the public, therefore, should be vacated. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: 1. Said 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 Dctober 18, 1988. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk OCTOBER 19.1988 46046 EDEN APPLE ORCHARD SPECIAL TRIP-KIDS KORNER/FEES PAID 18.00 46047 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-UTILITY BILLING 359.25 '&048 PETTY CASH CHANGE FUND-OPEN GYM PROGRAMS 30.00 049 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA -CONFERENCE-ASSESSING DEPT/ADMINISTRATION/ 110.00 PARKS RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCES DEPT 46050 A SOLID GOLD SOUND SERVICE 245.00 46051 RICHY ATHERTON REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 34.25 46052 BIRTCHER WELSH COMPANIES OCTOBER 88 RENT-CITY HALL 17596.76 46053 CINDI GRELSON REFUND-ADULT GOLF LESSONS 30.00 46054 RICK HESTER REFUND-RACQUETBALL LEAGUE 5.00 46055 JASON NORTHCO PROP OCTOBER 88 RENT-LIQUOR STORE 5885.67 46056 DA'VID MADSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 14.00 46057 JILL MAJESTIC REFUND-CENTER CARE 6.00 46059 MINNEGASCO SERVICE 50.74 46059 PAMELA NELSON REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 40.00 46060 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY SERVICE 19633.88 46061 NSP SERVICE 19633.88 46062 PRAVIN PANDYA REFUND-ADULT GOLF LESSONS 30.00 46063 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 7.28 46064 JOHN ROONEY REFUND-ADULT GOLF LESSONS 30.00 46065 IMOGENE SORVICK REFUND-SENIOR FITNESS PROGRAM 10.00 46066 LEE WENZEL REFUND-ADULT GOLF LESSONS 30.00 46067 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 138.73 46068 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 233.18 46069 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIDUOR J974.99 46070 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESALE LIQUOR WINE 8159.49 46071 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO WINE 4520.57 46072 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 374.19 173 DUALITY WINE CO LIQUOR 5004.96 )74 DALE SCHMIDT EXPENSES-STREET DEPT 6.50 46075 VIKING LABORATORIES INC CHEMICALS-COMMUNITY CENTER 27.00 46076 JOAN CLARK REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 24.00 46077 G E CAPITAL FLEET REFUND-STARING LAKE BUILDING RENTAL 53.00 46078 STEVE HAVERSTOCK REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 38.00 46079 RACHEL KYLLO REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS P0.00 46080 DENNIS MCKAY REFUND-FOR KIDS ONLY 14.00 46081 MINNEGASCO SERVICE 2462.23 46082 PAT PIERSON REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS Y0.00 46083 LINDA SOLHEID REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 17.00 46084 SUPPLIES 7 HI ENTER INC OCTOBER 88 RENT-LIQUOR STORE 4577.49 46085 JIM TORNOE REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 20.00 46086 TTTC CONFERENCE-STREET DEPT 60.00 46087 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CONFERENCE-STREET DEPT 130.00 46088 EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE DEPT DRIVER TRAINING/EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 586.00 46089 RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS OF MN -MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT/CASH REGISTER TAPE- 1166.47 LIQUOR STORE 46090 CITY OF MINNETONKA MUNICIPALS/FEES PAID 166.50 46091 U S POSTMASTER POSTAGE-ELECTIONS 27.25 46092 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 9/27/88 & 9/29/88 142.71 46093 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK PAYROLL 9/27/88 & 9/29/88 4477.12 46094 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSOC FOOTBALL REGISTRATION-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS 77.00 46095 AT&T SERVICE 2.56 46096 AT&T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV SERVICE 16.50 "S097 GERALD FAGERHAUG REFUND-FITNESS EXERCISE CLASS 5.00 98 MEREDITH ULSTAD REFUND-DEFENSIVE DRIVING CLASS 7.00 9271865 OCTOBER 18.1988 46099 PHYLLIS ULSTAD REFUND-DEFENSIVE DRIVING CLASS 7.00 46100 ST PAUL BOOK & STATIONERY CO OFFICE SUPPLIES-PARK & RECREATION PROGRAMS 144.59 a6101 SUBURBAN UTILITIES SUPERINTENDENT SCHOOL-WATER DEPT 80.00 l 102 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CONFERENCE-ASSESSING DEPT 30.00 46103 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 576.51 46104 DEBRA BJERKE REFUND-SKATING CLASS 34.00 46105 MN DEPT OF P/S MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION 23.75 46106 CITY-COUNTY CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 9/30/88 1226.00 46107 CLEARSDFT WATER CORD WITHHOLDING FROM EMPLDYEE PER COURT ORDER 122.06 46108 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 9/30/88 9918.76 46109 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK PAYROLL 9/30/88 50099.52 46110 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 9/30/88 3971.00 46111 GUARANTEE MUTUAL LIFE COMPANY OCTOBER 88 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM 2331.43 46112 ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION PAYROLL 9/30/88 1204.24 46113 MUTUAL BENEFIT LIFE OCTOBER 88 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM 2263.02 46114 NORWEST BANK HOPKINS PAYROLL 9/16/88 & 9/30/88 900.00 46115 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 9/27/88 & 9/29/88 2203.79 46116 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 9/30/88 24468.90 46117 PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN OCTOBER 88 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 19885.44 46118 UNITED WAY PAYROLL 9/30/88 211.50 46119 PETTY CASH CHANGE FUND-COMMUNITY BAND CONCERT 30.00 46120 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CONFERENCE-ENGINEERING DEPT 75.00 46121 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-HALLOWEEN PARTY BROCHURE 311.60 46122 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 1961.84 46123 UNITED WAY OF MPLS EMPLOYEE DONATIONS 341.00 46124 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 1714.58 46125 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR 10676.15 46126 PAUSTIS & SONS CO WINE 107.88 127 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR 4123.27 128 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 1105.77 46129 QUALITY WINE CO LIQUOR 3105.49 46130 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESALE LIQUOR LIQUOR 6144.53 46131 AARP DEFENSIVE DRIVING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 154.00 46132 BARBAROSSA AND SONS INC SERVICE-WATER TREATMENT PLANT ADDITION 16168.00 46133 BROWN & CRIS INC SERVICE-BENNETT PLACE & BLOSSOM ROAD 13798.09 46134 BROWN & CRIS INC SERVICE-SUNNYBROOK ROADiNEMEC KNOLLS 7523.67 46135 LAYNE WESTERN CO INC SERVICE-WATER TREATMENT PLANT ADDITION 103039.33 46136 NODLAND CONSTRUCTION CO SERVICE-WYNDHAM KNOLL 26989.67 46137 J P NOREX INC SERVICE-RIVERVIEW ROAD & RIVERVIEW DRIVE 33945.00 4618 NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO -SERVICE-MITCHELL/RESEARCH ROAD & WEST 154456.08 76TH STREET 46139 NORTHOALE CONSTRUCTION CO SERVICE-FRANLD ROAD 78690.41 46140 NORTHOALE CONSTRUCTION CO INC -SERVICE-UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS IN LEGION 81622.10 PARK 46141 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER -SOD CUTTER RENTAL/PRESSURE WASHER RENTAL- 104.94 STREET MAINTENANCE/PARK MAINTENANCE 46142 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL 637.82 46143 ADT SECURITY SYSTEMS -OCTOBER 88-SEPTEMBER 89 SECURITY SYSTEM 538.00 MAINTENANCE-PUBLIC WORKS BLDG/WATER DEPT 46144 AMERI-STAR LIGHTING LIGHT BULBS-PARK MAINTENANCE 80.56 46145 AMERICAN LINEN SUPPLY CO -AIR FRESHENER SERVICE-CITY HALL/UNIFORMS- 1364.85 -WATER DEPT/STREET DEPT/SEWER DEPT/PARK MAINTENANCE/COMMUNITY CENTER 4A146 AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK SERVICE 443.00 47 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOC BOOKS-WATER DEPT 315.35 66926749 Af(36) OCTOBER 1E1.1988 46148 EARL F ANDERSEN N ASSOC INC SIGNS-STREET DEPT 2878.76 46149 SCOTT ANDERSON HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 136.00 46I50 AQUA ENGINEERING INC 7 SPRINKLER HEADS-STARING LAKE PARK 1365.00 151 ARMOR SECURITY INC DOOR REPAIR-POLICE BUILDING 218.70 46152 ASSOCIATED ASPHALT INC BLACKTOP-STREET MAINTENANCE 527.7, 46153 AUDIO INTELLIGENCE DEVICES -NIGHT OBSERVATION KIT WITH RELAY LENS- 6438.95 -$4883.00/PAGER-WI555.95-POLICE FORFEITURE- DRUGS 46154 AYR INC CEMENT-STREET MAINTENANCE 115.25 46155 H I C PRODUCTS LIGHT BULBS-WATER DEPT 269.64 46156 B R W INC -SERVICE-TRAFFIC SIGNALS IN MAJOR CENTER 4635.02 -AREA/DELL RDiEVENER WAY FEASIBILITY/ -VALLEY VIEW RD-MITCHELL TO COUNTY RD 4/ TRAFFIC STUDIES 46157 BACONS ELECTRIC CO -REPAIR SERVICE WIRES AT WELL 03-WATER 691.73 DEPT 46158 GWEN BARKER PRINTING/SUPPLIES-SUNBONNET DAY 22.26 46159 DARTON-ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES INC -SERVICE-EDEN PRAIRIE COMPREHENSIVE PARK 9728.04 & RECREATION PLAN 46160 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC -ALTERNATOR/STARTER/TERMOSTAT/FUSES/SPARK. 389.13 -PLUGS/WINDSHIELD WASHER FLUID/BATTERIES- EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 46161 BERGIN AUTO BODY PAINT & REPAIR VEHICLE-EQUIPMENT MAINT 483.00 46162 RIFFS INC WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE 682.08 46163 CITY OF BLOOMINGTCN JULY & AUGUST 88 ANIMAL IMPOUND SERVICE 1027.50 46164 LOIS BOETTCHER -MINUTES-PARKS RECREATION & NATURAL 44.17 RESOURCES COMMISSION 46165 BRAUN ENG TESTING INC SERVICE-HOMEWARD HILLS ROAD 143.10 166 NATHAN BUCK -SOFTBALL/FOOTBALL/VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/ 312.00 FEES PAID 46167 BUSINESS CREDIT LEASING INC NOVEMBER 88 COPIER RENTAL-FIRE DEPT 182.75 46168 CENTRAIRE INC BUILDING EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE-CITY HALL 406.00 46169 CENTURION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS INC -SQUAD CAR SETUP-POLICE DEPT/SUPPLY & 230.23 -INSTALL CONCEALED ANTENNA-POLICE FORFEITURE-DRUGS 46170 CHANHASSEN LAWN & SPORTS -SPRING/OIL/CLUTCH/BEARING/SHAFT/RINGS- 82.06 FORESTRY DEPT/PARK MAINTENANCE 46171 CHAPIN PUBLISHING COMPANY LEGAL ADS-COMMUNITY CENTER 244.80 46172 CLIMATE MAKERS INC POOL UNIT REPAIR-COMMUNITY CENTER 347.25 46173 CLUTCH & TRANSMISSION SER INC -BRAKE DRUM/BRAKE SHOE/WHEEL CYLINDERS- 453.32 EOUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 46174 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE SEPTEMBER 88 FUEL TAX 208.00 46175 CONE DRIVE TEXTRON DILSEAL-WATER DEPT 45.3B 46176 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC SIDEWALK FORMS/STAKES-STREET MAINTENANCE 1214.45 46177 CONTACT MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS INC RADIO REPAIR-POLICE DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINT 350.00 46178 CONTECH CONST PRODUCTS INC CULVERT BANDS-DRAINAGE CONTROL 619.40 46179 COPY EQUIPMENT INC -OFFICE SUPPLIES/EQUIPMENT REPAIR- 339.82 ENGINEERING DEPT 46180 CONSTRUCTION FABRICS INC EROSION CONTROL MAT/STAPLES-HIDDEN GLEN PK 415.75 46181 CLIFF CRACAUER JR EXPENSES-STREET DEPT 5.25 46182 CROW/CHASEWOOD -ESCROW MONEY RETURNED FDR COMPLETION DF 18990.00 PHASE ONE TREE REPLACEMENT 46183 CROWN/AUTO INC SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 3.70 46184 CROWN MARKING INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-FINANCE DEPT 19.30 85 CURTIS INDUSTRIES INC -CLEANING SUPPLIES/DRILL BIT/KEY RINGS/ 183.61 KEY BLANKS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 5744913 46186 CUTLER-MAGNER COMPANY QUICKLIME-WATER DEPT 46187 D & K INC PRINTING-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION 5197.47 46188 WARD F DAHLBERG 97.47 SEPTEMBER B8 EXPENSES-LIQUOR STORES 80.00 46189 DALCO -CLEANING SUPPLIES-POLICE BLDG/PUBLIC 83.18 WORKS BLDG ( 190 MARY DAVIS REFUND-ADULT PROGRAMS 9.50 +6191 MONICA M DAY -SERVICE-EMPLOYEE NEWSLETTER/HISTORICAL 509.25 & CULTURAL COMMISSION 46192 DECORATIVE OESIGNS OCTOBER 88 SERVICE 46197 GARY DEMEE995 REFUND-UTILITY BILLING 95..95 46194 DIAMOND ACCEPTANCE -NDVEMBER 88 COPIER INSTALLMENT PAYMENT- 300.00 POLICE DEPT 46195 EUGENE DIETZ SEPTEMBER 8B EXPENSES-ENGINEERING DEPT 200.00 46196 DIXIE PETRO CHEM INC CHLORINE-WATER DEPT 2952.00 46197 BOB DOHERTY PAINT-SUNBONNET DAY 11.62 46198 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 31.70 46199 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU EXPENSES-COMMUNITY CENTER 376.49 46200 DUNLOP SLAZENGER CORPORATION TENNIS RACKETS-YOUTH TENNIS 214.50 46201 DYNA SYSTEMS -BDLTS/WASHERS/SCREWS/FLASHLIGHTS/DRILL 536.47 BITS-WATER DEPT 46202 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE EVENT FEE-EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 275.00 46203 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC -JACKET/CALIBRATOR KIT-SEWER DEPT 66.05 46204 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC CULVERT-DRAINAGE CONTROL 180.00 46205 JEFF ESS HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 136.00 46206 RON ESS HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 85.00 46207 FACILITY SYSTEMS INC SERVICE-FINANCE DEPT 155.00 4620B FPS CAPITAL MARKETS GROUP SERVICE 367.98 46209 FEED RITE CONTROLS INC CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT 5871.00 46210 FEIST BLANCHARD CO -TIE RODS/FUEL PUMP/SMOG PUMP/BELTS/DIL 1515.68 ( -SEALS/BEARINGS/VOLT REGULATOR/CAPS/PCV -VALVES/CARBURETORS/BUSHINGS/POWER -STEERING UNIT/GASKETS/PLUGS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 4621! FENDER VENDER 3 CAR SEATS-POLICE FORFEITURE-DRUGS 1647.00 46212 FINLEY BROS ENTERPRISES BACKSTOP REPAIR-PARK MAINTENANCE 64.50 46213 FIRST TRUST CENTER BOND PAYMENT 30379.38 46214 PETER FITCH HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 49.09 46215 FLOYD SECURITY -4TH OUARTER 88 SECURITY SYSTEM-LIQUOR 2101.00 -STORE/INSTALLATIDN OF ALARM SYSTEM- CUMMINS GRILL HOMESTEAD 46216 FDUR STAR BAR & RESTAURANT SUPPLY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 226.65 46217 DARRELL GEDNEY HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 34.00 46218 GOPHER OIL COMPANY HYDRAULIC OIL-WATER DEPT 236.40 46219 ALAN D GRAY SEPTEMBER 88 EXPENSES-ENGINEEPING DEPi 200.00 46220 GROSS OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 9.19 46221 GREATER MPLS BOARD OF REALiORS DUES-ASSESSING DEPT 65.00 46222 LEROY GUBA HOCKEY OFFICIAL/TEES PAID 85.00 46223 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO INC -LIGHT BULBS-COMMUNITY CENTER/INSTALL 212.78 -OUTLET-CUMMINS GRILL HOUSE/REPAIR SECURITY LIiE-PARK MAINTENANCE 46224 HACH CO LAB SUPPLIES-WATER OEPT 144.18 46225 JEAN HALL PAINTS-SUNBONNET DAY 15.85 46226 HANSEN iHORP FELLINEN OLSON INC -SERVICE-BLUFFS EAST 4TH ADDITION/HAMILTON 36667.67 -RD/SW E P DEVELOPMENT PHASING STUDY/BLUFF ( 46741 RD/COUNTY ROAD 4 WATERMAIN 46227 HARDRIVES INC LIMESTONE-STREET MAINTENANCE 176.50 46228 HARMON GLASS CLEAR GLASS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 69.98 46229 BRUCE HAVERLY REFUND-UTILITY BILLING L4.00 46230 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER AUGUST 88 BOARD OF PRISONERS 2443.25 I 271 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER FILING FEE-PLANNING DEPT 744.00 ;6232 HENNEFIN COUNTY TREASURER -2ND & 3R0 QUARTER 88 TRAFFIC SIGNAL 370.17 -MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT/ACETYLENE-PARK MAINTENANCE 46273 HENNEPIN PARKS NATURE TRIP-DAY CAMP/FEES PAID 89.00 44334 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL INSTITUTEE SCHOOL-Fifth UEF1 360.00 46235 0 C HEY CO INC MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-FIRE DEPT 70.00 46236 HOFFERS INC PAINT/FAINT THINNER-PARK MAINTENANCE 307.90 46237 DAWN MARIE HOLCOMB TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 13.25 46239 HOFw'INS FIRE DEPT -HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SUITS & GLOVES-FIRE 248.10 DEFT 46239 IBM CORPORATION NOVEMBER S8 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 424.32 ' 46240 IBM CORPORATION OCTOBER 88 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY HALL 566.56 46241 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL D1ST 5272 EXPENSES-ELECTIONS 500.80 46242 INDUSTRIAL LIGHTING SUPPLY INC LIGHT BULBS-WATER DEPT 169.78 46243 INTL OFFICE SYSTEMS INC TONER-POLICE DEPT 48.00 46244 INSTRUMENTATION SERVICES INC EQUIPMENT REPAIR-POLICE DEPT 22.97 46245 INTERSTATE DIESEL PRODUCTS INC -LOADER ENGINE REPAIR/FILTERS/GASKETS- 451.70 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 46246 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC -OFFICE SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/CORKBOARD/ 5728.94 -OFFICE SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/CORKBOARD/ -OFFICE SUPPLIES/DESK/BOOKCASES/CHAIRS/ CONFERENCE TABLE-FIRE DEPT 46247 JUSTUS LUMBER CO -LUMBER-STREET DEPT/PARK MAINT/FORESTRY 64.71 DEFT 748 KLEVE HEATING & AIR CONDITIONING AIR CONDITIONING REPAIR-PARK MAINTENANCE 218.90 _'49 MARY KOTTKE BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 74.25 46250 LANDSCAPE & TURF GRASS SEED-PARK MAINTENANCE/EDENVALE PARK 1590.00 46251 CINDY LANENBERG MILEAGE-FIRE DEPT 74.50 46252 LEROY SIGNS INC SIGNS-FIRE STATIONS N3 & M4 5043.97 46253 LORNA LISELL MILEAGE/EXPENSES-ASSESSING DEPT 21.10 46254 LOGIS AUGUST 88 SERVICE 6216.26 46255 LONDON'S SALES -6 SOFASi4 CHAIRS/4 TABLES/2 LAMPS-FIRE 8417.70 DEPT 46256 "ONG LAKE FORD TRACTOR INC -BRAKE PADS/BLADE/PIN/TRACTOR RENTAL-WATER 1107.02 DEPT/PARK MAINTENANCE 46257 LYMAN LUMBER CO MASDNITE-STREET MAINTENANCE 48.96 46258 DAN MAVISON ICE CREAM-SUNBONNET DAY 7.58 46259 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 11.30 46260 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT/CITY HALL 81.79 46261 MEDICAL OXYGEN & EQUIP CD OXYGEN-FIRE DEPT 146.65 46262 MERIT/JULIAN GRAPHICS PRINTING-BUILDING DEPT 178.98 46263 MERLINS HARDWARE HANK HAMMER-PARK MAINTENANCE 14.99 46264 METRO PRINTING INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 521.00 46265 KAREN MICHAEL MILEAGE/EXPENSES-HUMAN RESOURCES 78.35 46266 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP BLACKTOP/SEALCOATING-STREET MAINTENANCE 14009.20 46267 MIDWEST UNDERGROUND INSPECTIONS -SERVICE-CLEANING OF STORM SEWER-ANDERSON 4000.00 LK PARKWAY & PRESERVE BLVD 46268 MIDWESTERN MECHANICAL CORP -INSTALL DUCTS & REGISTERS-WATER TREATMENT 1150.00 PLANT 86603 46269 MINNESOTA COMMUNICATIONS CORP -OCTOBER 88 PAGER SERVICE-SEWER DEPT/WATER 128.50 DEPT/FIRE DEPT 46270 MN CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY -30 LENSES-0627.00/FIRE EXTINQUISHERS-FIRE 719.00 DEPT R271 MINNESOTA SUBURBAN PUBLICATIONS EMPLOYMENT ADS-COMMUNITY CENTER 199.L8 272 MINNESOTA SUBURBAN NEWSPAPERS 1NC -EMPIOYMFNT ADS-COMMUNITY CENTER/ 345.68 ADVERTISING-LIOUOR STORES 46273 MINNESOTA TITLE REFUND-OVERPAYMENT ON TAX FORFEIT PAYOFF 1204.71 46274 MINNESOTA TITLE REFUND-OVERPAYMENT ON TAX FORFEIT PAYOFF I952.93 46275 M V GAS COMPANY GAS-OUTDDOR CENTER-STARING LAKE PARK 87.75 46276 MINUTEMAN PRESS FRINTINu-UUILVIH6 DEPT/FIRE DEPT 228.65 46277 MOTOROLA INC BASE STATION RADIO EQUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT 6791.00 46278 MOTOROLA 1NC RADIO REPAIR-FIRE DEPT 561.04 46279 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO BLADE-PARK MAINTENANCE 1I2.50 46280 WM MUELLER & SONS INC GRAVEL-PARK MAINTENANCE 242.70 46261 MY CHEESE SHOP EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 11.99 46282 NATIONAL CHEMSEARCH CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 220.34 46283 NATIONWIDE ADVERTISING SERV INC EMPLOYMENT ADS-HUMAN RESOURCES 123.76 46284 NORWEST BANK MPLS NA BOND PAYMENT 595382.89 46285 CURTIS R OBERLANDER EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 49.75 46286 OFFICE PRODUCTS OF MN INC TYPEWRITER REPAIR-FINANCE DEPT 32.95 46287 PAPER WAREHOUSE -PLASTIC FORKS/SPOONS/CUPS/TICKET ROLLS/ 163.75 PAPER PLATES/POSTER BOARD-SUNBONNET DAY 46288 PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CENTER FITNESS TESTS-FIRE DEPT 1179.50 46289 PERSONNEL DECISIONS INC SERVICE-COMPARABLE WORTH STUDY 731.84 46290 THE PINK COMPANIES CHAIR-HUMAN RESOURCES L39.J0 46291 PITNEY BOWES TONER/OIL-COMMUNITY CENTER 981.01 46292 POMMER COMPANY INC AWARD PLAOUES-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS 100.00 ' 46293 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC -FIXTURE REPAIR/RELOCATE HAIR DRYERiREPAIR 119.65 POOL CLEANING PUMP-COMMUNITY CENTER T94 PRAIRIE HARDWARE STEEL RULES/SUPPLIES-CITY PICNIC/CITY HALL 41.00 295 PRAIRIE HARDWARE -CABLE/CLAMP/PAINT BRUSHES/SPRAY PAINT/ 164.59 -PLIERS/GASKETS/SPRINGS/MASKING TAPE/ -GRINDER/FLOOR WAX/FAN/LOCK/ROPE-COMMUNITY CENTER 46296 PRAIRIE HARDWARE -WASHERS/GLUE/SAW BLADES SHARPENED/MALLOT/ 93.48 -HOOK/HOSES/HOSE ADAPTOR/CAR CLEANER/ PAINT/SIGNS-PARK: MAINTENANCE/FORESTRY DEPT 46297 PRAIRIE HARDWARE PAINT BRUSH/PVC CAP-SEWER DEPT 12.58 46298 PRAIRIE HARDWARE -BUG SPRAYER/HOOKS/PAINT BRUSHES/DUCT TAPE/ 179.8I • PAINT/HANDLES/STRAPS/BOLT-STREET DEPT 46299 PRAIRIE HARDWARE -CLEANING SUPPLIES/BATTERIES/PUMP/NAILS/ 297.14 -POSTHOLE DIGGER/COPPER TUBING/FITTINGS/ -DOOR LOCK/HOOKS/PLIERS/WRENCH/MALLOT/ PUTTY KNIFE-WATER DEPT 46300 PRAIRIE LAWN & GARDEN ICE CUTTER REPAIR-COMMUNITY CENTER 17.55 46301 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING PRINTING-ASSESSING DEPT 175.45 46302 PRELLWITZ APPRAISALS INC SERVICE-LAND APPRAISAL 350.00 46303 PRIOR LAKE AGGREGATE INC SAND-SNOW & ICE CONTROL 6.65 46304 PSO BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS INC TELEPHONE INSTALLATION-CITY HALL 230.85 46305 PUMP & METER SERVICE INC NOZZLE/OIL METER-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 2I8.30 46306 OUINLAN PUBLISHING CO INC SUBSCRIPTION-PLANNING DEPT 66.81 46307 RED OWL SUPPLIES-POOL LESSONS 60.48 46306 RIEKE-CARROLL-MULLER ASSOC INC -SERVICE-EXTENSION OF GOLDEN TRIANGLE 19518.96 -DRIVE/MITCHELL & RESEARCH RD IMPROVEMENTS/ 344652 • I;1.1 WYNDHAM CREST 46309 RIVIERA FINANCIAL SERVICES -WRENCHES/SPRING TENSION PIN-EQUIPMENT 164.12 MAINTENANCE 46310 ROAD MACHINERY & SUPPLIES CO ROLLER-STREET MAINTENANCE 130.00 311 ROAD RESCUE INC BATTERY INTERLOCK-FIRE DEPT 146.89 712 ROGERS CABLESYSTEMS CABLE REPAIR-STREET MAINTENANCE 70.88 46313 ROGER'S SERVICE ALTERNATORS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 296.75 46314 RUSSELL SMITH ASSOCIATES INC SERVICE-RILE.Y LAKE LAWCQN PROJECT 150.00 46315 SAFETY KLEEN CORP TOWELS-PARK MAINTENANCE/EQUIPMENT MAINT 168.00 46316 ST PAUL BOOK & STATIONERY CO -OFFICE SUPPLIES-CDMMUNITY CENTER( 45.12 ASSESSING DEPT 46317 SANCO INC WOOD DUSTER/BROOM-PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 33.29 46318 DALE SCHMIDT EXPENSES-STREET DEPT 5.25 46319 SCHMIDT READY MIX INC CEMENT-STREET DEPT 2045.27 46320 SETTER LEACH & LINDSTROM INC -SERVICE-COMMUNITY CENTER LITIGATIONS/FIREE 10382.38 STATIONS 46721 SEW-EURGDRIVE INC BEARINGS/GASKET/SEAL-WATER DEPT 317.78 46722 SHAKOPEE FORD INC -WHEEL COVER/GAS VALVE/CARBURATOR/BASE 255.24 -PLATE/BRAKE PADS/REPAIR FUEL PRESSURE- EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/FIRE DEPT 46323 STEVE SINELL SEPTEMBER 88 EXPENSES 988.15 46324 W GORDON SMITH CO FUEL-POLICE DEPT 18.75 46325 SNAP ON TOOLS CORP -SOCKET WRENCH/SCREWDRIVER/PLIER/RATCHET 393.03 WRENCH-STREET DEPT 46326 ED SORENSEN EXPENSES-WATER DEPT 41.40 46327 SOUTHWEST AUTO SUPPLY INC -SPARK PLUGS/CARBURATOR KIT/AIR FILTERS/ 2611.09 -CABLE/U-JOINT/TIE RODS/GASKETS/BEARINGS/ -EXHAUST/BRAKE PADS/MUD FLAPS/FLOOR MATS/ -OIL FILTERS/SUCTION GUN/AIR HAMMER/SOCKET WRENCH-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/WATER DEPT '28 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC EMPLOYMENT AD-COMMUNITY CENTER 100.87 :29 SPE COMPANIES RODS/VACUUM BREAKER-PARK MAINTENANCE 31.26 46330 DONNA STANLEY MILEAGE-SENIOR CENTER 33.63 46331 STAR TRIBUNE SUBSCRIPTION-POLICE DEPT 35.10 46332 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE SPECIAL FUEL LICENSE 10.00 46333 STREICHERS PROFESSIONAL POLICE ED -BULLET PROOF VEST-$385.0O/SHIRTS-POLICE 666.25 DEPT 46734 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET -REPAIR CLUTCH & TRANSMISSION/GEAR/CABLE 695.40 -ASSEMBLY/LAMP ASSEMBLY/BRAKE CABLES-SEWER DEPTiEDUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/WATER DEPT 46335 SUPPLEE ENTERPRISES INC SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE 9.07 46336 TJ'S OF EDEN PRAIRIE EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT/CITY HALL 130.72 46337 MARC LEWIS THIELMAN EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 56.33 46338 THOMPSDN PLUMBING REFUND-PLUMBING PERMIT 161.00 46339 THOMPSON PLUMBING REFUND-PLUMBING PERMIT 141.50 46340 TIMBER PRODUCTS TIMBERS-STREET DEPT 1189.60 46341 J I TDUVE CONSTRUCTION OVERPAYMENT-SEWER LINE 17,80.00 46342 VALARIE TRADER AQUA AEROBICS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 200.00 46343 MICHAEL TRAVIS REFUND-OVERPAYMENT OF UTILITY BILL 26.77 46344 TURF SUPPLY CO GRASS SEED-PARK MAINTENANCE 412.00 46345 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO OXYGEN-STREET DEPT/PARK MAINTENANCE 111.04 46346 VAN NOSTRAND REINHOLD BOOK-PARK PLANNING 130.02 46347 MARK VANDENBERGHE MILEAGE-FIRE DEPT 117.00 46348 VESSCO INC -AGITATOR SHAFT/SCREWS/SPRINGS/GASKETS- 657.31 WATER DEPT 55826 •.27..r 46349 VIDEOTRONIX INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 56.40 46350 CLAYTON 6 VNUK -REPAIR AIR HAMMER/SMALL TOOLS-WATER DEPT/ 203.25 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 46351 WALDOR PUMP & EQUIP CO REMODEL LIFT STATION-SEWER DEPT 2699.72 l "6352 JIM WALTERS PAPERS INC XERDX PAPER-CITY HALL 287.50 ,353 WATER PRODUCTS CO -252 5/8 IN METERS-$11564.28/250 HORNS- 17963.52 -$3275.00/1 1 1/2 IN METERS-$317.79/I 4 IN METER-$2238.40-WATER DEPT 46354 WATERITE INC SEAL RINGS/SPRINGS/ROPE-COMMUNITY CENTER 46355 WATEROUS COMPANY 08.74 REPAIR PARTS FOR FIRE HYDRANTS 808.74 46356 WATSON FORSBERG CO SERVICE-REPAIRS TO COMMUNITY CENTER 2 46357 SANDRA F WERTS 9 708. 0 MILEAGE-SENIOR CENTER 108.10 46358 SANDRA F WERTS EXPENSES-SENIOR CENTER 66.45 46359 DORIS WOLTER SUPPLIES-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION 30.00 46360 XEROX CORP TRANSPARENCIES-CITY HALL 46361 YES PROPERTIES PARTNERSHIP 376.50 OVERPAYMENT ON MCA TRAFFIC STUDY 1436,50 46362 ZACK'S INC -SHOVELS/DEGREASER/ROTARY PUMP/SAFETY 528.26 SOLVENT-STREET DEPT 46363 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE -FIRST AID SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER/CITY 121.60 HALL 46364 EARL ZENT SCHOOL & MILEAGE-ASSESSING DEPT 101.15 46365 ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY CLEANING SUPPLIES-PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING 148.65 46366 ZIEGLER INC -REPAIR ROD BEARINGS & MAIN SHAFT/OIAGNOSE 1185.47 ENGINE MISS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 46367 CUSTDM FIRE APPARATUS INC FIRE ENGINE-FIRE DEPT 46368 BEER WHOLESALERS INC BEER b0275.00 46369 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 3277.95 BEER 6580.81 46370 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO BEER 11089.00 46371 KIRSCH DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 598.50 46372 MARK VII DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 20208.00 37.7 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO MIX 745.20 ,374 PEPSI COLA COMPANY MIX 450.10 46375 ROYAL CRDWN BEVERAGE CO MIX 169.40 46376 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 16679.60 46377 TWIN CITY HOME JUICE MIX 42527 VOID OUT CHECK 64.98 44396 VOID OUT CHECK 48.71- 45892 VOID OUT CHECK 12.31- 45986 VOID OUT CHECK 1500 62.00- 23740263 362.ZU $1862176.12 DISTRIBUTION BY FUNDS l 10 GENERAL 259311.25 11 CERTIFICATE OF INDEDT 67348.75 12 CERTIFICATE DEBT FD 109 25 15 LIDUOR STORS--P V M 77902.1.5 17 LIOUOR STORE-PRESERVE 49487.22 21 POLICE FORFEITURE 8156.95 31 PARI: ACOUIST P. DEVELOF 1.11588.77 __ UTILITY BOND FUND 1:7925.88 79 86 FIRE STATION CONST 10547.50 40 86 FIRE STATION DEBT 162.00 45 UTILITY DEBT FD ARE 147071.57 47 80 G 0 DEBT FUND 115967.78 51 IMPROVEMENT CONST FD 428759.15 55 IMPROVEMENT DEBT FUND ARB 126888.59 56 ROAD IMPROVEMENT DEBT FD 240587.76 57 ROAD IMPROVEMENT CONST FD 999.56 77 WATER FUND 52779.68 77 SEWER FUND 8864.75 81 TRUST F< ESCROW FUND 21802.46 83 INVESTMENT FUND 363.98 $1862176.12 244 5 s I TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: JOHN FRANE DATE: OCTOBER 13, 1988 RE: DELINQUENT UTILITY ACCOUNTS TO BE CERTIFIED AS SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS THE DELINQUENT UTILITIES TO BE CERTIFIED TOTAL $87,582; THERE ARE 327 ACCOUNTS DELINQUENT $40 OR MORE. 250 OF THESE ARE OF THE TYPE WHERE THE PRESENT OWNER IS DELINQUENT. 38 OF THE ACCOUNTS ARE NON-HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES (RENTAL, COMMERCIAL, OR INDUSTRIAL) OR ARE IN FORECLOSURE. 39 ACCOUNTS ARE HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES WHERE THE PREVIOUS OCCUPANT DID NOT PAY THE BILL WHEN THE PROPERTY WAS SOLD. THE CITY, ALONG WITH ALMOST ALL CITIES IN THE STATE, RELIES UPON AUTHORITY IN THE STATE LAWS WHICH AUTHORIZES CITIES TO SPECIALLY ASSESS DELINQUENT WATER AND SEWER AMOUNTS TO THE PROPERTY WHERE SERVICE WAS PROVIDED. IN MOST CASES WHEN PROPERTY IS SOLD THE SELLER PAYS THE BILL OR AN AMOUNT IS ESCROWED AT CLOSING. THIS, HOWEVER, IS NOT A PERFECT SCIENCE AND FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS, MONEY FOR THE BILL IS NOT ESCROWED AT CLOSING. THIS PRESENTS US WITH A DILEMMA. OUR NEW HOMEOWNER WILL HAVE TO PAY THE PREVIOUS OCCUPANTS UTILITY BILL. THE CITY BILLS 10,900 ACCOUNTS; THE TOTAL AMOUNT BILLED IS $3,000,000+. THE 39 HOMESTEAD ACCOUNTS TOTAL $4088 OR AN AVERATE OF $105; THE RANGE IS $44 TO $403. I RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY NOT SPECIALLY ASSESS HOMESTEAD PROPERTY FOR A PREVIOUS OCCUPANTS BILL AND THAT THESE BILLS BE GIVEN TO A COLLECTION AGENCY. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PESOULTIOr Mr. 8n-234 A RESOLUTION ORDERING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT OF DELINQUENT UTILITY ACCfUNTS BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie that utility accounts with a balance of $40.00 or more and having a delinquent balance be certified to Hennepin County to be collected as a special assessment for one year at 12% interest for 15 months. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on this day of 1988. Cary Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL • • 2q 20 Virg ( ( ( ( (-. (_ ( C ( ( (.. C --.C ( C__ (_ C C.. ( . 2 Oa C Cr O C O c O o O o O o 0 o c o o C a a o oa o C C o 0 0 o C o 0 0 0 0 o O c o o 0 0 0 o C c o C o o ago 0 o c.Z. vc - o.�- C • I I C *a r:t • • I �z i 2• -Y i 5 i :3 • j CV a% I i I 6 . eaoa0000caa00000000000 Ooo oaoc0000a'ooao00000.a0000a,0oo z Cr M M 4 4 W 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 M W y 4 4 M y W 4 y y y M 4 4 M 4 4 4 4 W M 4 4 4...4 4 4 4 4 4 y 4 M 1.M 4 C< W WUWu ..W W W W4u u WWUW WW W uu . ,,.,w W mi 6 0 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 6.0 0 0 2 • • 5 i I • i I " • I I 5 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O o O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O C 0 0 0 O 0 O O O C O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 C O O C O V V V V V V V V V V V V C C C C G c C C C C G C C CC C C G C 4 M W 4 4 U M 4 4 M 4 M 4 M N.-r r 2 2 .t Y% O O O C 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 O a 0 0 0 o C o 0 0 0 0 o C O O V 0 0 0 C h> • h h,h h h KKK h h h h h h R h h h h ha h h h h h h h h h h h R h NM h h ha h h O.h R h R h h h h h h r .2 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M N N V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N V N N N N N N > W WNNW W W W W WN NN.-...rp fa AD pW W WI..W414,l W W WNNNN DDDWWNNNry - rA rrhrhhh..r.GG4Gy4G4hhhhRr...,.r..rrh'hhh,2454h4.r.hRhhhh,4G4 C C C C C C C C C C C C C C CC C C C C O C C G C C C C C C C C C C C C C CO C C C C a n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C C 0 0 0 C O O C O O 0 C..r 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 C I.G..4 0 0 0 C Ci C; • OCCh04.GC .RGhO.CCOORR�+.C.CCOOCV .-r V54--R.- Oi✓1 W.0.00 v.RN W..D WvvN✓1DvmN DONN..•v...p vG O.iDUIO..r---I 4^rC2aC W 6Ny L+.RO iVIDO•DO- I m.T. I I 2n -.IL.. 1 CC it r r 2 I r u 1 •• u • y m 0,O o OI V V O C C o V O o o a V V'C 0.J V C O o C 0 C O....v V V o o O V✓1 VI C O O Jt V VI VI VI N o C V co y..v.C C,O..~h 4 h O o R R C O O 0 0 0 0 0...C a O C 4 M W.0 v C N000 .ON.•NM W..O O C.......4MM iiii MM DLO2000Oo0 Vi>v a M. C 0 4 R.O A`<O O t y J V h V O o r r r 0 6 a 6 0 Cc.L V V V G i C v 6.4 Lefty.•G h h h V 0 6 c h.+ y a a N0 NNv..v N✓t C D O 41000.RD D 6 Da 0 D. ...000. n D.V M..vOO v.00 000X+ MO • • O u ti n CV �;; C R C • 1.. r h Ch hh h...- hG V ✓.• hRhC O.,C.. _'a MO h. .•h Cu.-4 Y h J hC M C ti O O5.O--.. O..DM.+ ✓t DNNJI LUICC*NW OOM DN VTNONDDND DCVIMO CH 'IA. . C A.. MCA. . .A 1 C:O o y h-4 M.A C-C V O Y Y h h t C N 4.O C O h U C 2 M h V C h.0 2,1 V WC.-W..V NCO M00 DCUMC 00V 4VCU W6V WA V O'N VIIM V WC CC4CO.C4RhvrR..1l. r N N i 0..N N i 0 0 V O D 0 u W 6 i D. o.M N V1001141,41000 V o 0 0 0 O D 00..r.V 1 0 C.U.N V l y a r. • • • I Hk-ali 1 • • • a OM coat O O C O.O O O C O C C P O C v C v t 0 C y'r O O C O O O O p O 0 0 0 C O C f O 0 0 0 0 C f C 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 2 T 2 • i Tr Cr • a w • • I f �� rxi C 9 • • I • e ex O j 1 I Of eaoacO000co'cc o'000'QQo oo o'oo I000eo o• 'c - • 1 a000 000000 O• 0 00 o 0 o O a o z M M W M k 4 M k k Ir Y 4 k 4 k W 4 W M 4 W 4 4 4 4 W 4 4 4 4 4 k W k In 4 Y 4 M 4 k C r I/W W N N W W 44 W u .44 N N 4 .44 N 44 W 4141 u w W u W N W w W 4 4O 4 4 4 W 4 u O< O a 0:O C 0 0 0 0 n 0 n 6 On O n 0 n 6 6 6 C O V p O V 0 0 0:¢0:p n 0 6 0 0 0 a Q W u T'. p c o o Q a n a z • • I • • • • • 1 • O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o o C e o 0 0 0'O 0 o O'O 4 0 0 0 O o e T r r r r r d r p 0¢O 1313122 0011 O¢001,10 Q O;¢O¢¢ o O C O e ono O o 0 0 o e o o e o O o 0 0 C COVVVOO M 2 VT 1 0 0 0 O c O O 0 0 O 0 O O O O C O C C 0 0 c O 0 0 0 O 0 0 O O O C O 0 0 C O C 0 0 0 O O 0 0 O O O P O O C C pa A v a R h N n n M1 M1 n n R n R n n n n n n R n n n R n n P.n R R n n n M1 R n M1 R n N n R n N n R n R n n n n n n N N N N N N N N N N V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N V N N N N N N N V N V N N N•V N IY N N N N N N N 9 `r V NN.V n T W WNNNN *CC WUCW WUNNNNNNNNNNN . C`r r R h. 6.N 4 4 r C F C 4 4 4 Y 4 Y 4 4 Y 4 4 4.0 n n r W w N•y N N y. f R �'hr4M1 nRL L 00 '• 1 C C C C C 0 C C C C 0 C C C C C C C F 0 4 C C 4 4 4 C 4.4 N r Vr ....0................O C cO C C G C c C c C C<C<c C C C C C C_<O C C C C C C C<G C O n C.-rcvr�4P hknr ra NYC CCa c—C..Uly dNVG�GL.as,VC V Vr C c. O On R OCOr C r C T S d WW NIU,. W W W vdr 1 0W O W NJIpP.OPP..0.0.N401.42. 4` p r I me • 1 �� I C 1 r 1OCA I oa snveVNOVI0000 .voo• �0oeoecooe�n C • m , C 092dc c c c,...CCC G , OC C�O O...O.o O00Ooco 0O VVVV4.110t.,UI a Co = M1 r O O C 0 V 1."-n O 0 e n.0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 S P 0 0 O 0 0 O r ` 4 4 4 n y a P p 0 0 0 0 R O O r 's y-ft.." n n n n R n n a C C O V U O O n cc O C W 4 W r v W r d d 9 O.OPPNOWPO.p 0000.OSPTPT PJ SP o doa C C 4446 Q Crc t i G Qc<v OCOOO PPP..WW4C p P VP V vvvJ..V.p AO 1 22* I 1 1 • •• 1 I 0 a ti r -i O F h r'r O F r ...A.M... ►R a I 000NrO TC.p0000WWOPPCOWNOOPWNW 44 ...Gal.. 'R4RO. =A Ol O C V M1 N U k O c r F F¢V O O w O.4 O n M1 4 r O 1 V d d 0 0 0 N`4 P O C S P C C O P Cr v C • O P P N C C 1L W v`a. ,4 Q O C • • • • . • i F'v O.-ov vn kr,(L vo ram. o.p.p o ¢.INo¢06PP r.p V Nr a CkG MW V O CV O O C rs0 V Mnr< ^R, r d W V 1 0 C.I C V N r f r d r V O C O O O C d Q O Q • 0 MN • 1 1 • • • Ii • 1 I • i 1 _' 0.0 • I o 0 0 c o o o 0 0 o C o c o C o C o o O C o c 0 o C O C o p C O c 0 0 0 0 o O C o C o o'o o C C o 0 0 0 0 co- r C • Pa- C v ! I- C a CS • • I • o; I y a. • 6 II • • • Y 000010000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 O O o 0 0 0 O 0.0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O = 11 W W 4 4 W w W W W W u.W 4 u W W W W W W W 14i1 441..1...1...., C w w W W W 4 y 4 4 W 4�,M W 4 w y M 4 y 4 4 W 4 y.4 y 4 y Q C I o 0 0 00000.000006000 0 00 p O C O p 0 0 0 0-Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 ;t • 1 • • • • • • • I • I I • m 1 4y 4y R.rrC,C • C r CGC CCcc C CC CCGCCCC CC.000000000c000.c,c'.0000 m 1 1 c cCeccc ` • O O o 0 0 0 0 00 O o p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Op O O O o o O p 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 T VT n j I R n'n n R n rt Rh rt rt n n N R n n n rt n n n n n.n n R n R M1 M1 R M1 M1 R n n n M1 rt M1 R R n R M1 n rt R R R R n. o 2_ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 W W W W✓N N II O a C 4 N N N N N 4 N N N N r R 4 WMyRI.4R RM1n RRyy yyy nRnRLi Li LLf L: a.,ate. .II-a✓WWiWWyl✓Y«= L L L y i t rt M1 M1 — ! ✓ G ✓ VV � W nCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC -I COOOOOOOOOOOCON✓0000000 O000OOO. 0000000000000000 T;fW4Wd✓✓NPWyCy,✓UaPOIINVVPCNNarGO.owo✓W2SVLCRC IIG00 • PMdddva0 I I -.. • • �z • • • u VUINUICUIV 00000 V UIOC 0•000 V J'1nNU'NV V V UIV N V UI V OO 000 T I , O O o 0 .I v M1 R M1 n O C o n n n R C c O O o O o 0 0 o O p p o p O o G r r✓✓.O...O,..O`V 1 0 O C C C C dd ddm OONNJIN mNN UI UIOOmm mm d dd d d dada d d O.... ... CC =✓C C C G R'v 0 0 0 0 L . M C J V J^M1 L i C L C f f f f II i L II C II y 6 0 6 Q Q 6 0 0 0 G R M1 M1 M1 R M1 R'✓ NNN01,3 NNN N d Tv . �dd dd PPPP PPP PP PPPww4W WWWwwdddd OOdO .Op • • • j • ✓I R Ch so VW RO✓II ✓✓✓M1 M1✓ IV I !A > O N d d m d a d P w J N d N P P P. W P O a II J ✓R 7•R R L O 4►:M1✓4 CX MI CI-• -1 1, 06✓O..c o-o y L 6 c.-U,4n O w6✓C IIMd mJJIJI V Np;L NJm m a�000..0 L-N dN00 C.+ �.CO vi.L6:Wp C n:. .- . :L CO4C r✓47 L:O j T 0C R V CvII J0 4 f 0✓0U,4 0vC Ln V dJrR..p O V O V C W0 M1 Ji..C60 4.0.. ~Ai P. •• ✓J II N J a d L N N C o m C P G C V II d N w II ! V.N C d N m C a w u P m II V P d a 0 w i N • • • • •• i • I I I • • • x ca O O O O C O C O• O O O C O C O a p O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q O C O a C 0 0 0 0 0 0 C y r 0 0 0 0 0 o c o 0 0 OCCOCO .... OV • .". v c • At zz • •• • r lv • jI �s • • • , a O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0l0 0 0 0 o Oro cp 0 0 0 6 0;o O O J o o o c o o Oio O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 yr W W 4 4 W 4 4 4 M y 4I4 4 M y y y 4 M 4 4 , C r II • W W W W W W W W W W 4 W 4 4•w..4 4IW 4 V 4 M 4 4 4 S T a a a W W W W W W W 4 W y 4 W y 4 Q a a a a a 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 W W o W W W 4 4 y 4 y.4 I4 y.4 O c o Q o 0 o n o a n ae n a o o a o o ao 0 o.a a a Q a a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o z • II • •• • • • • • NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN �I • T 4 4 4 4 R -R R R R R R R R R O O O O C O a 0 O O C a 0 0 V V V V V V V V C I I I I I I I I I I i 1 1 i 1 1 . 1 1 1 i l I , . l i 1 1 V V C C L<C y T a. I i l i l l 1.1 I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 00cO O O O O p O C 0 p p O 0 0 0 0 Q Q p p p O 0 0 0 0 0 C T V T • I 1 . 1 1 . 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 . 1 . . 1 1 1 1 • . 1 . 1 . . 1 1 . 1 1 . l 1/11 l . . a • a R R R R R R R RRRRRRRRRR R R R R R R R R R.R R R R R R R R R R R R R RR R R M1 R R R R R R R R R 1. r- N N N N N N N N ry N N N N N N 1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ry N N y N N N N N N N N N N,V N N R!N N N a .-X R R r r N N N N F r F N r r r a. ' C C C C 4 4 4 4 R R R R C R h r r W 41 41 1..W N N N N A .1.W W y1 W y1 W W A A>N N W t r r •'r•'r C R R r R y 4 4 y M y R R R L C t C C C • a O O C O o O c c c C c c C c c C C C c C C C G C C C C C C c C C c C C C C c C C C C C c C C 6- V n I . IJ a V rCOt.Ora v..V R,RR.R O a c0 a V rVC.O....v4 W Cra RR C�C MO W RrO V rC� C cr r W v P 1 R a A O V I V 1 0 N O v O O C W O ry O Q t P N>u A W A C O O O m y I O.pvOvm ON A•AN C AO W v 08Or va..W V- 3T I f • I ar • r z I rH • I � a I OUIVV OO 000 COOOC O000 o V C ViNOO V V III V NN • m • G O O v Y =C R R R R R R R JCR C C p; VV IA O o 0 r C C C V V V 0 2 C x OM c VIVI`--r-- C0000 a—OOCCO,000001000rr Cvv.000000 CO C R 4 4 y4.0 c 4oy WM�[4 C W Wy 4—r OC oaa A .C a C•a Pa r O•y 3. " W4W..00OOC.C1A o oVAN.OPP . •r444VrC .LCc-or OOC`.-n MC 0> ...JI » P—I—o m a v ri A O O W W O.,C J1 ty o y I • i • 0 Ca F o rRV 4 r4 Rr..R rR M r Wr er >A' T O N.. >aP>D.COmv.+V NOP mNP v ". t •"'r 4.- .... V 4 x a MO r C m Ar.. R Rr C— _.. O Q•C O• • :W O 4 V•C r :R W:L r..,..v 0 ^a 0 0.0 C:O O a r Q 1.4 C R P r O O N C v A v C• • •• C• a• `V C C C• R• • • • • • • • • • • • V C•.C•: V R• 2,1 r W L L r C a 1 t C0 4 QI a 0 y 0 VAR O V O C r V,M.W C O a C v.i 4 R•O C 0 0 u.W r P N a. N m O O a C VAN C N W O W G v C v N..v a C o o N P,N C o N a x 0 P W r C W O o a l.r > -R r o ra • • • • • • • • I .!..:. aaU r . • • O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 2 o x c 0 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 C O p • 0 0 0 O O O O O O O P O.O C C O O p C 0 00 0 0 0 ow O O O C C C C r R C • "n a • • as` CX • • • mV • OM • • I • a ooJ 00000' • 00 • e000e J0000'ee000000 000000000 ooeo oo o'o oeo oo'o ao al • 1 W W W W W w U W U N 4 W W 4 U U W W 4 U U 4 W W W UW W W W W W c r 0 0 0 O O O O p o Q 0 0 6 W u W W u u u W w u u w u w u W N W W u u u u u W u u w u u N u W J N y,1M u u.Ni AIf • 0.0 Q 0 0.0 Q.Q 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 Q O O Q Q O Q O O O 0.Q CQ 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 = I i • 1 • • • • • • i • • N N N N N N N NN N'V N N N N N NN N NN N N N N N N N N N N N N N NN N NN • m V U U V V V.Y V V Y V V Y V V V U V y V L.;V V V V y V V V<C f c<L `NN=N+N N N N N N N N 2". L C t W 4 W 4 4W W 4• T VT O C 0 0 0 0 0 O p O O C O O O p p 0 0 O O p 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t O p O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C. a> • • n n n n M1 n n n n.n.n.n n.n n n n n n n n n n.n n n n n n n n n n n n n n. NNNNNNNNNNNNNNVVNyNNN NNry,y yNN NN VNNN NNN YNN'{�yNNNN'UYYNNVV R �� •'uuF r r u NNN x >.• C t r Zr."2 y n r 2 2 t t t t 2 t a C'N u W W y u u'IT N N N N O a a a — r m c c c v C W M1 M1 r•r r r W U c c M1 n M1 n r N N N N ry v C C C C Co Cc c C e C c c W W n C W W n e C 2 c c W > N N VIP N c u+C C 0 C O O V c W n'r V V W C o o m C o c o c o 0 0 o c 0 0 r C C c c c C C P C C c C C' -i m n a P.�N.0 muaNN V NN T N n C RPO NCO nm Ulu VINUNo 0 y yuNP w rO M.i.m NP V'ti v Wm m• • • xr • • • • • N o 0 m`o 0 o V o c J o 0 0`m 0 0 N N J N N N NIN N V C o vv C o c o N V c o N c o o N o 0 0 O�J V N C G o rt.-n coccoc m • N V m OW.A V V Y y V c P c C c C c c 0 0 0 0 0 Y 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 C c C,0 r C 0 n 0 r 0 C N N N VI C C C•,O L L L L L 4 m m o O m L N N JI O O m J C V N,O N a O J V V V L 2 y y d N N w C a a u a N n V a V Va t c r..r r^r N W c t t a o o aaa Oam m y+..rm¢eo V vv vPtIP.00.E • • trV. O 20 c m 206 tC CC n Rr. • j j • iW W a a N N N u N MO • • • • i • O • t W , n M V NNm Pu NJaaC n c rM1V I >v. m¢M.m .mr W r ny nr rn..-•.r I rr.n =y >M1 t c<. i n 0 0:Q O• . a m P O a m a A N u¢0 C a z a C V L V..O V C r r rn t • n W.-V V v::P S W O:C S r Q r V c 0 2 n P C V P N p- m F V N V V y C,~„ w • • .. �'�.o..rs CS e• Qnnc icv,r C oo c ort yg A P vNwCPPaaP �00 t Cc¢i NYn O n U vC c.pv V'+V6 vc r... N V m N N...P W N-.C C C C...N N m N V P P L¢ S r C 0 I'i .0 v r N V n V d r . 0 S S N V P P O O U.V r r N N m O r V i • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • j ay ag d • r r ! C C f C f f f f ( C C f ( f f_ ( i i m cA C 0f O O O C O O O O c O C O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O C O O O O O O C 0 C O O O O O 0 O c 0 O O c C r rc C ra. c-1 I j .0 '+1 r a n C. • OA 01. Cal 011. j 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0>'0 0 0 0 0 0 G O,I _ Cr i I4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 W 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 W 4 4 OCM C .W W.w..14.W W W w W W W W W W W W W W W,1 W e.W W W W W W 4 W W o1.14.64.10. W T-• • .0000124100000c10000000000000000000044.20000.00000 o O c m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a c 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 c 0 0 A j 1 • • • W W W W 4 W 4 W W N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N IV V V V V V V V V V......0 o 0 0 0 0 0 o V o 0 0 0 0 V O V V V V V V V V V V V V V I I a ✓ UT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 c r a IR R R R R R R R R R R R R h R R R R R R h R R h R R R A R R R R R R R R R R R R A R R R h r▪ r 1' iN N N N N N N N N N V N N N N V N V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N V N N N N N V.V A F W W r n C t C44 M1r " WN N.V N V N N...n...-....eeppp L. p pp e 4.-rrr r h i 4.0 4 t M1 R h A 4 4 4 4 4 4 M1 M1 h R R R h M1 R r r > cc o coo wCCc cCCCCCCCCCcCCGCCCcccC ee c cr.-000 c0CCC 0CC00z00000o0r . .000000r0 O T.-10 4cR N . t 4rp hr r r 4nCr0 V4.0 V Vt WrrrGG0,VV y,up .mnpoVmpOONPNWpPWmOOpre. oewwamroaoanmewa— wT zn j• r c 2 r • I j m 'o v 0 0.t 0 0 0✓,0 0 0 o o o o 0 0 0 0 c o o o V I V I N o o V o v c o o O o 0 0 0 0 V O O V C O' 2 0 0 0 0 O O O O,0 VI..C C.c c C'c c c c c cc.-0'0'0'_r 0 0 0 C C C c c c c c c o C c 0 C.O 0 c c O0 0 N r OOOJJJJPJ O J Omo V.m Sr y V V V C C C V V v..0 0 0 0 y V V V V,0 0..r C C O 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 s 4 Vu 4 r r 1 .••P P J P 0 0 0 P P m m.. ., m......m.....0..r,...N O O N N V N N N N I V W O p O MO 1 1 j I 1 e. IU. - O • srF > V V o n 4 M1 4 M1 r h M1.-. 'r V h• r 4^•r h 2 A A CI O m Ji4f W 000004N.0000 40,N00090 r R.0.00M1.r Nrr W C. r M • • • • • ..O O O V s 0 4 4 c t 2 4 V 0.t 4 V .6 4 c m 4 m 4.0 0 r N c P m 0 4 r R 4.0 o T R : o r V t C N<.V O cA.Oc 44000 c 40 CC R 40 r V vh tie a N4CV.0 444 C c V CC O 0 r > N N v O N P O 4 G 4 0.0 ,r m 0 0 1V m y V,0 V 4.0 N V O V O N V y1 N r.. `r r O P V N N C i O O r P I I j • • • • I i �a1�� 1 • • r { ( r r ( r f f r ( f r ! f f ( f ( • c C C >n 2 r > N.• n A C.. PC r r o n a R- Cr : • y 0 T C I 2 cz I z C 22 I A 3 j 3 C C Op y 1 1 I 2 : 2` • a m. I z • • C m z I .t V T D AA A n• r R ti z : Z f P. l > co c 4 R N; �. r. 1 I cC 1 r r N w 2 C = I I I 30 s ti s C o * 2 C 1 I i 1 1 j a I I 0 RA A >R; .i • • 1 1 �ya11 EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, was duly held at o'clock p.m., at the Eden Prairie City Hall, 7600 Executive Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota on October , 1988. Upon roll call at said meeting, the following members of the City Council were present: and the following members were absent: Member introduced and read the resolution attached hereto, designated as follows, and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. C4`G39 RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN IN CONNECTION WITH THE ELIM SHORES, INC. PROJECT UNDER CHAPTER 469, MINNESOTA STATUTES. The motion for the adoption of the attached resolution was duly seconded by Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following Members voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against it: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, and the Mayor and Clerk were authorized to execute said resolution. • 2ua� # RESOLUTION NO. 31-in ( RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN IN CONNECTION WITH THE ELIM SHORES, INC. PROJECT UNDER CHAPTER 469, MINNESOTA STATUTES. WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota (the "City") has established the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie (the "Authority") for the purpose, among others, to undertake tax increment projects under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 469 (the "Act") ; WHEREAS, Elim Homes, Inc., a Minnesota nonprofit corporation acting on behalf of itself and for Elim Shores, Inc. , an affiliated Minnesota nonprofit corporation (collectively, the "Developer") has filed a proposal dated August 12, 1988 with the City requesting that the City and the Authority approve a project which will consist of the acquisition of the real property described on Exhibit A attached thereto and the construction thereon of a 64-unit housing facility and related common recreation and support facilities for rental to elderly persons and families of low and moderate income (the "Project") ; and WHEREAS, the Developer has requested the approval of an interest reduction program for the Project as permitted by the Act (Minnesota Statutes §469.176, Subd. 4(b)) to be funded with revenues derived from a tax increment financing plan (the "Tax Increment Financing Plan") ; and WHEREAS, to encourage the development of the Project and to serve the purpose of the Act as more fully set forth herein, the Authority has preliminarily determined that it is necessary and appropriate to proceed with the Project and has transmitted such Tax Increment Financing Plan to this City Council; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 469.175, Subd. 3 provides that the City shall approve the Tax Increment Financing Plan only after a public hearing thereon after public notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least once not less than ten (10) days nor more than thirty (30) days prior to the hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: 1. Receipt of the Tax Increment Financing Plan is hereby acknowledged and such Tax Increment Financing Plan shall be filed with the Finance Director and available for public inspection. aya�� 2. Before the City shall consider the adoption and approval of the Tax Increment Financing Plan and the tax increment district specified in the Tax Increment Financing Plan, Minnesota statutes Section 469.175, Subd. 3 requires a public hearing on the Tax Increment Financing Plan after public notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality at least once not less than 10 days nor more than 30 days prior to the date of the hearing. 3. The City Council shall conduct such public hearing on December 6, 1988 at its regularly scheduled meeting, and the Finance Director shall cause notice of such public hearing to he published pursuant to MinnesotA Statutes Section 469.175, Subd. 3 in substantially the form of Exhibit A hereto. Approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota this day of October, 1988. ATTEST: EXHIBIT A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN (ELIM SHORES, INC. PROJECT) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie will meet at City Hall, 7600 Executive Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota on , the day of , 1988, at o'clock p.m., to conduct a public hearing on a proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan which provides for the financing of a certain interest reduction program for a Multifamily Housing Development for the Elderly to be owned by Elim Homes, Inc. and/or Elim Shores, Inc., both of which are Minnesota nonprofit corporations (the "Company") . Such development will consist generally of approximately 64 apartment units together with common recreational and support facilities to be constructed at a site adjacent to Lake Mitchell, near the intersection of Highway 3 and County Road 4 in the City. (The street addresses of such building has nut been established.) Copies of the Tax increment Financing Plan are on file and available for inspection in the office of the Finance Director at City Hall, 7600 Executive Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota, 55344, during regular business hours (8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.) . All persons desiring to appear at the public hearing will be afforded an opportunity to express their views with respect to the proposal to approve and undertake the Tax Increment Financing Plan. At such public hearing, or at any adjournment or continuance thereof, the City Council will consider and, if appropriate, will adopt a resolution determining to approve and undertake the Tax Increment Financing Plan. All persons interested may file written comments with the City Clerk prior to the date of the hearing set forth above. Dated at Eden Prairie, Minnesota, this day of , 1988. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL By TOTAL P.05 After some discussion, Councilmember introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. -11SJ O RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 462C, MINNESOTA STATUTES, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING A MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FOR THE ELDERLY; GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROGRAM FOR THE ISSUANCE OF SUCH REVENUE BONDS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota (the "City") as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.1. By the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, as amended (the "Act") , the City is authorized to plan, administer and make or purchase loans to finance one or more multifamily housing developments within its boundaries, including a development consisting of a multifamily housing development designed and intended to be used for rental occupancy primarily by elderly persons. 1.2. Elim Homes, Inc., on its behalf and on behalf of Elim Shores, Inc., a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (collectively, the "Company"), has indicated to the City its desire to acquire, construct and equip on certain land located adjacent to Lake Mitchell near the intersection of Highway 5 and County Road 4 in the City of Eden Prairie a development containing an approximate total of 64 apartment units for rental primarily to the elderly together with common recreation and support facilities (the "Project") . The Company estimates the capital costs of the Project to be approximately $5,400,000. The Company has proposed that the City issue its revenue bonds (the "Bonds") pursuant to the authority of the Act, in such amount as may be necessary to finance all or a portion of the costs of the Project and make the proceeds of the Bonds available to the Company for the acquisition, construction and equipping of the Project, subject to an agreement by the Company to pay promptly the principal of and interest on the Bonds. 1.3. The City, on February 2, 1982, adopted Resolution 82-87 approving the "City Comprehensive Guide Plan Update dated September, 1980" which includes within it the City's Housing Assistance Plan pursuant to the Act (collectively, the "Housing Plan") , which Housing Plan specifically evaluates the housing problems, policies, programs and strategies of the City. - 1 - 1 ) ) 1.4. The Act provides that, prior to issuing revenue bonds or obligations to finance a development consisting of a multifamily housing development, the City's Housing Plan must describe the program for which the revenue bonds are proposed. The Housing Plan provides, inter alia, that the City will attempt to provide lower cost subsidized housing with a ratio of 60% family and 40% elderly with continued cooperation between the public sector and private industry, including the formation and use of the Housing and Rehabilitation Authority of the City of Eden Prairie (the "HRA") . 1.5. Section 462C.05, Subd. 4 and 2 authorizes the City to construct housing for rental at market rates to elderly or handicapped persons (Subd. 4) and for rental to low and moderate income families who would otherwise be unable to obtain adequate housing at prices or rentals they could afford (Subd. 2), to encourage such construction in the areas of need and demand with a reasonable balance between non-metropolitan and metropolitan areas of the state, and to assist in the elimination of substandard housing conditions and to prevent the recurrence of such conditions by housing persons of varied economic means and a wide range of incomes in the same developments and neighborhoods properly planned and related to public facilities and sources of employment and services. The Act further provides that the City may plan, administer and make or purchase a loan or loans to finance one or more developments of the kind described in Subd. 2 and 4 of Section 462C.05 upon adoption of a "program" setting forth the information required by Subd. 6 of Section 462C.05 and Subd. la of Section 462C.03 of the Act. 1.6. A program implementing the Housing Plan to describe the Project has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of Subd. la of Section 462C.03 and Subd. 6 of Section 462.05 (the "Program"). A draft copy of the Program has been submitted to this Council and is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. 1.7. Prior to the consideration by the City of the Program, Subd. 2 of Section 462C.04 of the Act requires the City to hold a public hearing thereon following a notice published at least fifteen days prior thereto. On or before the day of publication of such notice of public hearing, the City is required to submit the Program to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment pursuant to Section 462C.04, Subd. 2, of the Act. The City must also submit the Program to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for review and for approval as provided in an on the basis of the considerations stated in Section 462C.04, Subd. 2, of the Act. 1.8. The City has been advised by representatives of the Company that conventional commercial financing is available to pay the capital costs of the Project only on a limited basis - 2 - ,2y.0 and at such high costs of borrowing that the scope of the • Project, the economic feasibility of operating the Project and the costs to be borne by the residents thereof would be significantly affected, but with the aid of municipal financing the Project can be constructed as designed and its operation can be made more economically feasible. 1.9. This Council has been advised by representatives of Dougherty, Dawkins, Strand & Yost Incorporated, of Minneapolis, Minnesota (the Underwriter) , that or. the basis of information available from the Company and potential purchasers of tax-exempt bonds, the Bonds could be sold at favorable rates and terms to finance the Project. 1.10. The full faith and credit of the City will not be pledged to or responsible for the payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds. 1.11. 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 approved by the Metropolitan Council or the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency; whether or not the project is carried to completion; and whether or not the Bonds or operative instruments are executed. Section 2. Approvals; Authorization and Hearing. 2.1. A public hearing on the Program shall be held at p.m. on , 198E and the notice of public hearing attached hereto as Exhibit B shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least 15 days prior to such public hearing consistent with §462.04. Subd. 2. The Mayor, City Clerk and City Attorney are authorized to submit the Program, if adopted by this Council after the public hearing, to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for review and approval in accordance with Section 462C.04 and Section 462C.05 of the Act and such officials are further authorized to prepare and execute such further required certifications as may be necessary or appropriate in connection therewith. The Program shall be submitted to the Metropolitan Council on or before the day of publication of the notice of public hearing. 2.2. It is hereby found and determined that it would be in the best interests of the City to issue the Bonds under the provisions of the Act to finance the costs of the Project in an amount currently estimated to be $4,400,000. 2.3. The Project is hereby given preliminary approval by the City and the issuance of the Bonds for such purpose approved, subject to conditions on such approval as may be - 3 - required as a result of the public hearing called pursuant to Section 2.1 hereof, The Bonds shall not be issued until the Program has been reviewed and approved the until the City, the Company and the Underwriter dhave ed yagreedct upond the details of the Bonds and the provisions for their payment. The principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds, when, as and if issued shall be payable solely from the revenues of the Project and/or the property pledged to the payment thereof and shall not constitute a debt of the City. The City Attorney and other officers of the City are authorized in cooperation with Lindquist & Vennum, as bond counsel, to initiate preparation of such documents as may be appropriate to the financing of the Project setting forth the detailed terms of the Bonds, the security therefor and provisions for payment of the principal, premium, if any, and interest thereon in compiial.ce with state and federal statutes and regulations and the City's Charter. In particular, and without limitation, the City Manager and/or City Clerk are authorized to execute on behalf of the City any and all certificates necessary to submit the program to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for approval. 2.4. Pursuant to Subd. 1 of Section 462C.07 of the Act, in the making of the loan to finance acquisition, construction and equipment of the Project and in the issuance of the Bonds or other obligations of the City, the City may exercise, within its corporate limits, any of the powers of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency may exercise under Chapter 462A, Minnesota Statutes, without limitation under the provisions of Chapter 475, Minnesota Statutes. 2.5. All commitments of the City expressed herein are subject to the condition that by December 31, 1989 the City and the applicant shall have agreed to mutually acceptable terms and conditions of the Revenue Agreement, the Bonds and of the other instruments and proceedings relating to the Bonds 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 are not sold within such time, this Resolution shall expire and be of no further effect. 2.6. The adoption of this Resolution does not constitute a guarantee or a firm commitment that the City will issue the Bonds as requested by the Company. The City retains the right in its sole discretion to withdraw from participation and accordingly not to issue the Bonds, or issue the Bonds in an amount less than the amount referred to in Section 1.02 hereof, should the City at any time prior to issuance thereof determine that it is in the best interests of the City not to issue the Bonds, or to issue the Bonds in an amount less than the amount referred to in Section 1.02 hereof, 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. - 4 - Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota this day of 1988. • - 5 - • aq 3 The for of the n option resolution was dulyosecondedebydCouncilmember foregoing 4 upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor and thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk d�3u EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 462C, MINNESOTA STATUTES, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING A MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FOR THE ELDERLY; GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND CALLING FOR THE • ISSUANCE OF SUCH REVENUE BONDS • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE PROGRAM FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT (ELIM SHORES, INC. PROJECT) Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the "Act") , the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota (the "City") has been authorized to develop and administer programs of multifamily housing developments under the circumstances and within the limitations set forth in the Act. Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.07 provides that such programs for multifamily housing developments may be financed by revenue bonds issued by the City. The City has received a proposal from Elim Homes, Inc., a Minnesota nonprofit corporation on behalf of itself and Elim Shores, Inc., a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (collectively, the "Company") that, pursuant to the authority found in the Act, the City approve a program (the "Program") for the financing of the acquisition, construction and equipping by the Company of a multifamily rental facility with an approximate total of 64 units for rental primarily to elderly persons together with common recreation and support facilities (the "Project") . The Project will be located adjacent to Lake Mitchell near the intersection of Highway 5 and County Road 4 in the City of Eden Prairie. It is estimated that rents for the Housing Units will be between $575 and $1,250 per month. The apartments will be rented to members of the general public, without regard to race, religion, creed or national origin. The Company will not give preference to any particular class or group of persons, other than elderly and Lower Income Tenants (as hereinafter defined) . Accessibility to the handicapped will be considered in the construction of the Project. The construction of the Project is to be funded through the issuance of one or more series of up to $4,400,000 in revenue bonds issued by the City (the "Bonds") . It is proposed that the Bonds be sold publicly through an underwriter. The Bonds will be secured primarily by a revenue agreement with the Company. Following construction of the Project, the Company will own and operate the Project as a multifamily residential rental project primarily for the elderly. At least twenty percent (20%) of the units will be specifically reserved for tenants whose incomes are not greater than eighty percent (800) of the area median income pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 462C.05, Subd. 2. The use of tax-exempt bonds for the Project will allow approximately 64 more affordable rental units for use by the elderly and/or low and moderate income families and individuals as required by law. The Project will also increase the variety of housing types and costs in the City. The Project, by providing alternative housing in which the elderly and/or low and moderate income families and individuals are housed in the same • gq 36 development as others of varied economic means will meet the needs and objectives of the City and the public at the least expense possible. The City, in establishing this Program, has considered the information contained in the Housing Plan, including particularly (i) the availability and affordability of private market financing for the construction of multifamily housing units; (ii) the availability and affordability of other government housing programs; (iii) an analysis of population and employment trends and projections of future employment needs; (iv) the recent housing trends and future housing needs of the City; and (v) an analysis of how the Program will meet the needs of persons and families residing and expected to reside in the City. The City, in adopting the Program, has further considered (i) the amount, timing and sale of Bonds to finance the construction of the Housing Units, to fund the appropriate reserves and to pay the cost of issuance; (ii) the method of monitoring and implementation of the Program to ensure compliance with the City's Housing Plan and its objectives; (iii) the method of administering, servicing and supervising the Program; (iv) the cost to the City, including future administrative expenses; (v) the restrictions on the multifamily development to be financed under the Program; and (vi) other matters deemed relevant. The City, in adopting the Program, considered the potential financial impact of a bond issuance on affected public agencies. In addition, the City reviewed the method of marketing the Program. Such review included the examination of the equal opportunity for participation by: (i) minorities; (ii) house- holds with incomes at the lower end of the range that can be served by the Program; (iii) households displaced by public or private action; (iv) families with children; and (v) access- ibility to the handicapped. The Project will be constructed and financed pursuant to Subd. 1 through 4 of Section 462C.05 of the Act (particularly Subd. 2 thereof) and Section 469.175, Subd. 4. Subsection A. Definitions The following terms used in this Program shall have the following meanings, respectively: (1) "Act" mean 462C.01, et seq., as currentlyinl effect aand aast Section the same may from time to time be amended. (2) "Adjusted Gross Income" shall mean gross family income less $750 for each adult (maximum of two) and less $500 • AJ') for each other dependent in the family as provided by and consistent with Section 462C.02, Subd. 7. (3) "Bonds" shall mean the revenue bonds to be issued by the City to finance the Program. (4) "City" shall mean the City of Eden Prairie, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. (5) "Company" shall mean Elim Homes, Inc., a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, and/or Elim Shores, Inc., a Minnesota nonprofit corporation. (6) "Housing Plan" shall mean the City of Eden Prairie 462C Housing Plan, adopted on February 2, 1982, as amended, setting forth certain information required by the Act. (7) "Housing Unit" shall mean any one of the apartment units located in the Project, occupied by one person or family, and containing complete living facilities. (8) "Land" shall mean the real property upon which the Project will be situated. (9) "Lower-Income Tenants" shall mean individuals who on the date of their initial occupancy of dwelling units in the Projects are individuals of low or moderate income within the meaning of Section 142(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"); without limiting the foregoing, the occupants of a unit shall not be considered to be of low or moderate income if all the occupants are students (as defined in Section 151(e) (4) of the Code), no one of whom is entitled to file a joint return under Section 6013 of the Code. (10) "Program" shall mean the program for the financing of the Project pursuant to the Act. (11) "Project" shall mean the multifamily housing development consisting of approximately 64 Housing Units to be constructed by the Company on the Land. (12) "Qualified Project Period" for the set aside of 20% of the Housing Units shall mean a period beginning on the later of the first day on which at least 10 percent of the units in the Projects are first occupied or the date of issue of the Bonds for the Project and ending on the date which is 10 years after the date on which at least 50 percent of the units in the Project are first occupied. • Subsection B. Program for Financing the Project It is proposed that the City establish this Project to construct 64 Housing Units to be owned by the Company, at the price and upon such other terms and conditions as may be agreed a�3� upon in writing between the City and the Company. To do this, the City expects to issue one or more series of Bonds, the proceeds of which will be loaned to the Company for construction and initial financing of the Project. It is expected that a Trustee will be appointed by the City to monitor the construction of the Project and any payments of principal and interest on the Bonds. It is contemplated that the Bonds shall contain a maturity of not more than thirty (30) years and will be priced to the market at the time of issuance. It is anticipated that the Bonds will be issued on or about December 1, 1988. The City will hire no additional staff for the administration of the Program. The City intends to select and contract with a trustee experienced in trust matters to administrate the Bonds. Insofar as the City will be contracting with under- writers, the trustee, and others, all of whom will be reimbursed from bond proceeds and revenues generated by the Program, little or no administrative costs will be paid from the City's budget with respect to this Program. The City will charge an administrative fee of 1/8 of one percent of the outstanding principal amount of bonds annually for administrative costs. The Bonds will not be general obligation bonds of the City, but are expected to be paid from properties pledged to the payment thereof, and out of net revenues of the Project or otherwise by Elim Homes, Inc. Subsection C. Local Contributions to the Program it is not contemplated that any additional financing or contributions will be needed for the completion of the Project, or for the operation of the Program. Subsection D. Standards and Requirements Relating to the Financing of the Project Pursuant to the Program The following standards and requirements shall apply with respect to the operation of the Project by the Company pursuant to this Program: (1) Substantially all of the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds will be used to provide funds for the construction of the Project, which will provide approximately 64 residential units. The funds will be made available to the Company pursuant to the terms of the Bond offering, which may include certain covenants to be entered into between the City and the Company. (2) The Company will not arbitrarily reject an application from a proposed tenant because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status or status with regard to public assistance or disability. The Housing Units are intended to be rented primarily to elderly persons. (3) No Housing Unit may be in violation of applicable zoning ordinances or other applicable land use regulations, including any urban renewal plan or development district plan, and including the state building code as set forth under Minnesota Statutes, Section 16.83, et seq. (4) At all times during the Qualified Project Period the Company will allocate (without designation) at least twenty percent (20%) of the dwelling units in the Project for occupancy by Lower-Income Tenants. (5) The Company has proposed a plan by which it will use its best efforts to see that approximately 70 percent of the Housing Units will be made available to individuals or families whose anticipated annual income is not more than 80 percent of the median income (adjusted for family size) of the metropolitan area (approximately $24,400), and 20 percent of the Housing Units (13 units) are targeted to be set aside for individuals with 50 percent or less of the area median income (adjusted for family size of 1 and 2) with the proposed limitation that no more than 40 percent of the latter group's income would be spent on rents. To the extent the foregoing describes a program to assist tenants of low to median income above and beyond the requirements of the Act, the Company has stated a good faith intention to implement such a program subject to the condition that the Company has the overriding concern and intention to operate the Project so that the Ponds are payable solely out of net revenues (i.e., the Project is expected to be and remain economically viable and self-supporting) subject only to (i) certain subsidies contemplated by a tax increment interest reduction program being considered by the City of Eden Prairie and (ii) the proposal that Elim Foundation use its best efforts to subsidize rents in the approximate amount of $50,000 per year for certain tenants. Subsection E. Evidence of Compliance The City may require from the Company or such other persons deemed necessary, at or before the issuance of the Bonds, evidence satisfactory to the City of the ability and intention of the Company to complete the Project, and evidence satisfactory to the City of compliance with the standards and requirements for the making of the financing established by the City, as set forth herein; and in connection therewith, the City or its representatives may inspect the relevant books and records of the Company in order to confirm such ability, intention and compliance. In addition, the City may periodically require certification from either the Company or such other persons deemed necessary, concerning compliance with various aspects of this Program. )LILIU Subsection F. Issuance of Bonds To finance the Program authorized by this Section, the City may by resolution authorize, issue and sell one or more series of its Revenue Bonds in an aggregate principal amount estimated to be up to $4,400,000. The Bonds shall be issued pursuant to Section 462C.07, Subd. 1 of the Act, and shall be payable primarily from the revenues of the Program authorized by this Section. Subsection G. Severability The provisions of this Program are severable and if any of its provisions, sentences, clauses or paragraphs shall be held unconstitutional, contrary to statute, exceeding the authority of the City or otherwise illegal or inoperative by any court of competent jurisdiction, the decision of such court shall not affect or impair any of the remaining provisions. Subsection H. Amendment The City shall not amend this Program while Bonds authorized hereby are outstanding to the detriment of the holders of such Bonds. EXHIBIT B NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING $4,400,000 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA HOUSING REVENUE BONDS (ELIM SHORES, INC. PROJECT) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie will meet at City Hall, 7600 Executive Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota on r JC:04 " , the '-r day of N� vv�,n n , 1988, at % 2; o'clock p.m., to conduct a public hearing on a proposed program for the acquisition and construction of a Multifamily Housing Development for the Elderly (the Program) to be financed by the issuance of revenue bonds or notes of the City pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462C (the Minnesota Municipal Housing Programs Act) in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $4,400,000. The Program describes a development, to be owned by Elim Homes, Inc. and/or Elim Shores, Inc., both of which are Minnesota nonprofit corporations (the "Company") , which will consist generally of approximately 64 apartment units together with common recreational and support facilities to be constructed at a site adjacent to Lake Mitchell, near the intersection of Highway 5 and County Road 4 in the City. (The street addresses of such building has not been established.) The Eonds or other obligations issued to finance the development will be payable solely from the revenues pledged to the payment thereof or other security or collateral furnished by or through the Company and in no event shall the bonds constitute a debt of the City. The Program describes the need for the development and the method of financing proposed and states that the development is to be constructed pursuant to Section 462C.05, Subd. 4, of the Minnesota Municipal Housing Programs Act. Copies of the City's Housing Plan and the Program are on file and available for inspection in the office of the Finance Director at City Hall, 7600 Executive Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota, 55344, during regular business hours (8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.) . All persons desiring to appear at the public hearing will be afforded an opportunity to express their views with respect to the proposal to undertake and finance the Program. At such public hearing, or at any adjournment or continuance thereof, the City Council will consi r and, if appropriate, will adopt a resolution determining to pr red with the proposal to undertake the Program. All persons interested may file written comments with the City Clerk prior to the date of the hearing set forth above. aqua Dated at Eden Prairie, Minnesota, this /Ir'' day of Oc-roL?r , 1988. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL By Carl Jullie, City Manager MR. OOUGLAS E. REUTER 8750 81ack Maple Drive Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 941-8444 (H) 935-6921 (0 September 20, 1988 Mr. Carl Julie, City Manager City of Eden Prairie 760D Executive Drive Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 To the City Manager, Mayor and Council: The purpose of this letter is to ask that a new resolution be adopted establishing assessment policies for improvement projects. This will limit the assessment liability in cases of improvement projects on streets and thoroughfares including paving, curb and gutter, sidewalks and street lighting. The "Feasibility Report for Franlo Road Improvements, I.C. 52-132" of April 14, 1988, approved by the City Council, resulting in very large "pending special assessments" for property owners is a perfect example of why a new resolution is needed. In my opinion, there is no reasonable excuse for the amounts some of the impacted properties have been assessed - even in a pending mode. We all know that the reason these are only "pending" is because the final costs are not in. History shows that these "pending assessments" will become final when the project is complete. Other properties have, in the past, been treated in a similar manner - having been assessed large amounts. I am enclosing a copy of a resolution used by the City of St. Louis Park. Because Eden Prairie is a little different than St. Louis Park in our zoning policies, I am not recommending that Eden Prairie copy this resolution but it certainly can serve as a guide in the drafting of a new resolution which will result in the "reasonable treatment" of the residents and property owners of Eden Prairie. I would like to give you an example of the difference between how one property owner is being treated by Eden Prairie and how they would be treated by St. Louis Park. Eden Prairie Parcel Number 14-116-22-34-0004 is owned by Charles Pufahl and has 155 frontage feet. This single family home has a pending assessment by the City of Eden Prairie of $15,698.00 for street, curb and gutter. If this home was in St. Louis Park, the assessment would be $2,480.00 or $16.00 per frontage foot compared to the $78.33 under the current policy of Eden Prairie. The adoption of a resolution similar to that used by St. Louis Park will result in fair and reasonable treatment of per le who have made an investment in property in the City of Eden Prairie. Th c you for your prompt and curteous attention to this matter. Douglas -. Reuter RESOLUTION NO. 11 A RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NUMBERS 4177,4216,4289.4492,4495,4497,4633,466E,496B,5376,6595,6780,6804,7147, 7251, 85-1D6, ESTABLISHING ASSESSMENT POLICIES FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS • WHEREAS, project designs for the installation of City improvements may differ with respect to zoning districts and special characteristics of certain streets and thoroughfares; and WHEREAS, distinctions can be made with respect to benefits realized by properties adjoining these improvements in accordance with zoning designations and street characteristics; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to express its policy on assessments for improvements for the guidance of its staff and its citizens; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby repeals Resolutions 4177, 4216, 4289, 4492, 4495, 4497, 4633, 4668, 4968, 5376, 6595, 6780, 6804, 7147, 7251, and 85-106. This Resolution shall replace those prior resolutions as a guide for the assessment of improvement projects; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of St. Louis Park that; 1. DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE Special assessments are intended to reflect the influence of a specific local improvement upon the value of property and no matter what particular formula or method is used to establish the amount of the assessment the real measure of benefits is the increase in the market value of the land as a result of the improvement. 2. PAVING, CURB AND GUTTER A. Projects to be assessed will be specially assessed a direct benefit of $10.50 per front foot for paving and $5.50 per front foot for curbing and gutter for residential properties and 100% of the cost for commercial and multi-family properties. B. STANDARD BLOCKS. All paving, curb and gutter projects, for which no assessment has been approved prior to May 1, 1972, the corner lot shall be charged 25% of the side street improvement cost. The remaining 75% of the side street improvement cost shall be charged equally on a front foot basis to all frontage, from the corner midway to the next intersection. The 75% balance is described to be the indirect benefit. • C. NON-STANDARD BLOCKS. The assessor, in spreading the assessment in the following situations may deviate from the Council's formula in spreading the cost to the extent that benefits asssessed are in proportion to benefits received for each type of improvement and equitably compare with ,ssessed properties in the improvement project: I. Where platting is irregular, including metes and bounds described properties, 2. In circumstances where subdividing has caused a rearrangement at the end of the block, 3. Where lots or building sites front on a side street contrary to the regular grid platting, 4. In circumstances where the distance between two corner lots is 300 feet or less, 5. Where "T" al leys invol ve 1 ots having the depth of lot adjacent to the bottom side of the cross "T". 6. Where a lot has frontage on two streets, the assessment will be on the street where the property is addressed. D. Driveway aprons shall be assessed to the benefitting property owner 100% of the cost of the improvement. E. All lands occupied by churches not in excess of their reasonable needs and used actively and exclusively for religious purposes shall be assessed at the prevailing rate applying to single or double family houses. F. For purposes of preparation of engineering data, improvement proceedings, and other administrative and engineering details, the administrative staff and the Department of Public Works may delete from any street improvement area any street or curb and gutter which in reasonable judgement of staff should be free from major maintenance and repair (barring unforeseen problems) for at least five (5) years from the date of the proposed improvement and does not adversely affect the general need, including drainage, and other essential determinations involved in the project area. G. Any street, curb and gutter, or other appurtenance invol ved in such street improvement project area so deleted may be reinstated or included by petition of not less than 51% of the owners of abutting and benefitting real properties of a street previously deleted. H. The City Assessor in making his assessments on new curb and gutters shall removedivedit 1inea1 footage of curb to the property rand gutter when such curb and gutter would to insure that no assessment will be made fbe,orthe in reasonable judgement of the Department of Public Works, free from major maintenance and repair (barring unforeseen problems) for at least 5 years from the date of the improvement and meets grade level requirements for gravity flow or surface storm water and that the storm sewer contractor will be responsible for the replacement costs of any curb and gutter removed or damaged due to his negligence. I. Improvements for paving, curb, and gutter shall be assessed for a period of 20 years to benefitting property owners. 3. SIDEWALKS A. Dn col lector roadways and thoroughfares, the cost of new sidewalk installation shall be assessed at 50 percent of the actual construction costs and the remaining 50 percent of actual construction costs shall be financed by general obligation bonds or other appropriate funds of the City. B. On streets which are not col lector roadways or thoroughfares, the cost of sidewalks shall be assessed IDO percent of the construction costs of sidewalks abutting them. C. Commercial, industrial, and multiple family properties shall be assessed 1D0 percent of the construction costs of sidewalks ahutting them. D. The assessment policy for corner lo' relative to sidewalk installation shall be as follows: 1. On collector roadways and thoroughfares under City jurisdiction, 25 percent of the actual construction costs of sidewalks shall be assessed against the property's sideyard (long side of the lot); 25 percent be assessed on an equal front-foot basis againstpropetief Fs on oneuhale constr �fnofosts the shall , block on the side of the street where the walk is constructed; and 50 percent of sidewalk construction costs shall be financed by general obligation bonds or other appropriate funds of the City. autih • 2. On streets which are not collector roadways or thoroughfares, 50 percent of actual sidewalk construction costs shall be assessed against the property owner's sideyard and 50 percent of actual construction costs shall be assesssed on an equal front foot basis against properties on one-half of the block on the side of the street where the sidewalk is constructed. E. Random sidewalk repair will not be assessed but will be paid out of the Street Department budget. 9'7,, 4. STREET LIGHTING A. The cost of street lighting improvements on residential streets as identified in the Comprehensive Plan shall be undertaken only by petition of all benefitting property owners and shall be assessed 100 percent against the benefitting properties on a unit basis; with a unit being defined as the equivalent of a zoning lot. If a standard zoning classification does not exist throughout the project area, special assessments may be computed on a unit, area, or lineal basis or any combination thereof. Non-petitioned projects on residential streets will be financed with general revenues. B. The cost of street lighting improvements for residential properties on collector streets with existing street lighting in pl ace will be financed with general revenues. C. The cost of street lighting improvements along any collector or thoroughfare, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, where street lighting is not currently in place, shall be assessed 50 percent of the cost of the standard residential portion of the design, that is intersectional and mid-block lighting. If a ( standard zoning classification does not exist throughout the project area, special assessments may be computed on a unit, area, or lineal basis or any combination thereof. General revenues shall be used to finance the remainder of the project cost. D. The cost of street lighting improvements in high density areas (six or more units per acre in R-3 Zoning Districts or a zoning district having a greater intensity than the R-3 Zone), business, or industrial areas with existing street lighting in place shall be taken out of the General Fund. E. The cost of street lighting improvements in high density residential areas (six or more units per acre in R-3 Zoning districts or a zoning district having a greater intensity than the R-3 Zone), business, or industrial areas without street lighting currently in place shall be assessed 100 percent against the benefitting properties. Costs shall be assessed on the basis of direct and indirect benefits. Direct benefits shall be equal to 30 percent of the project costs. The direct benefit shall be calculated by dividing 30 percent of the total project cost by the number of street lights in the project. The unit cost resulting from this formula shall be assessed against properties receiving a direct benefit from an adjoining street light. Direct costs shall be shared equally by adjoining properties when the street light is located on the property line. Indirect benefits shall be equal to 70 percent of the project cost. The indirect • costs shall be assessed against all properties in the project area on a front-foot basis. F. The useful life of a street lighti - project shall be established as 15 years. Replacement of any portion of the s: net lighting system shall not be assessable for a period of 15 years from the date of the last street lighting installation. Special assessments shall be financed consistent with the life of the improvement. Individual special assessments of $100 or less shall be paid in one year; and individual special assesssments between $100 and $200 shall be paid in two years, unless the person paying the special assessment is a senior citizen in which case the special assessments may be deferred. n 3 Rtig / • 5. ALLEY PAVING A. The cost of alley improvements for residential properties shall be assesssed as follows when at least 51 percent (alley front feet) of the property owners petition for the improvement: 1) Thirty (30) percent of the cost of the improvement shall be assessed against all properties abutting the alley. (INDIRECT BENEFIT) 2) Seventy (70) percent of the cost of the improvement shall be assessed against directly benefitted properties as defined in paragraph 5(B). (DIRECT BENEFIT) B. A property is directly benefitted if it has an existing garage with direct access to the alley, if an access to the alley could be constructed from an existing garage, or if, no garage exists, there is sufficient area on the lot to build a garage with access to the alley. C. Commercial and multi-family property owners shall be assessed 100 percent of the cost of the improvement. D. Alleys shall be constructed of concrete and shall be assessed for a period of 20 years. 6. MAINTENANCE COSTS FOR UNIMPROVED STREETS AND ALLEYS A. The total cost of maintenance of unimproved streets and alleys, including material , manpower, equipment, financing, supervision, and administrative overhead required for special assessment procedure and performance of work, shall be assessed against those property owners abutting the unimproved street or alley on which maintenance is performed. For purposes of this policy, maintenance is defined as grading, leveling, patching, surfacing, overlaying or sealing any or all portions of any street or alley roadway. Activities not related to restoration or improvement of the roadway surface, such as street sweeping or snow plowing, will not be considered as assessable maintenance costs. B. The assessment for street maintenance shall be determined by totalling the cost for each street maintained during the year and dividing the number of assessable feet of abutting properties to determine a cost per front foot. Said cost will be assessed against the number of feet on the front of any given lot, with side street assessments being assessed using the current City policy for street paving assessments. For purposes of this pol icy, a street or al ley is improved when it is constructed with proper drainage, has concrete curbs (streets only) gutters, and meets the State of Minnesota Department of Transportation "Standard Specifications for Highway Construction" which includes, but is not limited to, a minimum six-inch granular base and two-inch asphalt overlay or strength equivalent, or a minimum seven-inch thickness of concrete paving material. C. The assessment for street and alley maintenance shall be determined by total ing the cost during the I2-month period beginning January 1 of each year and assessing the cost per front foot to benefitting properties. D. Single properties normally will not assessed more than every three years forimprovement of the same street or alley; f ..•.ver,it is anticipated that inthe cost of streets and alleys which require "annual maintenance" there will be an accumulative assessment covering the three-year period. Assessments shall be payable in the year levied if the amount is less than $100.00; in two years if the amount is between$100.00 and $199.99; and in three years if the amount is greater than 1200.00. The interest rate charged to those property owners electing to pay after the 30-day period following the adoption of the assessment roll shall be the same as the interest rate charged for general capital improvement projects constructed during the year that the maintenance assessment is levied. a4.146 • • II. DELINQUENT CHARGES A. Delinquent charges for sewer, water, and refuse services, abatement of nuisances, tree removal , weed removal, curb/gutter repair and responding to fire alarms shall be assessed against those properties benefitting from these services. 12. INTEREST RATES A. In the absence of other instructions by the City Council on specific projects, for the purpose of preparation of reports, assessment proceedings, and other administrative and financial matters, the interest rate for special assessment improvement projects is hereby fixed at nine percent (9%). Adopted by the City Council, April 4, 1988 Mayor Attest: City Clerk C Reviewed for Administration: Approved as to form and legality: City Manager City Attorney C !if auy9 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources" DATE: September 30, 1988 SUBJECT: Riley Lake Park Acquisition In 1967, the City received a $490,000 matching grant from the State of Minnesota ($245,000 State match with $245,000 City match) for acquisition of Riley Lake Park and some development of the park including expansion of the beach, moving the boat access and providing additional parking. Late in 1987, the Council authorized staff to obtain an appraisal of the Jacques property. This appraisal was completed by Russell Smith in March of 1988. Staff requested Mr. Smith to obtain some additional comparative sales in April, and the additional information was provided to City staff in June of 1988. Mr. Dennis Daily, Supervisor of Appraisal/Review for the Department of Natural Resources also requested Mr. Smith to provide a supplemental appraisal report in April of 1988. This report was provided in May of 1988. All of the additional comparisons substantiated the original appraisal according to Mr. Smith. After several discussions with Mrs. Jacques and her attorney Paul Anderson relating to recent sales of property adjacent to the Jacques property, City staff requested Mr. Smith to complete another review of most recent sales of property north and east of the Elaine Jacques property that occurred in 1988. On September 27th, Mr. Smith completed the review of those two sales and submitted a letter supporting his original appraisal, dated March 7, 1988, of $277,000 for a 24 acre site north of the existing park property. City staff have met with Mrs. Jacques on several occasions relating to property boundaries, as well as the design of the park, and although Mrs. Jacques is not a willing seller, I believe that the issues of park design and boundary have been addressed to the best of our ability without reducing the park site. Mrs. Jacques still has some concerns for the future alignment of Riley Lake Road. The State grant for this project will terminate as of July 1, 1989; therefore, the property must be acquired as soon as possible and plans and specifications developed for the park improvements included in the grant in order to complete that project by July of 1989. Staff would remind the Council that the acquisition match for the grant is based on the appraisal, rather than the actual cost of the site; therefore, the grant assistance for acquisition will be $138,50D. Any cost above $277,0D0 for the 24 acre site will be paid for 1DD% by the City of Eden Prairie. 1 auto City staff recommends submitting an offer to purchase the 24 acre site north of the existing Riley Lake Park for $277,000 as per the March 7, 1988 appraisal, and the subsequent reports submitted by Russell Smith. Attached for your review is a copy of the original appraisal report and the two supplementary reports dated May 24 and September 27, as well as a copy of the proposed park depicting the proposed boundaries and improvements to be made with this grant. Although, we have staked proposed boundaries in the field, these boundaries have not been surveyed. Prior to actually submitting an offer, the boundaries must be surveyed and provided with a legal description. The 24 acre area is measured from the property line the City negotiated with Mrs. Jacques several years ago. BL:mdd 2 _.a City of Eden Prairie ederr City Offices prairies: 70 Executive Drive • Eden Prairie,MN 55344-3677• Telephone(612)937.2262 September 30, 1988 Elaine Jacques 9021 Riley Lake Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55347 RE: Update on Appraisal Dear Mrs. Jacques: Enclosed is a copy of a letter I received from Russell Smith relating to his review of recent land sales adjacent to your property. You will note from Mr. Smith's letter that he does not believe those sales change his original estimate of the market value of your property, due to the location of the MUSA line and the anticipated date of providing sewer and water after the year 2000. Based on Mr Smith's original appraisal dated March 7, 1988, his supplementary appraisal letter of May 24, 1988, and this most review of sales dated September 27, 1988, I will be recommending the Council submit an offer to purchase your property based on the appraised value at the October 18th Council meeting. Assuming the Council approves the request, you should hopefully receive a offer to purchase your property as soon as a survey can be completed after the October 18th meeting. I have enclosed a copy of the memorandum that will be forwarded to the City Council recommending the purchase of this property based on the State approved appraisal. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to give me a call. Sincerely, fl Robert A.-Lambert Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources RAL:mdd encl: cc: Roger Pauly, City Attorney Paul Anderson, Attorney Qq �' t 0 c I . 1J11 -43 d.44 n 7 0 7 O Ol m w m G n ./'i w i a .v n m n v 41:s S % '� g.f �. ( " � a 'IIIII IIIIIVI'D r i f ;, • m q jqp�t d �. G m j M l i S4 t t .: y 1 in o A w 111 �. I ow ItT7l 6� R B.' a 0 01 � �..� TI X' ? w Oa M Immo CD i o r r • '�' • •�tJs -4.49g:''.7('‘ .._ .. ' . .. • • CD a U6 oaa>\.. RUSSELL SMITH ASSOCIATES, INC. Specialists in Real Estate WESTVIEW BUSINESS CENTER 640 MENDELSSOHN AVENUE NORTH • SUITE 131 MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55447 Russet.C.SMm, NiueC.SMmI (614) 545-4401 I:RIooRY P.SMm1 September 27, 1988 Mr. Robert A. Lambert Director of Community Services City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344-3677 In Re: Our File #87097 Jacques Property Riley Lake Eden Prairie, Minnesota Dear Mr. Lambert: At your request, I met with Mr. Richard Feerick, developer, relative to the two purchases which his group has made in the general area of the Elaine Jacques property and which you indicated might be meaningful. The purpose of our meeting was to gain more detailed information • relative to those purchases in that they were substantially higher than my appraisal of the Jacques property and were physically in the same neighborhood. The two purchases which he made were at a stated rate of $16,000 per acre. Both purchases have been closed and with a down payment of about 13% on one and about 10% on the other. The balance of the purchase price was financed by the seller on a purchase money mortgage at a rate of 1% over prime rate with a minimum of 8% at a maximum of 11.75%. There is no payment during the first year but at the end of the first year, a payment of approximately the amount of the interest during that year (and each six months thereafter, at about the same rate) is required. The interest rate appears to be at about market. There are released on the mortgage to allow subdivision and development of parts of the project. Mr. Robert A. Lambert s� Page two September 27, 1988 These purchases appear to be about at market; however, they would likely be at an amount of slightly less than the $16,000 agreed upon if the terms were cash at the time of closing or are discounted to a cash situation. In reviewing those properties, my finding is that even though physically located in the same area as the subject Jacques property, they are not similar situations due to the factors of potential development. These two parcels which are basically "contiguous" and surrounding lakes and ponds are at least partially currently inside of the MUSA line and have sewer available for development. Water can also be extended into the area by bringing it in from State Hwy #5. This is an entirely different situation than surrounds the subject property where I am advised by Mr. Eugene Deitz, city engineer, that sewer and water are not available and will not be made available to serve the subject property for some time in the future. At the date of appraisal, the anticipated date of providing sewer was after year 2000, 12 years after the date of appraisal. The two sales as recently presented, are in the same category as those discussed in the Market Sales of Acreage - With Utilities Available - Discounted for Time in page #26 of the appraisal. Those purchases are consistent with the values found in that approach to value and in the market data included as Exhibit #2. Mr Ferrick was reluctant to allow the entire purchase agreement to be copied, but allowed the agreement to be reviewed and pertinent paragraphs to be copied. A copy of the pertinent information relating to financing, sewer, legal description, mortgages and releases in each agreement is attached. In summary, it is my opinion that these two additional sales confirm my opinion of value as expressed in the report at the date of appraisal and do not indicate a higher value for the subject property. If I can be of further service in this matter, please advise. Sincerely, Russell C. Smith • RCS/11r — SmiW STANDARD rri�ow ...:coon ��� Y PURCHASE AGREEMENT GREEN spr,.Ceps 1 Minnetonka w PINK BiiYria prsp,p, {. i RECEIVED Or Rlc hard M. Fee and Robert B1 klundMrm,esme January !? IgBB 3 the sum ul n<nty Thousand and no/100 by check Dal!ars is 20,000,00 L. as earnest money to be uruceyed the nen business day alter acceptance in trust account of Ireong broker (unless otherwise specified in writing)and in pan payment lot lye purchase el the premises legally described as eat forth on L Exhibit A attached hereto. Said property is appruxlmate ly 155.00 acres d le tax d as 7 P.I.D. No, B totaled et l$veet Address) legal to govern o r Exhibit A attach d B gavot Eden Prairie In ncluding all plains,shrubsand trees,all storm windows ,County of He one El In ,Sate el%noesoa.•' traverse drapery rods,enechedhghung fixtures with bulbs,plumping fixtures,water rts,SWOT healer.s hash,awtem,Pu window i antral bhnds,cunarn. rlectron.air tiller,automatic garage Poor opener with controls,water lie itn0 outlets red cab er,Central iNS to inomde, .3 dishwasher,garbage disposal,trash compactor.ovelet).CDokl .mrsror,cable en.hued.catOn outlets and .snstai ed carpetingeti to ANY,,, 14 located en ih9so the vet owing a rs oven,hood tan,inlercpm,inilauM IF premises which are the property of Seller and also the following personal property IS 15 I7 all of*Itch property Seller has isle day sold to Buyer for Ma Sum ol.4 2_yA0y_ tx Tea million four hundred eighty thousand and 900 00• 15 no/L00 Doyen. iC which Buyer agrees to pay in the following manner:Earnest m /, aZpp,gQgrQO oraypla zo.Doo Do and cash on or before Aueust I5. L9BA 2: of$2. A0 000 n .she date W Cbsi�--.-_.by Itnarrcirg as follows: rp,and the balance 77 •The rnrgj.purchase ".SS_e.'�'l�g-B--Addendu P.LC.s1l b�d on 15 2.1 survcv done by a cart ifled s --ll is s being sold f r S_,�B ODp17_i no er _e re a surveyor [ Duypr Dense prior to clos log discloses the acreage 25 to be more or less than 155 acres, the total selling price and the amount of [he purchase 26 mores mortgage shall be adjusted accordingly, 27 28 • 30 3i Attached a dumswntcn are made I.' SUBJECT TO performance by Buyer.Seller agreesa part of cease a agreement.dliver a 34 to be joined in by spouse,it any.Conveyin ela leileto the andemises a .13 1: III Building and zoning laws,ordinances,Stale and Federal regulalons 121 ReStroltonsrelaoh to oseucirnpruuenitem only ns' Walranlyt1NO ehectrve forlenure yronsten 13l Reservation of any minerals or mineral rights to the States Minnesota 4Mamertdainage easements li which do not interfere with present improvements.IS)Rrgns of tenants.it any. (1 Uubry and drainer ''al REAL ESTATE TAXES Seller agrees to paydrainage ihayesa 35 1989 -Z�./121n4 and Buyer apnealapay��/12thsot nsea due and Seller agrees to pet 7 fy/12ths end Buyer agrees 10 4 payable In therm 3v and payable in the year 19 1A, Buv awe.to `assume ;/e f c al annual secia installmenteof assessments leviede dderi due Olt Buyer shall pay taxes due ana on theidens of being all special assessments and padding. payable to the year bl A9 e y any taped will be e1 specs,assessments payable Iherewsth a I and Ihereaha Setter warrants that Imes due and payable in the year 19 a2 clessdteation.Neither Sallar nor Seller's Agent mates any rapresenleli dA A9 will de v. ..' diaJ WARRANTIES0oncarmrg Ina amount o lulura real sa��gay teals h°meslaad Seller warrants that buildings,it any.are entirely within the boundary lines of the.1'i Buyercclia es,heaing andai,Condilionuig,wring and plumbing used anti loran°en the promisee are in DremiNs.Seller on warrants that all conduihee rgtd to inspect premises criorto closing.Buyer shall salislyhrmsall/heraell st Ma/her expenseAr tarorllat appliaces heat ol ing ad air OmWam'xkmxzwrxaa eye 5eaoi pproperworkingorderhelareclosing Seller warrants that the pr isesareconnecehealiny sewer r cpapm tk r,O:nankslbcplyRgppg uremamYdresit CINCIAN ASVIIMIleakgeseeArt tne(y ASIRIS ASAP tyrtSSN a POSSESSIONs tXionterlx:aaaaarneleclmanala..8a ayg0111INtN Xaa111INPSAaaxlltla7i14K Seller agrees to debver possession not later than cab hours of to reaYsaMMMRDesMasdem188%yM. !a) All int as el erest Ciry 1 and Sewer Charges,electricity and natural yes charges,fuel Oil and closing 51 purtl petroleum gar s snap be proratadbelwean the 52.premised is before possNs,pp date.- •Seller agrees Le remove ad debris and all personal 53 TITLE N EXAMINATION Seller shall within a reasonable um*allot acceptanceagreement, fern h nAb at harem from the Registered Property',bsham,ceruhed to dale ratncludepro coveringban of sgrNmand,ceeell an hll be allowed 1Obusrness days ah,�rrecerpl for eseminalon Searches toe and makingen,bankruptcies,State shallel '�writing rdemed !" waived If any objection is so made.Seller shall be llaysf MN.sn paystenyn her Buyernd e°wed e d within 10ma aysee*Mileetable obPject inner,he pndae,p htam arlorm hereunder ' required shall postponed,but upon correction pl title and within 10 days after whiten real Ke to Buyer.the 5•i agreement according to its terms II role is not corrected wittun 120aays from the deleol wrrnen oblacpon,this agreement shell be null and void.al°piton of Buyer neither party shall Dances shall per to Buyer this DEFAULT If title re mark etabta or is corrnaedwenunIsaaid,ote.and Bumages yer defaults delta oan uytd eamements ur agreement.andonsuch leimnanon all payments made hereunder shall be retainodby agreements herein Seller emay r•srefundsidsm•abnlera 1,,2 a lntuaaiend triages,tonebangol the essence hereof.Thisprevrsronshell earthlerart of l his agreement,proy,dedlhisd not tleprneeiiha Ayanl.a4 tlbtllespBCltW inarasl4ma�eppedr, greeme 0 ilea tarmmarat end actronloenforcer WMollhergMalpnln71elhe Specdic pal arts lo i.t such nghlof action arises mine Went Buyer dplaulnmhis perlormanCe of the 1ptlmS oP.f lhn Agreement.ana N0ce o1 Can[lllal on's ,i 5592/upon the Buyer pursuant loM uuSA 559.21.the lerm,nauon period shall be thinly13DIdaysas Oerm,nedby SubeivCi onaof MSA G7 ACCEPTANCE Buyer understands and agrees that this sale is sublets to acceptance by Seller in writing Agent a not treble ordes tie account of this agreement.ascent to return or amount for the earnest money, iiti _AGENCY DISCLOSURE _ none ' Oonsale 1u In Iha Usti ng agent or broker atipua IN he co she la re IabeMor sea lxn pit Dreaenling Ina preaenung the Miler In Ina ItenMclimn.---'21 1,the Owner a the premises,accep this agreement and urrh the sale hereby made.SEL1E I agree Id sett a the prertuSes kg the/ conditions sly In alb bite and an the Terms and/ 4 L riee,• o�J CC(ai rem v i / 7f Dellewy of all pis a frecpc shall W made al the&hue ol: 16 Cargrd Sxncer C. R1ue ReI S 11 Attorney Setting Agent None • Address 14525 Highway 7, Su.te 145 I-•,• H ton a, cm/ 9, � THIS IS A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT.IF NOT UNOERSTOOD.SEEK COMPETENT ADVICE. • 1. PAYMENT OF BALANCE OF PURCHASE PRICE: $2,260,000.00 (the difference between the purchase price, earnest money and down payment totaling $220,000.00) shall be paid pursuant to a Purchase Money Mortgage Note and Deed in the form of Uniform Conveyancing Blank 43-H, together with interest on the principal balance from time to time outstanding and unpaid at the rate of nine and three-quarters (9.75%) percent per annum from end after the date of said Mortgage Note and Deed for the first year. The interest rate at the tine of installment payments in subsequent years shall be 1% over the Prime Race as defined by the First National Bank; however, said interest rate shall have a maximum rate of 11.75% end a minimum rate of 82. One year from closing Buyers shall pay all accrued interest or $200.000.00,whichever is the greater amount, and every six months thereafter. Buyers shell pay all accrued interest or $100,000.00, whichever is the greater amount. Said semi-annual payments shell continue until the seventh anniversary date of the closing on which date the entire unpaid principal balance and all accrued interest thereon shell be due and payable in full. Said installments shall be applied first tc .:.trued interest and the balance, if any, to reduction of the principal. The Sellers agrees not to sell the mortgage without first offering the bons fide sale of the mortgage to the Buyers in writing who have thirty (30) days to accept or reject the offer of the sale of the mortgage. The Buyers after closing may sell, assign, transfer, convey, mortgage or pledge all or any part of its interest in all or any part of the property without prior consent of Sellers; however, such assignment, transfet, conveyance, mortgage or pledge shall not operate to release Buyers from their obligations under the mortgage or note secured herein and Buyers shall remain primarily liable hereunder and under the note unless Sellers has agreed in writing to release Buyers from their obligations under the mortgage and note accrued herein. 6. MORTGAGE RELEASE. Sellers shall release from the lien of the Purchase Money Mortgage platted, buildable lots of the Buyers' choosing, pravided that: a. No default exists under the terms of the Purchase Money Mortgage Note and Deed, and b. The lots to be released are platted lots per a recorded plat and they qualify for building permits and c. The Buyers pay en amount for the release of each lot computed as follows: • (1) The beginning principal balance of the Purchase Money Mortgage divided by 80%of the total number of buildable lots in the City approved Concept Plan for the entire Property being aold herein. (In the event o: that the Buyers install and pay for all sewer, 6: water, and streets serving the lots which are to be released, the percentage referred to herein shall be 90% rathet than 80%) plus S;' (2) Interest (at the rate proscribed in paragraph 1) on the release price calculated in c(l) above. a2 The principal portion of each lot release payment shall reduce (by the same amount) the Buyers' obligation to make the periodic 16 payments sec forth in paragraph 1 of this Addendum. 67 ob Using the foregoing rmula, the Buyers ahall be entitled to lot rel for the pr pal portion, if any. of each periodic ii payment called for 1. paragraph 1 of this Addendum, but the Buyers 71 12. HIGHWAY 212 AND SEWER CONDEMNATION PROCEEDS. Condemnation proceeds or negotiated payment resulting from the realignment of Highway 212 • and/or resulting from the construction of the forthcoming Bedrock Intercepter Sewer shall go to the Sellers, but shall be applied against the mortgage balance with the payments being first applied '• toward the payment of accrued interest and the balance against �A reduction of principal. Those payments shall not release any lots from the lien of the mortgage or reduce or postpone Buyers' 7 obligation to make any of the periodic payments called for in Marl 1 Paragraph No. 1. i EX}IIBIT A r Legal Description The West 2 of the Southeast 1/4 and the 4; Southeast 7/4 of the Southwest 1/4 in Section 18, and the East 35 acres of the West 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 in Section 19, Township 116, Range 22, CityRecords. • i �1 i •r"•'"':,'•'':'M S'1'ANUARD YEW rn•Wm vy . S .nYELL/Jo GREEN Sett,rem PURCHASE AGREEMENT PINRBvrt:•xe.e. 1 Eden Prairie Mmn•sore OCv6Z Z.• 2 RECEIVEDOF Richard M. French and Robert Olorklund •I987 • 3 the sumef Twenty thousand DOltars 1620,000.00 — as earnest money to be deposited the next business day after acceptance intrust a¢ounl olO WgQ@rpge't Cy 4 try [heck It runless otherwise speuned in wnti gl and In pan payment for the purchase of the premises legally described es b set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto. Said property is approximately 131.33 acres and 7 1s taxed as Parcel No. 6000. 8 located 4i(Street Address) Legal to govern per Exhibit A attached. • • 9 CMnr of�7lgp Prairie .County of Hennepin ,Siam of Minnesota, I0 Ivding all plants.shrubs and trees.all storm windows and/or inserts.storm doors,screens.awnings.window shades.blonds,curtain. I1 traverse drapery rods.attachedeghhng fixtures wan bulbs,plumbIng hat ures.water heater,healing system,numidillor,central aircondlpomrp, I; electronic air nite,au,omahc garage door opener wan controls,wafer softener,cable television oullots and cabling.OUILT 13 dishwasher,garbage disposal.past,compactor,worts).cooktop stove,m,uowave oven,hood'lan.intercom, Ie i g IFcANY, la located on mem.Installed r2'1rer,np,IF ANY, premises which are the property pl Seller and also the following personal properry; 15. 16 r7.allot when progeny Seller has this day sold to Buyer for the sum..$2y D0 125, 0.00 //]^r..0- 1 Ia Too Million One Hundred and Twenty-five Thousand and no/100 0 Donate. 20 ch Buyer agrees to pay m the following manner:Earnest money of s $20,000,OQ TrD�Il110.rr a and r. cash on or before May 31, 19E8 ,the date of cloal el lap by,financing clomp.and the balance 2J. /— nB as follows: Sac at tailor.AArlrndllm 24. 25 * $125,000.00 of the cash paid at closing shall be allocated to the purchase of Seller's 26 home and the surrounding one acre of land. 27. 28 29. 30. 31 Attached ere__I__addendum,which are made a pan of the agreement. 32 SUBJECT TO performance by Buyer.Seller agrees to execute and debver a 3tr 3 to be Ironed a by spouse,a any,conveying marketable late to the premises subtler only to rite Iollow,n exceptions: Wertinty OeW, • it) Ilding ndtonmy laws,ordinances.State and Federal toyulanons.121 Resiriurons relate t rimprovement cone forfeiture provlslon.131 Reservallon of anyrig to 141 01mentnd theprageea easements vmv doom•nl Irir .N mine'a,su mineralInc 5rate 01..Minnesoral4l Uonryanddrainay extreme..,, -.*..L..�S«..�'.-uP«SI"H"-t l±e°my«mrm. .I a�n6_ �t�FPP�tsof a".N... REAL ESTATE TAXES Seller agrees to y�� /12ths and Buyer agrees re pay- /j_/1 2ths of taxes due and payable mthe year sib 79, Seller agrees repay_ 0/121hs and Boyer Y agrees to pig— /L 1a el closing of annual m,lallmant 01 sag is to ed and pen due 30 and frayada In die year 19 88, Bnye r' agree,to assume on thedataelmnnlsall a is Iviedandrere rttr 10 Buyer shall pay taxes due and payable in the year 19fl2 and any unpaid installments y` al and thereafter Setter warrants that tags,due andal aseessrtfenta payable thmawnlh 42 clasuhuuon.Neon,,Seller nor Seller's Agent makes payablein the year 7911� �11 homestead any representation concernaq the am nr of future real estate taxes.,.'. NIARRPMElegsX1111XXX UYttiGliMOIR110111 001/11NiXIP/ OL/WKWINWX/011 0 4/111XM NIXXXXX1 14111-0NtxaalRAYANKOWO MIX RR MIMPIXXXXXXXI AitnnxxaX/IRONt ROMMAa'n NE,Y:tAlkx.WILWW Iddi816011,.AXX 0;61'dlAMAN IORA n UMUIhJc u di BL�itNY(R4xNn ye.N.'pYaNxxl'a'dIXXXX(ASWXXIIxyxXNAIXMERRIdtMMECIMAIQxp,Y9VI01K40011L9NNNNXRI IOk0Y.il NK11 ix8 AX 41JV9x!NrXXxxxrsoisal OcxxXIxtua711gxKnrxmorxxtomotibtx 1FRNNamix*watt xA 7( N1rnxi Ianot:I N • CIPAmvon ON Seller agrees 0 wientosu NMNn rut later than N7euta'xllt}OEisIngCN •• POSSESSION Seller ag es to debver possession not later Man eta hours of terc �'m g. All mlcrest.wry later,.leas rrcharyes,etc mostly and natural gas charges.lu elod and pen gas shall be .I panes as of ee Ad de noun atiodaR B 9a prorated Mlweenthe ''v p�ssalateinaiaeGeaslmceata ala0:ixgNtedlixirallarrWRItRIC1RYBAea6vltkmNRRat a 'x TITLE 6 EXAMINATION Seller shall,wdhm a reasonable time after acceptance Of the agreement,fem.,an Abstract el Tire.pr a 6 v Registered PropertyAbstracr•cerhed to date to include proper searches coverne bankruptclas.State and Federalludgments andllens Buyer shall be allowed t0 business days elle,receipt for e,am,narlon of bile and mak,rp any oblecrions,which shall be made in writing or deemed y hil waived if anyoblechon Is so made,Seller shall Wallowed 120days to make hale marketable.Pending coneebon of title, :,/ required shall be postponed.Mil upon correction of tale and wuhm 10 days alter written,Write to Buyer,the panes shall p harem tine o. to, agreement according to its terms.If tole is n.conecredwdhm 120 days from the date of wrltlanobleann,this agreement shall brfor e null and Id.at option of Buyer,neither party shall be liable for damagos hereunder to the other•and earnest money shall be refunded le Buyer. y, ' OE FAULT If file is marketable or Is correcredwdhin mid pine and Buys.defaults in any of the agreements herein.Seiko may tarmmate Inne as and on such lelm,natron all uaymenrs made hereunder shall be retained by Sewer end Agent as thew respectme mimeo may appear. ....dated damages,time Mongol the essence nernl Thisptc-c sem shalt.;.opine either ponyol the right.enf r, r•: oucyagreemenr.proclnedrms agreement is not terminated and action to enforces Ding the withn six onthsts W I.. such right or action art ses.In themenl Buyerpertomato Agreete t.andN within uantenmson•, 6; GL 55911 upon the Buyer ,2I,Or.ien lnalnsperio steae of l Ba hat Ol this Ay eememut dby bubdl Cancellation.,Serve Y pursuant to MAXMSA 559.11,the lermrnation period shall Pe lhiny(30)days.permitted by Subdme,on 4 of USA hI El ACCEPTANCE Buyer understands and '' lkb on account of Ihn,agreemenL except to return orhat this accountrale a stibrect to for the earnest money'enta by sailer m wilting,Agent is rid liable p res 071. pin„GIB Ir`' AGENCY DISCLOSURE _NONE %I yes In INe pomace..The listing atrial a'broker stipulates M or s stipulate,he er she Is representing the ,. per he la Me mire"In this trensechon 71 1.the owner of the premises,accept the agreementrk a I„ 72 Irk Sala Mseby mate, soma MpurcnumlM Wmeeefe ei On the terms and 73 SELLER • �1. �Pf..V taddxxa e a 6w Yy� BUYER 6L' !L • 7. CGttCg b'QY° A/ BUYER • • 7EJ 75.Ds4mey d all popes and morass shall be made at the office of �A 7r 7 i t '76 �Dany Open',r r Plnegnl en ler'e Arrnrpey Sewing Agent Address 14575 111ghupy 7.Sol te 145 City e.+'•+?' Hlnnatonka HN }5145 net ' F' 7n THIS IS A IECALLY BI/1)DIN 5 CONTRACT.IF NOT UNDERSTOOD,SEEK COMPETENT ADVICE. 1. PAYMENT OF BALANCE OF PURCHASE PRICE. $1,B05,000.00, (the difference between the purchase price, earnest money and down payment totalling $320,000.00) shall be paid pursuant to the Purchase Money Mortgage Note and Deed in the form of Uniform Conveyancing Blank 43-M, together with interest on the principal balance from time to time outstanding and unpaid at the rate of nine and three-quarters (9.75X) percent per annum from and after the dote of said Mortgage Note and Deed for the first year. The interest rate at the time of installment payments in subsequent years shall be IX over the Prime Rate as defined by the First National Bank; however, said interest rate shall have a maximum rate of 11.75% and a minimum rate of 8%. Buyers shall pay a minimum of $70D,000.00 no later than one year from closing date and continue to pay $1SD,000.00 every six months thereafter until the fifth anniversary date of closing on which date the entire unpaid principal balance and all accrued interest thereon shall be due and payahle in full. Said above installments shall be applied first to accrued interest and the balance to reduction of the principal. The Seller agrees not to sell the mortgage without first offering the bona fide sole of the mortgage to the Buyers in writing who have thirty (30) days to accept or reject the offer of the sale of the mortgage. The Buyers after closing may sell, assign, transfer, convey, mortgage or pledge all or any part of its interest in all or any part of the property without prior consent of Seller; however, such assignment, transfer, conveyance, mortgage or pledge shall not operate to release Buyers from their obligations under the mortgage or note secured herein and Buyers shall remain primarily liable hereunder and under the note unless Seller has agreed in writing to release Buyers from their obligations under the mortgage and note 6. MORTGAGE RELEASE. As long as no default exists under the terms of the Mortgage Deed and Note which it secures nor under any other Note and Mortgage Deed between Seller and Buyer. covering land in the Mortgage, and the Property has been platted, Seller agrees to convey one lot designated by the Buyers to the Buyers free and clear of all liens and encumbrances upon payment by the Buyers of an amount computed by dividing 80% of the total number of lots in the plat covering the Property into the total purchase price less the cash down payment, as defined in Article 1, plus accrued interest thereon (in the event that the Buyers install all sever, ( 2' water, streets, etc. serving the Property, on a particular phase, the percentage referred to herein shall be 90%. Any%amount and accrued interest thereon paid shall be considered as a payment under the Mortgage, and the principal portion of each lot release payment shall reduce (by the same amount) the Buyers' obligation to make the periodic payments set forth in Paragraph 1 of this Addendum. The Buyers shall not be entitled to receive a conveyance 47.. ...portion of the property for the downpayment. 12. SEWER CONDEMNATION PROCEEDS. Condemnation proceeds or negotiated the forthcoming Red Rock interceptor sewer shall go to Seller, but shall be applied against the mortgage balance with the payment being first applied toward payment of accrued interest and the balance against reduction of principal. The payment shall not release any lots from the lien of the mortgage nor reduce or postpone Buyers' obligation to make any of the periodic payments called for in paragraph no. 1. 7 ,1 • EXHIBIT A Legal Description • The South one-half (S '/;) of the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4) and the Northeast Quarter (NE 1/4) of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4), and commencing twenty-five (25) rods south of the Northwest (NW) corner of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4); thence north twenty-five (25) rods; thence east to the Northwest (NW) corner of the Northeast Quarter (NE 1/4) of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4); thence south forty-seven (47) rods; thence Northwesterly (NWly) to the place of beginning, all being in Section Eighteen (18), Township One Hundred Sixteen (116), Range Twenty-two (22), according to the map or plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said County; according to the Government Survey thereof. • • Mar Aq(01 May 24, 1988 Mr. Denis Dailey Supervisor, Appraisal/Review Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 500 Lafayette Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 In Re: Our File #87097 Your File #88014 Riley Lake Park Jacques Property Eden Prairie, Minnesota Dear Denis: At your request, I have completed certain forms and supplements to the appraisal report as requested in your letter of April 12, 1988. T am as yet unable to complete the record of transfers form which you requested. I have had Eden Prairie offices attempt to trace down the information needed and they have requested the information from the land owner's attorney. Because of the delays in gaining this information, I am sending you the other information requested in hopes that we can alleviate some of the delays. Once the record of transfer information is provided to me, I will forward it to you. Attached please find the invitation to the land ower to accompany the appraiser and certification form and summary form. Also attached at your request is additional market data relating to lots to confirm the $100,000 average subdivided 10 acre lot value expressed in the appraisal report. These would be a supplement to Exhibit #3 in the Addenda of the report. Item #5 as requested in your letter is included as an attachment in the form of charts, adjusting the three sets of comparable properties. In that chart is your request #6, verification of the sales data used. MO' • Mr. Denis Dailey Page two Arpil 29, 1988 By telephone you also asked me to comment as to the effects of the green acres classification in which the subject property currently exists for taxation purposes. The appraisal report assumes that the seller would pay current taxes due and payble in the year of sale and also would pay any taxes levied prior to the sale. This, in effect, would assume that the seller would pay any make-up taxes required in the green acres portion of the law. If payment of prorata share of the green acres deferred taxes is required because of the present acquisition, it would be this appraiser's opinion that it would be paid by the seller from the proceeds (damages) and would not be an additional charge to the City of Eden Prairie or acquiring authority. I trust this letter and attachments suffice your needs. If I can be of further service, please advise. Sincerely, Russell C. Smith RCS/llr ay13 • eiA-ddpl l-W trDEPARTMENT OF APPRAISAL CERTIFICATION OVOGIODVA DNR File R8014 NATURAL RESOURCES • FOR LAND ACQUISITION Appraisers File 87097 County Project Name Project No. Parcel No. Opinion of Value Date Hennepin Riley Lake Park 87097 March 5, 1988 The Property Owner or Representative: Estimated Fair Market Value ' ® Did ❑ Did Not accompany ■e on the inspection. $946,000-$669,000=$27 , APPRAISER'S: OWNER'S: Russell C. Smith Mrs. Elaine Jacques Russell Smith Associates, Inc. Paul Anderson, Atty Several Family Members (612) - 451-1831 (Anderson) Telephone No. (612)-545-4404 Teleohone No. (612) - 934-0944 (Jacques) • I hereby certify that: The property owner or representative named above was invited to accompany me on my inspection of the property. It is also noted if the individual choose to do so. The OPINION OF VALUE DATE specified above is the date I personally inspected the prcperty and the date to which my opinion of value applies. The ESTIMATED FAIR MARKET VALUE specified above is my independent opinion of just compensation to be offered for the proposed acquisition on the date specified. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the statements contained in the appraisal report are true, and the information upon which my opinions are based is correct, subject to the limiting conditions attached. I have also made a field inspection of the comparable sales relied upon in making this appraisal which are represented by the photos in the report. I understand that the appraisal report is to be used as the basis for an offer of just compensation by the State of Minnesota; that the appraisal has been made in confor- mity with the appropriate State Laws, regulations, policies, and procedures applicable to appraising land for such purposes; and that should the State acquire the property, this report will he considered public data.. To the best of my knowledge, no portion of the value assigned to such property consists of items which are noncompensable under the established law of the State. In making this appraisal, I have disregarded any increase or decrease in the before value caused by the project for which the property is being acquired. Neither my employment nor my compensation for this appraisal and report are in any way contingent upon the values reported herein. The conclusion set forth in this report was reached without collaboration or direction as to value. I have no direct or indirect present or contemplated future personal interest in the property or any benefit from the acquisition of the property appraised. I will not reveal the findings and results of this appraisal to anyone other than the proper officials of the State of Minnesota until authorised by State officials to do ;o, or until I am required to do so by due process of law. I Appraiser's Signature ! Date 4-27-88 NA-00598-04 , RaQ!!!; DEPA�m4ARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES APPRAISAL SUMMARY DNR File 88014 'roject Appraiser File—. 87097 1 f I Trans. No.I Project No.i Parcel No.I County Riley Lake Park Hennepin APPRAISER: OWNER: Russell C. Smith • Mrs. Elaine Jacques Russell Smith Associates, Inc. Telephone No. 612-545-4404 Telephone No. 612-914-0944 County Property Identification Number(s) 19-116-22-24-0002/19-116-22-31-0002 Township Range 116 22 Zoning Township/Municipality Population Rural School District Eden Prairie 26,214(1986 est.) Eden Prairie Real Estate Taxes for Current Year Delinquent Amount Special Assessments Assessment Balance S 3736.68 (Green Acres) S None S S None None known Road Frontage: Q Paved Q Gravel - 1550± feet Road Name: Riley Lake Road r.....er Frontage: Q Lake Q Stream - 1550± feet Water Body: ' Riley Lake Recreational Quality of Water Frontage: EX Fish and Swimming Q Fishing Only Ei None Public Hazards: None known Total contiguous ownership consists of 121.3±'. acres. Proposed Acquisition consists of 24 acres. 24 acres at $ 7,000 $ 16R 000 acres at Damages to remainder 89 000 • 24 Total Acres Sub-Total: 257,000 Utility Value of Improvements: 20,000 - . TOTAL: $ 277,000 • Appraiser's Signature Date ati/< 4-27-88 W .a W • t O U V L i L 1...0 U U C)X V) .0 CO W O .. -. CO CO O. 0. I-O O CO CO co co co CV 1- O U W O 10 CO CO OOl O. 4.3 0 N. 1n 40 01 U IL CD--I VI. Vi tD U /l .z-,atVI •ram') L 7 in CD CD CD Z Op pp p0 CD CCD .0 O In In sn L0 O +-) I— C11 N 9 w ¢ 4''T 4 449 4 '^ (_) CD + + + + 1 CO J CO CD CD CD CD - CD CD CD O LaiIn In LC) In CD tH LO VI Vi V) 1 1 I 1 CO L 1- +a W L)) C. C) CO 0-1 O L to F- tO +'' Vs 0L O ¢ O ¢CD ¢ CD - od C o CD CO • CD 0) •O C) • O C)¢ 0 O) • C O O L V) CD V V)CD'O V) O V V) 'O E (_)W O • a+' I- In CO N•VI 0 N•V)O N Cl) In V)0 U NV) Q v+C 49.C • 49 C •4++C • 4++C • CO •7 S CC 1 0 1•^Z M^Z •r-f •r f La .0 'V • ¢ i .-. 1.-.co o1 1 O. ¢ — C. d 1 v ' - N W y CC CO CO C.) > ¢ ¢ V) 1L S. W CD CDT C) CD C) O CD CD CD C) +' ,-.1CV O O CD w 3 v+ v+ v+ w al ,... i -JO. W CO W N U 3 4- Y 3 ¢ 0 CC 01 w o '.1 c 0. ¢ (..) CD CO- CO co N Ci 7 Z -C - CT M '.1 co . Q C 0 o a c VD N. .. SO o+. rn +' W VI. v+ boo). VS- V+ > E V -J Q 01 3- C) v V) 'O O.- 4- C) r-N C V •.- 7•r- - CO +'� C) ZI Ol-to 7 C CD 0-1 i c > _ o 0) + CD ct v .N c X L +.- O+ V) C)CC Col vv ) a C1 C) LW i�.—L L MI ut +a 4— rC- 7 C) V) + L C C) t rt O .— V.-1 .r 3�0 vnk .0 V e'' CIV) a) +'c W ra E F-• 0 U) qt., f .0+' C. - 0 — C. C-) 4ro O CC 4- >, >)C a - C. 0 3 >,a 3 N .0 0)1- CO.r- 3 =+' 21p In X 34-C > C CO 4- I- •00 a0 O O'O 0 0 a., CO 1A i+' ( Ltd11 oil V)W VWl 3 W CO b• O)O C) .u0 0- VIV1Z L)lL O CL ti N M N •~w CO vv aucftc, . . j4-1—C° .. t Wo O Win W iUlO p b 01 ^01 Ill NN }UO � OV ^ �-- i O U C Cp•Wj N N NNd W m NC F-O UhiZ O i... ea 0 0. 0 VI 0) O CD CDCD CD .p CDL - Cy, CDp CD CD .o G/ . CDC7 CD in v O W b�4 en f"1 v# O + + +- + + .00 O CD CD CD i LU CD pp CD CD pp a0 J CD p .c h +�q t a rn v 4 sr+ w 49 r C C. 0 1 ) 1 I ) C f" O W ai i ILQ 4 40- in rN.. . CD WCe C J W CU Q N^•C L. ••- a, Q U. H N CL in0. to Q/in O C d U VI o. • 07 W .. cr J^..- T+-1 10 CI W d U vl ' 0) MI 1 ) n n•ro H S. I I I 1 I .0.0 i O F- ) 1 Y 4-. 1 w C 0. CC 0 O ro ^m D . 3 Q) U 0 W CD N. i0 01 CLI C m �� CD �o N. N. VI' rnb+.. C W Q CDw 01 01 N U 0 4 1.4) N N N V of 0) i++ V)d N N 4- T �.4 p 44 _ N N C Q/ MI C S. O — C N 0. al v. O z! 4 �. O�+J V 0. V U-. �� 4- 0) 0) 10+.. i 4,"0Y• N O 01 N .Od W O.W it 3 m MI VI • A N C O C• C CC "0 -^ C•.0C.0 • a, N C L. {F� )0'0 L.-_ .0 C L. S.m _ N > C ro•- • goo 0 CC 0 3 eo • C .. am ,-. c 0 � y>_i C.•.0 0-0 N 3 K 'IDO C C U K^.,C...�C f- y-0 N 3 0) W 00 W Y Y t � N r0 d10 VI C Y O'3 CYi 0) i C 0 0 co U t n ea Z}J 44 ea Z o o H C...)I L J+-. CD Ir Q in . vvv ay(9') M • •N 3k (7 }Z Y Q�' O .� 1- O O 0 O f. p0 O o O fr p W O OD 0 1n w O) LI" VD V) C) V O L U-J V O LLIX <W OD CD O rn O) .fir O O •.)_ .4 H •„• O O 0 O— y ..r O Z Q !.9 w w w 69 p w w w �.q Y •-..} L. C C. 0 0 d ZZ C) C)C) 0 0 0 C) p0 00 C) 00 00 0 0 0 0 O O O CI O < N Ls" Ls" Ls" l/7 C CV CV CV CV CV CV Ls" CV 10 CD OU -. w M w 4 4 4 w C")J !i + + + + + + + + + 'I I V) U 0 0 J to I C) O Q I C) CD W CC.• I CV O VI I'-'CU 1 In Ln L.. 2 Q I 6N9 w C VI Cl.CC + + J C Q Cl VI O O m y C. C. O O 0 O p 0 O IC uI W C: O C) 0 0 O O I 1 O O 7 7 .�. • LID I17 I I CC •On N M M M C"M M M I I L() p N 4: < w w b4 69 4, b} fR I b4 4, CU •C I + + + + + + -J < C 144 O O O } (CI I I I O O p O2 I _ 1 I I I 1 O' I O' -I O. to 49 IC J_ Q I • Y W + + + VI 2 C �p 00 C) C) C. In O p 0 O 1..... S. d J O O Lf) CD O) LID b O O O Cl O V Y K lf) N O W W OD C) '"'1 N 0 C) O J IZ M M lf) 1fI lf) 1� O O. > N !.9 w 69 M w 69 b9 w 69 b4 bq Nn CI ........ 11.1 - q Q 0 4 Lc)I Ls" .-I Q a .N.I SO 4 Q . CO Q O V7 _ N• Ls" In U7 • • In 0 O Inh. •-I (Si (V I Y M U N C) _O W VI Q ✓U.• ^ .-.. LL_ CM CM Cn Cn v V .-. .. ...� .. v d CC CU to a } Y y Cl L .0 .0 -C a 4-) Y 4.) .0 7 7 0 V Oa C)0 0 VI a II.. C CC CC C E E 0 V e0. •0 eC •0 Cl Cl n. J a. d 0 77k Y a I -to I- aI- a r) I I a y • Y ER O 0 L 0 L L L .0 C.0 •-• •_• Cl C 0 Cl Cl d d O Y ^ L. J V K C K K 2 O J 7 0 K L C �' .- C •- C C C 0 CU iC ik Cl X v L U W I- O•0 a a L Off),�) J.--) y) y) Y Y Y Cl O U r-- CI d W W I- V d "7 I Z 2 2 J J W N CO LL N d cCL e .--I CV 4-9 • 1f• �O CO O) p "'•N M In y'U CIUN m.. • , ,sylvcRy . ....0 ,it 1 ` J r. A i i' ( L�( ~1.:i.1'/ r.1+1'�^.r�a Ef)EN� M. '�t� • . . k. . ,._ _____.„ ..- 0 , ,..., . . ..<0 %,,f i \,,,....., IN • r '. .,Q sf' r, ` tla...n. 1;;, - • - - • f�'�C ^a F�� 4� ..r."..l."1"'"14 " ( 1, "3. - • MARKET DATA • • • SALES AND OFFERINGS OF LAND • • PROPERTY ADDRESS: 90(14 Riley Lake Road - Eden Prairie " SELLER: Beatrice M. Diehl-Evalt • BUYER: G & R Mor• gan • SALE PRICE: $105,000 • DATE: June 5, 1985 • . SIZE: 4.7 acres • • RATE: • $23,340 per acre • • ZONING: • Residential • HIGHEST AND BEST USE: Residential • SOIL CONDITIONS: Good • • TOPOGRAPHY: Sloping down towards lake • . - UTILITIES AVAILABLE: Telephone & electric (no sewer or water) NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: Residential LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 3, Block 1, Riley Estates • COMMENTS: Frontage on Lake Riley i" �S ( �crupru n S T -' r .-77i t ., r re.�.m.,e j! \ � Ni:: "• „ r i S' ` { /o yam. �, t i.. ,. . '44% •L I © of '.=fi )11 '.��` -ti a, ti, •• 4,..0.E J. , �" - MARKET DATA SALES AND OFFERINGS OF LAND PROPERTY ADDRESS: NEQ Hwy #101 & Pioneer Trail - Chanhassen • SELLER: ld ingelhutz Realty, Inc, • • BUYER: • • • SALE PRICE: ASKING.& SALES: $42,500 - $65,900 (non-lake 10 DATE: 'OFFERINGS & SALES: April 1988 • SIZE: 2.37 to 3.8 acres RATE: $17,932 to $39,447 per acre • • ZONING: Residential . • • HIGHEST AND BEST USE: Residential • .SOIL CONDITIONS: Good • • TOPOGRAPHY: Rolling • • .UTILITIES AVAILABLE: Gas, telephone E electric (no sewer.or water) ' NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: Residential LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lake Riley Woods . • • COMMENTS: See attached plat & sales prices. Seller is selling at scheduled price. - • • • • aqO . • • • . • APPRAISAL REPORT REAL ESTATE PARTIAL ACQUISITION JACQUES PROPERTY 9018-9021 RILEY LAKE ROAD EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA ) � • • • SSELL SMITH ASSOCIATES, INC. Specialists in in Real Lstatc WESTVIEW I3USl ES CENTER _MENDELSSMINAVE 9nI • SUITE m _.\ ��r eMm2�,em v.. RUSSELL SMITH ASSOCIATES, INC. SpecialiiG in Real Estate WESTVIEW BUSINESS CENTER ( ego MENDELSSOIIN AVENUE NORTH • SUITE 131 MINNEAPOLIS,MTNNESOT.1 55347 Rusact.t C.SMITH Pntt.ur C.Seuze (81Y) 515-tial March 7, 1988 Mr. Robert Lambert Director of Community Services City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 In Re: Our File #87097 Real Estate Partial Acquisition Jacques Property 9018-9021 Riley Lake Rd. Eden Prairie, Minn. Dear Mr. Lambert: You have requested that I inspect the real estate at the above location in order that I may advise you of my opinion of its fair market value, both before and after the "taking" of certain parts of this property by the City of Eden Prairie for park purposes. The legal description of this property is found in the attached report. • "Fair Market Value", as estimated in this report, is defined as: The highest price estimated in terms of money which the property will bring if exposed for sale in the open market by a seller, who is willing but not obliged to sell, allowing a reasonable time to find a buyer, who is willing but not obliged to buy, both parties having full knowledge of all the uses to which it is adapted and for which it is capable of being used. gq7a it 1��-JJ L'1,L J.111111 :\JJVI.,I.\l Lb, L.N.C. f Mr. Robert Lambert Page two March 7, 1988 After careful consideration of the factors affecting the value of this property, it is my opinion that the fair market value prior to the taking, is: NINE HUNDRED FORTY SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS ($946,000) After careful consideration of the factors affecting value of this property, it is my opinion that the fair market value of this property, after the taking, is: SIX HUNDRED SIXTY NINE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($669,000) The difference between these two values--i.e., the damages--is: TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($277,000) This property was inspected on March 5, 1988. The above estimates of value are for land, building and normal building appurtenances of lighting, heating, plumbing and permanent partitioning plus on-site improvements. The attached appraisal report is intended to provide a description of the property and its environs, various approaches to value considered pertinent by the appraiser and other general information relating to the • property. The report is submitted, subject to the Contingent and Limiting Conditions as set out in the "General Information" section of this report. The value estimate is limited to "value" at the date of the appraisal. No underwriting considerations as to the ability of management, finances of the owners, etc., have been made. This report assumes that the owners have the resources and capacities to own and maintain the property. The attached appraisal report is submitted for your inspection. Respectfully submitted, ussell C. Smith RCS/11r RI :-SELL r.'MITII ASSOCIATES, INC. 2 CERTIFICATION r I, the undersigned, hereby certify that, unless otherwise noted in this appraisal report: I have personally inspected the subject property. I am currently certified under the Society of Real Estate r Appraisers Continuing Education Program. t I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the subject matter of this appraisal report or the parties involved. r The amount of my fee is not contingent upon reporting a predetermined value or upon the amount of the value estimate. s rTo the best of my knowledge and belief the statements of l' fact contained in this appraisal report, upon which the analyses, opinions and conclusions expressed herein are t. based, are true and correct. This appraisal report sets forth all of the assumptions and limiting conditions (imposed by the terms of the assignment • or by the undersigned) affecting the analyses, opinions and F conclusions in this report. This appraisal report has been made in conformity with and is subject to the requirements of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Practice and Conduct of the Society of Real Estate Appraisers. No one other than the undersigned conclusions and opinions concerning rep ared the n real estate thataresset ;J ! forth in this appraisal report. i C `a �Russe 1 C. Smith . April 4 1988 (Date) i ( i o', KCSSLLL SMITH ASSOCIATES, INC. PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF RUSSELL C. SMITH i Russell C. Smith has been actively and continuously engaged in the real estate profession since 1950. During this time he has appraised all types of property ranging from vacant land to residential, apartment, commercial and industrial property including income properties and t special purpose properties. Mr. Smith is a graduate of the University of Minnesota with a B.A. degree in architecture. He has completed real estate appraisal courses offered by the University of Minnesota, the Society of Real Estate Appraisers and the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers. He has instructed the section "Appraisal of Special Purpose and Industrial Buildings" in the University of Minnesota Extension Division. • For the first five years in the appraisal field, he was employed by the Appraisal Service Company, appraising industrial and commercial 1f: properties. For the next two and one-half years, he was employed by , Investors Diversified Services, Inc. (Mortgage Division) appraising ;; cernercial and industrial properties and managing commercial properties; including shopping centers. While employed by these two firms, Mr. I Smith completed appraisals in Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Louisville, is i'2ntucky; Dallas, Texas; Chicago, Illinois and many of the larger cities � throughout the United States. . 1 from the fall of 1957 to January 1972, Mr. Smith was associated with the A.D. Strong Company as a fee appraiser. He was a Senior Vice President and Manager of the Appraisal Department. Mr. Smith appraised all types of real estate ranging from single family residential to special purpose properties while at that company. f Between January, 1972 and December 1974, Mr. Smith was a partner in the firm of Boblett and Smith, Real Estate Appraisers and Counselors, specializing in appraisal and counseling related to the real estate i field on a fee basis, .in a manner similar to the work performed at the A.D. Strong Company. i On January 1, 1975, Mr. Smith formed Russell Smith Associates and since that date has continued with this firm in the field of real estate as an appraiser, counselor and broker. He is currently Chairman of the Board in that firm. Mr. Smith has qualified as an expert witness in courts of law. He has been appointed to serve as commissioner in condemnation proceedings by judges of the District Bench. • • • auIs • $: RUSSELL SMITH ASSOCIATES, INC. 7 PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF RUSSELL C. SMITH — Cont. Mr. Smith has been awarded the designation "S.R.P.A." in the Society of • Real Estate Appraisers. He is currently certified under the Society of Real Estate Appraisers Continuing Education Program. He is a licensed real estate broker in the State of Minnesota and a REALTOR Active member • of the Greater Minneapolis Board of REALTORS and the National Association of REALTORS. He is also a member of the International • Right-of-Way Association Tri State Chapter #20. Since becoming a fee appraiser, Mr. Smith has appraised property for such public agencies as the Minnesota Department of Highways, Minneapolis and other Housing and Redevelopment Authorities, Hennepin County, City of Minneapolis, University of Minnesota and most of the Minneapolis suburban communities. Some of the major corporations for whom appraisals have been completed are General Mills, Honeywell, Oaytons, Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States and I Investors Diversified Services. He has completed appraisals for !1 numerous banks and mortgage companies and other private and public ;, companies as well as private individuals. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • c2(19G • • r���-=I" .M Rt I•bq .""1 • " ` �' P �•'11 .w,. ' 4 p• r r ,l. citil -1,1„.7.vr., .,.., ,iral i c .1 1 1 pri,1 i'':... , . �f I,�. �Ce. � ORIGII„ . tt:4 � ZY.•Z+ �1.,•r.1 +TL'` , a4W�'�Jr:J�4 Z.:Ai,Y Y 4 3 rr"4. , l..f ii y 41- t . -• , c:' }' ��'� x 1 J ;rn OUT OUILD:;:GS '* n / �� 'ii ��r` " 1..•1. LOCATED AT OR:G: ;,1L 4. • ,1 1� ' • \N. ,.d. ^ 4'ti4.•.S ij 1q,A 11r,•[w�1rq cr , 4.'' '• • J -i••t 11, l t�', u_ n u o II I' b:_.� 1 y'.. �4 ■ r •, 4 •r EAkN LOCATED AT s� ----�. }. ORIGL',,1L HC;ICCTE',il 1 a a tir„jam; 'ice' 1 � •••' stP_t! LOOKING SOUTHERLY FROM fr HGMESTEAD NEAR ORIGINAL Wp Xg VP i LOOKING NORTHWESTERLY iol ON RILEY LAKE ROAD FROM ORIGINAL HOMESTEAD LOOKING SOUTHERLY FROM MAIN D14ELLING TOWARDS 1C ;ORIGINAL HOMESTEAD At .._ ._`~-`~~__ u t la.l. -.l l i"11 .1dsoci.1'i'I:5, 15 NEIGHBORHOOD DATA " The subject property is situated in the southwest part of Eden Prairie I overlcoking Riley Lake. Riley Lake is a relatively deep lake and is attractive as a swimming, fishing and boating lake. The subject property is situated on the north side of the Lake. The neighborhood is primarily undeveloped at this time in Eden Prairie. In adjacent Carver County some subdivision has taken place and/or is in . progress. E ' 2 The i.-Mediate neighborhood of the subject property is basically rolling far, land. Just south of the property fronting on Riley Lake is an Eden Prairie park. To the west is basically farm acreage, except for lake front residences and an apartment complex, north of Riley Lake Road. The subject property and the surrounding neighborhood is outside of what Is known as the M.U.S.A. line, an abbreviation for Metropolitan Urban k" Service Area. Land lying outside this established line is not served by public utilities of sewer and water. It is a line designated and established by the community and the Metropolitan Council. Land in this St neighborhood which is outside of the M.U.S.A. line is not scheduled for tdevelopment until after 2000 when public utilities are proposed to be raoe available to serve the area. Sewer and water mains are currently e located some distance away from this neighborhood. At present, telephone and electric services are available to properties in the neighborhood. S A railroad right-of-way cuts through the area generally extending in a northwest/southwest direction. That railroad is proposed to be abandoned and the right-of-way converted to a part of the Eden Prairie trail system. Main access to the neighborhood is by way of Pioneer Trail, County Road . :1 extending generally in an east/west direction and by State Hwy #5 and Hwy #101 on the north and west. Riley Lake Road which serves the subject property ties into Pioneer Trail on the south and Hwy #101 about 1 1/2 miles west of the subject property. This neighborhood is considered to be quite attractive, and when utilities are available, should be readily developable. The lak public e view and access which is available to the subject property is a plus feature. No environmental type depreciation which would have an adverse effect ' upon the value of the subject property is noted or observed. • • 1 209 "'lt .1'S(1C1.11'L;, 1\C. 16 THE SITE Physical Features: The subject property is irregular in shape. According to the public records. it has a frontage of approximately 1,550 feet on the northeast f.. side of Riley Lake Road, and a frontage of approximately the same length on Riley Lake via a narrow strip of land of an average depth of 75 feet (. to 20 feet between the lake and Riley Lake Road for about half of the fr frontage and a very narrow strip for the balance. The overall north/south property dimension is about 4,024 feet and an overall east/west dimension of about 2,020 feet. t The public records show the property to contain an overall area of it approximately 121.3 ± acres. Please see the following page, a copy of a part of a section map showing the subject property outlined in red. c The site is rolling - both above and below street grade. Soil conditions appear to be generally adequate for a normal building program; however, there are ponds and low areas on the property and a creek extending through it. The area of the creek and ponds are i:-'entified as flood plain by the City of Eden Prairie. The soils in the property are assumed to be uncontaminated and to contain no toxic wastes. No soil tests or pollution studies have been viewed by this appraiser. No settling or cracking in the existing improvements was observed. t'unicipal sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water are not now available to t, the property and the property is outside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. Utilities to serve the subject property are not proposed until "after" the year 2000. Electric service is available from Northern FStates Power Company, natural gas service to the general area is available from the Minnesota Gas Company and primary telephone service sis available from Northwestern Bell Telephone Company. Riley Lake Road is partially paved but gravel where it extends through the subject property. asements• To the best of this appraiser's knowledge, there are no easements which would adversely affect the value of the subject site. Laiggi The subject property is zoned Rural. This classification requires a minimum of 10 acres per lot for development purposes. The Eden Prairie Guide Plan, 1982, shows the subject property unesinated - low density residential when utilities are available.as Currently, this type of zoning, with utilities available, allows a development of 2 1/2 lots per acre plus a park dedication fee. AZO HI-?2 . '‘'....." „,, ' ...._yr. ''''' ‘,..,.' -, _......r. _ ._ _____...,........1 . .;-, • F i3..i' .,wr Ill t �_ 'p:- / !i PUB r i k. "„t, � �i /1 CI _ ... .: 1 1 __ ( , a ,_r .Q> L i I ; Cari� , '' t ' --- 1 ----I 11T1,C - , T,. � r— - ,cI a ,1. n+?l, i i-i r' 'ii II °`, :i IJ'RI 27`'ri: • h ,,....,.._ ,-_ , \ . %,......,.. . • \, : A f . PUB T-�L7 c \ I It °'i r ; ' , ; T -�:� f 1 1 "l, ;�t5I -z _ f c 1 ..,,;,Sr„ •, > � ;r' —a�� ' I ",_. is ,,___/ ' ��-- `• 4 why , �• r 4•4 \1 1:I .., a- I ~ :>II'I1l ASSOCIATES, INC. 17 THE IMPROVEMENTS Ike subject property is currently improved with two residences plus several farm buildings. The basic building construction is as follows: MAIN RESIDENCE r t�P 50' X 28'6" = 1,425 sq. ft. main floor `0' X 28'6" = 1,425 sq. ft. walkout basement i 34'6" X 24'6" = 845 sq. ft. garage C` guilt 1970. fi } fl:Tviltions: Reinforced concrete footings; concrete block foundation and basement wails to grade. f;ocd frer..e walls, hardboard siding. Fl-,rs• lit reinforced concrete floors resting on earth in lower level, wood floor systea on upper level. t r,t criers• The first floor is laid out with a living room, dining room, kitchen, pantry, den, two bedrooms and a bath. The basic interior finish is a t gypsum board wall and ceiling finish, painted or papered. Floors in the kitchen, pantry, den and dining room area have a sheet vinyl floor covering. The remainder of the first floor is carpeted, except the 1 bathroom which has a ceramic tile floor and wainscot. The lower level is divided into a family room and bedroom with a bath plus a utility and storage area. The basement walls and partitions have a plywood panel finish. The ceiling is gypsum board and the floors are vinyl tile. millwork- , Wood exterior and interior doors, glider and casement windows, sliding patio doors each level, kitchen cabinets. stairs• cod stairs extending from basement to first story. aya ASSUCIATEs, INC. 18 Lwr Ii 2 fl'/FMFNTS - Con't. • 1y;I4 pEsinENcE - Can't. I: poor: Gable roof of wood frame construction with sheathing, insulation, asphalt shingles. Llrctrical System: Incandescent lighting system. Nn,it;-q, '' ntilatinq and Air Conditioning: Electric baseboard radiation. v. Plu—birq: g Bath on each level, stainless steel kitchen sink, pantry sink, floor ` drains, electric water heater, private well and sewage system. vxx` PPD11'�CeS: t Range. refrigerator, disposal. Garage: Y s' 2 1/2 car attached garage. Yardaork: Sodding, landscaping, concrete walks. • ORIGINAL HOMESTEAD 12' X 15' 180 sq. ft. 27' X 20' X 2 floors = 1,080 sq. ft. • 16'6" X 20' X 2 floors a 660 sq. ft. 1,920 sq. ft. Basement 27' X 20' 16'6" X 20' 30 sq. ft. 330 sq. ft. 870 sq. ft. Fat: Original construction 1881. Frundations. i i { ay83 ,iT. IULSSEIA, swill AssocIATEs, INC. 19 THE IMPROVEMENTS - Con't. ( ; ORIGINAL HOMESTEAD - Con't. F Floors: Concrete floors resting on earth in lower level, wood floor system on f upper levels. • 2 Interi.,t 1t t This building is divided into a kitchen, living room, bedroom, bath and t closer area on the first level and four bedrooms on the second level. c The :: sic interior finish is a plastered wall and ceiling finish and linol .ei, carpeted or exposed wood board floor finishes. Walls and ce'l: gs are painted or papered. t• The Casement is divided into two rooms under the original construction. The b:::ement area is unfinished and painted exposed structural members. i ,..il!,,2.rk: _ walls exterior and interior doors, double hung windows. r i ^oce Lairs extending from basement to first and first to second story. i _ill f .,ablee type roof of wood frame construction with wood sheathing nnalt shingles. and _lnctrical�m: Incandescent lighting system. ' '' atin Ventilatin and Air Conditionin : I oiler with oil burner, radiators throughout the building. Plumbing: Complete bath on first floor, kitchen sink, private sewer and water system. L Porch: i Porch at front and at rear entrances. SMITHASSOCIATES, INC. 20 < n+E !"PROVEMENTS - Can't. C4r1:4I. F'OMESTEAO - Can't. litwork: is SoCding, landscaping. (,`ut 7uildings: z A do story 36'6" X 64' barn with 12' X 12' one story addition and other out Luildings are located at the rear of the original homestead. APPRAISER'S COMMENTS } The -ain residence appears to be in a good state of physical repair. The ovfwail maintenance program appears good and no serious deferred raintenance was observed. The original homestead appears to be in a e Sc=u state of physical repair when recognizing age. The out buildings are :n use but some are in a fair to poor state of repair. S i • • • • • ' k ' ass ;,.- Hl'::<FI.I. -\Ii111 ASSC)CLITLS, INC. 21 HIGHEST AND REST US r ,, i 'Hirhest nd Best Use" is defined in Appraisal Terminology, a prrblicaticn sponsored by the Society of Real Estate Appraisers and the A®erican Institute of Real Estate Appraisers (1981 Edition), as follows: That reasonable and probable use that will support the 4' hicr.est present value, as defined, as of the effective date i4 cf :he appraisal. Alternatively, that use, from among reasonably probable loch alternative uses, found to be physically poss le, x 2ssrooriately supported, financially feasible, and which results in highest land value. "r The definition immediately above applies specifically to the • i hrrhest and best use of the land. It is to be recognized 1.c that in cases where a site has existing improvements on it, the highest and best use may very well be determined to be ` T Jifferent from the existinguse. x :,;ntinue, however, unless and until heland sv existing use will s -'';knelt and best use exceeds the total value of the property i is its existing use. See Interim Use. i .'-slied within these definitions is recognition of the contribution of that specific use to community environment C or to community goals in addition to wealth maximization of f ndividual property owners. Also implied is that the determination of highest and best E use results from the appraiser's `i skill; i.e., that the use determined from analyticalans . represents an opinion, not a fact to be found. In appraisal practice, the concept of highest and best use represents the premise upon which value is based. In the context of most probable selling price (market value) another appropriate term to reflect highest and best use would be most probable use. In the context of investment value an alternative term would be most profitable use. See Most Probable Use, Most Profitable Use. The subject property is zoned rural. It is the opinion of this appraiser that the highest, best and most profitable use of the land, • vacant and as presently zoned, is to hold for future development. A copy of the Rural classification from the Eden Prairie Zoning Ordinance is included as Exhibit #4 in the Addenda of this report. • i ; i I +}r lit' ELL SMITH ASSOCIATES, INC. 22 NnEST AND BEST USE - Con't. The subject property is improved with two residences and farm buildings. r The building improvements add value over and above the underlying land ` 7t this time. It is the judgement of this appraiser that the highest, ,, test and most profitable use of the property, as currently improved, is for a continued use of the residences and for future subdivision and t d veicpment of the excess land. t, f i Y r' t il C, 1 t y • 1 1. 4 e i .a' ill�-F.I.I. ',I I I it .\rt1C1.\1'Ea, INC. 23 TAXES AND ASSESSED VALUATION -� cm invectigation of the public records, it is found that the .:essor's opinion of market value for the taxes payable for the year 39 Is as follows: Land $ 488,500 Building 99 100 Total $ 587,600 '`',e prooert ois currently taxes as green acres. Real estate taxes ;,,• /able in 19Q 8 are $3,736.68. From the public records, it appears that here are no special assessments levied against the subject property at he present time. i 1 • • • • :y 44 THE VALUATION PROCES The valuation part of the appraisal process is a series of "checks" on the appraiser's judgement. These "checks" are used as a guide in arriving at a final estimate of "value". The first procedure in the case of improved properties is an estimate of value of the underlying land, recognizing its highest, best and most profitable use (as if vacant). This estimate acts as a check as to whether the land-to-building ratio is reasonable for the type of improvements and also whether the underlying land might also equal or exceed the value of the property as improved. After the value of the underlying land has been estimated, three approaches to value are used as guides for arriving at an opinion of value of the property as improved. Any and/or all of these three methods are used, as applicable, in the type of property being appraised. The first approach is known as the "Income Approach to Value". In this estimate, the emphasis is placed on the investment potential for the subject property, recognizing the past, present and future income potential for the property. The second of the appraisal approaches on improved properties is known as the "Cost Approach to Value". This approach is an emphasis on the cost of substitution, realizing that a buyer for the property being appraised has an alternative of erecting all new facilities. In this approach, the cost new is first estimated. To the cost new, adjustments for depreciation factors are applied where applicable. The third approach is known as the "Direct Sales Comparison Approach to Value", sometimes referred to as the "Market Approach to Value". This approach is a consideration of the subject property as it competes with sales of other already improved properties, with the emphasis placed on • market sales and/or offerings of competitive properties. This procedure is also the normal approach used in estimated value of vacant or underlying land, assumed vacant. In this appraisal, the value of the subject site, as if vacant, has been estimated. After that estimate, the value of the improvements has been considered and added to the underlying land value. • • • 1 tU.ssELI. sAIITII ASSOCIATES, INC. 25 ESTIMATE OF VALUE (Before the Taking) 1 The majority of the value of the subject in the underlying land. The property is however, improved with ttwo� residences, both of which are habitable and occupied and one which would likelyadd substantial value in a subdivision. The second building complex, he original homestead, might have some historic value; iadd likely that it would add substantial value over and above the underlying land, if platted todayit is not future located on a lo densityhe bdivRural zoning classification or in the subdivision lot. The subject property is currently zoned Rural and is located outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) line and will remain that way until utilities of sewer and water are made available to serve the property. This appraiser piliis is after 200a i.e.is advised that the timing of , some 12 years hence. Providing in Until public utilities are available, the subject property would remain rural the rural cl classification assifiistone residentialThemaximum lot per allowed under the is shown on the Comprehensive Guide Plan, for a time when utilities are available to be low density residential, per 10 acres. The property minimum lot size of 13,500 sq. allowsss classification perrgacre. a ft, and about 2.5 lots acre. In any subdivision of the provided to the homeowners property, su d�iveiisionkb accesswould land nbg south and west of existing Riley Lake Road, rather than b he property to Y way of the land lying Riley Lake Road. Lake access would ake access to only few lots fus ronting alla of directly platting onsubdivided lots by providing private access riglhts tolto ke of the In appraising the subject RileyY Lake. ncap of e nature the property, different approaches have been used be timing of development. property and because of the restrictions as to the lighto de market salesh o underlying land has first been considered alson at a time whenma utilities acreage without utilities available and property has also been considered available, discounted for time. The to valuey assuming development today, a development approach toe leerlying land has been , as zoned Rural. Toth to e a of improvements to arrive at an overall di of the building indication of value as improved. of Market Sales of Acrea e - Without Sewer and Water Available This approach is the basic Direct Sales Comparison Approach to value; i.e., the underlying land subject light of sales data relating to sales of perty unimproved bved la a onsidered in the set out as Exhibit #1 in the Addenda of this s report. nd such Comments relatiasng ating that those sales to the subject property are included with that data. • 1 qc Q bALUIlI .1SSOC .1TES, INC. 26 ESTIMATE OF - (Before the Taking) - Con't. Market Sales of Acreage - Without Sewer and Water Available In the light of that market data, it is the opinion of this appraiserCon't. that the underlying land in the subject property, sold as acreage, has a value of about $7,000 per acre. acres.al Arithmetically,ll The subject property contains 121.3 the underlying land in the subjectproperty. calculates to $849,100, say $849,000 for P P Y• Market Sales of Acrea e - With Utilities Available - Discounted for time utilities The predominance of acreage sales for land in Eden Prairie is land with considered aini the elightnof this thosereport, sales the buturecogniinthat if the subject property wasproperty has been after the purchased today it could not be developed until year 2000, some 12 years hence. Examples of market activity of acreage with utilities available, has been included as Exhibit f2. Comments relating that market data to the subject has been included with that data. In the light of that market data, it would appear that today, with sewer and water available and with the abilit to develo the ro ert have a value in the 322,000 per acre range with uthec buyerphavin would expense of paying the special assessments for sewer and water trunks, and the cost of developing and subdividing the property and extending streets and utilities to serve the individual lots. To purchase a parcel of property such as the subject today and wait for development, the investor-developer will require a return on investment. In owning the propertyq holding period, the land should produce dsomegfarthm income but would alsoso experience cost of ownership such as real estate taxes, insurance 12 year ' aand management. Typically, operation), would notexceed the the farm �cost eof taxes and insurance. For the (assuming a rental or share crop purposewof this al approach and insuranit ce has been assumed that the farm judgement that an investor purchasingIt would ye this appraiser would require e't least a 10% return on his investent.ts Tproperty unpredictible factors of. inflation, deflation which of cannot course,e determined. This appraisal assumes that the value 12 years hence would be equal to today's value relative to be the economy at that time. If thetvahe luein of the subject property rope section and yis assumed to be $7,000 per acre as estiyield on his ownership, then theif an investorpr requires a for value $7,000 per acre must equal $21,969, say , O0 land er are at the time it today for is developed. In other words, �the� 2 present worth of the right to receive • aU9l ESTIMATE OF VAi.UE - (Before the Taking) - Con't. Market Sales of Acreage - With Utilities Available - Discounted for Time - Con't. S22,000 per acre 12 years hence, discounted at a 10% rate is $7,000 per acre. Development Ann roach as Rural Land As indicated earlier in the report, the subject property is currently zoned Rural. As land zoned Rural, the Eden Prairie Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum lot size of 10 acres. In that acreage can be included land designated at flood plain and also street requirements so that the subject property, containing approximately 121.3 acres, could be developed into 12 lots under the current ordinance. The configuration for these 12 lots has not been attempted to be determined but no problem would be anticipated in fully developing the subject property with 12 lots which would meet the zoning requirements. It would be this appraiser's anticipation that the lake frontage would be somehow spread to encompass use and access to the lake from all of the lots in the subdivision. Eden Priaire zoning classification otandathereve bisalimiltedamarketaactivity duend remini in thetoRuthe classification and the limited amount of land. Very few areas are being subdivided and lots being developed in this classification in Eden Prairie. Other close-in communities have greater areas zoned Rural and there is more activity in those communities. Examples of some properties which have sold for a residential type of development as large lots without public utilities available are included as Exhibit #3 in the Addenda of this report. Comments relating the individual market sales to the subject property are included in that data. It should be noted that the properties in Plymouth currently have a minimum lot size of 20 acres for subdivision in the FRD (Rural) classification; however, land which is subdivided prior to the policy of 20 acre sites can be developed as single family residential sites. In the light of market data such as that set out, it would appear to this appraiser that on a retail, subdivided basis, with lake rights, the average 10 acre lot in the subject property should have a retail value in the $100,000 range or equal to $10,000 per acre for a 10 acre lot. To obtain the $100,000 per lot, the developer of the property would have costs of developing streets, platting and marketing the property. It would be this appraiser's judgement that these items would total about $33,000 per lot, allocated as follows: Marketing $ 10,000 Streets, Platting & Misc. $ 8,000 Carrying Costs & Profit $ 15,000 Total Per Lot $ 33,000 ESTIMATE OF VALUE - (Before the Taking) - Con't. Development Aooroach as Rural Land Assuming a retail value of $100,000 per lot and a development cost of • $33,000, the indicated value of a 12 lot subdivision would be $67,000 per lot X 12 lots or $804,000 or $6,627 per acre for 121.3 acres. Summary The various approaches of consideration of the value of the underlying land indicates a range of $6,627 to $7,000 per acre for the land at this date. It would be this appraiser's judgement that a value of $7,000 per acre for the 121.3 acres total property is reasonable. This would then indicate a value of $849,100, say $849,000 for the underlying land. Estimated of Value of the Improvements The subject property is currently improved with a main residence of approximately 1,425 sq. ft. of main floor area with a full partially finished basement and a garage of about 845 sq. ft. It would be the opinion of this appraiser that to build the main residence today would cost about $65.00 per sq. ft. of first floor area or $92,625. To this would be added the cost of the garage approximately $12.00 per sq. ft. or $10,000 or indicating a cost new of approximately $102,625 plus yardwork, driveways, etc. or indicating a cost new of about $110,000 total today. It would be the opinion of this appraiser that if the improvements were sold along with a 10 acre lot worth $100,000 today or in the future with a smaller lot, they add about 70% of the cost new or a depreciation of about 30% for the 18 years of existence. This amount calculates to a depreciated value of $77,000 for the improvements. The original homestead buildings contain about 1,920 sq. ft. of first • and second floor area. Today to build an equal facility would cost about $50.00 per sq. ft. or approximately $96,000. This building is now over 100 years of age and is approaching or has reached the end of its economic life. It would however, provide housing at least for an interim period or a base building structure, perhaps for some updating and remodeling. In the opinion of the appraiser, the value of the buildings including the out buildings added to a subdivided lot having a retail value of $100,000 would be minimal. It would be this appraiser's judgement that to a $100,000 lot the farm buildings and original homestead would add a minimal value say, $20,000 over and above a vacant lot worth $100,000. For the purpose of this report then, the added value has been considered to be $20,000 for the original homestead and its out buildings when the value of the land is estimated at its full value of about $100,000 as a 10 acre lot. ItUSSELL SMITII ASSOCIATES, INC. 29 ESTIMATE OF VALU - (Before the Taking) - Con't. Summary Summing up the various indications of value, it would be this appraiser's judgement that the indicated value for the subject property, before the taking, would be as follows: • Underlying Land $ 849,000 Added Value for Main Residence E 77,000 Added Value for Original Homestead & Out Buildings 20 OOO Total $ 946,000 After inspecting the property and giving consideration to the various factors which affect value, it is the opinion of this appraiser that as of March 5, 1988, the date of inspection of the subject property, the fair and reasonable value is: NINE HUNDRED FORTY SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS ($946,000) • • • au9u i I RUSSELL SMITH ASSOCIATES, INC. 30 DESCRIPT10P1 AND EFFECTS OF THE TAKING f The taking from the subject property is the most southerly 24 acres as calculated by the Eden Prairie Engineering Department. description of the property being acquired, as The legal appraiser, is as follows: provided to the Commencing at a point in the center lineof town road a distance of 321.6 feet Northerly from its intersection with the Northwesterly line of the Milwaukee and St. Louis Railroad right-of-way; thence due West 33 feet to the shore of Riley Lake; thence Northerly along said shoreline 50.3 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence due East 339.7 feet to said right-of-way line; thence Northeasterly along said right-of-way line to the North line of Government Lot 3; thence due West 20 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence due North a distance of 1110 feet; thence due West a distance of 1000 feet; thence Southwesterly perpendicular to right-of-way of Riley Lake Road to shoreline of Riley Lake; thence Southeasterly along said shoreline to a point 280 feet North of the South line a distance of 390 feet to the Easterly line of Government Lot 2; thence South a distance • of 280 feet along said line; thence East a distance of 540 feet to the point of beginning, except roadway. (This legal description is subject to change with survey of property). The land being acquired is rolling and the northerly line of the land being acquired generally follows a knoll where it extends from the southwest to northeast and then extends basically original rolling land in an east/west direction. Within the taking area isacross homested nd development showinga its theapproxi ate buildings. line of A the dtaking ois included p of the p a as the following page. Riley Lake Road extends through the land being acquired. This appraiser is advised that Riley Lake Road is to be abandoned within that area which will result in the forming of a dead end cul-de-sac street at the southerly property line of the subject property. Access to the subject property remaining after the taking will be only from the west. Eventually, Dell Road is to meander through the remainder of the subject property. Once that road is extended through the property, better access should be available from a major street. The Eden engineering department indicates that development of Dell Road willPrairie timed, with the removal of the M.U.S.A. line roads in Eden Prairie are not developed outsidence of theicall S permanentli . Being that Dell Road is proposed for future development some 12 years more, the potential of availability of use of that road has been discounted in this report. A9S RUSSELL SMITH ASSOCIATES, INC. 31 DESCRIPTION AND EFFECTS OF THE TAKING - Con't. The subject property could still be developed under the Rural classification. It would be this appraiser's judgement that the value of the land, as acreage, has been diminished resulting from the closing of Riley Lake Road, the removal of a portion of the property for park purposes and the proximity of the property to the park after the taking. • • • • • 1 RUSSELL SJIITII ASSOCIATES, INC. 32 ESTIMATE LUE (After the Taking) In appraising the subject property after the taking, the property has been recognized reflecting value based on the remaining property after the taking; i.e., a parcel of land approximately 97.3 acres improved with a residence. The remaining land is rolling and has approximately 800 feet of lakeshore and relatively good and level access to Riley Lake. The property after the taking has lost the Riley Lake Road access to County Road #1, Pioneer Trail, and has access available only from the west by way of Hwy #101, a more circuitous route for traffic from the east. It is the opinion of this appraiser that the subject property is still desirable, with the best lake frontage remaining and with the ability to be developed Rural at this time and with future development potential for more dense single family residential. Using the same approaches to value as before the taking, the indications would be as follows: Market Sal s A roach - Without Sewer and Water Available When considering the subject property after the taking, recognizing the negative features created by the taking, it would be this appraiser's judgement that the value of the remaining underlying land has been reduced by about 10%, from $7,000 per acre to $6,300 per acre. This would calculate to $612,980, say $613,000 for 97.3 acres. Market Sales of Acrea a With utilities Available - Discounted for time In the estimate of value before the taking, the value of the land, as is, was estimated at $22,000 per acre assuming utilities available. This equalled $7,000 per acre when discounted for the 12 year time period between today's date and the date when the property could be developed. Using the same arithmetic factors and $6,300 per acre for today's land value as estimated above, the value at year 2000, 12 hence, must equal $19,772 per acre to yield the investor a 10% return on his purchase. This is consistent with a 10% discount to the $22,000 retail value on a comparative basis. Development Approach as Rural land The subject property, containing 97.3 acres, would permit 9 lots, after the taking in a development of one lot per 10 acres. It would be this appraiser's opinion that the lots after the taking and with the more circuitous route, have been reduced somewhat in value compared to the value prior to the taking. For the purpose of this report and to test the value indicated by comparing it to acreage, the per lot value has been reduced from $100,000 to $90,000 and marketing was estimated at $33,000 per lot wnuld remainer lot. he costfthebsame51o� indicating a net value of $57,000 per lot, or about $5,700 per acre. Nine lots at $57,000 net per lot, would indicate a value of $513,000. Aar) �'•�•�, -".ui 111 .1:,;,UC1.1'1'Es, 1\C, 33 EST1h1ATF OF VALU - (After the Taking) - Con't. Summary - Underlying Land Value The two approaches indicate values of from $513,000 to $613,000. The lower value is indicated on the subdivision approach since there is not quite enough land left after the taking to subdivide the property into 10 lots. That land would however, be of value for future subdivision and likely as acreage to be held. With this in mind, the value has been rounded at $600,000 for the underlying land or equal to a value of $6,167 per acre. Estimated Value of the Tm rovements The main residence will still remain. It would be this appraiser's judgement that this residence would also experience the same type of depreciation of about 10% created by the closing of the road and other negative effects of the taking. This would then reduce the add on value for the residence from $77,000 to $69,300, say $69,000. Summary Summing up, the value indicated for the subject property, after the taking, is as follows: Estimated Value of Underlying Land $ 600,000 Estimated Added Value for Building Improvements 69 000 Total Indicated Value $ 669,000 In summary, it is the opinion of this appraiser that after the taking, the fair and reasonable value of the property after the taking, is: SIX HUNDRED SIXTY NTNE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($669,000) •