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 - 05/16/1989
FINANCE DIRECTOR AGENDA JOHN FRANE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, MAY 16, 1989 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7600 Executive Drive COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock and Douglas Tenpas CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Director of Planning Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation b Natural Resources Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, and Recording Secretary Oeb Edlund PLEOGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL COMMENDATIONS FOR OEBBIE QUANBECK, RECIPIENT OF THE ATHENA AWARD, AND JULIE Page 1020 O'CONNELL AND TODD HALLETT, RECIPIENTS OF OUTSTANDING SENIOR SCHOLAR AWARDS I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS II. MINUTES A. Canvassing Board Meeting held Friday, April 2B, 1989 Page 1023 B. City Council Meeting held Tuesday, May 2 1989 Page 1024 III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List Page 1047 B. Arorovvee Final Construction Plans for T.H. 169 Improvements et between Prairie Center Drive and C$AH Page 1048 T(Resolution No. 89-96) C. Final Plat Approval of Woodlands of Eden Prairie (located north Page 1049 of Pioneer Trail and east of Franlo Road) Resolution No. 89-97 D. Approve Traffic Control Signal Agreement for T.H. 169 • and Anderson Lakes Parkway Improvements (Resolution No. 89-101) Page 1052 E. Request from G. E. Capital for Relocation of Geese Page 1064 F. Change Order No. 2 for Natatorium Project Page 1067 G. WOOOLANO PONDS by Michael Halley Homes, Inc. 2nd Reading of Pa a 1069 Ordinance No. 11-69, Zoning District Change from Rural to 9 R1-9.5 on 20 acres; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Woodland Ponds; and Adoption of Resolution No. 89-102, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 11-89 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 20 acres into 49 single family lots, 1 outlot, and road right-of-way. Location: East of Juniper Lane extension, north of County Road 1 (Ordinance No. 11-B9 - Rezoning; Resolution No. 89-102 - Authorizing Summary and Publication) City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,May 16, "I Vl IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST BY CASTLE RIDGE FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $3,880,000 18; REFUNDING BONDS — — Page 1077 B. RED ROCK SHORES by Scenic Heights Investment, Request fir oning District Change from Rural to R1-22 on 13 acres, Page 1078 Preliminary Plat of 19.77 Acres into 17 single family 1es., 2; outlots, and road right-of-way. Location: East of Court,}, ftktrni No. 4, north and east of Lake Shore Drive. (Ordinance IC. 13-89 - Rezoning from Rural to R1-22; Resolution No. B9-i - Preliminary Plat) C. CSAH 1 and 18 Area Storm Sewer Improvements, I.C. 52-123 ResoTution No. 89-92 Page 1113 D. CHASE POINT by Crosstown Investors. Request for Compreh+msi'a Guide Plan Amendment from Medium Density Residential to Page 1114 Neighborhood Commercial on 7.9 acres, Zoning District Chmryr from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial on 2.7B acres, Prel,rirrrniarryy Plat of 7.9 acres into 2 lots, 1 outlot with variances tr. t reviewed by the Board of Appeals for construction of a gin, se:mii.cm, and daycare facility, and request for Land Alteration Pe^mn,'tr Begin Soil Correction Work. Location: West of Shady Odc giund„ north of the proposed City West Parkway extension. (Resriwr.icu 89-106 - Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment; Ordinance Na. t5'43i51 - Zoning District Change from Rural to Neighborhood Commer:r•a,7; Resolution No. 89-107 - Preliminary Plat) E. EDENVALE II BUSINESS CENTER by Hoyt Development. Reques `inr Site Plan Review within the 1-2 Zoning District on 4.59 le7”/5 Page 1160 for Construction of a 70,528 square foot office/warehouse. Location: 14500 Martin Drive. (Resolution No. 89-105 - Approving Site Plan) F. RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION OF A PORTION OF OLD SHADY OAK ROAD (;Lcu'tt of W. 62nd Street - Vacation No. B9R51--Resolution No. 14-•2.1Pb Wage 1166 V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS Page 1167 VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS A. CABRIOLE CENTER by Hansen, Thorp, Pellinen, Olson, Inc. /i questL for Preliminary Plat of 1D.3 acres into 2 lots for const;wc'ci�tm of Page 1168 a 65,000 square foot office building, with variances to lie mevijwed by the Board of Appeals. Location: South of I-494 and Ale 74th Street, and north of Anderson Lakes. (Resolution No. 8!-•1:D3. - Preliminary Plat) VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. Request from Jim Ostenson and Ron Krueger on behalf of tn... Developer's Forum for a meeting with the y Council to page 1184 Lily update the Council on their progress and solicit ideas for nem programs — —— City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,May 16, 1989 B. Request from Trammel Crow Company for Land Alteration Permit to Page 1185 Begin Grading Work on-TFoperty (located West of Washington Avenue and South of W. 76th Street) 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 F. Report of Director of Public Works 1. Special Assessment Policy (continued from April 18, 1989) Page 829 2. Award Contract for Hamilton Road Improvements, I.C. 52-131 Resolution No. 89-95 G. Report of Finance Director XI. NEW BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT i A COMMENDATION from the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie community encourages and supports its children in academic and athletic activities; and WHEREAS, the skills and values attained in these activities help students to become responsible residents of Eden Prairie and of the nation; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to recognize excellence in achievements made by Eden Prairie students; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie hereby commends DEBBIE QUANBECK as a recipient of THE ATHENA AWARD in recognition of outstanding performance as a Minnesota scholar-athlete. The Council congratulates Ms. Quanbeck for her fine achievement and applauds the positive recognition that she has brought to Eden Prairie. Presented May 16, 19B9. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor on behalf of the City Council Richard Anderson SEAL: Jean Harris Patricia Pidcock Douglas Tenpas A COMMENDATION from the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie community encourages and supports its children in academic performance; and WHEREAS, the skills and values attained through formal education help students to become responsible residents of Eden Prairie and of the nation; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to recognize excellence in achievements made by Eden Prairie students; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie hereby commends JULIE O'CONNELL for being named OUTSTANDING SENIOR SCHOLAR by the Eden Prairie Rotary Club The Council congratulates Ms. O'Connell for her fine achievement and applauds the positive recognition that she has brought to Eden Prairie. Presented May 16, 1989. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor on behalf of the City Council Richard Anderson SEAL: Jean Harris Patricia Pidcock Douglas Tenpas lea ( A COMMENDATION from the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie community encourages and supports its children in academic performance; and WHEREAS, the skills and values attained through formal education help students to become responsible residents of Eden Prairie and of the nation; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to recognize excellence in achievements made by Eden Prairie students; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie hereby commends TODD HALLETT for being named OUTSTANDING SENIOR SCHOLAR by the Eden Prairie Rotary Club The Council congratulates Mr. Hallett for his fine achievement and applauds the positive recognition that he has brought to Eden Prairie. Presented May 16, 1989. • Gary D. Peterson, Mayor on behalf of the City Council Richard Anderson SEAL: Jean Harris Patricia Pidcock Douglas Tenpas • • 1 a /oat UNAPPROVED MINUTES CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CANVASSING BOARD FRIDAY, APRIL 28, 1989 12:50 AM, CITY COUNCIL CiiAi1BEfS 7600 EXECUTIVE DRIVE CANVASSING BOARD MEMBERS: Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock, and Douglas Tenpas CANVASSING BOARD STAFF: City Manager Carl Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, and Recording Secretary Jan Nelson Board hlember Richard Anderson called the meeting to order. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adopt Resolution No. 89-49, certifying the results of the Special Election held on April 25, 1989. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris, to adjourn the Canvassing Board at 12:55 AM. Motion carried unanimously. • • /023 GLEE FPAIE._ lITY coUNcIL UNAPPRIVEL M:MUTE. TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1789 7: 0 PM ,ITY HALL COUNCIL ^LittnERS 7I.50 E::e,:,,'.t.., Drivc COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayer Cary Peterson, Ricoerd Ander:on, Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock, and Douglas Tenpas CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jull ie, Assistant ta the City Henager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Director of Planning Ch::is Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation , Natural Resources Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works E.:grne A. Piet:, and Recording Secretary: Det, F11609 PLEDGE CF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: COMMEIIDATICNS FCR THE EDEN PRAIRIE HIGH SCHOOL GYMNASTICS TEAM AND THE EDEN PRAIRIE Hlr:l! SCHOOL DA LETDALL TEAM Mayor Petero:en presented ,Site c; n:cerdetiot—e to Stevo "::halt re re,:entia Eden Drair.i:: i 1f,1' ; ii.,., ..,: r,_:ul. ScYiult.: :..,�:,�] the City r its contiro.:ing support, e1y in written form, hut al::o shown by attendance at. the High School events. I. “wAL OE 7ii 1T rFR ITEMS 11 GUST tIi.,S MCTI^N: Harria nu:ved, r._,ndc,l by Anderson to approve the Agenda as amended. ADDITIONS: Add Item VII.F:, Eden Prairie Center Plans for Remodeling of Entrances. Add Item X.A.1, Speed Control on Pioneer Trail. Add Item X.A.2, Report on Park Bond Referendum. Add Item X.A.3, Action taken on Item L of the February 21, 1939 Consent Calendar. Add Item X.A.h, Keefe Letter. Add Item X.F.1, Resolution No. 89-90 Accepting Bid For Flusher Unit. Add Item X.F.2, Recolu'tton He. n9-92 A:.opting 1211 For 1911 Seal DELETE. Remove Item I from the l' n..r'nt Calendar . Mutton carri. ,l unanin:oir:1v. /v L{`/ city Council Minutea., 2 May 2, 1989 IT. MTTII1E2 A. Regular C:ty couscil m,e'ing held Toesd ,y., February' 193,9 MOTION: Pilcock moved, seconded by Harris to api.reve the Miautes of the February 21, 1939 City Council mutiny as amended. cP2,97f7IU2.: Page 4, Paragraph 0, L,entence 5, should road: to make itc position known.. . . Page 10, Item 11, paragraph 2, should read: in the p,at, information about the companies should be Pogo 19, Item 8, paragraph 6, oentence 2, shoulJ read: and thore were enviremental Notation Added ahove 2nd Ballot and 3rd Ballot, should read: Ti . falluwing !.allots were cast for appointment to the two-year term remaining from a vacancy on the Commizsion. Motion carrioJ R. Relul:ar Meeting. held Tueslay„_April 13, 1239 MOTTO Harric maved, econdol by Pidcock to ..approve the Minutes of the April 18, 1989 City Council Meeting as amended. CORRECTION:1: Bgo 14, Item IX.A, Motion 2, should real: Dan Dryer. Page 15, Item X.A.4, Motion, should read: Cleanup Day on April 15, 1989 Motion carried unanimously. TIT . cONOFNT CALENDAR A. Clr.k...a License List R. 0eso1WM) Authoriciag. an AMItdM,Ilt. L) the Contract for an 9.1 anl :Itudy Report Asr T.H, 212 (Reuolution Nu. 39-79) C. Recviv,, r-t1tP,!; and cr1k,r Fealbility_Relaprt for Otrr-et & Utilitie,a for :7ummiLJMeadowvaleiRed Oak prive„ I.C. 52-166 /0i%r 7H-,y 7e,m, Mhoit 3 May 2, 1989 Nr,. 80-90) P. 5i.7.eive Ffl.,11,11('r. 7tn.1v for CSAH 1 & 18 - Vi7hnity Imp...u2yementsSut Neari.-:,11, 1.7. 52-121 (R--,u1,,Lin No. 79-74) E. KINcGTON PIDE (aka Starview Terrace) by Patrick Cauer. 2.01 Reading f Ordinance No. 50-38, Resening frm Rural to RI -13.5 on l5.72 acres; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Kin,jztr,n Ridge; au,( Adoption of Resolution Ni . 29-27, Authorizing Gommary of Ordinance No. 60-98 and Ordering cot I on 'f Said Gummary. Location: East of Fa3t Staring Lane, west of Mitchell Road, north of County Road No. 1. 15.72 acres into 26 single family lots. (Ordinance No. 60-88 - Rezoning; Resolution No. e9-07 - Authorizing Gummary and Publicat)on) F. Ply L i Apial for RinT-z,b3n (fOrmel.„L.Gtaty.i. w t ...14.5Lt(11 11 _Ecad_Lhad w f Ct. rigs (Resculutisn Nu. 89-82) G. GI.,!ng:: Oljer 119. 7 Pha.ie II Ci,..-,imunity_ Center H. 37L7'CRCOTNTE Pod Rock Ranch) by Mason HOM1!3. 2nd F-ading of Ordinance N . 4-89-pud-2-00, Planned !.!nit IThvelopment District Review Amendment within the R1-13.5 Zoning Distrizt; Approval of Supplement to Dovoloper':. A.31:0ment to. Cverall Red Rock Ranch; and Adopt:an of Pes,,lutiol. Nu. 08-71, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 4-80-pud-2-89, an,1 Ordering Puhlleation of Said Gummary. 60 acres within the R1-13.5 Zoning DiAtrict wild wuivoro om 3:7ont yard ,.etback Code requirements. :,ucation: West of Mitchell Road, east of Red Rock Lake. (Ordinance No. 4-89-PUD-2-89; Resolution No 39-71, Authorizing Summary and Publication) I. Resolution No. 8n-88, Authortzingthe I:;suanco of_$74652n0 (REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA) J. 12(e-inlotion No, 89-99, Authorizing th'i, Tospance of 000 in RefundinISonds and !.:100,'",01,..inRefIld_iria Aprreciotion aonds _Lze_r_a coupuia_bonds_ A,58,11 000 facel tor Castle Rig_e Fare Cent,Lr. K. Pontni Scr Gutdoor Center l'h of Jul_ _V .Thrs m. Parkidolr 'H ::se RLviziuu Si. At( r(try to R.:2cej_ve_411or Teni.s Court 1r!Ra-i.,:. at Fraa:o Ind Wyndham /10. 6 city Council Minute:_; .1 Hay 1, 12.89 MOTION: Ar,dorson moved, tecor•,ded by Harris to .approve the Consent Calendar a:: amended with the Removal or. Itcm I. ITEM G Tenpas :slid Lambert what was the approximate square footage of the additional painting done. Lambert replied the wall where the compressors were located had been added to the centro_i:. enpac. ...toted that the chang. high. Muller, to approve the Items on the Content Calendar carried unanimously. TV. P_I3LI HEARINGS A. CESARETDCE STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS, T.C._.__`� r2 (Resolution No. 09-81) City Manager Jo]lie reported that notice of this Public Hearing had been mailed to the affected property owners .and war, published in the April 19 and 26, 1989 issues of the Eden Prairie New... Diet:: reported the ore' to be served would be the Fairfield Sebdiviien, the former Cheyenne Place Sub:livi.,ien, the school district, and some City property. A ::term :;ewer would run fruni the pending area and a short egment of canit.ary ;fewer would be included in the project; however, the sanitary sower would be ,.ass ;'sed .as part of another project. The estimated total cost of the project woo $962,905; the City cost to be $74,866, the County cost to be $26,089, and the assessed amount appruximately $362,955. Dietz noted that a number of the properties would not be developed at this time and therefore, deferments would be allowed. Approximately $240,000 would be assessed for the project originally, with the as::e.,sments to be scheduled for the Special Assessment Hearing in the fall of 1989. The project was expected to be completed September 30, 1989. Peterson :asked Dietz if this project would be ready to be part of the Acs,,:._,ment Hearin:ls in Augu t with a comp letien date of September 39, 1989. Diets replied that most of the conto would be established by the Special eoeosm>nt Hearing in Augi t. Anl. r�.,en ....:kcd Diet: if there would be any advantage to having easements for the Red Rock area for sanitary sewer. Dig *-z replied that £easibillty study for sanitary sewer in the area of Summit Avenue aid Red O,ak Dr ivu would be part of another project. /J427 City connoil Minutus 5 May 2, 1989 Harr!: f.r claclfloat !en on the asked if utilitleo and atntm oewer woul1 he a:z..eeed this fall . flieLs replied that only the storm aewer would be asseased this fall. Jack Vaii7aam.rtel, 16921 Duos it Drive, commended Staff for the foresight to include tho sanitary sewer at the same time as the storm :ewer. He questioned if the detail presented had the sanitary sewer in the right location. Staff replied that the location depicted was general in natureMOTION: Harris nivci, tle(...01L::(1 by Pidcock to ol.:ese the Public Hearing and adopt Fesolution Na. 89-81 ordering the improvements and preparation of plans and specifications. Motion (..arrlod nnanic,lously. P. FPEN SQUARE sm000TN7. 7.ENTER by The Robert Larsen Partners. A request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment Review and Planned Molt Development District Review on 9.59 acres within the C-Reg-Ser zoning district with waiver:,, preliminary plat of 11.72 acres into 3 lots for sonotructio.n of a 60,704 square foot commercial development. L,yaatian: Northeast corner of Highway 4169 ana Prairie Center Drive. (Resolution N,J. 89-93 - PUP Concept Amotdment to Overall Eden ficinaz.._ DUD; Or3inance Ne. - Planned Unit Development District. and Diatricl Amendment within C-Rey-Ser District; Realutiou tte. - Preliminary Plat) raoperted that not Ice of this Public Hearing had 1),.‘eil sent to owners of 23 surrounding properties and publia,hed in the April 19, 1939 issue of the Eden Prairie •. News. Chcis (Salle, representing the proponent, presented the plans for a 5-building development on 9.5 acres, to inclu,le 2 fast-food restaurants. Salle stated that the would be one story buildings with an 8 canopied walkway along the front of the stores. The project was 50 percent leased at this time. Enyer reported that this item had been reviewed by the Planning CummHsi,s at its April 24, 1939 meeting and unanimously recommended approval subject te Staff remAillmandatienJ of the April 21, 1989 Staff Report. Eager bell,vad that !_he plan with tic,- three free standing lull-bingo would be more marketable than the original piano of two years ago. The developer had provided criteria by which the free-standing facilities would he u.miAtibie with the main facility. An irrigation system was prepsed. Eager stated that the sign-age issue /0a7 • City Council 'iriutc 1 May 2, 1939 had not icon rersolved sad added the options were a single shared pylon sign or individual signage or each facility. Engor repo:Lod that the proponent would like to proceed with son.truction this nj Lambert reported that: thls item had hoer' reviewed by the Carhs, :lecreation & Nato:ol Rosoures Commission at its May 1, 1989 meeting and unanimously recommended approval based on the Planning Department fltaff Report of April 21, 1939. Tenpas asked if the trail would he at gride level of Highway 4169 or woull it he higher. Engor replied it would be at grade level and a stairway would tie the trail into the shopping .sorter sidewalk system. Tenpas askel hew el oar the trail would be to Highway 0169. Enger replied the trail would be approximately 20 feet away from Highway 4169 due to the practical difficulties of getting the trail on tsp. Tenpas suggested that the trail be kept as far away as possible from the highway. Engcr replied thal, Staff would rebook at the trail. Peterson asked if there could be a fence installed between the trail and the highway and if the trail would be outside the snowpl-w ' c,ne. Diet: replied that it should he outside thr. shcwplowing Petersor aukod what type of pedestrian traffic was anticipated on this trail during the winter and who would be responsible to keep tier trail open during the winter. Lambert replied that the trail was hot used heavily ROW because the trail deatlended; however, once the connections were made ho anticipated incraserl usage and the City would eventually he responsible to maintain the trail. Anderson asked whose responsibility the stairs would be to maintain. Lambert replied that the stairs would be considered part of the shopping center's interior walkway system and the center could be responsible for the maintenance. Atdorson asked the prornent if it had a signed contract with the Pannehoeken Hais. Calle replied yes. Harris asked what colsr the canopy would be. (lane replied that the color had not been determined at this time; however, consideratien was; being given to the • hurgitudy color tu :.,1c,t51, the bonds storo. Calle added that • the center wanted to te ,roapatible with the surrounding businer.ser-, yet have its own identity. Petorson asked If these was any discussion at the Planning Commission level regarding exterior lighting and/or /0,A 9 City Co.u.cil 7 May 2, 1989 jlsrL:l g , t htiug, Peterson stated th:It he h.a::1 received c:alls 11 jhtir,q et. ::he center and was concerned '.!i.:ct lighting would be more cc:nspicuous. Eager replied that the lighting had not been di.:cussed by the P1_anc inj Commission as _i concern. Tire poles at the Lundy center were approximately 1C0 feet high. Eager said that typically when commer:-Ia] development was ac.ljacent. Lo residential arena: SL.aff recommended that the maximum height not exceed 05 feet. Enger added that Staff would work with the developer regarding the lighting. Peterson asked if them: would be a uniform neon lighting color scheme. Calle replied that a uniform neon sign requirement had not been discussed with the tenants; however, the tenants would want some flexibility to assure individuality. Peterson added the he believed that the ne0n1 i a 1_r. ,at the Luck center were acceptable; however, there were Lome color combinations which would not be compatible_. Enger replied that Staff had discussed at length what the proponent would be allowed relating to eignago. The aignage would need to provide consistency, there were to be designated areas for the signs, curd height re : Lotions, Enger said that Staff had preferred allewincj the proponent to have a choice limited to three colora hoic :n rather than designate a specific color. Tenn. . I.e1ic:c d that the City needed to be rerc:iLive to tic! of the center and that appropriate ..ignage was au i,,a goat factor in the retail bush :O. . Pot.._;.un a ked what Control; would be placed Oh tire fast- food :e t,,ur,-rc t:, if they each chose: t,: trove individual pylau signL and if a specified distance would be maintained L twecr, the signs. Enger replied that. Staff had not di cu_:.oed requiring a specific distance between the signs. Enger added that Staff had discussed a designated height not to exceed 20 feet and that the maximum square footage per sign would be 36 square feet. Enger added that Staff would look into a requirement related to the distance between the signs. There were nu feether comments from the audience. MOTION: Anderson moved, ec.onded by Harris to clone the Public Hearing and adapt. Resolution Nu. 89-83 for CUD Concept Amendment:. Hotie.n carried unanimously. MOT. .,. And.-rsc:n moved, ..ec•onded by Harris to aarrc,_ l ;t Reading of cl r r „ni 5 37-PUD -80 for PUP District and Zoning District t Amendments,. Motion carried unanimously. /030 City Cuunc i _ M iruato M y 2, 1999 Anderson meved, recorded by Harris to adr lution No. 31 44 up.h: . . . ,g the PreLiv.i:.ry Plat and t„ direct Staff to it-.par.- a . ;rlopm nt Agreement incorporating Commission Corr_ Staff recommendations. Motion carried unanimously. V. PAYMENT IF CLAIMS MOTION: Pidcock moved, :.eeruded by An::l• rron to api.cove Payment of Claim:. No. f thrccgh No. IOil2. Tmnpir; asked what 'yp_ of inv.:etigation was L :rformed for ;0.75 Claim Nu. 10435 . Jullie replied that he would check on this item. Pidcock ae}; d whxn coordination of ordering t:ctween departments would 1 =• taking place. Jullie replied that the City Council had authorized a position responsible for central purchasing, and hiring would be forthcoming in the near future. Jolt i a,llerl that the departments were making effort;, to be careful in th,.it purchaser.. POLL CALL VOTE: Ander.-on, Harris, Pidcock, Te pas .and Peterson all vot.;ng "AYE". VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLttTIONO A. 1in:an eel t;ng_..t the r viro i cnt{1 y lc:'-dt t!tt �r6,.a_d�r..d Peterson believed that the first consideration should be whether thy.• Council wished to di:ccusc this item at this time or to forward it to the Waste Management Commission for review per the Commission's request. Pidcock stated that she would like to see this matter considered tonight. Pidcock added that she had received a :all from the League of Women Voters, which encouraged the City Council to pursue this endeavor. Anderson concurred with Councilmember Pidcock. .and added that he L:,o had received several calls from both ind iv;du;.ls „id group.. Anders:mn ad I .l ;hat he would like t,u proceed with the approval of the 1:t Seadinj tonight an, '.hen : allow time for diccusci::: 0,'.i: interested yruLps; prior to a 2nd Reading. Harris asked .City Attorney Pauly if a 2nd Reading could be d;Dyed indefinitely to provide ,an opi,ortunity for all time no who wi..•hed to be heard to comment en the issue and /03 I • City . .• ,.cil "is ,t .. O May 2, 19 c9 1 to ;,' ., .._.r w.io.j t.!.. .:i,.lil„n<- te t.!,_ ,. ._,te M•-an:a.jr:.na,,.a,t tuv.icw and comment. Pauly replied that: the City Council could choose to adopt the 1st Reading of the Ordinance, refer the fl :Jioance to the Waste '1.snagernnnt C;oioi. . iuu .ltew time for public comments prior to a 2nd Reading. Peterson que:otioned if it would be more cumbersome to amend the ordinance oil how much of the ordinance could be amended before another lot Reading would to required. Pauly rei l led that the 2nd Reading process was required by !,c . Hy Code only. Pauly ,added that nothing in the City code the State Statutes provided guidelines on how much of ._a document could be amended before requiring the pr 'cos:, to .:tart .=auc•w. r.2t,2r;:.Qii stated that he would prefer this '.tem ro'Ole'w rl by the Waste a nr,'ay h u,nic,�i i;;r t:, a i'• a :a or by-r fY � C-1 i -t the City Council. Peterson believ ,l that by oppccvirig a lot Reading a mes::oge would be given to the Waste Management Commi0,uiun that the Council approved and supported the content of the ordinance. Peterson believed that this; issue was too serious to a< t hastily .and, because the W..iate Management Commi:>aio.a tint ;specifically requested to t„: allowed to review the ordinance, he could not support the lst Reading. Peterson could see no benefit for approving a lot Reading at this time end believed that the process being tot, ❑ w.at. not .n t'a,. proper order. 140 !• .asked if the. City ":ai;i,c;l a>1 r•,_Pi di i comment tonight and then forcer::] the Ordinance to W..:.t t1,.cagemcali. Cummissiun without Approving a lst Redding. Pauly replied that this prose:.;: would be permitted. Tenpas stated that he was inclined to approve the lst Reading. He .added that he too had coccive,l numerous. phone calls both pro and con and would appreciate the opportunity to hear from the public. Pidcock stated that in response to a Sierra Club letter, she wanted than public to know that the City Council was, bib i nd recycling. Pidcock added Lint she had not been aware of many of the issues until this item was brought before the City : ; ui oil . lilcc:ck :,ap,p, Otcd the approval of the l.st Reading .anal then forwarding the ardinanae t.0 the W.,:;t- It.1 .ag.oi.ent. Cummiasion. Harr i.s tl;.at ohr_ to lid receive? . ,:all_ both pr:, arid caul. Harris added the :;he would be :ooze comfortable with 911 ion:al :;t.wly to he conductedy h the group wliic!, the City Council had commissioned to study these exact issues /AR City Council Minmto, 10 May 0, 120 the Waste Matiageant C, mmcsion. HarrmL.. otated that she would ahotain. Peteroun asked if the .,ralinance was appia!sd 5,r 0 1st Feadiny if a o(veat cool f,e added stating that the City Council had not thoruughly oxamined thu dcts,:lenL, which so.:] ] allow the Wista Mai.agement Commi'osiom to recommend ,t(odificaLiuns. Tenpas did not believe the issue to be as complex as the Council w.ron making it colt to be. He comainscIted that rccycling waa now ts the area and that the different categorie of ploistisn:; made recycling , diffla.alt: process. Tenpao elated that. he believed that recycling should be the first alternative and that if recycling welH2 not posuiblo that harmful plastics he banned at> a second alternative. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson to approve the 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 12-89. • P,toa. ce: goa,,Liuned td,c wurding and the acceIrscy of come of the information presented in the otdinance. Peterson specifically took exception Lo the statement. nat pla:!,tles were not tucyclable. Anderson .:Ltd that oven if products were considered recyclab1,2, .a facility (:eedod to be provided 'which .-ould recycle therlm Auderon believed that the plastics industry was nut erring forth with any solutions for tne recycling prublems and that something needed to be done to create a catalyst, to get the plastics industry's attention. Anderson believed that the Minneapolis Ordluance and the Ordinance before the Council tonlyht could be those catalysts. Peterson noted that County Commissioner Randy Johnson had been trying for over a year to get a plastic recycling pra)gram estsbliahed. to bind that if an ordinance were approved it should be one which could be enforced and questioned how this would he accomplished. Hatris: added that. ::.he telived LAIL t:horo needed to be a place to Litart; however, she was nnrsmfortable with the information availahlo at this time. re' onson holicvcd thou wore inconsitencies in the ordinance which needed to be addressed and guestio:,a which needed to be answered before he would be comfortable approving the ordinance. • City rs'olc:1 ilinates 11 May .7, 1929 ridcoc!. miorled !hat exception coaald he taher with th? worlin; sner ,lesamenta approved bytho City ,-soarroil . notod that the ordinance had hcen iraepared by the City Attorney. Pauly -toted that he had taken the iiiajerity thoerJioj : the ordinance dircLly from the Minneapolim '.:aft as directed by the Toaacil . arrir boli—ved that it wan important. fur the public to know that oesry cnuncilmember was concerned about waste abatoment. Harris was concerned that the Csunril could be creating unnecessary hardships fer busiesses by approving this sisAlrance. Tenpas statod that hu, well as other Csuncilmembers, were lfl0".. LA:n.1 the cecyclin,; projrans of the Cuunty; hewever, there was d void in the prey:ram related to the recyoi:e; of plastics. Tenpas believed that approving th2 lot Peadij woold still allow time for additional inpat by the Curl, thc Waste Management Commission, and the public. Tenpas stated that he believed the intent of the ordinanca was to encourage recycling and hoped that the ordinance might opeed up the process by the private sector to he3in recyclinj plactic. A diacu:.,,claa took place among the Council members related to the appci:a Late time for public input. It woo determined that public comment would ho heard after the vote far t . co! ien errently on the flser was seampleted. Motion carried ]-1-1. Peterson %,oted "IL". Harris Paoly Joho,an, Hennepin County Commissioner, 'stated that he shareLl the Council's concern about plastics; however, the CoGILC11 needed to keep in mind what was actually tu be accomplished by the ordinance. Johnson stated that studies had indicated that the burning of plastics did not release rlioxins into the air. He said that the pla:,atico did not decompose rapidly; however, because of the lack of oxyen in landfills, very few items decomposed. A procerz.e. called densification was in the development stages, which would help in the solution of the recycling of plastics. This proceos should be available early in 1990. Johnson stotod that currently a local firm was paying $640 per ton to a firm in Chicago for recycled plastic and, therefore, believed th.is demonstrated that there was a value to recycled pH -tic. Johnson believed that the local market for recycled plastic would be strong. Johnson stated that tie Minneapolis Ordinance was not a ban it 111 because the ordinance provide] exemption for the plastic:; which were part of a recycling plan and that the intent, of the orivatala• wa:, to establish 3 Commission to tudy the 1H. usm. He said that food container plaatics were actLally tic moot benign plastic available. The Coitnly /0eq 12 2, 1)e9 ri! Y L:111 d ].o ol,er,tc ma! ,..:rial recovery facility f.,: J ,coon bell -ed that the City weld ho ccc productive if IL si!potl to County': Waste effrts, w,-,,t:ed harder tlt .1:,wr, on the volume of waste wculd boy recycled cer, rd would begin making pr,(.,/i„.; 1:::, to colleet plastiy [Sc ret'ycled. !-] at cur: HI' a firm in Chli:pewa Fall:, Wisconsin was recycling the „.:tyref(,am to rake insulation b,ard. J:hrc:,o cc 1d 1 y !atl:,J that plast.I C W,71-; ValUabi(.. • a„;k,..(1 H w;,1J1d tal:e for to use • t:a• af rcoycl,11-1.- material. .7„,tnon replied that the guality needed to be Ivi:,roved; h '„,eer, the demnd wa.5 btrong for recycled pL 'Jt1„,. Tenpac ao.kcd Johnson what the 1 M nne pol and the pr epos cd Eden Prairie ordin,a11(.:,:. VC': !iave on speeding up the process of recyc :1,.stit.s on the private industry. Johnson replied that the Minneapolis Ordinanc',2 had already had a negative effect on negi.tiatins by lice C.Dunty tc: Andel-.tcn commended Johnson on his .offortc. Anderson believed that a concentrated effort c,ee,l.,d to to made Lc., keep the State clean and added that private industry was supparting roti,er t:„-,n returnable one . Anden believed Uat hoc„tua,,2 ,F the Minneapoli.7, Ordinance the public now had tho .att- of the cla],urn;. Anderson that thic was too imyvt,aat an Icue not be addrec:,ed. Jehnson replied the problem Coun„:11member Anderccn was de:.,cribing was a litter problem whic:h W30 not the .aamv ,a7, a solid waste problem. Johnson believed that a better int, of educating the public was necry and that the litter laws needed to be enforced. J,::lark•-on said that McDonald in New York had started a program to recycle the "clam shell" containers. J,,hnson added that refillable containers required more energy to produce than the throw away or and added that. ceoc.Liar-c what appeared to be an obvious solution was not. T::,;1 Tupper, a plastics engineer for Advance Machine rrotu:,otc, :,tatud that Proctr & Gamble wa.-, looking for 20 to 7n million p:mnds a year of plastic L,ottles tu make ita Ccc:] cnn-ru. He believed that wa:, very interested in re .']]",, ',lactic. Tupper ▪ tat h,cd been conducted in t",ormany which fo:::,1 ! hat if ['lactic c•on',:ainerc thAt cc:,] IC • v w,••ild .4(.tually aad the landfill proll:_mr7, would bac far worse than what was presently fwing oen. Tupper ! ,id that the .L,Llay Lhat the weld Inerese Icy ac,„:-. 7001 fur 1 f tier: wc r 11;;ed /03•C-7, City Ccrncil t 11 May 2, 1939 El I he r: mu: , 7121 Will u Cuu}: road, LulLurl that the plat.tic !An wetill not accamplih what It. was Intended to do; hirvcr, by rairiir3 1he losue, the public was belie, male metre aware of the •,c:,,,blams so] Lerause the issue was before L.he Council tor:.,,h1 :'0,-.idents were able to hear the information available from Sandy Lehnson and Tom Tupper, which they weld otiurwi out been privilvejed to hear. Sorensen believed that the public: needed to take a stand before the plastic luCsrstry would Address the i$ZUQ . There were ua further c,e:rneoh: from the audience. l,12=722.11.L Pidcock mo•ied, 'eq:onded Ly nder.ron to :send Ordinance No. 12-39 te: the Waste Manayement Commission for review and reslc,on.n, pri r to the 2nd Boding. Motion carried unanimously. VII. PETTTIONS,_FET7STS COMMUNICATIONS A. Peritlest 1.?.Y l'I' cibb:)fh residents recdurlitla....Re2oniny'_. Eroi,essd Lake Heljhts Third Addition (continued foci Morch 2, 1909) Jr IlL reposte6 that the residents had been informed as to City A;_t..,r1 :y It.•n:ly's response and had in turn submitted a letter '2,IL,A 1, 1932 with a series of additional Tdestisno. Jullie recommended that the May 1, 1230 letter Le forwar&,1 U 1I6ff fe:: review :-111,3 to lb' rewldeiits :ni Hot a public hearinj be sehanled if tLe reHslento ...' ;I.'] to pursue the boo further. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Harris moved, rounded by Anderson to refer the May 1, 1939 letter from the residents to Staff for further review and response. Motion carried unanimously. B. Reg_uest from Timber Lake Homeowners As:, ,,datlon_to_Fial:,,. Control Level of Mitchell Lake Jul lie reported that Staff had not revived this item in detmil At this time and therefore, recommended that this item he referred hack to Staff for further review and Iddel thmt Staff wuul ] h„ive a rpollzu prepared by !Ls. • June 90, 1989 City Council. siting. NOT Harris moved, reconded Ly Anderson to refer the requect by Timber Lake Hameowners Association to Staff for further /03 • City coonu-11 Xinutes 11 May 2, 1909 review and to, L.:ve resia,nue prep,ured Ly the June 20, 1950 City Council meeting. A re:iident in the audience asked if Red Rook Lake could al:,o be censid.:red in th: •,Ludy. Dietz rei:11212 that Staff would alas look at Red Roci.: Lak . Peterson inked if the sttrm aewer proposal pr.ce:.ontod earlier thio evening would have an impact on the Red Rock Lake level. Diets replied that it could hring the lake to a minima; level; however, what was needed was ,:ignifi,:ant rainfall. Another resident stated that she would not be able to return on the. 20th of June and wanted the Council to he aware that the north hay of Mitchell Lobe :7,tagnant w,,Ater• Residents asked the Council who would conduct the ztudy. Peiterun replied that City Staff would conduct, the study and could determine if outside consultants were neceary. Peter:16n encouraged tl, residents to centoct St,ff by phene er by later wit;, :; ific concerns prior to the June 20, . 7,P.9 CiLy C,:ancil meeting. There were no further comments from the audience. MotHin carried unanimously. C. RED Rncr VIEW ADDITTCN by Mark Olsen. Request for Preliminary Plat of 5.7 acres into 9 oingle family lots and road right-ef -way. Location: We.: of Meadowvale Drive, oast of Clue Sky First Addition. (Resolution No. 39-35 - Preliminary Plat) Jullie reported that this was not a public hearing because the rezoning request had been withdrawn; however, he suggested that the Council follow the procedure for a development proposal and allow public comment. Frank Cardarelle, representing the proponent, stated that the erijinal request fur R1-13.5 'zoning fur 14 lots had been withdrawn based on recommendations by Staff and the Planning Cammiosion and the revised plan would be to maintain the current R1-22 zoning with 11 lots. The average footage of the lots would be 27,500 square feet. The 50' front yard tbacks reTleted by the neighLoi ii had Leon maintained along Meadawvale Drive; •the 125 foot let width r( gueutd by the neighbors, ;,e! able to be auce,mpliuh,id duo to Lhe uhape of the 1,r-i2erty t.:itheet the removal of an additional lot. Eug-r :,:i2orted that tlb L item had been reviewed by the • Planning Commiasion at the April 10 and A1rjl 21, 1939 • 037 4 City 7onhc•Il Minutes it Hay , 2950 meet:,ihtgo, Tht diocesior at the meetijr had sento-ul on ta-h 2 and 3 hclog rotated ha lace Maadowvalo Drive Aend the foot lot width. The plat had !pooh revimed based an 2taff and Planning Commissior 00 La reflect the rotation of the two Iota and to maintain tha 10-fo0t front yard setbacks as requested by the neighhors. The Planning Commission hdd approved the proponal based on the Staff recommerdaLisi, of the April 21, 1039 :iltaff report with a 4-1 vote. Christine Dedge had voted against the prop-coil to indicate tn the Cuutlail that she believed there was merit for fnrther discoa,lan of the 121 foot lot widthn. Lambert roperted that tic: Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commiasion reviewed thia proposal at it May 1, 1007 vleting and unanimously voted to recommend approval of thu proLosal based on the Planning Department Staff Revert 'fated AL•trli 21, 1039. Peterrton asked C.„:.tilrtlle to address the 125 foot lit width regoant, by the ncighbors. Cardarelle replied that of the 13 lots in tho cIrc.a 25% of the Iota had lot hhno 125 Cardarelle stated that the 1,stt, :rrd tha aa:tie amount of square footage and that the r.., • dt...e1.-er and narrower. itoffer, 27I1 ht,-,serlwvale Drive, stated that the leta-t•ity Of the crule ctwaa the real issue rand the 5aud, hhit U. wc,u3d Alter the whole character of the tr:riatinj neighhorhood. Hoffer said that the exinting 0 t.loba.lvale had a lot of space between the homes the proposed development would have large homes ON risi.Zr lots, which would give a crowded appearance. Tenpes asked Hefter if he was suggesting the removal of an additiaral lot. Hoffer stated that the neighbors had signed petitionn against the proposal. Hoffer added that original plan had shown five 100 lots along Meadcwvrie and the neighbora had requested that 1 lot be removed and the 25 feet be added to each of the 4 lots. Hoffer believed that of the three developments, this proponal had the greatest rf,fort on the neighborhood and added that he did not believe the developer had made any concessions based on the huljhbors concerns. Phlyo,7!: nardarelle if the footpads had dc,termined far ,AC!, lit. Cardarollo repliud ti No added that wit!, !h . 71 22 ntrg a minimum side yrr I sethask • Weald he if ittre..L rod therefore, would pry:de a minimiop of 70 fact hetwee cc wanes. • Toni:as asked Cardrell,. what the economic ImLact would be tar: ths prej, ..d : f an additional lot were f, he_,ved. • cardarolle relled that the cost of the one lot would have 7 C!t.1 Courwil rin,Jtes C May 2, 1939 to he ver S letn and the price lets would have Claude Johnnon, 2740 Red Oak Drive, rked if the Feasibility oroject area for Cummit Drive and Red Oak Drive a13 be completed before this delopm€,nt was complked ,:nd would the street, be torn up twice. Dietz replied Id. 1, Toff would look at LIe proje,c:t 01 a whole. Rob Smith, repreeenting the Strawberry Hill ii::oject, :Aated tr.,f, the p..LiLion for the public 1.uprevement:; had been withdrawn .Jall ,some ef the impovemeut, wild ho done privately by the developer. Diets stated ' hat two .separato prkj,:cte; would be done and In: Cl would try to coordinate the two projects. Dietz the major disturbanco b the front of the homes would be doo to the road John Hot for -t.:,ked that he did not want the developer to lose money or the project, nor did he belicve that the Council sheull guarantee the developer profits un the land. Pidcock aoked iLEfer how wide his lot was. Hoffer replied 125 feet a !",0-fort front i:.rd aeLback . Nancy sauro, 275" Neadawvale Drive, stated that the land ON the of khe propened lots along Meadi,ww.7e Drive would drop off .:ha:L,ly and added that the last 150 feet of the let: won3l Le ,.nusable. Cauro said that the' neighbors wero primarily objectio4 to how the neightorhoed would change in appearance Peterson etated that the City Council would need a legal poalton by which to deny a project or require a developer to make further changes Lo the plan. He added that what the Ccunnil waL; heing asked to consider was more than what the City Code rcquired. Larry Moo:3, 3651 Red Oak Drive, stated that part of the attraction for petitioning for utilities would be a reduction in costs to tie in with the another City project and asked if this would ,;Lill be possible. Dietz replied that, now that there were two projects, there could still to a price advatage, and the developer would be abriorbing c(,me of the cc- ;Ls. Hurris hy idcock to :;(11,t• Resolution N . 21-55 approvin,j ohc Praliminary Plat with the addition of the Staff Peeli,mendatins. Motion carried 4-1. Tenpas voted a city Council Minutes 17 May 2, 1939 sTTAVSEE7Y.yr1J, by Peli,a! WI f I c: Fr•]r tCC.,f Pr. !m r,:!' P . ,t of r I 1r; r .r. gl,:, family 1 �, and road : ;gait f-w:ry, with etc Hier.: to be revieved by the Coar•1 of Appeal tLion East r.f County Redd No. 1, north of fllue Sky Fis- t Addi!.. r. (R _ o]t:ti,-n U •, 39- 86 - Preliminary iminary r1,,L) Bol, :11th, reprc': e. tir:•; the proponent, stated that the original plan had been for 7 lots with R1. 13.5 zoning and th•:al. Lamed on Staff and Planning Commission rc•comme•nrl,atiun; the plan had been revised to eta with the :orjinj remaining the current R1-22. The ;tiliti es would curie from the Fairfield Subdivision, a permit front the D":R would he required, approval by the Watershed District, and a variance for one lot would be necessary to preeee 1 with the prejech . E:i,3.T L: t.r•l that this. ito hod been reviewed by the Planning Commission at its April 10 and April 21, 1939 meeting and ;cod received errar;incus approval bawd on the recommendations in the staff Report of April 21, 1989. Enger added that Staff and the Planning Commission were recommending approval of tho variance request. Lambert rope.rted that this item had been reviewed by the E,:rks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission at its tMay 1, 1939 meeting and had received unanimous approval based orr t.lro recuuunc•ndaliurr:, .to outlined in the Planning R pa . _.tent- Staff ReperL of "_1:ri1 21, 1083. Anderson moved, seconded by Harris to adopt Resolution No. 89-00 approving the Preliminary Plat with the addition of the Staff Recommendations. Motion car/led unanimously. E. E_DEN PRAIRIE CENTER, Plans for Entrance Remodeling Eager reported that the Council had reviewed at a previous meeting; the redeoign of the 4 entrances to the Eden Prairie Center aad at this time the Center had elected to proceed with those plans. Staff recommended approval of the plans. Tenp:r;; asked Larry 7-,a;•,.ra, manager of the Eden Prairie Con!. r, what the ; tas, were to increaJe the success of the center. Jen::en repIled that the center management had m.idr a cum.miLnuid for the interior and exterior .ent-leling of the -'enter. T!,, :den Prairie Center would be featured .It )n': of ;tic m.ija: conventions in Las Vegas this year. • Jensen noted that nn;. of the biggest problems to overcome w.3 the 1,revinuo p rception of the center and believed that the, r,•novat.h.i: proposed was the first c.tep. /04ID City Council Mimt-L• May 2, l'2?.') J Tenpas maked if the Ne,ja Mill propor-,ed Plotmingteb weulh hurt or 11,_,4 the Eden Prairie ',7..2bte; . Jensen h' Vlthot it help retailers to the j1. ,t and c.mild eecond ate:,-' the tte,j, Mall t,a Eden Prui;:e Picleoch ackt.d if I: -. Careen Ririe 7cott e,b ; anc.: be b!.al.ed that the main intent wa.:. to • change the appearail,a, ,f the 4 autin entrances fre.r celd and uninviting to e'. re and Inviting. Jensen added that • the' center did :lot have rcntrol over thu dol.artmoat store entrancs. VI It REPoRTfl ,Th7 ADVICCRY COMMhTOliC A. fl.orart irom Wasto nnaar2ment Commiqrsi221) 11naftcycldtau Yvonne Hargens, a memb-er of the Waste Management aummariziA the Commi..a:uiun' report. and recounr nda onc Petercon ae.ked if Ile Commission kbew if the County would alltw Rhen Prairie tt tu the wen1,1 th , .7.tsnty design,. te the dectination. reitlli,1 that it would seen re—onable Err f!.. CJenty In allow tlw City to use the Reuter facility. T-b1-,at; a:.kd if Lb.- WaJte Management C6mmictlion was a...iro of a hill befbre 1.•gislature which would allow the bnr.:-,ing of the pelleL, produced by Router Recycling, inc. proentcd the ccuncil with a copy of the amcaldo, nt. Peterson quo:,I. recommend atiun No. 6 and what purp.:se would be served by the City's contribution for the ceat of recycling contbibers. retcr.,,on believed that the residents shonld recuqnize that they were responsible for the waste gc.nerati6n and, therefore, :;hould share the burden of the :xpence. Peter-con noted that this would not be fair Lu the hu.Linesses, the residents would receive a break for recycling; however, the l'u:;inee:aes would not. Harric believed that tho proces chould be made ac easy at.. poscihle. She added that there was cemethin,i Eastive and rv:auraging in uff:ring T,omething free. Mar: in neted that Lb.. Lontainerc would he a one-time invet:tmemt far the City. • btated that !he eno-time inve:A;r,ant would cent t!, City appro:,:imately ;317,000 and tlr: could not know the were using the containez: for recycling. Pt.:nor believed the incentive would !,e the rate break. Pidcoch commented that the City cc,110, not buy goodwill. • City tliute; May A, 1Y39 r, y, Anderson otItod that to ww:1,1 libl booeo , .ot the impact t huctilct 1..; before approvh,3 the Cityz participaLic.n in the J.-.ost of the contai..e.o.. Haigen..; i:Lafed !fiat BFI W:13 willing to order the confainut:_;. McTIONf Pidcoci: ;•,,a:ved, o..ceJded by Harrii.. to ac',:et the Wai,to Marhly,nnon! 7,,,1111;iJL,in .., report, .i1Copt CHn 413, and be dclay the leyisi.in for City participofi• a in porLfa.;inq the .i.,hf:iH• r. furth.,r inforuftiti:,n was awailale wc,rlii .D with Hennepin County t 01i- : 1h1.•2 City Oct . Mot tin o;•.tfld IX. M'POINTMFIT7S X. RTTORTC CF (2FFT.C7R7. 70ARD (!nmmi:7,7ToNr7. A. F -ort:: of 7:1;1; :1 Metill,r-.7 1. o. Riuneer Trail ft.rrt:; the City'o; plans won: to Lodilcs the h. fhe roily of the Cedar Ridge C,chor,1 to ;;;ake tho afr. Diet,: replied that a signal wo;;Id Jo ih .f 7;Ji.;,fy A h Ii anJ County Road 41. Henri.i 0o.h.ed cold 00 in;Jalled. Diet rep712d Hat., ! „1, L; mparary could be in:atall,A by this summor; howevor, he had not had direct conversation with reyarlincj MO timing. Dietz added that thero not hoc pedcstritn traffic to the ,_;chool, this Wetth be burn route. Harri.i believed it was important for the City to erhance the f-;;Eety of the children crossing the toad near the schcol. Diet: stated that he would contact, the County. Hdc;: is meo,;(1, i;eco.tled by Tenpas to refer the issue of jid Ctitr61 ot Cty Road ni to Staff for f;:rtt..r • Aol i, A t., the ..chool wan; on the north rite f PL ,d #1 111,1yot:enrwoo n the f;outh oid aria believed blOt tho City should luck it pravidin;;; aml tic 1,Jath • north ef Coonty Road tl rod County Road #4. hellov-d that d 1 way stop would Lilow Then tho traffio more effc1 ivoly th.,al as Ijnal. Clot : 0eplie.i /02 • City Ceuaeil Mir,ntes May 2, '!')99 that neither 1.3r1 existed i.:r .,peed :entrol and did not !..,elic.ve that a 4-way .4ork nIl for thia ureo 2iot. tel tt,,t Staff ...:.;111,1 ..1(.1,1Lroj at he li.jht in thi.; area. Potion carried unahimau:ily. Wyr,TCZZ: !, 71,11-.: 'IL; to from ,1t 00 .O nen.lin4 what, the next. 1. h0.11.3 lar to pork improvemei.t. by the June 6, 12:39 C;t meeting. Motion S. Acd.1 n T IlL, 0nn Febr..iarzy Pidceck oekmmi f the P.taff recommendations had bccs forwarded t LI.o Chambe e of Commerce rc...garding the City's poi.„itien hew PNR Shereland Management n....gialsitionF3. Engirt lel net been [01:w...it...It:CI at fbi tire and that tic. weu1,1 -ee Limit wan dune. 0110(01: woved, acconcled by Anderson to present commendation:. Lu Duthie Ou.iinbeck and Julici Wagher be in j rc,c•iplent:: of Lie Athena Award. Motion carried 1. Veefe Peterson .-anted Jullie if he would take part in the Metropolit„in Coqncil's airport study. Jullie replied he would. f3ep.prt of Cit.y. Manager. 1. cit.Y Peterson :1-.itated th.it hecause of the. leng L-rm of .,Lrvice with tic City he iGcummended a 6% increa::e in .:alary for tl . (.7ity Manayeo. it the iialary obrull 0 . o.11.,:arahle with elLiei.; of e,p.:Al might i.e hi1lmrniny becacee G5 iitago of PiJ000t: •!;,. had had I.:L,Ht:%e lc.alin-j with city mAn.ojer dull . ; how. ./..;!, she believed that at some point /00 May " , m„odo that he i t 1 t'an:iye.. 1 In .rl , and :added that -she like L., jaid 1irtca he muro de=fiait.i ., . T(nj:a., L,: l i_o.•d that to base the: oalary ., , ....awe on where tho City M:n...ger lived would he inappreid.itte. Ne added that wh ,• and,', ny,if City Ma Jrsl.'�. l.�f' he pooition iL would he api�ropri,_at� to look at ,a�ra:;.i la:_. ,y Leguliement. at that Lime. Flarri;. ;nna ], a.. -al by 1udr_r:er a 6 .ats.a:cro ase for City `i y i Manay���� ,7��:1 1 i s�. M�,t i r.;i� C. Repro t ,,: city •,bt. l-ne'• P. R..e,pi,'..t._;!1:_Dir.ector_....of.._'_lanpi_na E. Director nf P ho. n ..rr t'oiii_:; SNatur:al e:5nurcer 1. High .,clio ,l Cnmmunity n n= L.a:nlart not: gal that bier a were actually two separate iwa;ueaa, one for uaai of the owimminy p,;u1 and one for tda u:,e and charri-a „f the ice arena for the hockey team. Lambert ,y;c•:,L�;1 _} :t each moue be deals. with �a'i%:,.:.!"ly• _ JiLls swim teas had expanded over the .,rl,li Lion-al pool time was. :iKj`.a.i'::e.l' however, if the pao] time w.as given to the school the Community ccht,.r would 1-oar approximately .$7,000 to ,001) i:a rry roue•: fr m swimming lesions which would not be able to be :Scheduled. Lambert stated that Staff and the Parks, Recreation_ & Natural Resources Commiusion both recemm aaaled yranLiray the school most of the additional poo, Lime. No noLard that the City had originally agreed with the School District that the Community Center would be the primary practice facility. Lamher.l. stated that the school Dic:trlct v.1i: re-alueu,ting a change in Ilia• mofIn d eel for charging fro the hockey yam, . The cur reut policy was to charge the District 1 houro of ice time, aplit the workers coot 50/50, oa1,] „plat the gate receipts 10/5C. The liotrict stated that. iL had lei,t money in 11 oral of the last 18 games played. The new Chaff prep.ns �1 w; e for the •1 a 1 Lr, charytour_ of i imr have the its ply the wcarkenra, and aplit the remaining The Parks, Recreation Natural l Cr:m i iou Ti!.y , Isar ge for 9 hnnar:i f isa. Lime, pay the workers, and take 1001, of the /GPI (-7ty C, anc i l Minutes32 what mi.,ct. tLer,, wuul._] I u, _ wIe 1i,1 m ,il.;:'rai,ii, fees to hela;J to the Comilinuity r. itpied that .,nme of the lecc:or, Jruar.; would r,ot !;. ff. . .. ^,urin'J the winter. • , .. a helieved 1 hat the timer from 7:i0 AM to 11:30 AM on at :r lHy :r,nrai:ay :Mould he kept. for :i,':r i,,J swimming • 3 l. . mean . Lambert st:at.r d that Staff ha:? recommended !.!',e ,3 : i, i ef that purtiou of the reyueec,t. Lambert added that 3Ftt cf the t.;,t,.al ler::,,ns were on Saturday morning. Lamti.art acted '!Pat the majority of th,asc of lie Couu:aunity Center.. if the indi;,01 had any other alternatives. 'i,ij ,l !L.,.. the osiy alternative sold to to seek _amo• '_f..., l,.cat.. for practice and the school did not terrf _ yt.lag anothr location. Atld<'r:en how lung the practices were ca_rcactby. mche•dole,l. Schultz rej:llr_'rl that practice::i were scheduled from 2: '0 PM to _ :PO PM, Schultz added that since the school had J',ined the Lake Conference all the o'.her schools housed their own i�.00l, and, therefore, tho _den Prairie .;t :,_'.e „ were at .a d.ic.advant,,ye _'ur..l needod the ,extra practitime. t.it„d that the City had agreed to ;a. .,mmsd,ate• the cchnol far any ucrceasc in the prc Ja,am. Pidccck . _ ._ '3 that _,he did not want P, aee ",.'.e a shers of the Cora ,,,:ity Sentor or the younger teeters a e• of the pe,,i. Anderson et.ete.tt that the City was exporting and noted that many other .:::,;manities had two or three pools. Anderson added that he did not: want to see tho pr;ccticc wasted. Schultz stated that when the District originally agreed to the current arrangement it had assumed the hockey games scold pay for: themselves. Schultz stated that the District had looked into what other schools in the area were doing .and found that most had a 50/50 split with the City. He added that Edina had a 70/30 split, hut: the City did ::ot c:har,jc• !he e .drew] for the ice time. Schultz: h,elieved that hsrausr' it was a school activity that at ',amt. 50me: _ ' r.'vear�ue should come: back t e., the Ghoul. !L., _:aid that `h. . t:rct w.ac: under hudye't, reatr,,,t,t._; eat »,,.. ._ „ ,N ',ay it could continue to aupii ,ra the rnyr apt . h, .; 'JJ, tcad t:h:' reeaihility of lanking at ac1J,a:;tinj t`r tai rats for the ice time. o;.•hi„+.•, believed th et t t,. ^,ar}:;;, Re cr,e,at.ion .S Natural Pe.:oerces , r "„l,t ion would hl' a;i;dltly .)r+. :,,' Stung Staff retcrnnmenilutia,n rec:e� i ;•d the iOtrs • City 7ouncil Mluatc:; May 2, 19E:9 HE !o• y ;;Ahd toroon tated t tz id of f orel oarup.1 ng • iit ; Odor, ojtle,7,t1 jrAcci why iny 1,uld ..Tect to oar 7.ity owned and -.1Jer.atod facillt:ca at a L'rofiL. An'toron ;tateril th•it he would agree with the Staff recommendation and :iaaggested that the e:chool increase Its oclmi::..aion [Co te S2.90. Anarcon holluved that the crow ceoti elchouid be the recponcftility of the Ditrirt. TeLpa.: L;tate,..1 that he con, with the Staff Ho bolie..' d that th fulotOict .and the City ca;amunity. 1177:117:.. Tent.u. rod, :oocou-ulod by Anderson to approve the chon,i;e.L; requeotod by the Eden Prairie School Diaotrict per Staff rE col,‘,10 r :1-it ions. Motion arrii3 unEirlimew.;ly. 0 oor t0 . t WUIR.3 1. Fo,-o)lahloo No. I19-9n Acce‘pting the Pid for the . dicved, aa-o, by Tonpai'; to ad,.pt Dee aoc,:'2ti!'!'.; the hIJ for the Flushr. Truck. Noti.,n it2E1 onwintoo7;iy. 2. Reso:Htica, N.). 29-92 Acci.L1.2Lio,j_lhe Pid for Scig_CL,ting, fal, 192,9 'TH Pld;,.oc% movod, ce:o,o,led by HarriL. LC) adAt Fc:.:.olution No. 89-92 acccpting 11,0 Lid of Allied Blac%tap for the Seal. Coating for 1929. Motion carried unanimouoly. xi. NOW DUSINES2 XII. ..a'J.IPIJI7N;IENT Tb,-! rcc-cect to .A at 17:25 AM. VW !]r.it :; je . ,o rojollin] It of fa,. Flying 7.1oud %andfill dau di.oi:u6sed 11 1:00 AM. • •/Oa 4./ CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST May 16, 1989 CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) PLUMBING The Fendler Company Carlson Plumbing Sonny Miller Construction Co. Dal by Plumbing Weis Builders, Inc. H.I.S. Plumbing Co., Inc. Heins & Sons Plumbing Rescue Plumbing CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY) Steinkraus Plumbing,Inc. DeVaan Development Corporation Gerold Brothers Construction GAS FITTER Hansen Hometech,Inc. Hornecare, Inc. Arrow Heating & Cooling Jefferson Carpentry, Inc. Berghorst Plumbing & Heating Darley G. March Care Air Conditioning & Heating,Inc. Richard Marple Builders, Inc. Spartan Mechanical, Inc. Mike's Home Service Partners 4 Design, Inc. Mark Peterson Design Const. SEPTIC SYSTEMS T.J.B. Companies, Inc. Tampa, Inc. Peterson/Bragelmann Company Radtke Excavating Swedlund Sewer & Water HEATING & VENTILATING_ SCAVENGER The Heinen Company, Inc. Peterson/Bragelmann Company • These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. 0,;1- Pat Solie Licensing IOU) • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 89-96 RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLANS FOR STATE PROJECT 2744-43 (TRUNK HIGHWAY NO. 169 FROM INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 494 TO COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY NO. 1) WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Transportation for the State of Minnesota has prepared plans, special provisions and specifications for the improvement of Trunk Highway No. 5, renumbered as Trunk Highway No. 169, within the corporate limits of the City of Eden Prairie, from 1030 feet south of County State Aid Highway No. 1 to Interstate Highway 494; and seeks the approval thereof; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL that said • plans and special provisions for the improvement of said Trunk Highway within • said corporate limits of the City, be and hereby are approved, as amended; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City does hereby agree to prohibit the parking of all vehicles on said Trunk Highway within the corporate limits of said City. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 16, 19B9. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor • ATTEST SEAL • • John D. Frane, Clerk IOLli CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 89-97 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF WOODLANDS OF EDEN PRAIRIE WHEREAS, the plat of WOODLANDS OF EDEN PRAIRIE 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 WOODLANDS OF EDEN PRAIRIE is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated MAY 10, 1989. 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 MAY 16, 1989. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk • lu�ly CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 4 ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT (RESOLUTION NO. 89-97) TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager Alan D. Gray, City Engineer FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician 50 ri DATE: May 10, 1989 SUBJECT: Final Plat of Woodlands of Eden Prairie PROPOSAL: Michael Halley Homes, Inc. has requested City Council approval of the final plat of Woodlands of Eden Prairie. The plat is located on the North side of Pioneer Trail, East of Franlo Road in the South half of Section 25. The plat contains 20 acres to be divided into 49 single family lots, one Outlot and right-of-way for street purposes. Outlot A contains 2.6 acres and will be dedicated to the City for park purposes. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council April 4, 1989, per Resolution No. B9-62. Second reading of Ordinance No. 11-69, changing zoning from Rural to R1- 9.5, is scheduled for approval at the Council Meeting to be held May 16, 1989. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report is scheduled for execution May 16, 1989. VARIANCES: Lot frontage variances for Lot 11, Block 2 and Lot 8, Block 4 were granted by the Board of Appeals at their May 11, 1989 meeting. All other variance requests must processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: Municipal utilities and streets will be installed by the Developer in conformance with City Standards. Prior to release of the final plat, the Developer shall submit to the Building Department and receive said department's approval of detailed plans for the proposed retaining walls on the property. PARK DEDICATION: Prior to release of the final plat the Developer shall provide the City with a warranty deed for Outlot A. Additionally, the Developer shall provide the City with an easement for trail purposes along the Southerly border of the property on the North side of Pioneer Trail. All other park dedication will conform to the requirements of City Code and the Developer's Agreement. /O,C J PAGE 2 OF 2 WOODLANDS OF EDEN PRAIRIE MAY 10, 1989 (Resolution 89-97) 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. A financial guarantee as required by the Eden Prairie Tree Preservation Policy must also be submitted to the City prior to release of the final plat. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Woodlands of Eden Prairie subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement and the following: 1. Receipt of street sign fee in the amount of $1,521.DO. 2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $6,210.00 3. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $1,960.00. 4. Receipt of an approval, by the Building Department, of detailed construction plans for the proposed retaining walls on the project. 5. Easement for trail purposes along County Road 1. 6. Receipt of warranty deed for Outlot A. 7. Satisfaction of bonding requirements. 8. Receipt of temporary turn around easement for Trentwood Drive. JJ:ssa cc: Michael Halley Homes, Inc. Probe Engineering /67 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 89-101 RESOLUTION APPROVING TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL AGREEMENT FOR A PERMANENT SIGNAL SYSTEM AT T.H.169/T.H.212 AND ANDERSON LAKES PARKWAY AND A REVISED SIGNAL SYSTEM AT T.H.169/T.H.212 AND HENNEPIN COUNTY VOCATIONAL TECHNICAL SCHOOL ENTRANCE WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation Traffic Control Signal Agreement No. 65685 has been prepared and presented to the City. WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie shall enter into said agreement with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes: To remove the existing temporary traffic control signal and install a permanent traffic control signal with street lights and signing on Trunk Highway No. 169/Trunk Highway No. 212 (Flying Cloud Drive) at Anderson Lakes Parkway; revise the existing traffic control signal on Trunk Highway No. 169/Trunk Highway 212 (Flying Cloud Drive) at Hennepin County Vocational Technical School Entrance; and install interconnect on Trunk Highway No. 169/Trunk Highway No. 212 (Flying Cloud Drive) from County State Aid Highway No. 1 (Pioneer Trail) to Prairie Center Drive in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth and contained in Agreement No. 65685. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL that Agreement No. 65685 is hereby approved and that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute said agreement. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 16, 1989. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL • John D. Frane, City Clerk • Ij MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL AGREEMENT NO. 65685 BETWEEN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE TO Remove the existing temporary Traffic Control Signal and Install a permanent Traffic Control Signal with Street Lights and Signing on Trunk Highway No. 169/Trunk Highway No. 212 (Flying Cloud Drive) at Anderson Lakes Parkway; Revise the existing Traffic Control Signal on Trunk Highway No. 169/Trunk Highway No. 212. (Flying Cloud Drive) at Hennepin County Vocational Technical School Entrance; and Install Interconnect on Trunk Highway No. 169/Trunk Highway No. 212 (Flying Cloud Drive) from County State Aid Highway No. 1 (Pioneer Trail) to Prairie Center Drive in Eden Prairie, Hennepin County, Minnesota. S.P. 2744-34 Prepared by Traffic Engineering • ESTIMATED AMOUNT RECEIVABLE AMOUNT ENCUMBERED County of Hennepin $ 1,60] .91 None City of Eden Prairie $17,621.18 Otherwise Covered /U.6? 7.4**-- WHEREAS, the County, City and State will participate in the cost, maintenance and operation of the revised traffic control signal and the new traffic control signal with street lights and signing, and the interconnect as hereinafter set forth; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The State shall prepare the necessary plan, specifications and proposal and shall perform the engineering and inspection required to complete the items of work hereinafter set forth. Such work as described immediately above shall constitute "Engineering and Inspection" and shall be so referred to hereinafter. 2. The contract cost of the work or, if the work is not contracted, the cost of all labor, materials, and equipment rental required to complete the work, except the cost of providing the power supply to the service pole or pad, shall constitute the actual "Construction Cost" and shall be so referred to hereinafter. 3. The State with its own forces and equipment or by contract shall perform the traffic control signal work provided for under State Project No. 2744-43 with the Construction Costs shared as follows: 65685 -2- 3. .fit /064 • • a) Trunk Highway No. 169/Trunk Highway No. 212 (Flying Cloud Drive) at Anderson Lakes Parkway. System "A". Remove the existing temporary traffic control signal and install a permanent traffic control signal with street lights. Estimated Construction Cost is $99,000.00 which includes State furnished materials. State's share is 88.375 percent. City's share is 11.625 percent. b) Trunk Highway No. 169/Trunk Highway No. 212 (Flying Cloud Drive) at Hennepin County Vocational Technical School Entrance. System "8". Revise the existing traffic control signal. Estimated Construction Cost is $5,000.00. State's share is 88.375 percent. City's share is 11.625 percent. c) Trunk Highway No. 169/Trunk Highway No. 212 (Flying Cloud Drive) from County State Aid Highway No. 1 (Pioneer Trail) to Prairie Center Drive. Install interconnect. Estimated Construction Cost is $52,000,00. State's share is 88.375 percent. City's 65685 -3- 7 share is 8.7)875. County's share is 2.90625 percent. 4. The State shall install or cause the installation of overhead signing for the permanent traffic control signal (System "A") and shall maintain the signing for the permanent and revised traffic control signals (Systems "A" and "A"), all at no cost of the County or City. 5. Upon execution of this agreement and a request in writing by the State, the City shall advance to the State an amount equal to its portion of the project cost. The City's total portion shall consist of the sum of the following: a) The City's share (as specified in Paragraph 3) based on the actual bid prices and the estimated State furnished materials costs. b) Six (6) percent of its share [Item (a) above] for the cost of Engineering and Inspection. 6. Upon completion and final acceptance of the project, the City's final share shall consist of the sum of the following: a) The City's share (as specified in Paragraph 3) based on the final payment to the Contractor and the actual State furnished materials costs. 65695 -4- /ODD b) Six (6) percent of its final share [Item (a) above) for the cost of Engineering and Inspection. The amount of the funds advanced by the County in excess of the County's final share will be returned to the County without interest and the County agrees to pay to the State that amount of its final share which in excess of the amount of the funds advanced by the County. 9. The City shall provide and/or perpetuate an adequate electrical power supply to the service pads or poles, and upon completion of said permanent and revised traffic control signals with street lights installations (Systems "A" and "B") shall provide and/or continue to provide necessary electrical power for their operation at the cost and expense of the City. 10. Upon completion of the work contemplated in Paragraph 3 (Systems "A" and "Be) hereof, it shall be the City's responsibility, at its cost and expense, to: (1) maintain the luminaries; (2) relamp the permanent and revised traffic control signals and street lights; and (3) clean and paint the permanent and revised traffic control signals, cabinets and luminaires mast arm extensions. it shall be the State's responsibility, at its cost and expense, to maintain the interconnect and perform all 65685 x -6- .d L— /O:/ shall have County approval prior to award of construction contract by the State. Said County approval shall be evidenced by signature of the County Engineer in the designated space therefor on the original plan. 14. The construction work provided for herein shall be under the direction and supervision of the State. It is agreed, however, that the County shall have the right to periodically inspect the cost sharing construction work provided for in Paragraph 3 hereof. The State shall have the exclusive right to determine whether the work has been satisfactorily performed by the State's Contractor. 15. The State shall insert in any contract with the successful bidder clause requiring the successful bidder to hold the County and the City harmless and also clauses requiring the successful bidder to provide and maintain insurance, all as follows: a) The Contractor shall defend, indemnify and save harmless the County and the City, their officers, agents and employees from all suits, actions and claims of any character brought because of injuries or damages received or sustained by a person, persons, or property on account of the operations of ( 65685 -8- /0,F I • the said Contractor or any subcontractor or their agents or employees, or on account of or in consequence of any neglect in safeguarding the work; or through use of • unacceptable materials in constructing the work; or because of any act or omission, neglect, or misconduct of said Contractor or any subcontractor or their agents or employees, or because of any claims arising or amounts recovered from infringements of patent, trademark, or copyright; or because of any claims arising or amounts recovered under the Worker's Compensation Act; or under other law, ordinance, order to decree. b) The Contractor shall purchase and maintain • such insurance for and in behalf of himself and the County, as an additional assured, and with a cross liability endorsement protecting the County from claims or damages for personal injuries, including accidental death, as well as for claims for property damage which may arise out of or result from the Contractor's operations under the 3 { 65685 -9- /0S9 '`� (9) Aircraft Liability (If Applicable) (10) Watercraft Liability (If Applicable) C) The contractual liability is to be either on a blanket basis for all written or oral contracts, or • specifically endorsed to acknowledge this contract. c) All certificates of insurance shall provide that the insurance company shall give the County thirty (30) days prior written notice of cancellation, non-renewal of any material changes in the policy. d) The above subparagraph establish minimum insurance requirements, and it is in the sole responsibility of the Contractor to purchase and maintain additional insurance that may be necessary in connection with this contract. e) The Contractor shall not commence work until the Contractor has filed an acceptable certificate of insurance with the County. All insurance policies shall be open to 1 65685 -12- /066 inspection by the County, and copies of policies shall he submitted to the County upon written request. f) The County agrees to pay <:o the State the total amount of the liability insurance • coverage premium costs, described herein, incurred by the State's Contractor for State Project No. 2744-34 in procuring and maintaining for the duration of the Contractor's contractual obligation to said State project. As such time, be it one or more, as the said State's Contractor furnishes the State with a certified statement of the insurance premium costs the Contractor has incurred on procuring the aforesaid insurance coverage, the State will invoice the County for the total amount of the insurance premium costs set forth in said • certified statement from the Contractor, and the County shall, upon receipt of said • invoice, promptly make payment thereof to the State. i 65685 -13- A .L4v' 3 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN By Clerk of the County Board Chairman of the County Board Dated Dated RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: By By Director, Department Associate County Administrator of Transportation and County Engineer Dated Dated (County Seal) Upon proper execution, this APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION: agreement will be legally valid and binding. By By Assistant County Attorney Assistant County Attorney Dated Dated • 65685 -15- /0 • RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Eden Prairie enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes, to wit: To remove the existing temporary traffic control signal and install a permanent traffic control signal with street lights and signing on Trunk Highway No. 169/Trunk Highway No. 212 (Flying Cloud Drive) at Anderson Lakes Parkway; revise the existing traffic control signal on Trunk Highway No. 169/Trunk Highway No. 212 (Flying Cloud Drive) at Hennepin County Vocational Technical School Entrance; and install interconnect on Trunk Highway No. 169/Trunk Highway No. 212 (Flying Cloud Drive) from County State Aid Highway No. 1 (Pioneer Trail) to Prairie Center Drive in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth and contained in Agreement No. 65685, a copy of which was before the Council. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the proper City officers be and hereby are authorized to execute such agreement, and thereby ( assume for and on behalf of the City all of the contractual obligations contained therein. CERTIFICATION • State of Minnesota County of Hennepin City of Eden Prairie I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted • by the Council of the City of Eden Prairie at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the day of 1989, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession. City Clerk (Seal) 'y. io�3 ,,ram-� GE Capital May 9, 1989 City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Attention: Mayor and City Council Subject: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL GE CAPITAL FLEET SERVICES PROPERTY GEESE REMOVAL Dear Mayor and City Council Members, GE Capital Fleet Services property has been home for many Canadian Geese for several years. Each year the new "hatch" is larger. The result of the larger hatch and more geese has caused considerable problems for us. We feel it is a two-fold problem: 1) Health, life and safety--- because this year, the geese in several instances, have been attacking our employees. 2) A sanitation issue--- The droppings from the geese cause constant pressure washing of the entryway and part of the drives. Since this is a continuing problem, we find it to be very unsanitary. Through the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) , we have contacted a Dr. Jim Cooper of the University of Minnesota. Along with his other teaching duties, he is responsible for the geese removal program for the Twin City area. Dr. Cooper informs me that similar programs are operable by several local municipalities as well as at General Mills and Prudential. The cost is $1,000 per site and GE Capital Fleet Services will pay for the removal of the birds to a different locality. For your information, the geese ARE NOT KILLED. The geese are picked up when they are "flightless". This occurs approximately 5-6 weeks after hatch, about the 19th of June through the 14th of July. /(2('/ City of Eden Prairie May 9, 1989 Mayor and City Council Members Page 2 of 2 The program which Dr. Cooper heads deals with the media and local citizens so that there is appropriate communication. Thank you for your help and approval. Yours truly, • 4J udith Brinkhaus anager, Real Estate & Facilities JB:dcm I, W113 City of Eden Prairie eden ^Thty Offices prairie 600 Executive Drive • Eden Prairie.MN 55344-3677• Telephone(612)937-2262 May 10, 1989 Dear Resident: GE Capital (formerly Gelco) has experienced some problems with Canada geese on its property on the north side of Anderson Lakes. As the goose population becomes larger each year, these problems continue to grow. Not only are there the usual unpleasantries from goose droppings, there have also been several cases of geese attacking GE Capital employees. GE Capital wishes to relocate the geese on the GE property to states south of Minnesota. It would contract with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and Dr. James Cooper of the University of Minnesota. The geese • are not killed; rather they are picked up when they are flightless during their molting period, from about June 15 through July 15. In order for the DNR to proceed, the Eden Prairie City Council must approve this request. This matter is being scheduled for the May 16, 1989 Council meeting. It will be placed on the "Consent Calendar" early in the 7:30 PM meeting as little discussion is expected on this matter. • Because you are a resident along Anderson Lakes, we wanted to let you know about the action being considered. The team under Dr. Cooper would conduct this project as it has been done throughout the metropolitan area, and would work carefully to relocate only those geese which frequent the GE Capital site. Sincerely, Craig W. son Assist t o the City Manager CWD4p' Si. /066 LL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation ,i :6Fattura1 Resources i{Ju i DATE: May 2, 1989 1�� SUBJECT: Change Order No.2 for Natatorium Project Enclosed is a copy of Change Order No. 2, the pool tiling prutiect, for $200. This resulted in the architect recommending al ,zibamge from the original design of grout between the tile and the eri; ti„g stainless steel to a clear silicone caulk as a better prcanci :for that location. The total cost was a $200 Change Order. BL:mdd • / t A /060 CHANGE ORDER Distrtbation toy OWNER AIA DOCUMENT C701 ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR • HELD OTHER PROTECT: Natatorium Remodel ing, (name.address) Eden Prairie Community Ctr. CIIANCEOkDEk NUMBER: 2 Eden Prairie, Minnesota TO(Contractor): INITIATION DATE: April 17, 1989 ARCHITECTS PROJECT NO: 1848.002,05-1 Land of Lakes Tile Co. CONTRACT FOR: Entire Project 5215 West Broadway LMinneapolis, MN 55429 J I CONTRACT DATE: February 10, 1989 You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract: Drawing No. 1. 1. Refer to Detail 11/1, Section at Pool Edge; install caulk joint, continuous, between bullnose ceramic tile and existing stainless steel linear gutter, at entire perimeter of pool edge. ADD: $200.00 TOTAL ADD: $200.00 Not valid until signed by both the Owner and Architect. Signature nr the Contractor Indicates his agreement beres,Ith.including any adjustment In the Contract Sum or Contract Time The original(Contract Sum)(Gwra•n4 1-#.Sr1+li+mxnCvsH was Net change by previously authorized Change Orders $ 29,580.00 The(Contract Suntl((hr,,r,r,(rrK}*fRnnrtm{iwtl poor to this Change Order was $ 1,280.00 S 30,860.00 The (Contract Sums(tin.nanrrr'rii1rm e m�nrneywill Ire(increased)Iricrrn1g2 h1Tluttohengcn by 'his Change Order $ The new(Contract Sum)IE:H,IraralerEl Ad,rrrNHRr(-r,y+l including this Change Order will he E 200.00 The Contract Time will be (igsleas,.(I}Irks„„«r{t (unchanged)by 31'D6C•DD The Dale of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is ( 1 Days. unchanged • Setter, Leach I Lindstrom, Inc, Land of Lakes Tile Co. Authorized: (ca City of Eden Prairie ATtilli icollet Mall (bll�'�1��� Broadwa R Address y � � Executive Drive Address Minn 1 'S, IN 55403 M. nea polis, MN 55429 Address Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3677 BY A BY DATE L. DATE 4l/9 l�g DATE AIA DOCUMENT 4701 • (141N(E ORDER • Anti 11 N EDITION •THE 1VMERI \N IN II SUET or ARl iiiI(Cls,I,Ir.\I\\1(1RA•1\'E,N.\V \VAMIIN(t,lr)N or aON G701--1978 Woodland Ponds of CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 11-89 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the Rural District and be placed in the R1-9.5 District. Section 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the R1-9.5 District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to in City Code, Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and are amended accordingly. Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of May 16, 1989, entered into between Michael Halley Homes, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie, which Agreement is hereby made a part hereof. Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. • FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 4th day of April, 1989, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 16th day of May, 1989. ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of . R /0(1)9 y�. • h'JONL A';D PONDS EXHIBIT A Pf ATT ING DESCRIPTION • • That part of the West Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 25, Township 116, Range 22, described as beginning at a point in the East line of said West Half • of the Southeast Quarter distant 410.37 feet South of the Northeast corner thereof; thence West at a right angle to said East line of the West Half of the Southeast Quarter a distance of 508.02 feet; thence Southerly deflecting to • the left 76 degrees 56 minutes 37 seconds a distance of 1209.34 feet; thence Southwesterly deflecting to the right 35 degrees 58 minutes 18 seconds a distance of 144.72 feet to the center line of County State Aid Highway No. 1, shown as survey line on Hennepin County Highway Plat No. 6, on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds; thence Southeasterly along said center line to an intersection with said East line of the West Half of the Southeast Quarter; thence North a distance of 1830.09 feet, more or less, along said East line of the West Half of the Southeast Quarter to the point of beginning, except that part thereof embraced • within the plat of Prairie East. Fifth Addition, according to the United States Government Survey thereof and situate in• Hennepin County, Minnesota. • REZONING DESCRIPTION That part cf the West half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 75, Tot.snhip 116, Ran .: 22, itres as crnn_eciag at a point in the Fast line of said First Half of the Soetheast Quarter distant 410.37 feet South of the Northeast corner thereof; thence West at a right angle to said East line ot the best Half of the Southeast !• Quarter a distance of 508.02 feet; thence Southerly along a lire hereinafter re- ferred to as Line 'A"; deflecting to the left 76 d-cre^s 56 minutes 37 seconds a distance of 320.29 feet to the intersection with the southerly line of Outlet A, PFITP-IE MST FIFTH ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof which is also the point of beginning of the parcel to he described; thence continue southerly along referenced Line"A•a distance of 889.05 feet; thence soot westerly deflecting • to the right 35 degrees 58 minutes 18 seconds a distance of 144.72 feet to the center line of County State Aid liighwuy No. 1, sham as survey lineon Hennepin County lltg`ray Plat lb. 6, on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deede thence southeasterly along said center line to an intersection with the East line of the west Half of the Southeast Quarter; thence northerly along said East line of the hest Half of the Southeast Quarter a distance of 939.66 feet; thence csterly deflecting to the left 90 degree's 00 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 40.00 feet; thence northerly deflecting to the right 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 184.00 feet; thence north,sterly deflecting to the left 27 degrees 3S minutes 37 second,a distance of 146.03 feet; thence nort r,sterly de- flecting to the left 49 degrees 31 minutes 31 seconds a distance of 143.68 feet; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 50 degrees 01 minute 23 seconds a distance of 106.19 feet; thence narthw_•sterly deflecting to the right 83 degrees 46 minutes 11 seconds a distance of 111.87 feet; thence re-tkrsterly a distance • of 124.60 feet along a nontargential curve concave to the southwest having a radius • of 50.00 feet a central angle of 142 degrees 45 minutes 46 seconds and the deflecting of the previous course and the chord of the described carve is right 18 degrees • • 36 minutes 37 records; thence deflecting to the left, fran said chord of east des- cribed carve. 11 degrees 48 minutes 08 seconds„ not tangent to the last described curve, a distance of 154.42 feet to the intersection of said southerly line of Outlot A, PRAIRIE EAST FIFTH ADOITIC6l theme westerly along said southerly line of Outlet A, a distance of 40.00 feet to the point of beginning. • • • IJ'24 Woodland Ponds DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENI, made and entered into as of May 16, 1989, by Michael Halley Homes, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City:" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for rezoning from Rural to R1-9.5 and preliminary plat of 20 acres for construction of 49 single family homes, situated in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred to as "the property;" NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance #11-89, 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 March 30, 1989, reviewed and approved by the City Council on April 4, 1989, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. Developer shall not develop, construct upon, or maintain the property in any other respect or manner than provided herein. 2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof. • 3. Prior to release by the City of the final plat, Developer agrees to submit to the Facilities, Safety, and Inspections Department, and to obtain said Department's approval of detailed plans for the retaining walls indicated on the grading plan in Exhibit B, attached hereto. Said plans shall include details with respect to the height, type of materials, and method of construction to be used for said retaining walls. Upon approval by the Facilities, Safety, and Inspections Department, Developer agrees to construct said retaining wall improvements as stated above, as approved by said Department, concurrent with the grading and street construction on the property, �Q�r and in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. Developer further agrees that said retaining wall improvements shall be completed prior to issuance by City of any building permit on any lot other than building permits for the fair (4) model homes to be constructed on the property. 4. Concurrent with and as part of the final plat, Developer agrees to provide to the City an easement for trail purposes to be generally located at the south boundary of the property along the north side of Pioneer Trail (County Road #1) as depicted in Exhibit D, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Developer agrees to submit the alignment for said trail easement to the Director of Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources, and to obtain the Director's approval of said alignment, prior to inclusion of said trail easement on the final plat for the property. Upon approval by the Director of Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources of the alignment of said trail easement, Developer agrees to provide said trail easement by inclusion of said trail easement on the final plat. 5. Concurrent with, and as part of the final plat for the property, Developer agrees to dedicate the following to the City, free and clear of all liens, mortgages, or encumbrances: A. 0utlot A, consisting of 2.6 acres, located in the northeast portion of the property, as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. B. Drainage and utility easements over Pond #4 and Pond #5 as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. The easement over Pond #4 shall be located from the outer edge of the established High Water Level at elevation B33.7 easterly to the property boundary line and over Pond #5 shall be located from the outer edge of the established High Water Level at elevation B27.5 to the low point of said pond at elevation 820.0. 6. Prior to release by the City of the final plat for the property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and receive the City Engineer's approval of plans for streets, sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, and erosion control for the property. Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall construct, or cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said plans, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit C, attached hereto. 7. Developer has submitted to the City a plan for tree replacement for 540 caliper inches of trees which are to be removed by construction on the property. Developer agrees to implement, or cause to be /O-) implemented, said tree replacement plan, in accordance with the Tree Preservation Policy of the City, attached hereto as Exhibit E, and made a part hereof. The financial guarantee required by said Policy shall be submitted to the City prior to release by the City of the final plat. The amount of the guarantee shall be $48,600.00 based on the tree replacement plan submitted by Developer and approved by the City. 8. Prior to issuance of any grading permit on the property, Developer agrees to contact Hennepin County in order to obtain the necessary approvals and permits for extension of sanitary sewer along the north side of Pioneer Trail within the County's right-of-way. Upon approval by Hennepin County, Developer agrees to provide proof of any such approval to the City prior to release by the City of any permit for grading on the property. 9. Developer shall notify the City and the Watershed District 48 hours prior to any grading, tree removal, or tree cutting on the property. 10. 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 obtain 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. Construction limits shall be staked with snow fencing. 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 contact City for reinspection of the implementation measures, and to obtain 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. 11. Concurrent with grading on the property, Developer agrees to grade a ten-foot wide pad within the trail easement as provided in item #4, above, in the general location as depicted in Exhibit D, attached hereto. Said graded trail pad shall be for the provision of an eight-foot wide bituminous trail to be installed by City at a future date. 12. Concurrent with construction of streets and utilities on the property, Developer agrees to construct, or cause to be constructed, f a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk within the right-of-way of the /07)? Streets as depicted in Exhibit D, attached hereto. Developer agrees to construct said sidewalks in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 13. Concurrent with construction of streets and utilities on the property, Developer agrees to construct, or cause to be constructed, • acceleration/deceleration lanes within the right-of-way for Pioneer Trail (County Road #1) for ingrees and egress to and from the property. Said lanes shall be constructed in accordance with the terms and conditions imposed by Hennepin County. 14. Concurrent with construction of streets and utilities on the property, and prior to issuance of any building permit on any lot other than those designated for the four (4) model homes to be constructed on the property, Developer agrees to install those landscaping materials within the outlined area as depicted within Exhibit F, attached hereto, and made a part hereof. Said landscaping materials are generally located along the perimeter of Pond #5, along the south border of the property adjacent to Pioneer Trail (County Road #1), and along the southern portion of the western boundary of the property. 15. Prior to issuance by City of any building permit on Lot 11, Block 2, or on Lot 8, Block 4, of the property, as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto, Developer agrees to obtain variances from the Board of Appeals for minimum frontage on a cul-de-sac for said lots to allow for a 59 ft. lot frontage for Lot 11, Block 2 and a 63 ft. lot frontage for Lot B, Block 4. 16. Developer agrees to abide by covenants, conditions, and restrictions for architectural design control of the units on the property per as • per those described in Exhibit G, attached hereto, and made a part hereof. 17. Developer acknowledges that the property will benefit from trunk storm sewer improvements to be constructed by City adjacent to County Road #18, south at Pioneer Trail (County Road #1) and that assessments will be levied against the property for said storm drainage improvements in the future. ropy Woodland Ponds CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 1, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 89-102 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE 11-89 AND ORDERING THE PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 11-89 was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 16th day of May, 1989; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 11-89, which is attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said ordinance. B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a body type no smaller than non-pareil, or six-point type, as defined in Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07. C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance shall be posted in the City Hall. D. That Ordinance No. 11-89 shall be recorded in the ordinance book, along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein, within 20 days after said publication. ADOPTED by the City Council on May 16, 1989. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk • I(i7 Woodland Ponds CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 11-89 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH OISTRICT, AND AOOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY COOE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Su�mnaar This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located west of County Road #18, north of Pioneer Trail from the Rural Oistrict to the R1-9.5 District, subject to the terms and conditions of a developer's agreement. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. • ATTEST: /s/John D. Frane /s/Gary D. Peterson ( City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1989. (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.) • • /0')6 I TO : MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: JOHN FRANE DATE: MAY 9, 1989 RE : PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASTLE RIDGE ON THE ISSUANCE OF $7.,880,000 IN REFUNDING BONDS THE COUNCIL PASSED RESOLUTION 89-89 AT ITS LAST MEETING WHICH AUTHORIZED THE ISSUANCE OF THE BONDS SUBJECT TO THE HOLDING OF A PUBLIC HEARING. THIS HEARING WILL PLACE THE ISSUANCE OF THE BONDS IN CONFORMITY WITH STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS CONCERNING THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS. NO ACTION NEEDS TO BE TAKEN OTHER THAN HOLDING THE HEARING. NOTICE OF THE HEARING WAS PUBLISHED IN THE E.F. NEWS ON APRIL 26, 1989. M CITY OF EOEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION #89-104 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF RED ROCK SHORES FOR SCENIC HEIGHTS INVESTMENT BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Red Rock Shores for Scenic Heights Investment, dated May 11, 1989, consisting of 19.77 acres into 15 single family lots, 3 outlots, and road right-of-way, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 16th day of May, 1989. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk • 1u'n C - MEMORANDUM - TO: Chairman and Planning Commission Members FROM: Alan Gray, P.E. City Engineer DATE: April 7, 1989 RE: Red Rock Shores, Strawberry Hill and Red Rock View Addition The purpose of this memo is to discuss utility service for three newly proposed residential subdivisions located east of County Road 4 in the vicinity of Lake Shore Drive. The proposed Red Rock Shores subdivision consists of 16 residential lots located on approximately a 19 acre parcel north and east of Lake Shore Drive adjacent to Red Rock Lake. Strawberry Hill and Red Rock View additions are situated southerly of Lake Shore Drive between Meadowvale Road and CSAH 4. SANITARY SEWER: Trunk sanitary sewer service for this area is provided by the newly constructed Red Rock Interceptor sewer. As part of the Fairfield Addition westerly of County Road 4 a lateral sanitary sewer was extended { easterly from the Red Rock Interceptor sewer to the west right-of-way line of CSAH 4 for the purpose of providing sanitary sewer service to the Lake Shore Drive, Meadowvale Drive and Red Oak Drive area. From its current termination point in the Fairfield Addition sanitary sewer may be extended easterly across CSAH 4 and through the proposed residential subdivisions as shown on the preliminary utility plan for Red Rock Shores. The nine most northerly lots within the proposed Red Rock Shores subdivision are adjacent to Red Rock Lake and have proposed basement elevations below the invert of the extended gravity sanitary sewer. A lift station will be required for this area as shown on the preliminary utility plan for Red Rock Shores. In addition to the sanitary sewer shown on the preliminary utility plan for Red Rock Shores it is recommended that sanitary sewer be extended in Scenic Heights Road to provide sewer service to the existing home on the east side of CSAH 4 south of the future intersection of Scenic Heights Road and CSAH 4. As part of this proposed plan sanitary sewer would be constructed in a segment of Meadowvale Road and Red Oak Drive providing sanitary sewer service to existing residential homes in this neighborhood as well as the proposed new subdivisions. WATER: Trunk watermain will be extended south along CSAH 4 this coming construction season. Completion of this trunk watermain project will make lateral water available for extension through the proposed residential subdivisions. The segment of watermain to be extended from CSAH 4 within io 79 C April 7, 1989 Page 2 of 2 future Scenic Heights Road will be 16" trunk watermain. The remaining watermain extended within the proposed residential streets may be 6" watermain provided that the system loops back to the trunk watermain on CSAH 4. STORM DRAINAGE: The Strawberry Hill and Red Rock View additions lie within a 16 acre watershed easterly of County Road 4 that drains to a small kettle hole that currently has no outlet. As part of the subdivision improvements a storm sewer outlet to Red Rock Lake from this kettle hole will be constructed. Preliminary drainage calculations have been provided and indicate that sufficient storage and outlet hydraulic capacity can be provided for this area to provide protection from storm events of a magnitude equivalent to the July 1987 storm. The remaining areas of the proposed subdivisions drain to Red Rock Lake. Lateral storm sewer is proposed as shown on the preliminary utility plan. The current outlet to Red Rock Lake from the intersection of Red Oak Drive and the proposed residential street within Red Rock Shores is inadequate and will require reconstruction as part of a City Improvement Contract or privately by the proposed developments. ADG:ssa lU t(J 9 f PETITION We.fe residents (includingthestreetsooftNeadowvaleRedkDr..Wes Red iOak oDr. and Summit Dr.) do hereby request that the road planned In the new development north of our neighborhood, end in a culdesac as the developers originally planned, instead of connecting to Red Oak Dr. The majority of people who built in our neighborhood did so because it was a quiet, dead-end area. We understand the need to have a second exit/entrance into our neighborhood for public safety, etc., but feel that the new road planned to connect Meadowvale Dr. to Lakeshore Dr. will fulfill that need. Extending Red Oak Dr. would offer a shortcut to Scenic Heights Rd. for residents in the development now being built west of Cty. Rd. 4 - changing the character of our neighborhood from one with no outside traffic to one with a possible heavy traffic flow. The major reason we have been given for having this connection Is that culdesacs cause problems for plowing, mall delivery and public safety. Recent developments around us have numerous culdesacs, as does most of the City of Eden Prairie. One more culdesac does not seem to be Inconsistent with past planning. bet PETITION 4/89 14� We, the residents of the Red Rock West neighborhood, (including the streets of Meadowvale Dr., Red Oak Dr., Summit Dr., and the east side of Cty. Rd. 4) do hereby request, for the purpose of keeping future new homes consistent with existing homes in our neighborhood,that the planning commission take the following actions: 1. Retain the current zoning of R-22 for the proposed additions of Strawberry Hill, Red Rock View Addition, and Red Rock Shores. The residents of this neighborhood bought and built in this neighborhood partially because of the large size of the lots. The entire area has the same size zoning and it is reasonable to expect that the zoning would remain consistent. The developers who have purchased land to be developed in our neighborhood bought land zoned R-22. They should be expected to develop the lots according to the present zoning. 2. To be visually consistent with the neighborhood the frontage of the proposed lots on Meadowvale Dr. be consistent with facing lots currently on Meadowvale Dr.--125 ft. minimum as opposed to the proposed 100 ft. frontage. 3. That the setbacks of the proposed lots on Meadowvale Dr. be consistent with current construction in the rest of the neighborhood--50 feet instead of the proposed 30 feet. It would be inconsistent with the two houses presently on Meadowvale Dr. if this is not changed. 4. We would recommend that the homes built on either the existing Meadowvale Dr. or Red Oak Dr. adhere to some of the restrictive covenants existing on the rest of the lots--such as no fences in the front yard, a minimum first floor size of 1100 sq. ft. for a 2 story home, 1300 sq. ft. for a 1 story home. zajL ,5 k t4�D U0a. {- ~� 4- -.3--- /5851 s-.., -r. 14 16/z) f&)((-))1x k .:;1; ' -_r / • / S J1 rs .. rIf inRAm 11111 lt2A i *. .2 M i. —r- .: �L�) ...l1161MPir c v i S.WANI 11: s"5ir 5,....-_.�-- Zcl 1�":g\ - 1 _ _ l�1�t1 wi .�r_'1�►i�i1 !�miriyarimarfl .. AMP _ aO. E. /O e 4` re-tltloiN `i i o re • hi �� -F ' C - Ici-7 L ,C. S ,o/ ti , roil'ie 44) ti 7U� S.. /�� �� () �D�, l' 21 Mti C" , 86SS 'CO OAs[ OA pb" 1A.at • �'tM 7 R • . k - x, 765 ' 46 gt g2.30 ti,-41,11 r "Mr ''.-711 ii ,,,,,k kft,_, D , 0, IF ow k- (A� ao )ad 4_ , I A ( ( Petition April 7, 1989 We believe that street additions to the Red Rock West neighborhood are unnecessary and would only increase traffic. The current configuration of Meadowvale Dr. and Red Oak Dr. is a ho,seshoe which is more than adequate for snow removal and school buses. ^( IV /) !// /I ,1 it 1/ t,--,- !te /5- s- „9-, ,e,. ' y.-,c/a.t<r �� f/_ !l' //` f—/ « 4- _ / 1„/ /S-73 / r Ci2rvrw.7 � - C�PQC,i9,1 .`1'lyYirn, /.T7// .-t/Gl-r.-rner 4--- U fr L Sji ..,-,7 ' .JU/ . , shy -z21 ,q,.----7/ 0,,z Xer e 9. kan.„....7- 4 7c7P0 7 czee...,,,,,;:li- i 04-. • Lk76o St,,,, M CT Q .3'6 l 04/c J/u, . : _all/-f/" C � '-� � U ff'7l . /07; • (- Petition April 7, 1989 We believe that street additions to the Red Rock West neighborhood are unnecessary and would only increase traffic. The current configuration of Meadowvale Dr. and Red Oak Dr. is a horseshoe which is more than adequate for snow removal and school bus s. aaty ;(..ett7i(72. .Y6 e/6 e")(1(9,4 4i• Ezn P44;4,- md 1� ., "r7 ,Y67/ ',mac C. 172 . �y.c 1i44- A�� � At,/ 171/ (1/, VI.)trr� 87sv .N/,', cv�-(e6c tx� . J Oekt- r.1 _770/ �� ) .1\ U pNf„� s?II AR .P .40// k6o 6/4 b Fr • ( PETITION 4/89 ( I We. the residents of the Red Rock West neighborhood., _6 of1 (including the streets of Meadowvale Dr., Red Oak Dr. anal Summit Dr.) do hereby request that the road planned in 'the ���( new development north of our neighborhood, end in a cu3demaw as the developers originally planned, instead of connecCPig to Red Oak Dr. The majority of people who built In our nelghborhomr a:lialt so because It was a quiet, dead-end area. We understaom: tibe need to have a second exit/entrance into our neighborhood: for public safety, etc., but feel that the new road planneuti to connect Meadowvale Dr. to Lakeshore Dr. will fulfill'. tllratt need. Extending Red Oak Dr. would offer a shortcut to Scenic Heights Rd. for residents in the development nom being built west of Cty. Rd. 4 - changing the characteo de our neighborhood from one with no outside traffic to are; with a possible heavy traffic flow. The major reason we have been given for having thlv. connection is that culdesacs cause problems for plowing,.. mall delivery and public safety. Recent developments arminali us have numerous culdesacs, as does most of the City o° 2blem Prairie. One more culdesac does not seem to be inconwst+em with past planning. e Qn«s S L (._' . ,....f no..5. tx�� k.5% \ 5,..n.,-:i .1>c. a. . )A''"'�., \ I�c3o Sw,.,tt,,.\T bcZ 3 at_,ggt Or�. ''^ -- 1“1 26o oat OR- S w 244/ .e., 'L'i<. , 6. it k// , -1. • 9. t° , 'r/^ fed/Ji'AKA.."©i. ab V 7oo .S ..,nt ,> D,c I� %. /l, t4. .\,! :<Q._. n./ $711 (fc- ... v,l _ ts. p' 16. O.' '1___ Ii61) f&ISZ'Yal!),11)N, ___________ tY. � �.`.,:-`-/: L tF/LA .lei t S(oO fee • Df /�J� l sr+ /..r-7// • Y 711 Ear,,, Q dl t- P al. /cy11 ��in n,'+' �+l. r-;, Italr,e.P7u• ba, • by o,� A 1 S b:A Su.nnvc DQ. r- t�KAl2IE TA. • (t2S( I� 3' ...t as tr" zipSS c��.-.v 8950 Ill n Ed . a7. ad al. Ho YI. 43. 44. 45 41. 44, 3�. Si. 5a. 63. SI. 65. sb. 61. gib• 69, be. 'I. ba, `5. 4,4 4.5. bb. bl. 66. 44. 70, l 1. 7a 73. 74 • JO?? il a !_ ).% .,, \ \ , it iwlP ! '� /-,N....,/ 1 r \ • y. 11 ) 4 \y'I / 161�1 ® I• ��\ 1Nh�'+'+yr .,,+�.I IQ ts f� , ;: • -i i ,i 8- \, ic„. t Ili! . jr,,,„ ' q \(; F L' 7' ' `�\ E A • 11:. lit - j 7�1-1 14��l y° r�' -.:'N'' -,, I Er i (.. ,4j.i. \ .. 0,,,- ,.,.2 4 ,0%. ii t i nIt..�.11;N� el'. /:' \"4 Z'aarw oA `•' �,/ V' - Y .....;-, V.)).•-. 41i 6 1n P Al!r1 �v�. �J 11 . 41. It' : '' 1 i,-'..'t7'',i I-,' ',;ri-,,Bif3 L::: itr'l '..,-,,,, (- --Ci .� il IiI� / ,r,.r. ;sF % , 1,, l \ 11 -d o 6 \_., i •b••L. T 'L C .4�' /• �Y4e5.. ` t.Q - '6' \, - I. l )c , -, F i S 74 i , ) :.,n.711 ,,-------i „..7...„,_- 'f„k•------______11___ - _ f...""4,„\\, i A i c. i1rc / ,s ue',-1 .l C!-4• - - PSL, .6 �' F71 4'` w Q g;;F 1_r W ".1 i ,s t i --5,i, L,'> , / 1.J, �::. K: ram/ 0 Ny i.,. .• N -4-,'' ,4',V,\\' .R7 ./L1,-.241'--' .„„ / c.471, il ___,V--Hi.—‘,,,j-,„6\---1, r`i'; '..0-`,.` -,), ,,.',\.\,--,'' i; 7 ,,';--= _ •)• 4 ., . to tNi,s> )1,. Fit„C::: . ,E., :' ii,1,6,'-:;-' 1. ,-:. \,.11,--\•:,,c 1 ,„ " -*- , '('---... i; \\ i ';',,,,,..:,,,,,,,.r..N-Th., : .1...;, _. 4., ,---L, 2 . --:;-- ,‘4,-"Iltg-;,.•-•,,, -, k IS r.,"-117: e err o / R(- "1�� r' •�� • I To: Eden Prairie Planning Commission Apr.,7,„ 3.9439 The neighborhood we call Red Rock West, consisting of the, names on Meadowvale Dr., Red Oak Dr., Summit Dr. and the near- ttmmex mrm the east side of Cty. Rd. 4, was invited to a nei4 +llluntbaroptl meeting March 30, 1989 called by Bill Gilk in rltrieti tha kee developments (Strawberry Hill , Red Rock View Additioe.,. and Med Rock Shores) which adjoin our neighborhood were presented._ We were unhappy with the developers' plans and r:{d:Gpd neighborhood meeting Wed. April 5. On two days notice 2i1 tia,n:rllce • attended. The two petitions that follow will be presenierit Morrilmy night at the Planning Commission Meeting. We need ttte• rest tad the weekend to route the petitions around the neighbe.—helots ff,mm signatures. Also included is a copy of the attendees off mum' meeting. These families endorse the two petitions 21-0. We expect a large turnout from the neighborhood at Mond;ev mi�?Lxt's planning meeting. We ask that you consider the needs of our neighborhood. Bill Sauro 8750 Meadowvale Dr. 4 /OW) ( ('_ PETITION 4/89 We, the residents of the Red Rock West neighborhood, (Including the streets of Meadowvale Dr., Red Oak Dr., Summit Dr., and the east side of Cty. Rd. 4) do hereby request, for the purpose of keeping future new homes consistent with existing homes in our neighborhood,that the planning commission take the following actions: 1. Retain the current zoning of R-22 for the proposed additions of Strawberry H1ll, Red Rock View Addition, and Red Rock Shores. The residents of this neighborhood bought and built in this neighborhood partially because of the large size of the lots. The entire area has the same size zoning and it is reasonable to expect that the zoning would remain consistent. The developers who have purchased land to be developed in our neighborhood bought land zoned R-22. They should be expected to develop the lots according to the present zoning. 2. To be visually consistent with the neighborhood the frontage of the proposed lots on Meadowvale Dr. be consistent with facing lots currently on Meadowvale Dr.--125 ft. minimum as opposed to the proposed 100 ft. frontage. 3. That the setbacks of the proposed lots on Meadowvale Dr. be consistent with current construction in the rest of the neighborhood--50 feet Instead of the proposed 30 feet. It would be inconsistent with the two houses presently on Meadowvale Dr. If this is not changed. 4. We would recommend that the homes built on either the existing Meadowvale Dr. or Red Oak Dr. adhere to some of the restrictive covenants existing on the rest of the lots--such as no fences in the front yard, a minimum first floor size of 1100 sq. ft. for a 2 story home, 1300 sq. ft. for a 1 story home. 4 /09I pot Ilion L April 7, 1989 We believe that street additions to the Red Rock West neighborhood are unnecessary and would only increase traffic. The current configuration of Meadowvale Dr. and Red Oak Dr. is a horseshoe which is more than adequate for snow removal and school buses. • 1 ( (__ k16-N6vk HooD tIF_E.ritJG LJEO; 9PK, S, ,'98 1 6 !1 TM1LI-o- tl M- � 1SG07ice ' E�neJ� ,t/a S J ,57J/. i.,s l 4//7 /;c1`aV //o// 4..4-ZS-1,9r, a, 1. e.)r. , Lsi ,e_ 8700 Sc.n, Aicr Q2 Bb(0O 60c'R,,, 41,.. .Ce%., $(o5c Rif,(Oa 07 (. rl/. L.fP//�- C L,. . %_Az.� s.0 /LJ g7d)f a/64%4; . �-��� ifi 7/Ldos, /,(7/� ��.L.,-,..x�L A, / ,vc : Mg VU 6=e1L- sew h-i 4,4- d4. ''1 B ?II Mcncowvglq_ .DR11, ___ AL wkv5 l ('7C;4;, LB, "Bug iee-,o 0,4 4(2._ . • � J .1-G /oe..,p : . )2/4-AoZt-v V6i/ --/-72,40.,-, ,ei_ . .4,,,, a4.6:61, 4,,,,, 5-7 -c, k • 4, . IO1 - JUtle �� la(.- 30 TTT . _ •/ NAME (" - imm s... i>mo[rapfLMNWwA 17['TiNIOBTI DATE ~MAD •�e•nqv CHECKED BY DATE •■eYetates.IeG .::+ DESIGN DATA • hM A-ddLr 5$ ' lEt) --.PuttcA., ' A A. ** 1 i S/Gld Ae- 0/4/0),.<.- 4 • /(moo// . . . 0• .._ i...„, id",. Rar✓:9c:.a.te/ Js“seti . . : :a4)q R Oal. _Dr, ..:..._ \.kups. of FCeFZw . . : $ 9U mecirowvgLE. Ord JaNa_:1-40r- :_ . t . , , ( D - LP' : .9ffr0 x. . .AA). . _. r 4-a . . . - /7oi�' -<../ :. .„. . _ 13oi.Ab {.a. .-s.r . .. . . . . :1 Sa a -Suw.w --.12,,. . _. . _ RCobettx ._NIA im-¢ : . .154.o. . Soi+1'v+=T_1)2., .. 61.a;6, LeePie :/r140 :_Slinnm.ii pa. .. • _- Bill and Nancy SQuro. . . . . . . . 8750 gleadouwale Tyr Curl 4 a...?(4 2,ocIs'k0-t. . . . ._ f'6RI,t=4a.v PM we- Rd._ _ _ La i ' Kzail :1•oos :. iiLsl .'Rad O4.. pac ./ ff f ✓•Ald I4kWA ) /.(9ii. OSa4.asr .JailiIC• . . N\ Wl ,s 1C=1.a3c: 3`.*w.w.c - Oil. Dog PAGE Of •.: • HAR;;Y A. ROGEiiS 910) EDEN PRAIRIE RD EDEN PRAIRIE. MN 5534 C % 4-e- , , -• _ .-ecr ' de'z-Ze... d--4/&tee: 4 Lji ••••-f: •o__,,4:46 zAy. . . • • cz. c?)/ • /OS. I • L. 1,7/ (,/ 2 _ — o v i L 61 v J L ca. -./t�C�..�` �Y�/:�..t/ .' (ft-C • . . • STAFF REPORT 9 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: April 7, 1989 PROJECT: Red Rock Shores LOCATION: East of County Road #4, north and east of Lakeshore Drive APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: Scenic Heights Investment REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Change from Rural and R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 19.77 acres. 2. Preliminary Plat of 19.77 acres into 16 single family lots, 3 outlots, and road right-of-way with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals. Background ++ •� II /J. {{ 1... (>r..;'. �i C,COM (H , . This 19.77-acre site is currently i ,�� guided Low Density Residential and "�,,,,�'�� ;� t �_ , approximately 6.65 acres are zoned / Lam%" '.. R1-22. The property to the south is *—_ r'. ) i R - . `{ .F' also zoned R1-22 and developed with = " large lot single family homes. The RO--s'l PROPOSED SITE proponent is currently requesting a � zoning district change from RI-22 to a::: 1... �*Ti: R1-13.5 and a preliminar :•:•.: Y Plat of r---- �•:•::. 19.77 acres into 16 single family �.,,-.•.-.-,,•.• .. , : ,� lots and 3 outlots. ' S�.�.�,'•0. Site Plan/Preliminary Plat ( ''�"••• f ,0 The site plan depicts the sub- ;:;:\. \ ) ' ,,". ' division of the �''• `'property into 16 single family lots and 3 outlots. � �� `. Outlot A, which is a lowland area r~ N E'o. adjacent Red Rock Lake, contains �+ 1, 4.95 acres, while Outlot B, to the --- . ''_ ; _a+ - ,gqi �Z north of the future Scenic Heights -ri_., .? - a n c, Road extension, contains 3.04 acres. -ww.r-a-r_T'' f ^ Outlot C, containing 1,674 square -._rj !_! ti feet, is proposed to be combined "` with the property to the west at PUB � � \`\ AREA LOCATION MAP i iog') Red Rock Shores 2 April 7, 1989 time of development. A total of 11.74 acres are proposed for development with 16 single family lots at a density of 1.36 units per acre. Lot sizes within the subdivision range from a minimum of 14,564 square feet to a maximum of 39,506 square feet. Average lot size is approximately 27,300 square feet. All lots meet the minimum requirements of the R1-13.5 zoning district with the exception of Lot 1, Block 3, which requires 100 feet of frontage on Lakeshore Drive because it is a corner lot. A variance will be required for lot frontage. Access to this site is provided by a temporary street located on the Scenic Heights Road future alignment, Lakeshore Drive, and the extension of Red Oak Drive. The extension of Red Oak Drive will require the acquisition of approximately 6,500 square feet of the adjacent property to the west. If this property cannot be acquired, or an agreement reached with the owner to use the property, temporary cul- de-sacs will be utilized adjacent this property until a road connection can be made. Shoreland Ordinance Because the property is adjacent Red Rock Lake, which is classified as a Recreational Development Water, the following requirements exist: 1. Minimum lot size - 20,000 square feet 2. Minimum width at the building line - 120 feet 3. Minimum width at the Ordinary High Water Mark - 120 feet 4. Minimum building setback from the Ordinary High Water Mark - 100 feet Due to the definition of an abutting lot, which are lots located within 150 feet of the Ordinary High Water Mark, the Shoreland Ordinance affects all lots within the subdivision with the exception of Block 1, Lot 1, and Block 3, Lots 1 and 2. All of the lots within Block 2 meet the minimum requirements of the Shoreland Ordinance with the exception of Lot 9, which has an existing home closer than 100 feet from the Ordinary High Water Mark. A variance will be required for a setback less than 100 feet. Outlot A extends within 150 feet of Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5, Block 1. Due to the abutting lot classification for Lots 2-5, Block 1, and the desire of the proponent to subdivide this portion of the property into 5 single family lots, a total of 7 shoreland variances are required. These variances include 4 lot width variances, and 3 lot size variances. All variances within this area could be eliminated by removing one lot. Grading Elevations on this site range from a high point of B78 at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and the east property line to a low point elevation of 839.7 adjacent Red Rock Lake. Natural slopes on the site are towards the east and north. Minimal grading occurs in the southeast portion of the site adjacent Red Rock Lake due to the relatively flat nature of the project site. The majority of grading work occurs at the intersection of the temporary road and the extension of Red Oak Drive. Cut and fill amounts in tihs location reach a maximum of 16 feet of fill and 12 to 16 feet of cut. Approximately 10 feet of fill is occuring within Outlot A below the 840.5 contour elevation which is the Ordinary High Water Mark. The proposed grading plan is subject to review by the Department of Natural Resources and the Watershed District. Id • Red Rock Shores 3 April 7, 1989 +$ Based upon the proposed grading plan and the submitted tree inventory, a total of 3,097 caliper inches of significant trees exist on this site. A significant tree loss of approximately 1,041, or 33.6%, has been calculated. A detailed tree replacement plan depicted 465 caliper inches be submitted prior to Council Review. Utilities Because this area is currently served by wells and septic systems, public utilities must be extended to this site. Sanitary sewer and water service is proposed to be extended to this project site through adjacent properties. The decision to extend utilities to serve the subdivision has not been made at this time. A petition for utility and road construction must be reviewed and accepted by the City as a condition of zoning and plat approval. Utility connections will be made from the west of County Road #4, adjacent the Fairfield project and connected through Strawberry Hill Addition, Red Rock View Addition, within Meadowvale Drive, and Red Oak Drive. Gravity sanitary sewer will be able to service Lots 1 through 5, Block 2, and Lots 1 and 2, Block 3. The remaining portion of the site will be required to serviced by a lift station and force main. A maintenance fee for the lift station will be required to be submitted by the developer. Water service will be provided by the proposed 12-inch watermain proposed to be constructed this summer by the City west of County Road #4. Storm water run-off is proposed to be collected within a series of catch basins in the extension of Red Oak Drive with discharge into Outlot A and Red Rock Lake. Detailed utility plans shall be submitted for review by the City Engineering Department and the Watershed District. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Approval of the subdivision would have to he contingent upon proper road extensions and utilities, which are not established at this time. Approval of the project shall not obligate the City to provide the improvements through public improvement projects. If these conditions are met, Staff would recommend approval of the Zoning District Change from Rural and R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 19.77 acres, and a Preliminary Plat of 19.77 into 16 single family lots, 3 outlots, and road right-of-way based upon plans dated March 31, 1989, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 7, 1989, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall: A. Provide a tree replacement plan for 465 caliper inches. B. Submit a petition for the extension of sanitary sewer within Meadowbrook Drive and Red Oak Drive. C. Resolve the extension of Red Oak Drive across the adjacent property. 2. Prior to Final Plat approval , proponent shall: A. Provide detailed storm water run-off, utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer. 8. Provide detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. I( ) Red Rock Shores 4 April 7, 1989 • 3. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall: A. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance of grading. B. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee. 4. Prior to the release of the Final Plat, the developer should provide a bond for 465 caliper inches of tree replacement. 5. The proponent shall submit to the Engineering Department, the lift station maintenance fee. 6. Apply for and receive from the Board of Appeals, Shoreland Ordinance variances for Lots 2-5, Block 1, Lot 9, Block 2, and lot width variance for Lot 1, Block 3. 7. Street names within the subdivision shall be consistent with the City's street naming policy. 8. Approval of the rezoning and preliminary plat is contingent upon City Council acceptance and approval of the petition for roads and utilities. • 1T l/UU A 1•;\s\ :'; •• —\?,gr't (9' i) " • 1.— • ' (3) . ti .---.....\ ___------_-- - • I * ......glibb::!'sillaulaalri,, 111110) (4; 5 •,.. .., Rock (6) ,,. ,...'. . !.. N E D ,r.,-;-..x,•-,:;\ X...\ N 0 — 4.,44E_i_si.4043E _44134vE - - ,. ,IIIMII:-......\\,,etrli Shore I iil 3, 1 1\ '43.0,(:, , (5) ; -t ?. ti I U) I j" ,, .• ,..„ A 1. ..,,.," — — ---- ' Strwber!.... I, ');---.r.):-...,,...7j,„41‘... .;)'it).0)." ' 'I .\-,• • .e. • . ..,...„ ,,,., ..• , In 1 1 g, Ali\Pn 3- do. ., :. (24) 7 4 •'9, ; 1525.' S i , , e° aill 0-\\ Red Rock '.--ti '''' tl);'----, - .s,,-.%'•('7.) -.2'',, 1 I c,- View 6 Fairfield istin! 416 eeil t ' i 9.. ., . •2 ---qP,--,_,V-5 °' ,14:4,16\ .‘ ,.., •, rb Estates - • ',k '• t.•\, ‘‘..‘\•412—I' ""s.Alli4,14 • (2) ...4..„ • k (So Ilt .v. '.* Ir.;`.... .• 15iso 1 , ..:••-• 0.27,..14,.1)), '..9.- '.!72;').... '5"----.3 tt.....0„,- ?..1 40 z\ ' 2) ...:\s..,,, ••,. r, ...w ,•• ...” El SA,,,)'-' S Ue) F.- 1 i_it ' .- 0-6. 3 tr•Sy ' '8',•or,' .P:; •c,..., ... • It,'.'Lk k5) ,T :.- :; 'i ,., PIO NODE LAD(...IND ADO 1. Sit.' „i>•."‘•'1"S'••K (V) •• '"I 0 *T" ,. -- '• • '''' "" 1 •j in.b ° w• /)...1,.v, 4 (73) ' " "Proposed Sanitary Sewer go ti• . '1" . ), ittiNi l'itdextl. ..c. • '„2 . , ,. ',..1,;..,.,' ••.•••■Existing Sanitary Sewer ;..4-i.,;.4,;''f,4,244...—) .,..‘..„'„',. 't:Zo"' 3'.„' : . ----Proposed Water Main ....,,..Pl,";,;...:ri""1-..T:-..'if,.71 ,-; r" :.1-sehim4-4--1- ,,..---; 41-eft,„„, IYE ., . • s• 4 , —/- —Existing Water Main '.... )64054 114311 -.J1'.' AV ' "3: 5',;I 5' '0'.1 5F6 I; '..: LAKE FIINT Ate. 9 1 ') "6' 1 1 I \ . 1 .. \•.•' Proposed Sanitary Sewer and Water Extensions MEMORANDUM TO: Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission THRU: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources FROM: Barbara Penning Cross, Landscape Architect DATE: April 26, 1989 SUBJECT: Supplemental Staff Report to Red Rock Shores Planning Staff Report Dated April 21, 1989 This project is closely tied with two other projects, Red Rock View and Strawberry Hill, both adjacent to this site. These projects have undergone some changes since staff first reviewed them in early February. The street configuration at that time was two cul- de-sacs coming off of Lakeshore Drive. Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Staff recommended no sidewalks to be installed within the project. Since that initial review, the road layout has changed. The cul-de-sacs have evolved into a street which connects to Red Oak Drive, part of the established neighborhood linked by Summit Drive to County Road 4. These projects have generated a great deal of neighborhood interest and involvement. At a Planning Commission meeting, a sidewalk was suggested along the west side of the proposed Red Oak Drive. The sidewalk could be extended along Red Oak Drive and Summit Drive when improvement are made to the existing roads. The residents heartily endorsed this idea and have petitioned the City to improve existing Meadowvale, Red Oak and Summit Drive. Improvements to the roadways will include paving the streets and all utility work. Timing of the project is being studied and will be determined by the Engineering Department. Staff has attached a plan for sidewalks within the revised subdivision. The plan also shows proposed sidewalk locations to be constructed concurrent with roadway improvements. Staff recognizes that the trail along Country Road 4 is less than optimum due to the fact it crosses County Road 4 at Lakeshore Drive. The steep grades along both sides of the road made the crossing necessary at the time the trail was constructed. When County Road 4 is upgraded by Hennepin County, the City will have the trail extended on each side of the road. Outlot A within this project is also worthy of mention. The developer will dedicate Outlot A to the City as part of the final plat of the property. Dedication of this outlot will protect the shoreline from docks, mowed lawns to the lake edge and tree loss. Staff recommends approval of this project based on the Planning Staff Report and this supplemental report. BPC:mdd I1 -16 ' iiiii • . . .:: . ::i.:.i. ..1 DRIVE li..y:f1.:,.:::::j.i.:•. .:!:,. ...:.. ; �.. ���®�� , \ g• .:*0:::::4::.: ;:.•:::[:;1:::ii : ojti. No4M11r..,:ea i \ \ 4- 3 D1 r \\\\\\\i.:;iiiiiiiiiiiii- :'.':.iii,::' ; " 1%4''''". , .',,,\\\ \ l'\ ?.\::iiilig:;!::S;i11::.::: ::ith::::::i ; i;ii:::::. i 1,41%4 - \_ \AKE SHORE D.g.0\ \ .• "L 411111111ill•:::/ill":11:ifillillilii::.,:::;:::.i.:::11::: :::.:::•"::::::: ::::.:11::!/illii "-., ' 1 \\\\ :.i:S1::./:ihi.: i:'i/i: IiiN:I , is mILLrFOR ; -PP zo �T T R. 1 cacti �� , •:::•::::':: ,••: ::::i:::::J:::•.: •••••:. ' 031 RoLLE • `Za w NDLEWOOD 1 ®- - mj AS ` l 91 _ NU: :r1:1: ::P:: — ' ''' — AAYFI LO .111 , SUMMIT DR. • r ,IRFIELD • • 'y KELSEY \IiillF411rif • - • - ::::::::: :' • O�,'OO�yO.( , ArAppir `Oj _o bsx - --- ^- _ - CORRAL )� J 1 ® atsilwi 8' mII\SW •2o4L. pgopDsE-d 5' ccF.E.TE.. s117ewALY-- Dt.WAi 1- X-`t1;N5101•45 PP D %Mt W--J IMpeovvite is I(Di 1a Planning Commission Minutes 13 April 10, 1989 NOTE: THE FOLLOWING THREE PROJECTS WERE PRESENTED TOGETHER. Uram reported that the Strawberry Hill, Red Rock View, and Red Rock Shores project were connected due to the extension of utilities. The water service will come from the west side of County Road 4. The holding pond will require an outlet to Red Rock Lake. All of the projects are requesting a zoning district change from R1-22 to R1- 13.5. Uram noted that each project would require separate public hearing and motions. Frank Cardarelle, representing the Strawberry Hill project, stated that the sewer had to go through the Strawberry Hill subdivision to service the other projects and that 1/2 of a holding pond was on the Strawberry Hill property. The request for a zoning change was due to the problems to meet lot requirements due to the topography of the land. Cardarelle stated that the proponent concurred with the recommendations presented in the Staff Report of April 7, 1989. He added that this property was a transition parcel with the average lot size being approximately 17,000 square feet. Some of lots were smaller and some were larger due to the topography of the land. The street layout had been approved by the City Engineering Department to maintain an adequate traffic flow. Cardarelle stated that the request for the zoning i/iA Planning Commission Minutes 14 April 10, 1989 change was important due to the changing times and economy, roads, utilities, and storm sewer. Bob Smith, representing the Red Rock Shores project, stated that Bill Gilk had acquired the Strawberry Hills project. Smith did not believe it to be the best plan to have the driveways on County Road #4 and; therefore, had changed the lot configuration to remove two lots and enlarge one lot. This was a transitional piece between the Blue Sky First Addition and the development to the north. Utilities would come from the Strawberry Hills project. Cardarelle, representing the Red Rock View project, stated that the proponent concurred with the Staff Report dated April 7, 1989. Cardarelle stated that if one lot was dropped as per Staff recommendations the average lot size would be approximately 24,800 square feet, which was similar to the average size in the Red Rock Lake area. Cardarelle stated that 12 to 25 % of the lots in the Blue Sky First Addition and the Red Rock Lake subdivision had front footages of 100 feet. Smith, Red Rock Shores, stated that this property was divided into four parcels, with existing homes. Smith presented two alternate proposals with the recommended proposal consisting of 15 lots and 4 outlets. Variances would be required for the lot with the existing home and one additional lot due to the front footage requirement. The proponent would initially grade in the streets to save trees and in addition some wetland grading would be required. Smith said that two temporary lift stations would be installed. He believed that the proposed road alignment would afford the best public safety protection. A tree replacement plan would be submitted prior to review by the City Council. Uram reported that the Strawberry Hills subdivision was a transition piece with the revised plan for 5 lots, which would meet the Staff recommendations. Staff was concerned about the placement of the road onto the Harry Rogers property. Uram added that Staff wanted to assure that the Rogers property would remain developable. Staff recommended approval of the project based on the revised plan submitted tonight. Sandstad requested that the Planning Commission be allowed to review the revised plans before taking action. Smith stated that Gilk had just acquired the property this week and that the only change was to drop 2 lots. Ruebling asked if the Rogers property was platted and zoned. Uram replied that the Rogers property was unplatted, but was zoned R1-22. l,'03 Planning Commission Minutes 15 April 10, 1989 Ruebling asked what the lot width requirement was for R1- 11 22 zoning. Uram replied 90 feet. Bye read a petition submitted by the residents of Red Rock West, which requested that the zoning remain at R1-22, the lots be visually consistent with adjacent properties at a 125 foot minimum lot width, not the 100 feet proposed, setbacks be consistent at 50 feet not the 35 feet proposed, and that the proposed development be required to adhere to covenants similar to adjacent neighborhoods. Bye noted that 40 of the 44 neighbors signed the petition. A second petition submitted by the residents of Red Pock West requested that the road planned in the development north of their subdivision end in a cul-de-sac as originally planned by the developers, instead of connecting to Red Oak Drive. The neighbors believed the extension of Red Oak Drive would drastically change the character of the neighborhood from one with no outside traffic to one with heavy traffic flow. Allen Nicklay, 16011 Lake Shore Drive, stated that the zoning should remain at R1-22. He believed that the Southwest Area Study recommendations should also pertain to these three developments. Development in this area should be limited until County Road H4 was upgraded. Nicklay believed that the 100 lot limit was already exceeded with the approval of the Cedar Ridge Estates project and the Phase I Fairfield project and that these three developments would add 35 more lots. He added that all of these developments would utilize County Road 44, which already was heavily used. Nicklay requested that the proposal be denied and current zoning remain in order to uphold the recommendations of the Southwest Area Study. Jack Van Remortel, 16051 Summit Drive, stated that he had not been able to attend the neighborhood meeting, but would like to add his name to the petition to support the requests. Van Remortel recommended that the pace of approval for these projects take into consideration the need for the total area requirements for utilities and to install all the utilities at one time. He was concerned that his property had the potential to be under construction for 3 to 4 years before all utility connections were complete. Van Remortel said that one week after he had put in sod after the trunk watermain was installed the City came out and put in stakes to tear up the property for sanitary and storm sewer. Gary Ernst, 15851 Summit Drive, stated that by extending Red Oak Drive the character of the neighborhood would change. The neighborhood would be used as a short cut to Scenic Heights Road to avoid the congestion on County Road #4. Ernst was concerned about the affect of the increased I1,)LJ Planning Commission Minutes 16 April 10, 1989 traffic. He did not believe that a third entrance to the neighborhood was necessary. Don Harasyn, 15811 Summit Drive, stated that this area had been zoned R1-22 for several years, the existing homes are zoned R1-22 and could not see the justification for a zoning change now. Fred Purcell, 8610 Red Oak Drive, believed that the temporary road proposed with the Strawberry Hill project to the north would create traffic problems. The lots proposed for Red Rock View had small lots abutting to large lots, with the potential for small houses to be constructed on the back portion of the lots. Purcell believed the zoning should stay R1-22 for both Red Rock View and Red Rock Shores. Red Oak Drive currently had a poor design and did not want to see the road extended. The streets should be kept at a 60 foot width. Purcell wanted to see the intersection upgraded. Purcell said that the area had had water problems for 17 years and was concerned about affect of the new development. Larry Lewis, 8681 Meadowvale Drive, stated that the lots along Meadowvale Drive had front footages of 125 feet and believed the new subdivision should maintain that front footage. He said that the reason he bought his home in this location was because of the closed road system. Lewis believed that two accesses to the neighborhood would destroy the character. Lewis supported the use of a cul- de-sac rather than a through street. He wanted the setbacks to be maintained at 50 feet. John Hoffer, 8711 Meadowvale Road, believed that the houses would be too close together. He added that 100 foot frontages with $200,000 homes would be too close. Hoffer believed that the proposed developments would not be compatible with the existing neighborhoods. Sandra Russer, 8731 Summit Drive, stated that she would like to see the zoning remain R1-22 to maintain the aesthetic appeal of the neighborhood. She believed that these three developments would destroy the integrity of the neighborhoods. Russer supported only one additional entrance to the neighborhood, because of the concern regarding increased traffic and the amount of young children in the area. Russer believed that the majority of the land in the Red Rock Shores addition was swamp land and believed that the natural swamp lands in Eden Prairie were becoming endangered. Steve Wagner, 8430 Eden Prairie Road, stated that his property would be affected by the Scenic Heights Road { alignment and believed that traffic on County Road 04 was substantial now. Wagner requested that Staff and the JJ Planning Commission Minutes 17 April 10, 1989 Planning Commission give careful consideration to the traffic patterns in this area. Hoffer commented that he did not see where a transition was being made. He could only see smaller lots being mixed in with larger lots. Larry Moos, 8651 Red Oak Drive, asked what the City was transitioning to. He believed that the Gilk project would be a nice development. Moos was concerned about the potential increased traffic generation with the proposed extension. Moos asked how the City could control the traffic. Uram summarized the neighbors concerns as the following: 1. Southwest Area Study. 2. Drainage. 3. Right-of-way widths. 4. Zoning issues. 5. Traffic. 6. Utilities. Gray stated the upgrade of County Road #4 and Highway #5 was a MnDot project. He added that the contract had been awarded for the upgrade and should be under construction this summer. Gray noted that by this Fall the developments along the west side of County Road #4 would only have possibly one to two dozen occupancies and that the upgrading of County Road 04 and Highway #5 would correlate well with the new home construction. Gray stated that Staff had not had an opportunity to meet with the neighborhood regarding utilities; however, the City was in the planning process for a storm sewer project in this area, with proposed construction to begin by the end of this year. Gray added that Staff would be looking at the Summit Drive neighborhood for sanitary sewer. Gray stated that the City Council could authorize a feasibility study if the neighborhood generated interest and added that Staff was prepared to proceed with a feasibility study if the interest was expressed. Gray stated that the existing street right-of-way in this neighborhood was 60 feet and that the proposed developments were planning 50 foot right-of-ways. He said that 50 foot right-of-ways were adequate for residential streets. These streets would not be major collectors. Gray said that there would be no need for sidewalks in this area. He added that if 28 foot streets were constructed there would not be a detectable difference between a 50 foot or a 60 foot right-of-way, the street width would remain the same. • Planning Commission Minutes 18 April 10, 1989 Gray stated that it was the City's policy to eliminate unnecessary cul-de-sacs whenever possible. He believed that when Highway 212 was built and Scenic Heights Road was realigned, additional traffic would not use Red Oak Drive. 5,:chic Heights would be signalized and County Road #4 would become a 4-lane toad, allowing for a greater capacity for County Road 14. Bill Sauro, 8750 Meadowvale Drive, asked if County Road 114 would be 4 lane south of Scenic Heights Road. Gray replied that the construction would be done in stages and that eventually County Road H4 would be 4 lane all the way to County Road #1. Gray believed the through connections were justified; however, the neighbors concerns regarding the speed of traffic were valid. Gray added that Summit Drive traffic could decrease with an alternate access to the north. He believed that the traffic would be dispersed evenly. Uram reported that the properties could be developed now as R1-22; however, the change in the zoning to R1-13.5 would force the developers to install utilities. The change in zoning would also give the developers flexibility in the developments. Uram believed that the Harry Rogers property which was zoned R1-22 would not be developed as R1-22. Currently the standard zoning district was R1-13.5. Bye asked Uram what the setback requirements were. Uram replied 30 foot setbacks within the R1-22 zoning. Uram added that the property to the west could meet the 50 foot setbacks. Hallett stated that he was pleased to see the Strawberry Hills project drop the two lots and change the road alignment so that the driveways did not come out onto County Road 114. Hallett was concerned that the Harry Rogers property be protected to avoid land locking his property. Hallett pointed out that when utilities were installed as part of a total development package the costs could be reduced and encouraged the neighbors to consider this fact. He was pleased to see the through street going to Scenic Heights Road, and believed it would improve circulation and provide an internal route for the neighbors. Hallett asked why sidewalks were not being considered in this area and suggested that some type of trail system be established. Hallett asked Uram if there was a trail system along the lake. Uram replied no. Hallett stated that Red Rock View should be more compatible with the existing neighborhood. Ruebling stated that he favored leaving the zoning at R1- ! 22. He would like to see the utilities installed in this Planning Commission Minutes 19 April 10, 1989 neighborhood and encouraged the developers to install them now. Ruebling said that the lot lines and setbacks should match that of the existing neighborhoods. He considered the through street a plus. Ruebling concurred with Hallett that sidewalks and/or a trail system should be considered. Fell stated that he concurred with Ruebling and HalietL on their recommendations. Fell wanted to have the opportunity to see a set of revised plans showing the layout of the 5 lots for the Strawberry Hills project. Sandstad asked Gray if the street would be curbed and paved. Gray replied that the temporary road would be bituminous and would have a curb. Gray added that Red Rock Drive would a permanent. Sandstad recommended the zoning remain at R1-22. Dodge stated that the Red Rock View addition could not meet the R1-22 zoning on all the lots. Dodge asked if the setbacks could be mixed with some being 30 feet and some being 50 feet. Uram replied that Staff would recommend being consistent and maintain the 50 foot setbacks. Uram added that 3 lots would have to be removed in the Red Rock View project to meet the 125 foot lot widths. { Uram reported that on the Gilk property all of the lots on the east would meet the R1-22 zoning requirements; however, 2 lots on the west side would not and required variances. i //'' 100{y7 Planning Commission Minutes 20 April 10, 1989 1 • ✓F. RED ROCK SHORRS, by Scenic Heights Investment. Request for Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 19.77 acres, Preliminary Plat of 19.77 acres into 17 single family lots, 2 outlots, and road right-of-way. Location: East of County Road #4, north and east of Lake Shore Drive. A public hearing. t109 Planning Commission Minutes 21 April 10, 1989 MOTION: Ruebling moved, seconded by Sandstad to continue this item to the April 24, 1989 Planning Commission meeting. Hallett was concerned that two weeks would not be enough time for this item. Smith stated that the developer would be requesting variances on some of the lots. Van Remortel asked where the neighbors stood regarding utilities. Gray recommended the neighbors file a petition with the City to show the City Council that there was an interest on the part of the neighborhood. Gray added that a petition did not obligate the neighbors to anything, it would simply start the process. Van Remortel asked if a certain percentage of the neighbors would have to sign the petition in order for any action to be taken. Gray replied 35 percent. Gray added that a 4/5 vote by the City Council would be required to proceed with the process. He described the formal process to the residents. Sauro, asked how the City would determine if a 5 foot concrete sidewalk or an 8 foot bituminous trail would be installed. Gray replied that it would most likely be a 5 foot concrete sidewalk. Gray added that the costs were basically the same for either system. Smith stated that the developer had had conversations with the Parks & Recreation Department and that it was not recommended to install sidewalks. Hallett stated that the Planning Commission was recommending sidewalks be installed. Motion carried 7-0-0. V. OLD BUSINESS ELECTION OF OFFICERS Fell stated that this could be his last term and did not wish to be considered for any office. Fell said that Chairperson Bye had done well this year; however, he would like to see a different person chair the Commission to provide depth to the Planning Commission. Fell suggested Bye for Vice Chairperson. Fell recommended Richard Anderson for Chairperson. He believed this would indicate to the City Council the Planning Commission support of Anderson for reappointment next year. Hallett believed that Anderson would do an excellent job as Chairperson; however, he believed that an individual should serve at least two years in the position as chair. He added that the first year was a learning experience. Hallett /110 Planning Commission Minutes 11 April 24, 1989 the square footage added to Lot 4 due to the pending requirements. Motion carried 5-0-0. ✓D. RED ROCK SHARE$_, by Scenic Heights Investment. Request for Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 19.77 acres, Preliminary Plat of 19.77 acres into 15 single family lots, 2 outlots, and road right-of-way. Location: East of County Road #4, north and east of Lake Shore Drive. A continued public hearing. Gilk stated that he questioned the wisdom of maintaining the R1-22 zoning. He noted that with R1-13.5 only two variances would be necessary; one for his home, and one for Lot 2 to allow for an 82' lot width. Bob Smith, representing the proponent, stated that the average lot size would be 35,000 square feet. The plan had been revised to remove 2 lots. Three variances would be necessary with the R1-22 zoning; one shoreline variance and two lot size variances. Uram reported that the variances for Lots 1 & 2 were necessary due to the location of the streets, a variance was required for the existing home site setback, and a variance for the 82' lot width on Lot 2. Uram stated that the rationale by Staff was that it would be more appropriate to request these variances than to change the zoning on the entire parcel. Uram stated that Staff recommended approval of the plan based on the Staff Report of April 21, 1989. Fell asked Uram if the Board of Appeals would take into consideration Gilk's concerns regarding the variances for the two lots what options would be available to the developer. Uram replied that the Board of Appeals may not find the variances acceptable and then the proponent could drop an addition lot or request the R1-13.5 zoning. Fell asked if the Planning Commission should assume that this is the most appropriate action. Enger replied that the proponent would also be able to appeal the Board of Appeals decision to the City Council if the variance were denied. Fell stated that it appeared that Gilk was uncomfortable requesting the variances and questioned if other alternatives were possible. Enger replied that he believed the variance approach to be the most expedient and best solution for both the developer and the City. Enger added that the City Council had indicated the preference of the City was to preserve the larger zoning districts and offer variances. Sandstad asked if the developer or the City had considered the property in Block 3 as public space. Gilk replied that the area was heavily wooded and secluded because of the trees. Sandstad asked Uram if the property would be II! • Planning Commission Minutes 12 April 24, 1989 too small for the City to consider of value for public space. Uram replied that this had not been considered. Gilk noted that part of the parcel was also zoned Rural. Ruebling stated that this would change the request for rezoning. Uram stated that the proponent was correct and the wording would need to be changed for the appropriate motions. Nancy Nicklay, 16011 Lake Shore Drive, asked if the letter to Harry Rogers would become part of the record related to the road alignment. Uram stated that the letter was considered part of the record. Nicklay added that an agreement had been worked out with Harry Rogers and the City which had contingencies. Sandstad asked Nicklay if she favored this project. Nicklay replied that she did favor the project and added that was why so much time had been spent on the road alignment. MOTION: Hallett moved, seconded by Fell to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0-0. MOTION: ( Hallett moved, seconded by Fell to recommend to the City Council approval of the request for Red Rock Shores for a Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-22 on approximately 11.99 acres and accept, without prejudice, withdrawal of the Zoning District Change request for Red Rock Shores from R1-22 and Rural to R1-13.5 on approximately 8 acres, based on plans dated April 18, 1989, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 7 and 21, 1989. Motion carried 5-0-0. MOTION: Hallett moved, seconded by Fell to further recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Scenic Heights Investment for Preliminary Plat of 19.77 acres into 15 single family lots to be know as Red Rock Shores, based on revised plans dated April 18, 1989, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 7 and 21, 1989. Motion carried 5-0-0. Ilia , UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, REC. 8 NATURAL RESOURCES COMM. May 1 , 1989 -4- MOTION: Joyer moved to recommend approval of staff's recommendation on additional and exclusive pool time requested by the school. Richard seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0. MOTION: Richard moved to recommendapproval of a formula that allowed the City to keep all revenue above operating costs for hockey games. Baker seconded the motion. On call for discussion, Baker reminded the commission of the City's philosophy in the past regarding operating costs and breaking even. The motion passed 4-0. V. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. Red Rock Shores Refer to memo dated April 26, 1989 from Barb Cross, Landscape Architect and staff report dated April 7, 1989. Barb introduced Bob Smith from Krueger g Associates. Smith said the site is located on Co. Rd. 4 on 19.77 acres. The original proposal was for 17 single family lots, but this has been reduced to 15. The residents have petitioned the City to improve existing Meadowdale, Red Oak and Summit Drive. The Planning Commission suggested that a sidewalk be constructed on the west side of Red Oak Drive. Grading will be done for the streets only and there will be tree loss of 327 caliper inches. There are 3097 total caliper inches of trees on the site. B. Strawberry Hill This site is located on 3.2 acres south of Lake Shore Drive, east of Co. Rd. 4. The original proposal was for. 7 single family lots, but this has been reduced to 5. The largest lot in this subdivision would be approximately 30,000 sq. ft. There is no access to Co. Rd. 4 from this subdivision with the exception of the Wittenberg homestead. C. Red Rock View Addition This site is located on 5.7 acres west of Meadowdale Drive and east of Bluesky 1st Addition. Nine single family lots are proposed and this development has already been approved by the Planning Commission. UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, REC. & NATURAL RESOURCES COMM. May 1, 1989 -5- Cross said that Red Rock Shores was discussed in February. At that time, the streets consisted of two cul-de-sacs off of Lakeshore Drive. Staff recommended no sidewalks within the development. Residents in the area were opposed to the project until sidewalks and thru streets were added. Grading on the site follows the natural contours and 33% of the trees will be removed which is average. Utilities will be installed with the roadway improvements as petitioned by the residents. Regarding trails, Cross said trails may be extended when Co. Rd. 4 is upgraded. Outlot A which consists of 4.95 acres of lowlands adjacent to Red Rock Lake will be dedicated to the City. Baker asked how this development connects to the public access and park on the other side of Red Rock Lake. Cross said there will be no trail connection because of the number of established homes in the area. Baker asked if there are any plans to use the outlot area for this purpose. Cross said the outlot is a marshy area. Lambert noted that there should be an 8'added to the plans alon 9 the south bituminous trail Road. side of Scenic Heights Mikkelson asked at what point the homeowners will be contacted about docks, etc. not being allowed down by the lake. Lambert said it would be unlikely that residents would have a dock since the area is so marshy. Cross added that residents do not own land down to the lake like they do on Mitchell Lake. There is a buffer area that is owned by the City. Richard said that when the builder is responsible for preserving trees and not the developer, it must be more difficult for the City to monitor. Cross said that the City does have a loss of control when the builder is responsible for trees. Baker asked what is the total number of lots in this development. Smith said there will be a total of 29 units. MOTION: Baker moved to recommend approval of Red Rock Shores per staff recommendation with the addition of an 8' bituminous trail on the south side of Scenic Height Road connecting to Co. Rd. 4. Mikkelson seconded the motion and it passed 4-0. • • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESDTA RESOLUTION NO. 89-92 RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 2nd day of May, 1989, fixed the 16th day of May, 1989 as the date for a public hearing on the following proposed improvements: I.C. 52-123 (CSAH 1 and 18 Area Storm Sewer Improvements) WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the Council hearing through two weekly publications of the required notice was given and the hearing was held on the 16th day of May, 1989 at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: 1. Such improvement is hereby ordered. 2. The City Engineer is hereby designed as the Engineer for this project and is hereby directed to prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement, with the assistance of H.T.P.O. consulting engineers. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 16, 1989. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk 4 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE • HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 89-106 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted the Comprehensive municipal Plan ("Plan"); and, WHEREAS, the Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment; and, WHEREAS, the proposal of Crosstown Investors for development of Chase Point for Neighborhood Commercial use requires the amendment of the Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, hereby proposes the amendment of the Plan as follows: approximately 7.9 acres located west of Shady Oak Road, north of the proposed City West Parkway extension, be modified from Medium Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial. ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 16th day of May, 1989. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk { l! CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION #89-107 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF CHASE POINT FOR CROSSTOWN INVESTORS BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Chase Point for Crosstown Investors, dated May 11, 1989, consisting of 7.9 acres into two lots and one outlot, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 16th day of May, 1989. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk 1 3 Ii.0 James Development Company ( James L.Ostenson 7808 Creekridge Circle • President Suite 200 Bloomington,Minnesota 55435 May 4, 1989 612/941-7805 • Mayor Gary Peterson and City Council Members CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 RE: Chase Point Dear Mayor Peterson and City Council Members: In addition to our request for rezoning to accommodate a New Horizon daycare center, I would also like to solicit your cooperation in granting an early building permit for this same daycare facility. As you may know, the Chase Point property was impacted by the expansion of the ''''-'4,-..':,''''',.,,i'.:t Crosstown/Shady Oak Road intersection and new access was required through the site by extending City West Parkway. Because of the poor soils in this location, this roadway has been surcharged and the land not developable for almost three ( years. This particular New Horizon daycare facility is presently located in an office building in Opus and has wanted to relocate to Chase Point for almost two years. If they are allowed to begin construction immediately after City Council approvals, they will still be able to be open for business September 1, 1989. Otherwise, they will be forced to extend their present lease for another two years. We would appreciate your support in authorizing the staff to issue a building permit prior to final plat or second reading of rezoning, Thank you for your kind consideration of this matter. a Si cerel • 0'1401 Ji Ostenson ,4 Fo Crosstown Investors JO/nr lilt, e. • W ---jr & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE CONSULTANTS 7901 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE,SUITE 119/EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA 55344/(612)944-7590/FAX(612(944.9322 i April 20, 1989 REFER TO FILE 89-34-21 MEMORANDUM TO: Michael Franzen, city of Eden Prairie FROM: James A. Benshoof and Jon Wertjes RE: Traffic Analysis for Proposed Chase Point Development PURPOSE, APPROACH AND CONCLUSIONS The purpose of this memorandum is to document the traffic analysis we have completed for the proposed Chase Point Development. As shown in Figure I, the site is located Just south of Highway 62 and Just west of Shady Oak Road (across from the City West development). At the south boundary of the site a new roadway would be constructed which would extend west from Shady Oak Road to connect with the single family neighborhood to the west. At Shady Oak Road, this new roadway connection will align with City West Parkway. The principal objective for this analysis Is to determine whether the roadway system can adequately accommodate the traffic generated by the Chase Point development plus all other projected traffic. Based on discussions with project participants and a review of previous related studies, we identified three particularly important points that Influenced the analyses necessary to accomplish the above objective: • The property is being proposed for a mixed commercial development, which is different from the current mid- density residential guiding for the property. • Previous traffic studies have indicated potential serious traffic problems at the T.H. 212 (formerly T.H. 169)/Shady Oak Road interchange. • The primary basis for the traffic results mentioned In the above Item is traffic study work performed 1n 1981. This study was updated in 1983. Given that this traffic work is now six to nine years old and given that extensive development has occurred in the meantime, a strong need exists to monitor and update the traffic situation. r Z_ IN • - 4 411 �.67N0 5(. CHASE POINT SITE\ 61 �`' .5. i ‘•...\,,, ,,,,,.. /r BRYAN7 (}e 1/VIIIII FUTURE 44y440 LANE «+ os CONNECTION bei 1 NORTH 0 1500' l E APPROXIMATE SCALE •/ CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE \ TRAFFIC STUDY FIGURE I CHASE POINT SITE LOCATION BENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES,INC. OEVEIOPMENT ':'''''' TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE CONSULTANTS . J iii? s Mr. Michael Franzen -3- April 20. 1989 To accomplish the project objective in the context of the above major factors: the following five-step work program was accomplished: I) Survey the traffic presently generated by the City West development and provide updated Information -.regarding projected full development traffic characteristics for City West. 2) Develop traffic forecasts for the proposed Chase Point development and relate those forecasts to the traffic situation that would occur if the Chase Point site developed with mid-density residential in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 3) Prepare complete, updated traffic forecasts for the intersections on Shady Oak Road at the Highway 62 interchange and at the T.H. 212 interchange. 4) Analyze the ability of the above mentioned intersections to accommodate the Chase Point trips plus all other projected traffic. 5) Analyze major site access/egress arrangements and internal circulation characteristics and make appropriate recommendations. Principal conclusions that have been established from the traffic analyses are as follows: . City West traffic characteristics are different from those predicted in the original City West studies in the following two respects: - Peak hour trip generation is II to 17 percent lower than previously predicted. - A larger portion of the development trips use the Shady Oak Road/Highway 62 interchange and a smaller portion use the Shady Oak Road/T.H. 212 interchange. . The proposed Chase Point development would generate about 250 additional vehicle trip ends in each the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, as compared to the number of trips that would be generated if the site is developed in accordance with the current guide plan (mid-density residential ). . The updated year 2000 traffic forecasts, including the trips generated by the proposed Chase Point development, could be accommodated through the interchanges of Shady Oak Road with Highway 62 and T.H. 212 at level of service D or better. Ij;�I Mr. Michael Franzen -4- April 20, 1989 . If approved, the proposed Chase Point development would utilize 44 percent of the available reserve capacity in the a.m. peak hour and 77 percent of the available reserve capacity In the p.m. peak hour. The term "reserve capacity" in this instance refers to the additional trips that could be generated by properties in the area without causing any of the interchange intersections to exceed level of service D. . To provide safe operations on Shady Oak Road and within the site, it is recommended that no direct access or egress be provided on Shady Oak Road so long as Shady Oak Road remains an undivided roadway along the site frontage. . A definitive layout needs to be developed for the Shady Oak Road connection at the south boundary of the site. Such a layout should be developed and approved before decisions are made on right-of-way and on the location and design of driveways. . Several concerns exist regarding access/egress and internal circulation for the gas station/store. Further site planning work, including development of alternative layouts, is needed to resolve these Issues. . Concern exists about the dead end circulation system shown for the daycare development. It Is suggested that further consideration be given regarding a possible plan that would provide one driveway as shown on the proposed plan plus flow-through circulation. TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS FOR CITY WEST AREA For purposes of this section, references to City West area pertain to all property bounded by Shady Oak Road, T.H. 212, and Highway 62. As has been previously mentioned. traffic forecasts for the City West area have been updated because two major factors have occurred in the six to nine years since the earlier City West traffic studies: . Significant development has occurred in the City West area . Based on various surveys. changes have occurred in the trip generation rates for several different land uses. Accounting for current information and expectations, the trip generation for the City West area has been updated. Table I Indicates that full development of the City West area will result In about the same number of daily trips as originally projected, but will result in II to 17 percent fewer trips in the peak hours. 1/2 O ( ( , i :r. Michael Franzen -5- April 20. 1989 TABLE I UPDATED TRIP GENERATION FOR FULL DEVELOPMENT OF CITY WEST AREA With 1983 Planned Land Uses and Trio Generation Rates Daily A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peek Hour Land Use/Size Rate Trio Enos Rate Trio Ends Rate Trio Ends Office-613.000 S.F. 12.3/1.000 7,540 2.32 1.425 2.20 1,350 Bank-8 tellers 150/teller 1,200 6.25 50 0.67 100 Residential-240 DUs 8.0/DU 1,900 0.80 190 0.80 190 Hotel-300 Rooms 10.5/Room 3,150 0.85 255 0.73 220 Office-600.000 S.F.: 12.3/1,000 7,380 2.32 1,395 2.20 1,320 Residential-330 DUs - 8.0/OU 2.640 0.80 264 0.80 264 Totals 23.810 3.579 3,444 With Current Expected Land Uses and Trio Generation Rates Daily A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Land Use/Size Rate Trio Ends Rate Trip Ends Rate Trio Ends Office-I01.300 S.F. 17.6/1,000 1,784 2.30 233 2.33 236 Office/Warehouse-376,000 S.F. 8.4/1.000 3,165 1.97 740 1.26 475 Apartments-288 DUs 6.1/DU 1,756 0.51 148 0.59 171 Primetech Park Research-12.000 S.F. 8.5/1.000 102 1.17 14 1.33 16 Medical Office-3,200 S.F. 30.1/1,000 962 1.53 49 3.41 109 Office-I63.000 S.F. 17.2/1,000 2.808 2.26 369 2.29 373 Daycare-3.400 S.F. 67.1/1,000 228 11.5 39 12.4 42 Assembly/Warehse.-8.000 S.F. 4.4/1.000 35 1.0 8 1.0 8 Shady Oak Center Restaurant-5,000 S.F. 87.4/1,000 437 1.2 6 6.8 34 Office-22.620 S.F. 19.9/1,000 450 2.48 56 2.52 57 Commercial-28.550 S.F. 115.2/1.000 3,290 2.87 82 11.38 325 Gas/Cony. Store-3.510 S.F. 241.1/1.000 798 30.2 100 36.9 122 Office-600,000 S.F. 8.77/1.000 5,259 1.56 936 1.45 871 Residentlal-330 DUs' 6.1/DU 2.014 0.53 175 0.67 222 Totals 23.088 2,955 3,061 ( Differences - -722 -624 -383 Land use in Honeywell and residential area north of City West. /13‘ 1 -Mr. Michael Franzen -6- April 20. 1989 In addition to trip generation, the directional distribution and routing characteristics of City West area trips also are important. To address this point, a survey was performed to record the specific routes of travel for a sample of motorists leaving City West. The results of this survey are shown in Figure 2, together with the trip distribution percentages for the original City West traffic study. This figure indicates that a larger portion of City West users are oriented to the north on Shady Oak Road and the west on Highway 62 and that fewer City West users travel to/from the southwest on T.H. 212. City staff also have expressed interest in the current level of service characteristics at key intersections in the City West area. Based on recent counts. both ramp intersections at Shady Oak Road and Highway_62 presently operate at level of service B during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Due to the lack of traffic signal control , the T.H. 212 ramps and City West Parkway at Shady Oak Road presently operate at level of service E during the peak hours. Both T.H. 212 ramp intersections presently meet peak hour traffic signal warrants; with traffic signal control the intersections would operate at level of service B/C. TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS FOR PROPOSED CHASE POINT Accounting for the particular uses in the proposed development, the anticipated trip generation for Chase Point is shown in Table 2. As indicated, the proposed development would generate about 250 more trips in each the a.m. and and p.m. peak hours than if the property developed according to the current mid-density residential guiding. City staff asked about the effects on trip generation if a hotel (100- 150 rooms) were developed on the north portion of the site instead of the two office components and the restaurant. Under this scenario, the a.m. peak hour trip generation would be reduced from the 291 trip ends shown in Table 2 to 157-193 trip ends,, and the p.m. peak hour trip generation would be reduced from 312 to 166-200. Based on our surveys, the expected directional distribution for Chase Point trips is shown in Figure 3. As expected. the Chase Point trips would be more oriented to Highway 62 and the north on Shady Oak Road than the overall City West trips shown in Figure 2. I LR 2 , i.,________, t® .... 1111r N. 62NO ST. - 41/40 )1°llIllillihllh' ............\ \ 12/I9 62 1 111 CITY hrST / \I(c !F..'0 0�' �� p10 ... �� 4 'Pp 43 \\ BRYANT LANE �p �� W ,. a., z. 0 \/ 35/20 DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES FROM 1981 CITY WEST EAW FOR FUTURE ROAOWAY SYSTEM DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES FROM 1989 BENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES, INC. I SURVEYS 3/31/89 A J XX / XX NORTH 0 1000' 11/4 APPROX. SCALE 010 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE FIGURE 2 / TRAFFIC STUDY CITY WEST FOR TRIP DISTRIBUTION CHASE POINT BENSHCOF&ASSOCIATES.INC. DEVELOPMENT TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE CONSULTANTS 1110 I/' Mr. Michael Franzen -8- April 20. 1989 TABLE 2 TRIP GENERATION FOR CHASE POINT SITE AM PM Peak Hour Peak Hour In Out In Out WITH DEVELOPMENT PER GUIDE PLAN Mid-density residential - 80 DUs 8 35 37 17 (10 DUs/acre) WITH CHASE POINT PROPOSAL Office 28.800 sq. ft. 60 9 11 59 Office 8,000 20 3 4 20 Restaurant 5,900 62 50 63 55 Day Care 5.600 45 40 40 45 Gas/Cony. Store 3,000 61 54 92 83 248 156 210 262 Less 59. internal/multi-purpose -12 -7 -11 -13 Less intercept trips -50 -44 -71 -65 10% Restaurant & Day Care 707. Gas/Cony. Store Total Net Trips 186 105 128 184 Added to Roadway System INCREASE IN TRIP GENERATION DUE 178 70 91 167 TO CHASE POINT PROPOSAL 248 258 1 IOU • m 25 35 N. 62ND ST. �' 62 SITE (8 ACRES) Tax CITY NEST BRYANT p' 5C1' LANE o /150 rir IS 1 TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGE 0 900' xx NORTH APPROX. SCALE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE FIGURE 3 TRAFFIC STUDY CHASE POINT FOR TRIP DISTRIBUTION CHASE POINT BENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES.INC. DEVELOPMENT TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE CONSULTANTS J /j;L (7 Mr. Michael Franzen -10- April 20, 1989 TRAFFIC FORECASTS As previously mentioned. it is important to establish the total traffic forecasts at the Shady Oak Road interchanges with Highway 62 and T.H. 212 in order to assess the ability of the roadway system to accommodate the Chase Point traffic. The approach to completing this effort involved utilizing earlier year 2000 forecasts as a base and then adjusting those forecasts to account for previously discussed changes in the City West traffic characteristics and to account for the Chase Point traffic characteristics. For the intersections of Shady Oak Road with the Highway 62 ramps, baseline year 2000 complete volume projections were obtained from Hennepin County. These forecasts, which were developed In September 1983, were based on earlier City West traffic projections and account for the !oop ramp in the southwest quadrant of the interchange. For the intersec- tions of Shady Oak Road and the T.H. 212 ramps, such complete baseline forecasts were not available either in prior reports or from the files of consultants who performed earlier City West traffic studies. Therefore, in order to assess traffic performance through these intersections, we had to estimate the year 2000 a.m. and p.m. peak hour turn movements. We believe that we established reasonable estimates for these projections because we have been able to relate to the following two items of information: existing a.m. and P.M. peak hour traffic turning movements that we counted in the spring or 1989 and year 2000 approach volume projections presented in the 1983 traffic report for the City West development. The resultant year 2000 peak hour traffic forecasts are shown In Figures 4 and 5 for two scenarios: I) if the Chase Point site develops with 80 units of mid-density residential and 2) if the Chase Point site develops according to the proposed plan. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS FOR SHADY OAK ROAD AT HIGHWAY 62 AND T.H. 212 Utilizing the forecasts shown in Figures 4 and 5, capacity analyses have been performed to assess the ability of the interchanges of Shady Oak Road with Highway 62 and T.H. 212 to accommodate the projected volumes. From these analyses, a determination has been made regarding the level of service provided at each intersection during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The level of service categories range form A to F, with A being a free flow condition and F being a situation with severe congestion. Level of service 0, which represents moderate delay, is the typical design standard in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area and was used as the limit of acceptable operation for the Southwest Eden Prairie Development Phasing study completed in late 1988. IIc'L • • -11- $F a 1 / s iga J-I- L112/171/ill `-TW0035,9l ..I I ��6IND S1. t.x uO 2NORIA RAINS ' 61 Re _..\ 8 _!I N3., ), 6151e151e15-P 10/135/135 BRTANT ` E7,/SS UM 9 141/4I3I4/0i :Y T.N. id AST i or FRONTAGE 8 SWIN IWO 8- ROAD W Iz Oi'il?I? YEAR 2000 RPoncrl7Ns 0E0EEOPEO IN 1901 CORRENI TEAR 1000 1 P0UJEC1IONS n70 AEs1UTNFIAL m CNASI POW SIR L1 ONT JEAN 1000 .�-.r y M I"''� PROJECTIONS RIIN •Z .5...i L- PROPOSER OEYTEONNNf • SPADE 000 R0. •4•'• ma/KO/nK J L SNAot 6u p. r1 J60/1 OA/10 60/60/60 r 160/160/15050 ...150/239/M 'SOURCE a PROJECTIONS000/T61/711-- ITS/Ile/116J 710I 161/1 OM BRA IN 1967: 91 flf1961/965� I *MAIE IC ANALEIS FOR wy r SNARE OAK ROAD MON CS I Y gMAN 61 INfERCTNNOE H S 70 1N.69 INIERCNANSE', WM.INC.,fEMRDARE,1967. x$ NORTH • 0 1500' t APPROXIMATE SCALE 111, CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE TRAFFIC STUDY' FIGURE 4 FOR CHASE POINT YEAR 2000 DEVELOPMENT AM PEAK HOUR BENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES,INC. TRAFF I C VOLUMES TRANSPORTATION ANO LAND USE CONSULTANTS A • ( -1 2- 11 :3 T MOAN RANKS ..4....S I.N.67/ ; L 491/N91/N91 F705n)1IMf �j _1 1 1 N.67N0 SI. Y S i 67 tS ir SOWN RAW F!.. _6RSAN1 Cho 400/100/400, L_B,u I/.II LAM i`�AYA 0/191 19� - `0I 10/IO IN/719/777i Ty�, ai' Q3 e $ S 1(AN 7000 RRONCIION N4FINFO IN 1901 CUMIN'INN 7000 n0'I moos NIOl RISIOFNIIAI ON OINSF POINT Slr( OWN!!!SOON 7000 E I- 191111FCFIOIS NIIN ~•- 1`E. -S P DOM OWN! ROMONYf l011RM1 ~1 �� In/re1/In f el0/70A/171 110/110/7r0 T-179/171/175 -6e0/697/100 e50/6e1/691+ 510/171/171J Inonw/e:R--. 44v439/447 mRlc(a IxroucNan N VCIaLO IN 19651 4MOY ONt ID. �I r •19A11IC ANA111$1@ Rti 51N0I OAR ROAD/ROI 2�^ CSAN 62 INI(R(INK.( A i NORTH Io IN 109 INI(9CI4IN67', ti MIN. INC.,1(0101.02,1901. 0 1500' 1 1 APPROXIMATE SCALE t J CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE FIGURE 5 TRAFFIC STUDY FOR CHASE POINT YEAR 2000 DEVELOPMENT PM PEAK HOUR BENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES,INC. TRAFFIC VOLUMES TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE CONSULTANTS IIAA Mr. Michael Franzen -13- April 20. 1989 The year 2000 level of service results for the subject intersections are shown in Table 3. Two major findings from this table are: I) all intersections would provide an acr_eotable level of service during the peak hours and 2) changes in land use represented by the proposed Chase Point plan would not cause a significant reduction 1n the level of service results. In addition to the preceding findings, City staff have expressed interest in reserve capacity - pertaining to possible consideration of reguiding some other properties on the west side of Shady Oak Road. A key question In that respect is: Do the interchanges of Shady Oak Road with Highway 62 and T.H. 212 have sufficient "reserve" capacity to accommodate reguiding of the Chase Point site plus other possible nearby properties? To address this question, we have completed the following four-step process: I) Determined the maximum number of additional trips (over the year 2000 forecasts with Chase Point as residential) that could operate through each of the four subject intersections during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours without causing level of service E operation. 2) Allocated one half of the additional trips for possible increased development in the study area. This would allow the other half of the additional reserve capacity to be a safety factor and to be available for other development in Minnetonka and Eden Prairie. 3) Adjusted the results from step 2) by the typical trip distribution for the area to translate the additional intersection trips from step 2) to trip generation. 4) Selected the lowest value for the a.m. peak hour and the lowest value for the p.m. peak hour from step 3) to constitute the additional available trip generation for the study area. The premise for choosing the lowest value for each peak hour is to avoid level of service E at any intersection. The result of this process is that the roadway system could accommodate additional trip generation in the study area of 352 trip ends in the a.m. peak hour and 239 trip ends in the p.m. peak hour. The proposed Chase Point plan would utilize 44 percent of the additional available trip generation in the a.m. peak hour and 77 percent of the additional available p.m. peak hour generation. • Mr. Michael Franzen -14- April 20, 1989 TABLE 3 YEAR 2000 LEVELS OF SERVICE FOR SHADY OAK ROAD INTERSECTIONS AT HIGHWAY 62 ANO T.H. 212 Level of Service A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour With With With With Chase Proposed Chase Proposed Point Chase Point Point Chase Point Intersection as Res. Plan as Res. Plan Shady Oak Rd./ westbound ramps for Highway 62 C C C C Shady Oak Rd./ eastbound exit ramp for Hwy. 62/ south frontage rd. 0 0 0 C Shady Oak Rd./ southbound ramps for T.M. 212 C C C C Shady Oak Rd./ northbound ramps for T.H. 212 C C C C II30 Mr. Michael Franzen -15- April 20. 1989 ANALYSIS OF ARRANGEMENTS FOR SITE ACCESS AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION We have reviewed the site plan submitted to the City' regarding its ability to provide effective access/egress and internal circulation. From this review and discussions with City staff, the following particularly important issues were identified: . Feasibility of direct site access via Shady Oak Road . Layout of the Shady Oak Road connection at the south boundary of the site - how this layout relates to the existing Shady Oak Road/City West Parkway intersection and how this layout relates to access for the Chase Point site and the property to the south. . Location and layout of the driveway for the gas station/store - particularly the adequacy of the on- site circulation. . Layout of the daycare site - adequacy for drop off/pick up functions. We have carefully addressed each above issue and have developed appropriate findings and recommendations. Regarding the idea of direct site access via Shady Oak Road (the proposed site plan indicates right turn In access only), our finding Is that such access would not function effectively. Two principal reasons for this conclusion are: . Since Shady Oak Road at the location of the proposed access point presently is undivided, It would not be possible to prevent left turns from the south on Shady Oak Road Into the site. Serious hazards would be created whenever a vehicle would attempt such a left turn. . Potential confusion would exist where the right turn in access would Join the cul-de-sac of the private internal roadway. Several curb cuts are shown In the cul-de-sac, of which this would be the only one-way drive. Some motorists may attempt to use this driveway In order to exit to Shady Oak Road, which would create a hazardous situation. It may be possible to reconsider the idea of a curb cut on Shady Oak Road, potentially for right turns in and out, after Shady Oak Road is upgraded and a raised median Is constructed. Concept/Site Plan." Chase Point, Sather-Bergquist. Inc. , March 30. 1989. • • Mr. Michael Franzen -16- April 20. 1969 Regarding the Shady Oak Road connection at the south boundary of the site. our primary concern is that a detailed layout of this roadway should be developed before decisions are made on right—of-way and on the location and design of driveways. Such further engineering work should also address the probable location of driveway(s) on the south side of this roadway. On a preliminary basis, we would make the following traffic suggestions for this roadway: • Location at Shady Oak Road to align opposite City West Parkway. Just west of Shady Oak Road the roadway probably should have two eastbound lanes (one for left turns and one for through/right movements) and one westbound lane which could widen to include a westbound left turn lane for access to the property to the south. Construction of a raised median, which would be continuous between Shady Oak Road and the private roadway serving the Chase Point development. Under this circumstance, a driveway serving the gas station site would serve right turns in and out only. Regarding the location and layout of the driveway for the gas station/store, we have the following principal concerns: Limited distance between the roadway and the pump islands. The plan shows about 74 feet, but the actual distance likely would be less if the roadway is constructed according to the preceding suggestions. In order to provide adequate stacking distance, our experience has been that 80 to 100 feet are needed between the curb of the roadway and the pump island. • Multiple potential traffic maneuvers and conflicts just with the site. This characteristic, together with the preceding point, create potential that on— site traffic difficulties would cause interference with traffic movements on the roadway. . Tendency that entering traffic destined for the store will drive through the pump islands, causing conflicts with vehicles and persons using the gas pumps. We would suggest that further site planning work be completed for the gas station/store parcel in order to resolve the above issues. I I,7'2 • Mr. Michael Franzen -17- April 20. 1989 Regarding the layout of the daycare site, our concern is that on-site congestion may occur In the a.m. and p.m. peak periods due to the dead end circulation system. One alternative would be to revise the site plan to provide flow-through circulation. Another alternative, if the City and applicant are comfortable with the plan as shown. would be to construct the development as currently proposed on the current site plan and consider traffic revisions later if needed. In either event, we would suggest that the day care development Just have one driveway. The volume of traffic generated by the development does not require a second drive, and further, a second driveway close to the Shady Oak Road connection likely would create problems. 9, { r/33 iliF BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE CONSULTANTS 7901 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE,SUITE t 19/EDEN PRAIRIE.MINNESOTA 55344/(612)944-7590/FAX(612)944-9322 i May 3, 1989 REFER TO FILE 89-34-71 MEMORANDUM TO: Michael Franzen, Sity of Eden Prairie Vp FROM: James A. Benshoof and Jon WertJt RE: Update to Traffic Analysis for Proposed Chase Point Development PURPOSE The purpose of this memorandum is to update our earlier traffic analysis on the Chase Point Project, which was documented in a memorandum dated April 20, 1989. Based on comments made by the Planning Commission at their meeting on April 24, 1989, and by staff, this update has been performed to address the following subjects: • Right-of-way and access characteristics along Shady Oak Road • Layout of gas station/store site and day care site ▪ Right-of-way needs and layout for Shady Oak Road Connection • Reserve capacity at key intersections Our findings and recommendations regarding the above points are presented next. RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ACCESS CHARACTERISTICS ALONG SHADY OAK ROAD As requested by Hennepin County, the development plan should provide a total of 50 feet of half right-of-way along the entire site frontage of Shady Oak Road. This right-of-way is needed to accommodate the planned future upgrading of Shady Dak Road. In addition to this right-of-way, we recommend an additional triangular piece of right-of-way in the northwest corner of Shady Oak Road and the Shady Oak Road connection. This additional right-of-way, which is needed for future sight distance and traffic signal control equipment, would have a dimension of about 25 feet along both Shady Oak Road and the Shady Oak Road connection. I `i I ( ( - Mr. Michael Franzen -2- May 3, 1989 As indicated In our April 20th memorandum, we recommend that the development plan not provide any direct access or egress on Shady Oak Road. In order to conform with this suggest- ion, the right turn in only access on Shady Oak Road, which was shown on earlier plans, should be deleted from the plans. LAYOUT OF GAS STATION/STORE SITE AND DAY CARE SITE We participated with City staff and the applicant to address several issues that were raised regarding the site plans for the above referenced parcels. As a result of this process, significant changes have been made to the plans for the gas station/store and the day care facility. We are confident that the current proposed plans will provide effective traffic operations. RiGHT-OF-WAY NEEDS AND LAYOUT FOR SHADY OAK ROAD CONNECTION Through past actions by the City, a total of 80 feet of right-of-way have been dedicated for the Shady Oak Road Connection along the south boundary of the Chase Point site between Old Shady Oak Road and Shady Oak Road. We have applied considerable effort to assess two aspects pertaining to this roadway: . Adequacy of the 80 feet of dedicated right-of-way . Layout characteristics of this roadway In order to provide effective operations at the Shady Oak Road intersection (considering the relationship with City West Parkway to the east) and to provide effective operations along the Shady Oak Road connection west to Old Shady Oak Road. One basic conclusion we reached Is that the needs for this roadway can be met effectively within the presently dedicated 80 feet of right-of-way. Our recommended layout for the Shady Oak Road connection is shown 1n Figure 1. Major features of the recommended layout include: . One through lane In each direction . Left turn lane from the west at Shady Oak Road (this left turn lane will complement the left turn lane presently provided from the east on City West Parkway. . Left turn lanes from the east and west at the private road intersection. The left turn lane from the east at this location will be to serve future development on the south side of the roadway. /el C C ,. 1 / / 1 A : %; , \ • \ �\VC.° WI I V \ 0 .0'ti EO�OaC- r ` GAS STATION DRIVEWAY 1 6 \O R i:1 f7R NORTH �► COUNTY ROAD 61 O 80' ) f I I I n i J CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE TRAFFIC STUDY FIGURE 1 FOR CHASE POINT CONCEPT LAYOUT DEVELOPMENT FOR SHADY OAK ENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES,INC. ROAD CONNECTION TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE CONSULTANTS I I?i19 (7 Mr. Michael Franzen -3- May 3, 1989 . Raised center island that will extend from Shady Oak Road to about 520 feet to the west, with a median opening provided Just at the private road intersectlon. This raised island is needed, in our Judgment, to provide protection for the left turn movements, to coordinate with the design of City West Parkway to the east. and to control traffic movements at the gas station/store driveway. RESERVE CAPACITY AT KEY INTERSECTIONS On page 13 in our April 20th memorandum, we introduced the concept of "reserve capacity." The intention was to give an indication regarding the amount of additional trips that could be generated by the Chase Point site and, possibly, by other properties on the west side of Shady Oak Road without causing the intersections on Shady Oak Road at Highway 62 and at T.H. 212 to exceed level of service D. After our April 20th report had been submitted, we realized that a couple of input parameters needed to be revised in order to apply this "reserve capacity" concept in a sound, defensible basis for land use control purposes. An example is that In the April 20th memorandum, we allocated the total available additional capacity for properties on the west side of Shady Oak Road among all movements through each particular intersection, rather than just among the movements that would be affected by additional trip generation on the Chase Point site and other nearby properties. Another example of an updated item is that our analysis presented in the April 20th memorandum assumed that no improvements would be made to the existing intersections of Shady Oak Road with the Highway 62 ramps. On reflection, we realized that two improvements would be logical at the intersection of Shady Oak Road with the eastbound exit ramp from Highway 62 and the south frontage road. These two improvements would be: . Addition of a third northbound lane through the Intersection. This third lane would terminate at the eastbound entrance ramp to Highway 62. This situation would be identical to the southbound situation, where a third southbound lane on Shady Oak Road terminates at the loop ramp to eastbound Highway 62. . Addition of a third lane on the east approach to the intersection, which would be needed to serve the major future development planned on the Honeywell site. II/) C ( Mr. Michael Franzen -4- May 3, 1989 Therefore, we updated the reserve capacity analysts to account for all updated Input parameters. For the critical p.m. peak hour, our current finding Is that the roadway system can accommodate an additional 1596 trip ends generated by properties on the west side of Shady Oak Road. Of this total 1596 trip ends available for properties In the area, the additional generation represented by the proposed Chase Point development would account for 258 trip ends (16%). Two further points should be emphasized regarding application of the "reserve capacity" concept to the proposed Chase Point development: . The 258 p.m. peak hour trip ends attributable to the Chase Point development account for the difference between trip generation with the current proposed development and trip generation if the property developed as mid-density residential. This increase in trip generation on the Chase Point site would be less if the northern portion of the site developed with lower traffic generating uses than the presently proposed office and restaurant uses. . The "reserve capacity" figure of 1596 trip ends Is based on usage of just half of the total additional available intersection capacity. The purpose of this 50 percent reduction factor Is to preserve a reasonable portion of additional capacity for possible growth In through trips and/or trips associated with additional development on properties other than those on the west side of Shady Oak Road. Specifically, this reduction factor Is applied because we do not think it would be prudent for the City of Eden Prairie to allocate the total available additional capacity Just among the properties on the west side of Shady Oak Road. Having expressed these points, the reader can Interpret the effect of the proposed Chase Point development on reserve capacity in either of the following two manners: - That Chase Point would utilize 16 percent of the reserve capacity available for properties on the west side of Shady Oak Road - That Chase Point would utilize eight percent of the total additional available capacity on the roadway system STAFF REPORT i TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: April 21, 1989 PROJECT: Chase Point LOCATION: Northwest quadrant of the intersection of City West Parkway and Shady Oak Road APPLICANT: Crosstown Investors REQUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Medium Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial on 7.9 acres. 2. Zoning District Change from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial on 2.78 acres. 3. Preliminary Plat of 7.9 acres into 2 lots and 1 outlot. 4. Site Plan Review. _. ... !i Background -- ' _ _ r 11 • This site is currently designated i C-HW\- a H Medium Density Residential on the 1 ;:.c , C-t�?N �` Comprehensive Guide Plan for up to '1} ° �' i 10 units per acre, or a total of 79 PROPOSED SITE-4.,�N, I i �� housing units. Surrounding land y ��► L�__ , . uses are guided Low Density . �- '<, j.4.; : ; Residential to the west, Medium rt , N3 f,.b.q..*•, t OTC Density Residential to the south, •�~-cr, ;• Crosstown Highway to the north, and -»::--:.1.,4 , - '�{ ; " O Commercial and Office to the east `?i s�%`( f i �? . across Shady Oak Road. This 'ju `r' %- . I <.. ? property is currently zoned Rural. ""'>'-- ! F X I,� RM-2., Comprehensive Guide Plan ---- •`.-, This site is transitional between wo ,•.. ti , g • the more intense land uses to the — ---- ,-- east of Shady Oak Road and the lower i/ intensity residential land uses to — ice " I ' the west. The current designation -Tr ' /� of Medium Density Residential is a i O transitional land use. It is the ,; AREA LOCATION MAP Chase Point 2 April 21, 1989 responsibility of the proponent to provide substantial evidence which would justify the change in the Guide Plan to Neighborhood Commercial. The applicant should demonstrate that other uses can be transitional on this site, identify the potential impacts on surrounding uses, identify the impacts on-site, and identify the impacts on adjoining roads and intersections. If impacts are high, mitigating measures should be proposed. Development Request The 2.78 acres area for the day care and the gas station is proposed to be rezoned from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial. The balance of the property is not proposed for rezoning at this time. The concept plan for the remaining 5 acres is to indicate the type and intensity of neighborhood commercial uses envisioned for the property and for the purpose of preparing the traffic study. Only a Guide Plan Change is requested for the 5-acre outlot. Site Plan The site plan depicts the subdivision of land into 3 lots. Lots 1 and 2 will be for the gas station and the day care. Neither of these lots meet the minimum 2-acre lot size requirement for the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district and both will require a variance to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals. The site plan for the gas station meets the minimum setback requirements for building and parkirg. A total of 24 parking spaces are shown on the site plan which would meet the minimum parking requirements for a commercial gas station. A 50% credit can be given for parking at the pump islands, therefore 12 spaces other than the pump islands are needed to meet Code. The site plan for the proposed day care center meets the minimum setback requirements to building and parking. Adequate parking for the day care center has been provided on-site. Roads and Access Benshoof and Associates traffic study identifies the extent of traffic improvements that would be necessary as a result of this development. One of the recommendations of the traffic study is for the design of the Shady Oak Road connection (City West Parkway extended). This roadway should be 90 feet in right-of-way width and 74 feet for the road surface, which would include the median from the Shady Oak Road intersection back to the private drive connection into this site. Since the road right-of-way is only 80 feet wide, an additional five feet of right-of-way would be needed from this site as well as from the property to the south. Additional right- of-way is necessary to accommodate the road design and a sidewalk and trail on either side of the road extension. Internal Site Circulation There are internal circulation conflicts on both the gas station and the day care center sites. The internal circulation conflicts with the gas station would be parking in front of the building which backs into a driveway and the short distance between the gas pumps and these parking stalls. In addition, there is an internal circulation conflict between the location of the pump island and Shady Oak Road connection, since the distance is 74 feet. The traffic study recommends BO to 100 Chase Point 3 April 21, 1989 feet to allow for 2-way traffic and for additional reaction time for people entering the site. Since the site plan is already tight, and there is a drainage utility easement which prohibits structure encroachment, it is not possible to amend the site plan and resolve the circulation problems without enlarging the site. A way to resolve these internal circulation conflicts would be to eliminate the parking in front of the building (this would be consistent with other gas stations in Eden Prairie) and close the driveway entrance off the Shady Oak Road connection. To improve access to the gas station site, there should be a provision for a cross- access to the site to the north, and this could be accomplished off the end of the parking lot on the east side of the building. Internal circulation problems with the day care center site are the result of dead- end loaded parking. A way to resolve this would be to provide for an interior looped driveway as recommended by the traffic study. Traffic Benshoof and Associates traffic study analyzes the trip generation of the proposed development and impacts it would have on the adjoining road systems at intersections. The Planning Commission will recall the City's concerns for traffic increases when the Comprehensive Guide Plan was changed to accommodate the City West PUD in 1981, and more recently the City West retail project in 1985. The Guide Plan would generate 54 p.m. peak hour trips. Chase Point will generate 472 peak hour trips at full development. The gas station and day care generate a total 270 trips. Factoring in intercept trips and multi-purpose trips reduces total peak hour traffic to 312 trips. Chase Point would generate 258 more peak hour trips than if the si te were developed as multiple. The traffic study indicates that the adjacent road intersection operates at level of service E and that Chase Point traffic will not change the level of service. The critical movements at this intersection are the difficulty with left turns onto Shady Oak Road. The Highway #212 ramps operate at level of service E and F and meets signal warrants. All other intersections operate at level of service D or better. The Minnesota Highway Department acceptable design for intersections is level of service D. When Shady Oak is upgraded with signals and turn lanes all intersections at full development in Year 2000 will operate at level of service C or better. All developments in the City West PUD entered into an agreement with City to pay a proportionate share of Shady Oak Road upgrading. This would also be valid for Chase Point considering the traffic it adds to the intersection. Archi tecture Residential architecture for the day care and gas station may provide transition to the residential properties to the west. (The architecture for the gas station was initially a flat roof, but has been revised). The day care and the gas station have a sloped roof. The proponent has indicated to Staff that the buildings will utilize the same brick and colors. The roof for the day care is proposed to be shingles while the gas station is proposed to be metal panel. The roof material should be consistent between both buildings. Staff would recommend metal panel. The panel thickness should be of sufficient gauge to prevent oil canning (wrinkling of the • metal). The canopy for the gas station should match materials on the building. This would be a metal panel for the canopy and brick for the columns. This has been required for other gas stations in Eden Prairie. 114 Chase Point 4 April 21, 1989 Trash enclosures should be constructed out of face brick to match the buildings. Mechani cal equi pment must be screened to City Code. Any mechanical equi pment Elul is not contained within the roof and is mounted on the ground must he screened. Access to the Adjoining Properties to the West Attachment A indicates City-ownership of property which has been set aside as a future access point to the Loosen property to the west. A different way of providing access to the Loosen piece is acceptable to the property owner. The City is in agreement with this change in access provided that the private easement covers cross-access and maintenance. The City must have legal control over the easements so that the private easement could not be disolved without City approval. Any change of this road easement access in the future would be predicated upon an alternative access being provided from old Shady Oak Road. Overall Design Framework The architecture proposed for the day care and the gas station store should be continued to the outl ot to the north. There should also be continuity in terms of exterior materials, shapes of buildings, colors, and rooflines. The outlot to the north should continue with similar landscaping berming, sidewalks, lighting, and signs. Grading Grading for the gas station and the daycare center site is a general leveling of the land to provide for building pads and does not result in a significant amount of cut and fill. The concept grading plan for the outlot to the north does not disturb the wooded slope. This wooded slope acts as a buffer to the property to the west. Any future devel opment of the land area to the north must stay out of the steep sloped and wooded area. Landscaping The amount of landscaping requi red for this proposal would be based upon a caliper inch requirement based on building square footage, screening of the parking areas, and providing a transition to the properties to the west. The amount of landscaping and berming proposed meets City Code. Since the plan relies heavily on plant materials for screening and transition, an irrigation system is recommended. Utilities There is an existing sewer and water line which bisects the gas station and day care center site. Storm water run-off is proposed to drain into a ponding area to be created in the southwest corner of the site. The preliminary drainage calculations indicate that the ponding area has only been sized to accommodate the drainage from this 7.9-acre site. The Engineering Department has indicated that the watershed is much larger and new drainage calculations must be provided to take into account run-off from area outside of this project. This addi tional run-off may require that the ponding area be deepened or enlarged. The additional drainage calculations should be provided prior to review by the City Council. n Chase Point 5 April 21, 1989 Lighting As required with all gas station canopies, the lighting should be a recessed flat lens to minimize the glare off-site. Since this site is adjoining to residential areas, the maximum height of the lighting should be 20 feet. The lighting should be also downcast cut-off luminars to minimize glare off-site. The lighting details must be consistent throughout the entire project. Signs The sign program for the day care and gas station store depicts one pylon sign for each site to City Code. Although the details of each sign have not been designed, the developer has agreed to a common design which utilizes a single pole and common materials. The shape of the signs should be consistent. The sign for the day care center is a diamond and the sign for the gas station is rectangular. Pedestrian Systems There will be a sidewalk and a trail along either side of the Shady Oak Road connection. In addition, there should be a sidewalk running along the east side of the private roadway and appropriate connections between each site to this private drive. Conclusions The decision to change the Comprehensive Guide Plan should be dependent upon how well the project fits in with the surrounding uses in the area, impacts on the Guide Plan balance, the impacts that the proposed change would have on surrounding land uses and on the site, as well as the impacts on the infrastructure necessary to support the project such as utilities and roads. The Guide Plan does not depict specific sites for neighborhood commercial areas but does indicate that 10-15 neighborhood sites may be needed to serve the community. The location of these centers is based on need, service area, and how well it fits into the surrounding neighborhoods. The change in land use does not appreciably affect the balance of land uses in the community; 0.7% less residential and 1.2% more commercial. The site is transitional between the lower intensity land uses to the west and the higher intensity land uses to the east. The Medium Density designation on the Guide Plan for housing is a transitional use. A residential character, low site intensity, saving of natural features, and heavy landscaping are characteristics of multiple family projects that could work well on this site. It is the responsibility of the developer to demonstrate that other uses could meet the same characteristics of a Medium Density land use on the property. The neighborhood commercial plan exhibits similar characteristics of a multiple family project such as: The gas station and the day care center are developed with residential looking appearances. The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the these two sites are 0.06 and 0.09, well below the 0.20 allowed per City Code. The concept plan for the outlot to the north retains the wooded slope and hill which buffers the adjoining residential areas. The proposed project depicts extensive berming and heavy landscaping. II , iI�J Chase Point 6 April 21, 1989 Changing the Comprehensive Guide Plan to Neighborhood Commercial on this site can impact future land uses to the west and to the south. The land area to the west because of its steep sloped characteristics would be unlikely for office buildings, but could be utilized for cluster housing or low density residential. This would also be consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan if the density does not exceed 21 units per acre. The site to the south across Shady Oak Road connection is guided Medium Density Residential. This makes sense for transition and to save site features. The original request for Chase Point was for a gas station, day care center, and office building on the south side of Shady Oak Road connection. This would seem to indicate that the market has determined that the southern site could be suitable for commercial as well. Approving commercial on the site to the north may precipitate other requests for commercial uses to the south especially because of the exposure on Shady Oak Road. The project will have an impact on the infrastructure system necessary to support the project. The traffic study does indicate the need for the building of Shady Oak Road connection to accommodate four lanes (two lanes of traffic in each direction), median, and turn lanes. There will also be no direct driveway access permitted out to Shady Oak Road according to Hennepin County. The levels of service at the affected road intersections on Shady Oak Road are North City West Parkway - L.O.S. D, South City West Parkway - L.O.S. D & E, Highway #212 and Shady Oak Road - L.O.S. E & F, Highway #62 and Shady Oak Road - L.O.S. B. ( Traffic will not change level of service. Even though the road system will be able to handle the proposed traffic, from Chase Point the City should consider that adjoining undeveloped land may also request Guide Plan Changes with increased traffic and the cumulative affect may be an over loading of the intersections. The traffic study indicates a reserve capacity at affected intersections, which allows for increased traffic before they reach level of service E. Chase Point uses 77% of this reserve in the peak hour. A way in which to minimize the increase in traffic on Shady Oak Road would be to look at alternative land uses for the remaining 5-acre portion. Eliminating the restaurant, reducing the overall square footage of office, or looking at a motel on this property, would be ways in which the traffic generation could be kept to a minimal amount. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS If the Planning Commission feels that the proponents have provided compelling reasons which warrant a change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan, then approval of the project would be predicated upon a rezoning on 2.78 acres from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial, and a preliminary plat of 7.9 acres into 2 lots and 1 outlot, based on plans dated April 21, 1989, and based on recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 21, 1989, and subject to the following conditions: I. Prior to City Council review, the proponent shall: • A. Modify the site plan for the gas station store to eliminate the access off the Shady Oak Road connection, provide a cross-access to the outlot to the north, and remove the parking in front of the building. B. Modify the site plan for the day care site to provide an interior • loop road connection. • Chase Point 7 April 21, 1989 C. Modify the site plan to depict an additional five feet of right-of- way from the day care and gas station site. D. Provide additional storm water run-off calculations identifying the amount of water to be generated from the entire watershed for review by the City Engineer. E. Revise the architectural plans for the day care and gas station to reflect a common roof material. F. Modify the architectural elevations on the gas station for the canopy to be using the same roofing materials and brick for the columns. G. Provide sign details which depict the construction drawings for the proposed signs, signs to be of a single pole with common materials and a common shape. H. Provide a lighting plan with details for review with 20-foot high downcast lights for parking lots and flat recessed lenses for the gas canopy. 2. Prior to Final Piat approval, proponent shall: A. Provide detailed storm water run-off and utility plans and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer. B. Provide detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. 3. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall: A. Stake the proposed construction limits with a snow fence. B. Notify the City at least 48 hours in advance of grading. C. Submit samples of all proposed exterior building materials for revi ew. D. Submit the sign plan with details for review. E. Submit the lighting plan with details for review. F. Submit plans for review by the Fire Marshal. G. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee. 4. Concurrent with site construction, construct the sidewalk trail along the • Shady Oak Road connection and internal sidewalk along the east side of the private road with appropriate connections to the proposed uses. 5. The Guide Plan should remain Medium Density Residential for the 5-acre outlot to the north until specific site plans are available for review. Uses proposed for this outlot should generate significantly less traffic than the current uses proposed. Chase Point 8 April 21, 1989 6. The developer shall enter into an assessment agreement to pay a proportionate share of costs for the upgrading of Shady Oake Road. If the Planning Commission feels that the proponent has not demonstrated substantial evidence for warranting a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change and that the impacts on- site the adjoining uses the Comprehensive plan adjoining road systems are high and have not been mitigated, then one option would be to recommend denial of the request as proposed. 5 I t CO I C. t1i \ III 14•0 I I i I a I i ::. • \\ ; 1 Y CO 1 4 0 0 \ 1400. .. I ..i = (I) 1400. CO Property , ,,. ,,,.....k,::::::::::::::::. 7. --.".i 1 ' \ fi'':'i':'':'i'i'i'i 0 i 1 i It • 4,.'.'...... ..•.....•...... :.'.":".a.i0.4.:.i.'.i. W t;:::::::::::::::::::::::::. i .4'::":.::;:::::.,.:::••••• ••••--••-4 i .::ii ::. '1". i 1 i I \ , I ni:_i:::•':•:::77,1'.:*•:.7.7::174---`"-- . ___:,, t, .__1 ; \ PAVELKA ,:''::?:•:,i,K:i:::i:" .::... 1 • • :0::*i:i::!./.::::::::::i:::. I t• ri \1 Property A:iii.:;;M:: t 1? ci ( /::iiiMiii::•.- i'. ••.• I 1. z I : • 0 / :.1.•;i:1:: :*i::. '.4 I « 4 / i.:iii7 ,-..,......-..,.::: . f 7.-,:,-„---_-r-' L-—-4 ' a 7...... i , : -- - 1\ >- :...., CV :;:, ‘ !-• \ 0 71 AO \ 1 / ... ..,---- __...„ ...,.... .4...,..;:.- - ,. ..-%---,.- ...-...i..0 : C PARKWAY \ IT Y WEST V'''. L.— / \ — — • PARKWAY / .. access easement area :::::::.:.:.:•:•:•:—Right-of-way to be vacated ..I. _.---- 4. I ,f, Access to west property Ii(r) 4 ( STAFF REPORT r i TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: May 5, 1989 PROJECT: Chase Point LOCATION: Northwest quadrant of the intersection of City West Parkway and Shady Oak Road APPLICANT: Crosstown Investors REQUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Medium Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial on 7.9 acres. 2. Zoning District Change from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial on 2.78 acres. 3. Preliminary Plat of 7.9 acres into 2 lots and 1 outlot. 4. Site Plan Review. Background F ;-,, ' • c Y : I This is a continued from the April 24, 1989, Planning Commission I IC-HW .� meeting. The Planning Commission h? recommended that the plans be �' PROPOSED SITE-7`:�;:`%'- 1 ' returned to the proponent for - ` '.'•`"?-,4 _ ��� r , I �� revisions identified in the Staff L ,0�•� , � Report. These include improving " 's.441'..! .OFC 1 ! access and internal circulation for 1 �' �'t,�'! the gas station and the day care '-::.. ._`-'`` _-- ' 0 P center, finalizing the road design ti.. ,.i;`4 U for the City West Parkway extension, - I r+ i, Z continuity of architecture between ra ,'r , 1 f• ` . the gas station and the day care, ---\ l' + RMt2.S continuity for signs and lighting, c ; 1---- '';:, and a design framework for future e ^ _4�,` uses to the north. The Planning —, Commission was also concerned with .,.---- - • the change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan, future land uses to the —' :i• '\ north, and reserve capacity for '• AY traffic. 4( ,.. 1 ke.. II v .u l AREA LOCATION MAP ��) C C Chase Point 2 May 5, 1989 Site Plan Revisions The site plan has been revised for the gas station site which improves site access and internal circulation. There is a right-in/right-out access off City West Parkway extension. This allows vehicles entering the site to bypass the gas pumps. Parking remains in front of the store. An additional ten feet of width has been provided which will reduce traffic movement conflicts between cars at the gas pumps and cars backing out from the gas station store. The access and internal circulation revisions are acceptable to City Staff and the traffic consultant. Access and internal circulation has been improved for the day care center site. Parking has been eliminated directly in front of the building. A 7-foot wide sidewalk is shown along the west side of the parking lot which allows for children to be walked to the day care without going through the parking lot. The 18 parking spaces designated on the west side of the parking lot would be for day care drop-off and 9 spaces on the east side would be designated for employee parking. A turn- around has been provided off the end of the parking lot which will help with internal circulation. The revised access and internal circulation plan is acceptable to City Staff and the traffic consultant. Total parking on the day care site at 27 spaces is acceptable. Road Design City West Parkway Extension A preliminary design for the extension of City West Parkway has been submitted. The design of the roadway with turn lanes and medians is acceptable to Staff and the traffic engineer. Architecture The exterior building elevations for the day care and the gas station will utilize the same colors and exterior materials in compliance with City Code requirements. Both the day care and the gas station store will have a sloped metal roof which provides for continuity and residential character. A design for the gas station canopy has not been submitted. The canopy should use the same metal roofing material and same roof pitch as the gas station. Brick should be used for the columns. Design Framework Manual A design framework manual has been submitted which indicates how the future uses on the site to the north would be linked together in terms of architecture, roof lines, exterior materials, colors, landscaping, signs, lighting, and sidewalks. This is acceptable to Staff. Siqns A sign plan must be provided with details which depict construction drawings for the proposed signs. Signs should be a single pole with common materials and common shape. The size of the sign is to meet the City Code requirements. Lighting A lighting plan must be submitted with details for review. Since the project is II y C Chase Point 3 May 5, 1989 adjacent to future residential land uses to the west, lighting should be a maximum height of 20 feet. The lights should also be downcast cut-off luminars. The lighting for the gas station canopy should be a flat recessed lens. Storm Drainage Storm water run-off calculations need to be provided identifying the amount of water to be generated from the entire watershed for review by the City Engineer. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change The decision to change the Comprehensive Guide Plan is not a question of the Comprehensive Guide Plan balance. The impact on the balance of land uses is minimal. It is a question of how well the project fits in with the surrounding area, the impacts the proposed change would have on the surrounding uses, and impacts on the infrastructure system necessary to support the project such as utilities and roads. Since the Guide Plan does not identify specific sites for Neighborhood Commercial, the location of these centers is based upon need, service area, and how well it fits in with the surrounding neighborhood. The Planning Commission had previously questioned if there is a need for an additional gas station in the area, since there are already two gas stations within close proximity. While the area seems to be well served by gas stations, this area of the community is not well served by convenience retail. The existing gas stations do not provide many convenience goods. The SuperAmerica store would provide that use. This site is transitional between the lower intensity land uses to the west, and higher intensity land uses to the east. Retaining the wooded slope on the northeast corner of the site and designing the project with a residential character overall, will help provide a transition to the residential properties to the west. The Floor Area Ratio's (F.A.R.) are well below City Code and this could be a transition in site intensity. Approval of commercial uses on this site may cause similar requests for commercial on the south side of City West Parkway extension. There is approximately 2.5 acres of buildable area adjacent to the westland. Traffic will limit the intensity of use and the market may not support another day care or convenience store. An appropriate use may be neighborhood office/medical. The wetland to the south could be a transition which would allow for medium density residential to occur south of the wetland adjacent to Rowland Road. Traffic and Reserve Capacity The traffic study has been amended with a more detailed analysis of reserve capacity. The updated traffic information indicates that there are new input parameters. This involved allocating the additional capacity for properties on the west side of Shady Oak Road to turning movements that would be affected by the additional trip generation, the addition of a third northbound lane through the Crosstown intersection (which is not currently part of the County's current plan for the upgrading of Shady Oak Road), and the addition of a third lane on the eastbound approach which would serve the major future development planned on the Honeywell site north and east of Chase Point. The net effect of the updated reserve capacity analysis indicates that the roadway system can accommodate an additional 1,596 trips Il�J C Chase Point 4 May 5, 1989 generated by properties on the west side of Shady Oak Road (approximately 60 acres). 1. Of this total, the additional generation represented by the Chase Point development would account for 258 peak hour trips or 16% of the reserve capacity available on the west side of Shady Oak Road. Chase Point would utilize 8% of the total additional available capacity on the roadway system. Since there are 60 total acres available for development on the west side of Shady Oak Road, the reserve capacity could be allocated on an acreage basis or 26.6 trips per acre. Since the Chase Point project is 7.9 acres in size, a total of 210 trips would be allocated to the Chase Point site. The Guide Plan traffic, (54 p.m. peak hour trips), added to the reserve capacity, would mean a traffic allocation of 264 p.m. peak hour trips. The Chase Point project as proposed, generates 312 p.m. peak hour trips. This means that the Chase Point project is generating 48 more trips than could be allocated to the property. Since the day care and the gas convenience store would generate approximately 130 p.m. peak hour trips, it would mean that the property to the north could be allocated a total of 134 p.m. peak hour trips and be consistent with their allocation for reserve capacity. If the decision is made to amend the Comprehensive Guide Plan to Neighborhood Commercial for the 5-acre outlot to the north, it should be predicated upon future uses which generate a total of 134 p.m. peak hour trips or less. Based on trip generation only, future uses could be 60,600 square feet of office, a 265-room motel, or a 128-room motel and 3,500 square feet of restaurant. The actual uses after City Code requirements for parking setbacks, B.A.R., height, landscaping, etc., and transition to the residential uses to the west are applied, the use of the site will be less intense site development. For example, the 150-room Marriott Courtyard motel needed 4.2 acres to develop. Parking, B.A.R., and transition for office would limit development to approximately 45,000 square feet. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS If the Planning Commission feels that the proponents have provided compelling reasons which warranted change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan, then approval of the project would be predicated upon a rezoning of 2.78 acres from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial and a Preliminary Plat of 7.9 acres into 2 lots, and 1 outlot, based on plans dated April 21, 19B9, and May 3, 19B9, based on recommendations of the Staff Report, dated April 21, 1989, and May 3, 19B9, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to City Council review, proponent shall: A. Provide additional storm water run-off calculations identifying the amount of water to be generated from the entire watershed for review by the City Engineer. B. Provide sign details which depict the construction drawings for the proposed signs with signs to be of single pole with common materials and common shape. C. Provide a lighting plan with details for review. Lighting standards • should be a maximum of 20 feet high and downcast lights for the parking lot, and flat recess lens for the gas canopy. C Chase Point 5 May 5, 1989 1 a D. Modify the exterior elevations of the gas canopy to be consistent with materials used on the building including a sloped metal panel and brick for the columns. E. Provide trash enclosure details. Trash enclosures should be constructed of face brick to match the building. F. Provide samples of of all exterior building materials for review. G. Modify the site plan to depict the sidewalk and trail on either side of the City West Parkway extension and an internal sidewalk along the east side of the private road with connections to the proposed uses. 2. Prior to Final Plat approval, proponent shall: A. Provide detailed storm water run-off, utility plans, and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer. B. Provide detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. 3. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall: A. Stake the proposed construction limits with a snow fence. B. Notify the City at least 48 hours in advance of grading. C. Submit samples of all proposed exterior building materials for review. D. Submit the sign plan with details for review. E. Submit the lighting plan with details for review. F. Submit plans for review by the Fire Marshal. G. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee. 4. Concurrent with site construction, construct the sidewalk and trail along the Shady Oak Road connection and an internal sidewalk along the east side of the private road, with appropriate connections to the proposed uses. 5. The 5-acre outlot to the north would be guided Neighborhood Commercial with the stipulation of future land uses not generating more than 134 p.m. peak hour trips, compliance with all applicable zoning Codes, providing the transition to the west, and consistency with the design framework manual . 6. The reserve capacity as identified in the traffic study is predicated upon the addition of a third northbound lane through the Crosstown intersection and a third lane on the eastbound approach lane. 7. The developer shall enter into an assessment agreement to pay a proportionate share of costs for the upgrading of Shady Oak Road. c Chase Point 6 May 5, 1989 8. Final design for City West Parkway extension will require approval of the City Engineer and the traffic consultant, based on recommendations in the traffic study. 9. Access to the Loosen piece is based upon City a pproval of right-of-way vacation of Old Shady Oak Road, cross-access and maintenance agreement between Chase Point and the Loosen property, with the City having a legal control on the private easement so it could not be disolved without City approval. Any change in this road easement in the future is predicated upon an alternative access being provided from Old Shady Oak Road. If the Planning Commission feels that the proponent has not demonstrated substantial evidence for warranting a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change and that the impacts on- site the adjoining uses the Comprehensive Guide Plan adjoining road systems are high and have not been mitigated, then one option would be to recommend denial of the request as proposed. • • • Planning Commission Minutes 16 April 24, 1989 ✓G. CRASEPOINT, by Crosstown Investors. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Medium Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial on 7.9 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial on 2.78 acres, Preliminary Platting of 7.9 acres into 2 lots, 1 outlot with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals for construction of a gas station, and daycare facility. Location; West of Shady Oak Road, north of the proposed City West Parkway extension. A public hearing. Jim Ostensen, proponent, stated that a Comprehensive Guide Plan change was requested to rezone the property to Neighborhood Commercial. The rationale for the rezoning • Planning Commission Minutes 17 April 24, 1989 request was that the property was located on three major roads. Ostensen noted that traffic was a major concern. Ostensen stated that excess capacity was available for this area and believed that this project would not overburden the area with traffic. Ostensen, noted that there were several concerns raised by Staff which the proponent needed to work out. One concern was that the daycare center and Super America have similar architecture. Ostensen stated that the daycare center and Super America would use a similar exterior brick and would co-ordinate the signage. Super America had agreed to use a hip roof; however, Super America's proposed roof would be metal and the proposed daycare center roof would be shingled. Ostensen believed the daycare center roof should remain shingles due to its proximity to the residential homes. He added that it would be very • expensive to propose a metal roof on the daycare center. Ostensen stated that the proponent had worked extensively on the site plan and had made the following changes to the • plan based on Staff recommendations: 1. The access road to the daycare center had been changed to a cul-de-sac to act as a turn-around. 2. The internal circulation had been changed due to the concern by Staff that the entrance required drivers to make a quick decision as to what island they would use. 3. The lot had been made deeper. 4. The distance between the front of the Super America store and the islands had been increased from 35 feet to 40 feet. 5. Turn lanes and a median had been incorporated into the design. Ostensen concluded by stating that he believed the majority of issues rated by Staff had been addressed. Sandstad asked what the adjacent land uses were. Ostensen replied that approximately 8 acres was guided low density residential, another 20 acres was vacant at this time and guided low density residential, and the property to the south of Medcom Boulevard was guided medium density • residential. Franzen reported that two important decisions needed to he • made by the Planning Commission; if a Comprehensive Guide Plan had been substantiated and how well did the site plans meet the City Codes. Franzen noted that this site had been guided medium density residential for some time. The Comprehensive Guide Plan stated that a Neighborhood Commercial designation would require the facility to serve the community. Franzen emphasized several of the points for substantiating a Comprehensive Guide Plan change that • Planning Commission Minutes 18 April 24, 1989 were outlined in the April 21, 1989 Staff Report. Franzen stated that Staff was concerned about the traffic generation from this development and added that this proposal would use approximately 771, of the Reserved Capacity. Franzen questioned if allowing this proposal to use 77% of the Re:.er.c C_a ..ri,ty would be fair to the other property owners in the area. Based on Staff's previous observations, Franzen noted that convenience stores typically generated the most traffic. Franzen stated that when this proposal had first come in there had been no co-ordination to tie the two sites together. City West has similar types of architecture and roof styles. Franzen believed there were still issues which needed consideration. He added that the revision of the entrance to the property was being presented to Staff for the first time tonight and he would like to have time to review this proposal before offering Staff approval. Franzen believed that the revised entrance needed to also be reviewed by the City Engineering Department. Sandstad asked if the approval of the request for the Comprehensive Guide Plan change would affect similar properties near major roads. Franzen replied that to his knowledge there were no other similar instances. He added that most of the Neighborhood Commercial developments were located at the fringes of neighborhoods. Ruebling asked how access would be gained to the Loosen property. He did not believe that access by a private road to a low density residential area was appropriate. Enger replied that the City had not been desirous to obtain the entire parcel. Enger added that the Loosen parcel did have access via Old Shady Oak right-of-way or at least access on paper. Enger said that access was obtainable; however, not practical. Access would be practical if the hill elevation was reduced and the hill graveled or another possible access would be via other properties to the south. Enger noted that the developer had requested that the City vacate ownership on the east. Ostensen stated that northern access would not be the ultimate access to this property and added that access would come through the Pauelka property. Ruebling asked if only a temporary access was being created. Ostensen replied that if the road was vacated as requested a new access would be provided and the new alignment would maintain the status quo. Fell stated that he was concerned about the traffic pattern at the daycare center for dropping off the children. Gene Peterson, major daycare developer in the Twin Cities, stated that the average parking for daycare centers was for 10 to 12 cars; this proposal provided 29 Ili "a 3 Planning Commission Minutes 19 April 24, 1989 parking spaces. Peterson said that there were pros and cons for any parking lay out; however, he believed that stacking of cars would be of concern rather than the drop off. Fell asked how many parking spaces would be provided in front of the building. Fell added that when adequate parking space was not provided in front of the daycare center children were walking across the traffic, which he considered to be a dangerous situation. Peterson believed that having the parents be able to park the car rather than drop off the children to be a safer situation. Ostensen added that it was the New Horizon's policy that the parents had to accompany the children into the center and could not drop the children off outside the facility. Fell asked where the nearest franchise daycare center would be to this facility. Ostensen replied at the Opus Center; however, that facility was closing to move into this location and added that the building needed to he completed by September 1, 1989. Franzen reported that Staff had been recommending more parking spaces for the new daycare centers being constructed in Eden Prairie. Franzen suggested that if the daycare center was shifted to the west an "L" shaped parking lot or if the building could be moved further back on the lot a "U" shaped parking area could be provided with designated spaces for employees. Sandstad asked why the proponent believed this proposed land use to be better than Medium Density Residential. Ostensen replied that this property would not be a desirable place to live due to the vicinity of the three main roads and added that transition needed to be provided back to low density residential. Sandstad asked if Staff concurred that if the gas station and daycare center were approved the property to the north was not appropriate for Medium Density Residential. Enger replied yes. Ostensen stated that the daycare project needed to start as soon as possible to meet the September 1, 1989 deadline and asked if the Planning Commission would consider approval of the land use now and approve a site plan at a later date to allow time to work with Staff on the unresolved issues. He said that construction would need to begin by May 20, 1989. Dodge asked if Staff believed the Neighborhood Commercial designation fit with this proposal. Enger replied that the proposal for the daycare center did provide a needed service for the community; however, he questioned if a gas station was appropriate for this location. Enger stated that Staff was concerned about: the amount of traffic generation from a gas station at this location. Enger believed that some compromising would be necessary for i II ; 7 Planning Commission Minutes 20 April 24, 1989 this area. Cliff Bodine, 6400 Old Shady Oak Road, asked if City West would extend to Old Shady Oak Road. 0stensen replied that City West would go to Old Shady Oak Road. Bodine asked if the elevation would be lowered. Ostensen replied that this area had poor soil conditions and had therefore surcharged the road; the road would be lowered to taper to Old Shady Oak Road. Bodine asked if the gas tanks would be lower than the surcharge. Peterson replied that the tanks would be above the surcharge. Fell believed that there were several issues which needed to be resolved. Enger stated that Staff would like to review the revised entrance plan with the Engineering Department. Fell stated that he favored a continuance. Dodge concurred and added that there were too many unresolved issues. Enger noted that there was usually a four week period after a plan was approved before the proposal was discussed at the City Council level. Hallett stated that he believed there was a possibility for a Comprehensive Guide Plan change; however, additional work was needed on the location of the building and the parking. Fell stated that the issue of the roofing material needed to be resolved. Ruebling stated that the proponent needed to address the parking and traffic circulation for the daycare center, the traffic generation issue related to the gas station, and can a buffer and transition be created between this development and the low density residential area. Sandstad asked Benshoof if a more intense use of the property was intended. Benshoof replied that the traffic projections were based on this proposed plan. Enger stated that a small shopping center could be built on this property and added that other land uses needed to be explored. Enger supported the daycare center proposal; however, he was concerned about the potential amount of traffic generation from the Super America. Enger noted that the property south of City West Parkway would probably not be developed as Medium Density Residential. Sandstad stated that he was comfortable with the daycare • portion of the proposal. Planning Commission Minutes 21 April 24, 1939 Fell asked if the Planning Commission should give direction on the roof material. Enyer replied that Eden Prairie had tried to be consistent and create a good image. Enger added that the roof was one way to make this project come together; however, Staff was not stating a preference related to metal or shingled, there just needed to be compatibility. Peterson stated that the roof material would be metal panel for the daycare center. MOTION: Hallett moved, seconded by Sandstad to continue this item to the May 8, 1989 Planning Commission meeting and to direct Staff to publish the proposal for the City Council May 16, 1989 meeting and to further direct the proponent to work with Staff related to the parking layout for the daycare center, access and circulation for both sites, traffic, road improvements, and the overall design framework related to compatibility. Motion carried 5-0-0. V. OLD BUSINESS VI. NEW BUSINESS VII. PLANNER'S REPORT VIII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Hallett moved, seconded by Ruebling to adjourn the meeting at 11:30 PM. Motion carried 5-0-0. 4 i I N, STAFF REPORT I TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: April 21, 1989 PRDJECT: Edenvale II Industrial Building APPLICANT: Scott Anderson FEE OWNER: Equitable Life Insurance Company • REQUEST: 1. Site Plan Review on 4.57 acres for the construction of a 71,800 square foot office/warehouse building on property currently zoned I-2 Park. Background This site is part of the Edenvale ),. ` /,/• .' T � S/� r Industrial Park, previously platted �Imo/! and rezoned from I-General to I-2 „ -, ,..' " C._� 9 Park in I972. The Guide Plan '�'identifies this site for an �1, --Industrial land use. The Guide Plan -s`-7�"� .. Li also depicts surrounding land uses 7r-.'�• ,/�./ -y? as Industrial. This site lies --//// 4A_ C-cD R�/ within a 100-year floodplain and is pi -'T> i part of the conservancy and /, • ' 4,.., / •. j transitional area of the Purgatory • Creek. Provisions of the Shoreland �i Management Ordinance will apply ,. ', since the property is within 300 ;PROPOSED SITE feet of the Purgatory Creek, ) ai11 Provisions of the Floodplain �� 7Drdi nance wil l also appl y since a IIf..�� r CIli portion of the building and parking ,2 , i areas are within the 100-year �-`• I--,----r- , -AM floodplain. "Ci. This project was previously reviewed V4314 and approved by the City in 1984. • The request at that time was a zoning district amendment within the 1 • existing I-2 Industrial Park and a - _ -J preliminary plat of 4.57 acres into I r\ one lot. The developer did not proceed to building permi t AREA LOCATION MAP application. iI(1U • Edenvale II 2 April 21, 1989 Site Plan The site plan has not changed from the previously approved 71,800 square foot proposal. The building, as proposed, is a 2-story office portion facing Purgatory Creek with the warehouse and loading portion facing Martin Drive. The site is being developed at a Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) of 0.26 and meets the minimum setback requirements for building and parking from all property lines. A total of 190 parking spaces are shown on the site plan. Current industrial zoning regulations require the provision of 153 parking spaces. Grading A minimal amount of grading work is proposed, with some cut required in the southwest corner of the site which will used to fill the lower areas of the site adjacent to the golf course. The use of the 2-level building also minimizes the amount of grading required. The plan indicates that the upper level warehouse portion will be approximately 10 feet higher in the lower portion of the office which faces Purgatory Creek. The grading plan indicates that a portion of the building in nearly all of the lower level parking, will be within the 10D-year flood plain elevation. Permanent structures may occur within this flood area, provided the lowest floor is at a minimum of 2 feet above the flood elevation. The lowest floor elevation is 843. The 100-year floodplain elevation is 840. Parking is a permitted use within the floodplain area; however, Staff would expect that during the 100-year storm event nearly all of the parking in the lower level would be flooded. The proponent is providing for some compensatory water storage by a ponding area on the extreme northern portion of the site to replace the existing storage area lost due to filling. In 1984, the City Council passed Resolution 084-271 granting a permit for construction within a designated floodplain area for this project. A permit to construct within the floodplain area was also approved by the Watershed District. Shoreland Management Drdinance Purgatory Creek is a General Development Water and provisions of the Shoreland Ordinance apply since the property lies within 300 feet of the Normal Ordinary High Water Mark of Purgatory Creek. The plan meets all requirements of the Shoreland Management Ordinance with the exception of the minimum lot size. This site currently exists as a 4.57-acre lot which was final platted in 1984. Driginally, this site was two lots that were platted in conformance with the minimum I-2 zoning regulations in 1972 prior to the enactment of the Shoreland Drdinance, therefore, no variances would be required. A small portion of the site (from the proposed ponding area to the north property line) is within the Conservancy District of Purgatory Creek. The balance of the site is within the transition zone. The transition zone of Purgatory Creek is a "build with care" zone and provisions should be made to retain as much of the site character as possible. It is extremely important to provide a buffering of the parking area to the creek and the townhouses across the creek. 1161 Edenvale II 3 April 21, 1989 Architecture The industrial building is proposed to be constructed of exposed aggregate and architectural metal panel. There will be a high percentage of glass for the 2-story portion of the office building which faces Purgatory Creek. The use of the 2-story building helps break up the overall building mass when viewed from Fairway Woods townhouses. The building does appear to be quite massive when viewed from Martin Drive; however, extensive use of berming and large plant materials can help break up the building mass. A mechanical equipment screening plan must be submitted prior to Council review. Landscaping The amount of landscaping required for this project is a caliper inch requirement based on building square footage, screening of the parking areas from Purgatory Creek, screening of loading areas, and parking areas from Martin Drive, and tree replacement. The minimum amount of caliper inches required per Code is 220 inches. A total of 310 cal iper inches are shown on the plan. The plan depicts a total of 115 inches. The proposed ponding area removes nearly all of the existing natural scrub vegetation along the north edge of the property. The landscape plan depicts lowland vegetation which should provide effective screening from Purgatory Creek. Parking and loading areas will be screened from Martin Drive through berming and coniferous plantings. There are 84 inches of significant oak trees on-site. Retaining walls are proposed to save one oak tree along Martin Drive. Since the retaining wall is located within the drip line of one of the 24-inch oak trees along Martin Drive, we would { not expect this to be saved. Tree loss is calculated at 79%. The amount of tree replacement would be 66 caliper inches. Tree replacement is included in the landscape plan. Util sties There is an existing pump house which is located just west of the property. The Engineering Department has indicated that the developer should provide an easement and construct a driveway access to the pump house. This is shown on the site plan. Sewer and water service can be extended to the building by connecting to existing facilities within Martin Drive. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff would recommend approval of the Site Plan Amendment based on plans dated April 7, 1989, subject to the recommendations in the Staff Report, dated April 21, 1989, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to City Council review, proponent shall: A. Provide a mechanical equipment screening plan for review. 2. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall: A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee. B. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance of grading. C. Stake the construction limits with a snow fence, 'Planning Commission Minutes 12 April 24, 1989 • • • ✓E. EDGNVALE IT DUSINESS TENTER, by Hoyt Development. Request for Site Plan Review within the I-2 zoning district on 4.59 acres for construction of a 70,528 square foot office/warehouse. Location: 14500 Martin Drive. A public hearing. IIv3 3 • Planning Commission Minutes 13 April 24, 1989 Franzen reported that the City had approved this project in 1984 and that due to the new Site Plan Ordinance the project was required to come back through the process again. Scott Anderson, representing the proponent, stated that the project was being sold to Hoyt Development. He added that the only change to the plan was to bring the project into compliance with the new Landscape Ordinance. Anderson stated that the space was 50 to 70% preleased at this time. MOTION: Fell moved, seconded by Ruebling to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0-0. MOTION: Fell moved, seconded by Ruebling to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Hoyt Development for Site Plan approval of Edenvale II Business Center within the I-2 Zoning District on 4.59 acres for construction of a 70,528 square foot office/warehouse building, based on plans dated April 7, 1989, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 21, 1989. Motion carried 5-0-0. • • f itd Edenvale Business Center II CITY OF EDFN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 89-105 A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR EDENVALE II INDUSTRIAL BUILDING FOR SCOTT ANDERSON WHEREAS, Scott Anderson has applied for site plan review of Edenvale II Industrial Building on 4.57 acres for construction of a 71,800 sq. ft. office/warehouse building on property located north of Martin Drive, west of Mitchell Road, currently zoned I-2; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its April 24, 1989, Planning Commission meeting and recommends approval of said site plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its May 16, 1989, meeting; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, that site plan approval be granted to Scott Anderson for Edenvale II Industrial Building, for construction of a 71,800 sq. ft. office/warehouse building, based on plans dated April 7, 1989, subject to the following conditions: A. Developer agrees to notify City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance of any grading on the property. B. Prior to issuance of any grading permit on the property, Developer shall stake the construction limits of the property with snow fencing. C. Prior to building permit issuance on the property, Developer shall submit to the City, and obtain the City's approval of, a mechanical equipment screening plan, to be implemented by Developer upon receipt of City's approval. D. Prior to building permit issuance on the property, Developer shall pay the appropriate cash park fee. ADOPTED by the City Council on May 16, 1989. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk '� VAC 89-05 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 89-100 VACATION OF PART OF OLD SHADY OAK ROAD IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, T116, R22 WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has a certain roadway and utility right-of-way described as follows: Tracts D, F and G, Registered Land Survey Number 1581 as recorded in the office of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 16, 1989, after due notice was published and posted as required by law; WHEREAS, it has been determined that the said roadway and utility right- of-way has no interest to the public, therefore, should be vacated. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: 1. Said roadway and utility right-of-way as above described is hereby vacated. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare a Notice of Completion of the proceedings in accordance with M.S.A. 412.851. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 16, 1989. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk /166 I (CO RD NO 62) 196.61 _ SS1.9 1T1:4 � 1 S E COR SEC 35 T 1 17 R 22 "� 9 15 s r s n/ �' 4105 • , I ___.(4414,1':, SHAD OA% 'PARCEL' ',..'/403 ,; ' CROSSTO2iV 1.�e!Q rp �11e, ,N ADD(Q 14. 1 4. e` ' •m•s st • El 1 s ,"t o (12) y',\` co a 00C NO A _ =7 ea P, . 1‘‘ rt tt 4E. `. 552 1 '09{ in ;'a (1) c ' .- n(n) ,. C)o 'g M S. • • >w '-d 6 U° 3- io e cn CZ . (13) s , s0 (2) MO .h 1 • '�. . j� 1 9D DATA TAAD1 RCN•► • II . • ,��1•1p $ 1 In SEC SHEETS g^, • r.Tc.. 0..: 4'41 1 F.e 1 (17)• 1 r • 1 I 6 1 91E6 ...__.. p A TS•M• •. _ a 155.OB 1 _ STS1 It°• S In 12D 1b. �n Zs 1 ;' AS N K 1 1'` 1 _ I lit I DUIEDT A Q , - , _A 10 �c 1 1 a i� ND n 1 Z ' 1 1 1s • 0 9f V, (3) MAY 16,1989 50613 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-UTILITY BILLING 538.20 50614 EDENVALE -CITY'S PORTION OF RESERVE OFFICERS 360.71 APPRECIATION BANQUET SI5 AT&T SERVICE 225.04 „d616 JOHN H CROWTHER INC LIABILITY INSURANCE-LIQUOR STORES 3071.00 50617 MINNEGASCO SERVICE 9130.61 50618 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY SERVICE 17075.22 50619 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY SERVICE 12790.86 50620 TEENER'S THEATRICAL FABRICS & ACC COSTUME SUPPLIES-ICE SHOW-COMMUNITY CENTER 24.53 50621 U S WEST CELLULAR INC SERVICE 287.78 50622 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 498.60 50623 BIRTCHEP. WELSH MAY 89 RENT-CITY HALL 19880.79 50624 JASON NORTHCD PROP MAY 89 RENT-LIQUOR STORE 6168.54 50625 MN DEPARTMENT OF P/S MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATIONS 33.75 50626 MN DEPART OF PUBLIC SAFETY MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION 16.50 50627 A T 0 M CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 30.00 50628 CENTER FOR DESIGN TECHNOLOGIES CONFERENCE-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 245.0o 50629 VOID OUT CHECK 0.00 50630 JIMMY JINGLE EXPENSES-OPEN HOUSE-POLICE DEPT 178.52 50631 MAAO CONFERENCE-ASSESSING DEPT 120.00 50632 MADD POSTERS-POLICE DEPT 20.00 50633 PITNEY BOWES -WEIGHING SYSTEM RATE CHIP/'89 MAIN1ENANCE 248.00 AGREEMENT-POLICE DEPT 50634 KEITH WALL APRIL 89 EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 208.00 50635 LEE WENZEL REFUND-GOLF LESSDNS 34.00 50636 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-SUMMER BROCHURE-COMMUNITY CENTER 1950.00 50637 VOID OUT CHECK 0.00 50638 MN OEPARTMENT OF P/S MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATIONS & EXCISE TAX 770.24 i 39 MN DEPARTMENT OF P/S MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION & EXCISE TAX 814.67 • ,40 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC STREET SIGNS-STREET DEPT 4504.75 50641 THE MINNESOTA DAILY EMPLOYMENT ADS-COMMUNITY CENTER 200.81 50642 AT&T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV SERVICE 94.25 50643 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES CONFERENCE-COUNCILMEMBER 150.00 50644 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY SERVICE 9749.74 50645 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 50.95 50646 PAT WEBBER REFUND-KIDS KORNER 9.00 50647 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYDLL 4/28/89 11269.27 50648 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 63.12 50649 FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE PAYROLL 4/28/89 55126.36 50650 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR 8172.30 50651 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESALE LIQUOR LIOUOR 6852.53 50652 NORWEST BANK HOPKINS PAYROLL 4/14/89 & 4/28/89 1000.00 50653 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIOUOR 4366.26 50654 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 597.37 50655 QUALITY WINE CO LIQUOR 4186.05 50656 SUPPLIES 7 HI ENTER INC MAY 89 RENT-LIQUOR STORE 4925.13 50657 SYNDERS DRUG STORE SWIMMING MANUAL FOLDERS-SWIMMING LESSONS 54.08 50658 LMC INSURANCE TRUST LIABILITY INSURANCE-CITY HALL 60349.50 50659 CITY-COUNTY CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 4/28/89 1363.00 50660 MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 4/28/89 25.00 50661 CROW WING COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 252.00 50662 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 4/28/89 4401.00 50663 HENN CTY SUPPORT & COLLECTION SER CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 194.76 51664 ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION PAYROLL 4/28/89 1278.92 8 5 MEDCENTERS HEALTH PLAN INC MAY 89 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 12574.10 26653081 I/:/ I MAY 16,1989 50666 MUTUAL BENEFIT LIFE MAY 89 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM 2501.63 50667 GUARANTEE MUTUAL LIFE COMPANY MAY 89 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM 2598.73 "6 68 PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN MAY B9 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 22384.61 69 UNITED WAY PAYROLL 4/28/89 246.50 .,u670 PETTY CASH EXPENSES-CITY HALL 61.35 50671 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT EXPENSES-POLICE OEPT 63.i4 50672 MICHAEL BARTELME REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 17.00 50673 RICK GRANNES REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 22.00 50674 HEIDI HALVERSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS Y2.Q0 50675 MARYLS HANSEN REFUND-BIKE TOUR. 95.00 50676 DENISE <IEFER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 20.00 50677 MICHAEL KIENTILE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 20.00 50678 SANDY KNAAK REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS Y4.00 50679 DIANE KNIGHTON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 41.00 50680 MARGARET KRUEGER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 22.00 50681 DEBORAH LARSON REFUND-PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND 19.00 50682 VERONICA MALONE REFUND-BICE TOUR 95.00 50683 JULIA NEWMAN REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 11.00 50684 BARBARA PANKRATZ REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 22.00 50685 THOMAS POLADIAN REFUND-RECREATION LAND PLANNING CLASS 30.00 50686 KYLE ROSE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 20.00 50687 KATHY RUCKER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 30.00 50688 JENNIFER SEMOTUK REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 14.50 50689 NANCY SNOW REFUND-RECREATION LAND PLANNING CLASS 30.00 50690 TERRY TAtBERT REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 20.Q0 50691 MARY TRICE: REFUND-SWIMMING LESSON'S 16.00 50692 JULIE VALITCHKA REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 14.50 50693 DAVID WEHRS REFUND-BIKE TOUR 95.00 '4 ROBERT WEHRS REFUND-BIKE TOUR 95.00 V5 DANA GIBBS PACKET DELIVERY 467.00 50696 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 4/13/89 & 4/14/89 27402.34 50697 EXECUTIVE DIRECTDR-PERA PAYROLL 4/28/89 27521.34 50698 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PERMIT TO TREAT ROUND LAKE 20.00 50699 RITA L ANDERSON ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 99.00 50700 PRISCILLA A BAILEY ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 99.00 50701 JUDITH E BAKER ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 113.75 50702 LEONE BARTA ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50703 BERNADINE BEAUVAIS ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 99.00 50704 MARY LAVELLE BOLL ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 99.00 50705 ADELINE M BRAMWELL ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 119.00 50706 LYNN BRAMWELL ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 99.00 50707 JEANNE BRANDT ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 115.50 50708 CHERYL BRIDGE ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 100.50 50709 RDBERTA BRONSON ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50710 DOLDRES BROWN ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 97.50 50711 JAMES C BROWN ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50712 BARBARA CA IL ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 115.50 50713 SHIRLEY M CARLON ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50714 FAY CLARK ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 115.50 50715 GERTRUDE DAHLBERG ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50716 JANET DAHLKE ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50717 VIRGINIA GARTNER ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 115.50 50716 JULIET A GLEASON ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 !CI 9 KAREN HACKMAN ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 i 0 LA'VERNE C HALES ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 94.50 8671209 t MAY 16,1989 50721 LEOTA M HALES ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 97.50 50722 HELEN D HAUPT ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 115.50 '0723 ANNE R HAWKINS ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 d 24 BECKY L HEALD ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 '5 725 CAROL HEGGE ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50726 BERNICE M HOLASEK ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 99.00 50727 ALLENE HOOKOM ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 97.50 50728 ISABELL IVERSON ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 99.00 50729 ELAINE M JACQUES ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 94.50 50730 BILL JELLISON ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50731 SHIRLEY JELLISON ELECTIDN JUDGE WAGES 112.00 50732 DELORES KLEIN ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 99.)0 50733 LESTER LABORE ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50734 ADELINE L LEVIN ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50735 NANCY LITTLE ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50736 VIOLA MCLAIN ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 99.00 50737 RUTH MITAL ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 119.00 50738 JOYCE MYHRE ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 113.75 50739 KATHLYN M NICHOLSON ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50740 KATHLEEN PORTA ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50741 JIM RANNOW ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 115.50 50742 ALICE J SCHULTZ ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 99.00 50743 DDROTHY SCHWARTZ ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50744 WILLIAM SCHWARTZ ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50745 CAROLE SHERIDAN ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50746 MARY UPTON ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 93.00 50747 BARBARAVANDERPLOEG ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 115.50 50748 MELODY VILLARS ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 19 ETHYL WOKASCH ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 96.00 50 JO ANN WRONSKI ELECTION JUDGE WAGES 113.75 50751 RICHARD KNUTSON INC SERVICE-COUNTY ROADS 1 & 4 WATERMAIN 123071.13 50752 ABBOTT PAINT & CARPET PAINT-WATER DEPT 184.40 50753 ACE CHEMICAL PRODUCTS INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 170.45 50754 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL 828.10 50755 HERBERT AOOLPHSON MILEAGE-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 37.50 50756 AG SYSTEMS INC -2 500 GAL TANKS-$678.00/2 PUMPS-3472.00- 1150.00 PARK MAINTENANCE 50757 AIRSIGNAL INC PAGER SERVICE-POLICE DEPT 82.00 50758 ALL STEEL SOCCER GOALS INC -3 SOCCER NETS-3213.51/2 SOCCER GOALS- 449.51 $236.00-PARK MAINTENANCE 50759 AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK BOND PAYMENT 64087.50 50760 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSN SUBSCRIPTION-PLANNING DEPT 25.00 50761 AMERICAN RED CROSS WATER SAFETY MATERIALS-AQUATICS SUPERVISOR 196.00 50762 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOC BOOKS-WATER DEPT 24.25 50763 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC STREET SIGNS-STREET DEPT 851.80 50764 AQUATROL CORPORATION WELL *1 TELEMETRY SYSTEM REPAIR-WATER DEPT 261.57 50765 AMERICAN COMPENSATION ASSN DUES-HUMAN RESOURCES 95.00 50766 ARMOR SECURITY INC REPLACE LOCK-OUTDOOR CENTER-STARING LK PK 83.40 50767 ARROW APPLIANCE & PARTS CENTER RADIO REPAIR-SENIOR CENTER 36.25 50768 ART STONE DANCE& GYMNASTIC SUPPLY BODY SUITS-SPECIAL EVENTS 48.91 50769 ASTLEFORD INTL INC -THERMOSTAT/SEAL/GASKET/O-RINGS-EQUIPMENT 24.58 MAINTENANCE 50770 THE AMERICAN STORES ADAPTOR FOR TRAILER WIRING-EQUIPMENT MAINT 18.98 ST'71 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC -BATTERIES/SPARK PLUGSiMUFFLER CLAMPS- 239.72 j EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 19499255 / ;;7i) I MAY 16,1989 50772 BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES INC SERVICE-MCA TRAFFIC STUDY 2778.97 50773 BELL OAKS CO REFUND-DEVELOPER'S DEPOSIT 28916.62 4;''774 BENTEC ENGINEERING CORP LIFT STATION DIALER REPAIR-SEWER DEFT 84.50 I 75 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON INVESTIGATION-POLICE DEPT 100.00 9 0776 CITY DF BLOOMINGTON MARCH 89 ANIMAL IMPOUND SERVICE 610.00 50777 BLOOMINGTON LOCK & SAFE CO LOCK REPAIR-WATER DEPT B5.79 50778 BORCHERT-INGERSOLL INC 0-RINGS/HOSES/REPAIR KITS-EQUIPMENT MAINT 323.20 50779 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC 89 TILT CAB CHASSIS TRUCK-STREET DEPT 32542.00 50780 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC FLYWHEEL-EQUIPMENT MAIN? 179.73 50781 TOBY BOYUM HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 449.00 50782 LEE M BRANDT HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 120.00 50783 BRISSMAN KENNEOY INC VACUUM SWITCH-FACILITIES DEPT 4.57 50784 DAVID BROWN BASKETBALL DFFICIAL/FEES PAID 352.00 50785 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC GRAVEL-STREET MAINTENANCE 1808.27 50786 BSN CORP 6 SOCCER NETS-PARK MAINTENANCE 851.40 507B7 BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL INC APRIL 89 WASTE DISPOSAL 841.00 50788 MATT BULLOCK CONTRACTING CO SERVICE-STARING LAKE PARK 46483.64 50789 BUREAU OF BUSINESS PRACTICE SUBSCRIPTION-FACILITIES DEPT 42.06 50790 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION SERVICE 600.00 50791 BURTON EQUIPMENT INC 2 LADDERS-WATER DEPT 393.66 50792 BUSINESS CREDIT LEASING INC JUNE 89 COPIER RENTAL-FIRE DEPT 182.75 50793 BUSINESS MACHINES SALES & SVC 1989 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-POLICE DEPT 804.00 50794 CARLSON SYSTEMS REFUND-OVERPAYMENT UTILITY BILLING 20.16 50795 STEVE CARNEY FISHING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 50.00 50796 CARVER COUNTY TREASURER -SERVICE-HWY 212 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 3018.04 STATEMENTS & STUDY REPORT 50797 CERTIFIED LABORATORIES -CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/EQUIPMENT 278.46 MAINTENANCE ( 78 CHAPIN PUBLISHING COMPANY LEGAL ADS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 58.50 99 CHEMLAWN LAWN CARE-SENIOR CENTER 100.00 50800 CLUTCH & TRANSMISSION SER INC -HUBS/WHEEL BALANCING/CLAMPS/BEARINGS/AIR 956.02 -COMPRESSOR/AIR BRAKE CHAMBERS/VALVE/NUTS- EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 50801 CLEVELAND COTTON PRODUCTS TOWELS-WATER DEPT 182.73 50802 JOHN COLEMAN SCHOOL-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 151.75 50803 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE APRIL 89 FUEL TAX 175.80 50804 COMMUNICATIONS CENTER -RADIO REPAIR-SEWER DEPT/WATTMETER-$401.00- 1504.81 -EOUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/MOBILE RADIO- 81019.81-FORESTRY DEPT 50805 COMPUTER PLACE NETWORK CABLE-PDLICE DEPT 100.00 50806 CONDENSER SERVICE CONDENSER REPAIR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 50.00 50807 CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN SUBSCRIPTION-ENGINEERING OEPT 74.00 50808 CONTACT MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS INC -RADIO REPAIR-WATER DEPT/POLICE DEPT/ 617.15 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 50809 CROWN AUTO INC FLOOR MATS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 46.56 50810 CROWN MARKING INC CITY HALL/ENGRAVED SIGNS-WATER DEPT 225.71 50811 CRYSTAL MINN FABRICS 4724 COSTUME SUPPLIES-SPECIAL EVENTS 9.37 50812 CURTIS INDUSTRIES INC -LUBRICANTS/GREASE/DRILL BITS/SCREWS-WATER 915.68 DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 50813 CUSTOM FIRE APPARATUS INC RE-WIRING-FIRE DEPT 55.50 50814 CUTLER-MAGNER COMPANY OUICKLIME-WATER DEPT 6620.72 50815 D & K PRINTING PLUS INC PRINTING-SENIOR PROGRAMS/SIGNS-POLICE DEPT 250.70 50816 WARD F DAHLBERG APRIL 89 EXPENSES-LIQUOR STORES 80.00 50817 DALCO -CLEANING SUPPLIES-FACILITIES DEPT/PARK 209.98 ( MAINTENANCE 134;,;490 /IAC MAY 16.1989 50818 DAVIES WATER EQUIPMENT CO 5/8 " WATER METER PARTS-WATER DEPT 264.97 50819 CRAIG W DAWSON EXPENSES-ADMINISTRATION 43.50 `'920 DECORATIVE DESIGNS MAY 89 SERVICE-CITY HALL 49.50 i 321 DENISON MAILING SERVICE POSTAGE-EVALUATION NOTICES-ASSESSING DEPT 368.63 o0822 DIAMOND ACCEPTANCE -JUNE 89 COPIER INSTALLMENT rAYME:T-POLICF 300.00 DEPT 50823 EUGENE DIETZ APRIL 89 EXPENSES-ENGINEEHING GErr 203.50 50824 DPC INDUSTRIES INC CHLORINE-WATER DEPT 1230.00 50825 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 1056.33 50826 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 16.01 50827 DUNLOP SLAZENGER CORPORATION -144 T BALLS-SPRING SKILL DEVELOPMENT/20 447.00 TENNIS RACKETS-YOUTH TENNIS 50828 OYNA SYSTEMS -SCREWS/MASONRY BITS/ANCHORS/SCREW SHIELDS- 896.25 WATER DEPT 50829 EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY -JANUARY & FEBRUARY 89 MAINTENANCE 678.44 AGREEMENT-CITY HALL 50830 ECON INSULATION INC INSULATION/ADHESIVE-WATER DEPT 592.47 50831 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE EXPENSES-ADMINISTATION 12.00 50832 EDEN PRAIRIE CRIME FUND CRIME PREVENTION GRANT 1200.00 50833 DEB EDLUND MINUTES-CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION 275.00 50834 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC -RAIN PANTS/60GGLE SPLASHES/FACEPIECES- 680.84 -WATER DEPT/SAFETY VESTS-STREET MAINT/ GLOVES-PARK MAINTENANCE 50835 ELECTRICAL MECHANICAL SERVICES IN MIXER DRIVE BEARING REPAIR-WATER DEPT 258.0C 50836 DOUG ERNEST EXPENSES-PARK MAINTENANCE 9.28 50837 RON ESS HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 40.00 50838 EXPRESS MESSENGER SYSTEMS INC POSTAGE-PLANNING DEPT 20.82 50839 FEIST BLANCHARD CO -U-JOINTS/FUEL PUMPS/CAPS/ROTOR/OIL SEALS/ 1021.23 -BEARINGS/SNOW PLOW KITS/CABLE TIES/WATER -PUMP/LAMPS/MOTOR/WIRE & CABLE CLAMPS/ -UTILITY LITE/SWITCHES/FUSE HOLDER KIT/ BELTS/HOSES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 50840 THE FITNESS STORE -BELTS/BELT CLIPS/HAND GRIPS-FITNESS 53.70 CENTER 50841 MILT FLOYD SQUARE DANCE INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 112.00 50842 FOREMOST BUSINESS MACHINES INC TYPEWRITER RIBBON-WATER DEPT 22.47 50843 FOUR STAR BAR & RESTAURANT SUPPLY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 1150.28 50844 GAB BUSINESS SERVICES INC LIABILITY INSURANCE 462.06 50B45 GETTING TO KNOW YOU ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES 112.80 50846 JOSEPH GLEASON HOCKEY & SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 335.00 50847 JOANIE GDODLEY SERVICE-ICE SHOW-COMMUNITY CENTER 1204.00 50848 GOODWILL INDUSTRIES INC APRIL 89 EXPENSES-SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT 1814.67 50849 GOODYEAR COMMERCIAL TIRE & SERVIC TIRES/TIRE REPAIR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 1360.96 50850 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL INC SERVICE 463.94 50851 GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 190.00 50852 W W GRAINGER INC PIPE INSULATION-WATER DEPT 173.56 50853 THE DALE GREEN CO SOO-STREET MAINTENANCE 405.00 50854 GROSS OFFICE SUPPLY TABLE/PRINTER STANO-POLICE DEPT 380.00 50855 LEROY GUBA HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 123.00 50856 ROBERT HANNON HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 46.00 50857 HEALTH & HOME ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES 69.33 50858 HELLER'S CARBONIC WEST INC CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT 686.18 50859 LAURIE HELLING MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER 31.25 5-960 HENN CO FIRE CHIEF'S ASSN ODES-FIRE OEPT 10.00 ( ,1 HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER SCHOOL-FIRE DEPT 15.00 1888497 Ii '70 MAY 16.1989 50862 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER FILING FEE-PLANNING DEPT 875.00 50863 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER MARCH 89 BOARD OF PRISONERS 1868.00 `0864 HENNEPIN PARKS GARBAGE BAGS-PARK MAINTENANCE 127.05 365 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL INSTITUTE SCHOOL-FIRE DEPT 144.00 b0866 D C HEY COMPANY INC APRIL 89 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-FIRE DEPT 35.30 50867 HOFFERS INC FIELD MARKING PAINT-PARK MAINTENANCE 538.50 50868 HOLMSTEN ICE RINKS INC -2 COMPRESSOR KITS-$786.90/TUBE ASSEMBLY/ 1001.07 OIL-COMMUNITY CENTER 50869 HOME SAFETY EQUIPMENT CO BADGES-POLICE DEPT 73.13 50870 HONEYWELL INC INK CARTS-WATER DEPT 141.06 50871 HOWE RICHARDSON DIV TESTING WHEEL LOAD SCALES-POLICE DEPT 88.00 50872 IBM CORPORATION JUNE 89 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY HALL 424.32 50873 INDUSTRIAL LIGHTING SUPPLY INC LIGHT BULBS-WATER DEPT 330.32 50874 INOEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST 11272 -SERVICE-YOUNG AUDIENCE CONCERTS- 940.00 HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION 50875 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST M272 -BUS SERVICE-SPRING SKILL DEVELOPMENT/ROOM 274.63 -RENTAL-ADULT PROGRAMS/PRINTING-RECREATION SUPERVISOR 50876 INTERSTATE DIESEL PRODUCTS INC -FILTERS/FITTINGS/HOSES/ENGINE TURBD 1064.08 -CHARGER-$771.77/GASKETS-EQUIPMENT MAINT/ POLICE DEPT 50877 INSTRUMENT CONTROL CO PIPE LOCATOR REPAIR-WATER DEPT 126.52 50878 INSTRUMENTATION SERVICES INC REMOTE & ANTENNA MOUNT-POLICE DEPT 225.74 50879 INTL ASSN OF PLUMBING & MECHANICA DUES-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 20.00 50880 IAAI DUES-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 37.00 50881 INTL SOCIETY OF FIRE SVC INSTRUCT DUES-FIRE DEPT 60.00 50882 JM OFFICE PROOUCTS INC -OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/WATER OEPT/FIRE 1057.97 DEPT 183 JOHNSON CONTROLS -2ND QUARTER 89 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT/ 1873.40 -PULLEYS/FILTER/VALVE ASSEMBLY-COMMUNITY CENTER 50884 N CRAIG JOHNSON MAI APPRAISAL FEE-MILLER PROPERTIES 3000.00 50885 KERR ASSOCIATES BOOK-PARK PLANNING 38.00 50886 KEYS WELL DRILLING CO -REMOVE/REPAIR & RE-INTALL WELL PUMP-WATER 14749.00 OEPT 50887 MARY KOTTKE VOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 114.00 50888 KOKESH ATHLETIC SUPPLIES INC -STAKE PLUGS/POST COVERS/BASES/PITCHERS 2438.49 PLATE-PARK DEPT 50889 KRAEMER'S HOME CENTER -VALVE/RUST REMOVER/BITS/BRUSHES/FLOOR 310.14 -MATS/ROLLERS/DRILL BIT SET/SCREWDRIVERS/ -TOOL CASES/BOLTS/SCREWS/WASHERS/BROOM -HOLDERS/SPRAY PAINT-WATER DEPT/FIRE DEPT/ STREET MAINTENANCE 50890 LANG PAULY & GREGEP.SON LTD -NOVEMBER 88 THRU FEBRUARY 89 LEGAL 565.00 SERVICE-CABLE TV 50891 SUZANNE K LANE MILEAGE-ELECTIONS 15.00 50892 CINDY LANENBERG MILEAGE-FIRE DEPT 49.50 50893 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY PISTON PUMPS-FACILITIES DEPT 177.91 50894 LMCIT LIABILITY INSURANCE 224.00 50895 LINHOFF COLOR PHOTO FILM PROCESSING-FORESTRY DEPT 9.40 50896 DYLAN LOHONEN VOLLEYBALL & BROOMBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 258.50 50897 LYMAN LUMBER CO TIMBERS/SHEATHING-STREET MAINT/PARK MAINT 85.73 50898 M & I INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC PIPE SEALER-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 7.85 5.1899 M & M PRINTING INC RECRUITING BROCHURE-FIRE DEPT 1289.00 JO MACQUEEN EOUIF'MENT INC -SPROCKET/SHEAR PIN CLIP/DRIVE CHAIN/BRAKE 752.87 -SHOES/FILTERS/SPRAY NOZZLES/SEALS/GAUGES/ 'S4�i+48 IIf) -BEARINGS/SEAL RINGS/BLADES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/PARK MAINTENANCE 50901 MASTER CRAFT LABELS INC BADGES-FIRE DEPT 450.00 50902 MASTER FRAMES INC -PARTIAL PAYMENT-HOCKEY RINK REPAIRS- 238.13 COMMUNITY CENTER II /03 MATTS AUTO SERVICE INC TOWING-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 85.00 .,0904 MBA DESKTOP PUBLISHING PLUS -PRINTING-SUMMER BROCHURE-3975.00- 1005.00 -COMMUNITY CENTER/SUMMER TEEN VOLUNTEER PROGRAM FLYERS 50905 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC EXPENSES-CITY HALL/POLICE DEPT/SENIOR CTR 193.74 50906 MEDICAL OXYGEN & EQUIP CO OXYGEN-FIRE DEPT 18.00 50907 MEDICINE LAKE LINES BUS SERVICE-ADULT PROGRAMS 217.50 50908 MICHAEL MEEHAN REFUND-ROUND LAKE PARK PAVILION RENTAL 43.00 50909 METROPOLITAN MECHANICAL CONTRACTO REPLACE 2 SHOWER VALVES-COMMUNITY CENTER 223.25 50910 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP BLACKTOP-STREET MAINT 54.65 50911 MINNEAPOLIS GLASS COMPANY 2 WINDOWS-PARK MAINTENANCE 402.62 50912 MINNESOTA COMMUNICATIONS CDRP -MAY 89 PAGER SERVICE-SEWER DEPT/POLICE 210.50 DEPT/FIRE DEPT 50913 MN SUBURBAN PUBLICATIONS ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES 292.80 50914 MINNESOTA WANNER CO PLUG-PARK MAINTENANCE 21.78 50915 MINUTEMAN PRESS PRINTING-RECREATION SUPERVISOR 23.60 50916 MODERN OFFICE CART-AQUATICS SUPERVISOR 75.16 50917 IACK MODS LIGHTING AID-VARIETY SHOW/FEES PAID 23.10 509I8 MOTOROLA INC RADIO REPAIR-POLICE DEPT/FIRE DEPT 515.50 50919 MR SIGN -NEW VEHICLES LETTERED & STRIPED-POLICE 1544.00 DEPT 50920 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO -SCREWS/KNIVES/ROLLER ASSEMBLY/BELTS/ 379.04 BUSHINGS/SPACERS-PARK MAINTENANCE 50921 MUNITECH INC SERVICE-METER REPAIR-WATER DEPT 236.00 50922 NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE FILM-POLICE DEPT 99.90 i23 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSN SUBSCRIPTION-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 75.75 24 NATIONWIDE ADVERTISING SERVICE IN EMPLOYMENT ADS-COMMUNITY CENTER 82.88 50925 JP NOREX INC SERVICE-SANITARY SEWER REPAIR 398.00 50926 NORTH STAR TURF INC -BUSHINGS/CASTERS/WHEELS/SEALS/WASHERS/ 253.61 KNOB-PARK MAINTENANCE 50927 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO -SERVICE-BLUFF'S E 5TH ADDITION/ANDERSON 686.50 LAKES PARKWAY 50928 NORTHERN STATES SUPPLY INC -PLIERS/MALLET/CDUPLINGS/PIPE WRENCHES- 176.45 WATER DEPT 50929 NORWEST BANK MINNESOTA N A BOND PAYMENT 14450.00 50930 NORTHWEST POWER PRODUCTS INC SECONDARY BASIN MIXER PARTS-WATER DEPT 477.54 50931 OCHS BRICK & TILE CO CEMENT-SEWER DEPT 101.25 50932 OFFICE PRODUCTS OF MN INC -COMPUTER REPAIR/TYPEWRITER REPAIR- 203.50 BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 50933 JAN OLSON ILLUSTRATIONS-FIRE DEPT G0.00 50934 CITY OF ORONO COMPUTER/ACCESSORIES-CITY HALL 50.00 50935 DAN OTTEN SCHOOL-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 107.75 50936 PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CENTER PHYSICAL EXAMS-HUMAN RESOURCES 68.00 50937 JOHN PARKER EXPENSES-COMMUNITY CENTER 98.09 50938 CONNIE L PETERS MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER 17.50 50937 THE PINK COMPANIES FILE CABINET-FINANCE DEPT 285.00 50940 PITNEY BOWES PRINTPOWDER-RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 196.00 50941 PDMMER COMPANY INC SOFTBALL TROPHIES/PLAQUES-SPECIAL EVENTS 400.00 50942 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC REPLACE BALLAST & LAMP-FACILITIES DEPT 78.30 ^463839 • • • MAY 16,1989 50943 PRAIRIE HARDWARE -AIR HOSE/CLAMPS/ROLLER REFILLS/PAINT/ 183.15 -SANDPAPER/BRUSH/BATTERIES/FLASHLIGHT/ -TAPE/SWITCHES/WASHERS/TARP/SPRAY BOTTLES/ SAW BLADES/SCREWS-COMMUNITY CENTER ,44 PRAIRIE HARDWARE COUPLING-LIQUOR STORE 4.56 50945 PRAIRIE HARDWARE -SANDING SEALER/SWITCHES/PAINT/DOWELS/ 160.00 -PLUGS/PAINT BRUSHES/PUTTY KNIFE/BOLTS/ -RDPE/STEEL WOOL/SCREWS/WASHERS/BLADES- PARK MAINTENANCE 50946 PRAIRIE HARDWARE -CLAMPS/HOOKS/HAMMER/RUSTPROOF!NG/BACK 98.93 -PADS/BATTERIES/KNIFE/BLADES/STRING-SEWER DEPT 50947 PRAIRIE HARDWARE PAPER TOWELS/PLATES/DETERGENT-STREET MAINT 16.51 50948 PRAIRIE HARDWARE -BATTERIES/RAKES/SPONGE/DRILL BITS/CHAIN/ 214.93 -CLASPS/ELECTRIC CORDS/CAULKING/TAPE/ LUBRICANT/BRUSHES/SCREWDRIVERS-WATER DEPT 50949 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING OFFICE SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 147.50 50950 PSQ BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS INC TELEPHONE SERVICE-CITY HALL 2208.00 50951 R & R SPECIALTIES INC -ZAMBON! BLADES SHARPENED-ICE ARENA- 96.60 COMMUNITY CENTER 50952 RC BEVERAGE-TWIN CITIES MIX 99.95 50953 RESCUE ONE -2 CUTTERS-$5240.00/2 SPREADERS-$923O.00/ 30984.00 -2 CHAIN SETS-$364.00/2 CHAIN ADAPTER SETS- -$640.00/2 RAMS FOR HEARST TOOLS-$3584.O0/ -2 HYDRAULIC PUMPS-$5190.00/4 VALVES- $5076.00/4 HOSES-$1660.00-FIRE DEPT 50954 RESOURCE RECYCLING SUBSCRIPTION-ADMINISTRATION 75.00 50955 ROAD MACHINERY & SUPPLIES CD -2 SIDE BOXES-3334.30-FORESTRY DEPT/BARREL 1035.38 -SEAL KITS/WATER PUMP/PAVER PARTS- EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE .,56 ROAD RESCUE INC FIRST AID RESCUE EQUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT 1967.73 50957 ROGER'S SERVICE CO -SNOWPLOW MOTOR REPAIR/ALTERNATOR & 651.75 STARTER REPAIRS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 50958 ROSEMOUNT EMPLOYEE CLUB REIMBURSEMENT OF SOFTBALL LEAGUE FEE 240.00 50959 RUFFRIDGE JOHNSON EQUIPMENT CO STEEL TUBES/CLAMPS/HOSES-SEWER DEPT 235.00 50960 RYAN CONSTRUCTION REFUND-BUILDING PERMIT 4.00 50961 ST PAUL BOOK & STATIONERY CO OFFICE SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 243.63 50962 SALLY DISTRIBUTORS INC GAMES/PUZZLES/TOYS-SOCIAL EVENTS 313.55 50963 SANCO INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-FACILITIES DEPT 150.30 50964 MICHAEL SAUL HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 40.00 50965 SEARS -PLIERS-FIRE DEPT/DRILL BITS/BEARING SET- 150.89 PARK MAINTENANCE 50966 SEELYE PLASTICS INC -PLUMBING & CHEMICAL FEEDER REPAIR-WATER 1194.66 DEPT 50967 SETTER LEACH & LINOSTROM INC SERVICE-COMMUNITY CENTER REPAIR 1754.38 50968 SEXTON/CIS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 99.93 50969 TODD SEVERSON -LIGHTING AIDE-VARIETY SHOW-HISTORICAL 34.65 & CULTURAL COMMISSION 50970 SIMPLEX TIME RECOROER CD 1989 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-COMMUNITY CTR 40.75 50971 SIR SPEEDY -PRINTING-ARBOR DAY WALK FLYERS-FORESTRY 82.50 DEPT 50972 SNAP ON IDOLS CORP -SANDER/SOLDERING SET/HOSE/CUTTER/PLIERS- 362.20 WATER DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 50973 SNYOER DRUG STORES INC EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 19.19 5( '4 SOUTHWEST AUTO SUPPLY INC -FUEL PUMPS/BRAKE SHOES/KNIFE/FILTERS/ 2230.82 -WRENCHES/BRAVE PARTS/CAR WASH BRUSHES/ 4514046 -TIRE GAUGE/BRAKES/ROTORS/HUBS/FLOOR MATS/ -EMERY CLOTH/PIPE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/ q WATER DEPT 50975 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC RECRUITING POSTERS-FIRE DEPT 322.00 50976 SPECIALTY SCREENING EMBLEMS-FIRE DEPT 440.50 g 77 STAR TRIBUNE SUBSCRIPTION-CITY HALL 70.20 i. 178 EMMETT STARK COMMUNITY BAND OIRECTOR/FEES PAID 650.00 .4 50979 STI-CO INDUSTRIES INC ANTENNA-POLICE DEPT 50.31 50980 STREICHERS PROFESSIONAL POLICE EC! -LIGHTBAR-SEWER DEPT/RELAYS/LIGHTS/MOUTH 4183.14 -PIECES/BARRIER TAPE/BATTERIES/LIGHTBARS/ BUMPERS/FLASHERS/SPEAKERS-POLICE DEPT 50981 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET -LUBRICANT/TURN SIGNAL SWITCH-EQUIPMENT 38.92 MAINTENANCE 50982 SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY FIRST HALF 89 MEMBERSHIP FEE 700.00 50983 SULLIVANS SERVICES INC WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE 62.14 50984 RENAE SUNDGREN COSTUME SERVICE-ICE SHOW-COMMUNITY CENTER 344.00 50985 SUPPLEE ENTERPRISES INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE 15.60 1 50986 TARGET STORES OFFICE SUPPLIES-PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 46.47 50987 TENNANT COMPANY -DISTRIBUTOR CAPS/POINT SETS/CONDENSERS/ 137.60 ROTORS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 50988 THANE HAWKINS CHEVROLET CHEV 1 TON 4X4 TRUCK-SEWER DEPT 13232.00 50989 TOT STOP CHILO DEV CENTER PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT-EDEN VALLEY PARK 2000.00 50990 TROVEHL INOUSTRIES INC BRACKETS-COMMUNITY CENTER 14.65 50991 TURNQUIST PAPER CD CLEANING SUPPLIES-FACILITIES DEPT 33.62 50992 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO ACETYLENE/OXYGEN-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 59.27 50993 VALLEY INDUSTRIAL PROPANE INC GAS CYLINDERS-COMMUNITY CENTER 183.62 50994 VAN PINES INC TREES-FORESTRY DEPT 212.50 50995 VAN WATERS & ROGERS CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT 1862.50 50996 VESSCO INC -NUTS/TIRES/0 RINGS/SEALS/SWITCHES/VALVES/ 2495.20 -CONNECTIONS/GASKETS/CHORINE LEAK DETECTOR-$1190.00-WATER DEPT 77 VICOM INC MAY 89 WIRE MAINTENANCE-PUBLIC WORKS BLDG 5.25 50998 VICOM 19B9 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-COMMUNITY CTR 37B.00 50999 VIKING LABORATORIES INC CHEMICALS-POOL-COMMUNITY CENTER 748.20 51000 VOSS ELECTRIC CO LIGHT BULBS-FACILITIES DEPT 537.27 51001 SANDRA F WERTS MILEAGE-SENIOR CENTER 111.83 51002 WEST CENTRAL INDUSTRIES INC LATH BUNDLES-ENGINEERING DEPT/STREET MAINT 204.60 51003 WELCH VILLAGE SKI TRIP/FEES PAID 322.00 51004 WEST WELD WELDING SUPPLIES-PARK MAINTENANCE 204.05 51005 DAVE WHITEFORD SOFTBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 114.00 51006 GERALD ZAHN VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 40.50 51007 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE FIRST AID SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 108.40 46066 VOID OUT CHECK 50140 VOID OUT CHECK 30.00- 50342 VOID OUT CHECK 433.81- 50538 VOID OUT CHECK 27222.6282.62- 191253 $808126.08 1 .' U. ) j 1 :i 1 I161 h 1 i DISTRIBUTION BY FUNDS 10 GENERAL 339740.18 CERTIFICATE OF INDEBT 79767.74 LIQUOR STORE-F V M 22787.27 1' LIQUOR STORE-PRESERVE 18447.09 21 POLICE DRUG FORFEITURE 99.95 22 STATE AID CONST 3018.04 31 PARK: ACOUIST F< DEVELOP 52676.51 33 UTILITY BOND FUND 123071.13 39 86 FIRE STATION CONST 32567. 17 43 77 FIRE DEBT FUND 311.75 44 UTILITY DEBT FUND 14450.00 45 UTILITY DEBT FD ARB 53806.25 55 IMPROVEMENT DEBT FUND ARB 10281.25 73 WATER FUND 46187.54 77 SEWER FUND 15023.25 81 TRUST g, ESCROW FUND 76777.21 91 T I F DEBT FUND -433.81 $808126.08 II(,1T Cahnule Center 9531\yeu 78th Street Eden Name,N1tnnexota 55344 612 941 1792 May 12, 1989 Mr. Steve Durham Assistant Planner City Council of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Dear Steve: Please accept this letter as a request to the City Council of Eden Prairie to review the action taken by the Board of Appeals (item number 89-20) at the meeting on May 11, 1989. The Lexington Company has worked closely with the staff of Eden Prairie regarding this proposal and would like a favorable ruling at the council meeting on May 16, 1989. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, oseph H. Rya JHR:cm/sd • • • rt CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION #89-103 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF CABRIOLE CENTER FOR HANSEN, THORP, PELLINEN, OLSON, INC. BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Cabriole Center for Hansen, Thorp, Pel1inen, Olson, Inc., dated May 11, 1989, consisting of 10.3 acres into 2 lots, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADDPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 16th day of May, 1989. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk • • • I/VZA • LAN(;, I'AULY&GREGERSON,LTD. A71ORNI YS Al LAN 441111IDS 1-i.,ti I I:R SM soy LH null I II s rREET MINNF..AI'OL!C MINN!SOT SS4112 1 ELI.I'HONL.III I 21178-117 y> FAX.(612)349-6718 NtIAl RI I.> PRAIRIE 11111(L NI Gi N A PAI I.) NtDAS II)11 I�NI I,l NSII+• St III 1'll R ic 11' A Nll1 ROM. 2,11PR 11N11II SII NISIISC AIANA111111\till\ Il ll+PNAINII MINNI\IIlA to 111 10,,EPH 1 MLA.. Itl!i X,v�1�S 1(III NM LA,I,.t PA RI PI Y III MINN!1N II IS OM11'i LEA M IA SlA'LA 1l.VTR111 AI'I')LVI ISl• JL'l)I 111 A III 1(III.N • RARHARA M MISS May 2, 1989 Mr. Michael Franzen City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Re: Cabriole Center Preliminary Plat • Dear Mr. Franzen: We have reviewed your memorandum of April 18, 1989, setting forth the conditions the Planning Commission placed upon the approval for the Preliminary Plat of Phase II of the Cabriole Center. As we discussed I would suggest that condition number 4 be restated to require the developer to execute and file such "covenants, restrictions and/or easements to provide for cross parking and cross access and that the same be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney prior to final plat review by the City Council". Although we did not discuss the exact items that are necessary to bring the existing plan into conformance with the existing developer's agreement, I suggest that condition number 1 set forth a date by which the developer would bring the plan into compliance. Further, as I noted condition number 2 does not bind the developer to do anything but discuss the development with residents in Bloomington. If the commission had particular action in mind as a result of those discussions that should be set forth. • I. Lj Page -2- ( If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact us. Very truly yours, LANG, PAULY & GREGERSON, LTD. 5F lc BY: 1< 2.1 /<y�%�,1�� Richard F. Rosow • 4 111)G 1 STAFF REPORT 1 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: March 10, 1989 PROJECT: Cabriole Center LOCATION: South of 1-494 and West 78th Street, and north of Anderson Lakes APPLICANT: Hansen, Thorpe, Pellinen, and Olson, Inc. FEE OWNER: Lexington Company REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Amendment within the Office District on 10.3 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals. 2. Preliminary Plat of 10.3 acres into 2 lots. ���Background I -2' The current proposal is for the 2nd ( iJ• I phase of the Cabriole Center, which ..„1I "O FC° is an office development located on '.--.1111111141 West 78th Street. This project was •�— �` 1 �/ approved by Ordinance #78-26 on June • _-f' �'`�`,'� P 7, 1973, which changed the zoning -7 7:::',—(------- ---- classification from Rural to Office _� , I on approximately :r:c :t Galba __ The proponent is requesting a zoning ., `PROPOSED SITEy. .:_ :,_ _. district amendment to allow for the _-- .... ... - construction of Phase 2 of the **NNW: Cabriole Center originall ����, Y approved O C 15 . �*i�i�isi OF in 1978. Phase 2 building will •�•�•�•• contain 65,040 square feet on a lot , Q•�l.� containing 5.8 acres in addition to ��!� ! a one-level parking ramp contai ning I ' . PUB�. <,•. 144 parking stalls. The Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) will be 25.8% which 6., is allowable in the Office zoning \ `'. district. Overall square footage on ,i the site, which includes 63,850 . n > c , + �� . ,K� '.`' square feet for Phase I, would be cj.. 128,890 square feet. The overall F P I - , square footage includes one level of 839 underground parking beneath each / ./1 \• \�� calculateng. Maximum F.A.R. has been AREA LOCATION MAP calculated at approximately 28.6%. j(? Cabriole Center 2 March 10, 1989 The proponent is subdividing the 10.3-acre tract into 2 tracts. Lot 1, which is the location of the existing building, would contain 4.5 acres, while Lot 2 would contain 5.8 acres. Because of the lot line which runs down the center of the property, a number of variances are being requested. These variances would include a sideyard setback for the existing building, a zero lot line setback to the parking lot on Lot 1, a zero lot line setback to the parking ramp on Lot 2, and off-site parking. A height variance for the future building is also being requested to allow a building height to 45 feet. Maximum height allowed in the Office zoning district is 30 feet. • Based upon a total building square footage of 128,890 square feet, parking requirements have been calculated at 4.2 parking stalls per 1,000 square feet, or 552 parking stalls. A total of 542 parking stalls are provided on-site. This figure includes 256 parking stalls on-grade, 144 parking stalls within the ramp, 73 parking stalls within the buildings, and 71 proof-of-parking stalls. With the exception of those stalls within the parking structure, the majority of the parking stalls have already been constructed. With the proposed lot subdivision, cross- parking, access, and maintenance agreements over the entire parking lot are necessary. In regards to the approved project, the parking ramp is in approximately the same location; however, because the building design has changed, it is approximately BO feet further down the slope. In the 1978 Staff Report, concern was raised regarding how far down the slope the building would go. In the June 7, 1978, Developer's Agreement, item #15 required that "A barrier of either dense landscaping or fencing for the purpose of preventing physical intrusion into the wildlife area south of the 852 contour shall be designed and submitted to City Staff for approval prior to construction. The barrier should be placed at or north of the 852 contour." Because the building has moved further down the site, grading is occuring to approximately the 846 contour elevation. In order to come into conformance with the Developer's Agreement, the building would have to be relocated. Traffic The 1978 Staff Report discussed a neighborhood concern regarding traffic avoiding the West 78th Street/County Road #18 intersection by proceeding through on Ensign Road to gain access to County Road #18. Since this time, a connection has been made from West 78th Street to merge with the off-ramp from I-494, thereby providing additional access to County Road k1B. Finally the original Staff Report anticipated approximately 100,000 square feet of office to be developed which would generate a total of 1,400 daily trips. Based upon the current proposal of approximately 110,000 square feet, a total of 1,353 daily trips are expected. The difference is a caused by a change in trip generation rates from 14 daily trips/1,000 square feet of office in 1978 to 12.3 daily trips/1,000 square feet of office in 1989. Grading The majority of the site to be utilized for Phase II has already been constructed upon. Grading is proposed with the parking structure and additional grading is necessary for the future building. Due to the slopes on the site, the building has been designed to step down the hillside. Approximately 10 feet of grade difference exists between the first floor elevation and the garage floor elevation. About 10 //t)41 • Cabriole Center 3 March 10, 1989 feet of fill is proposed along the front of the building and approximately 10 feet 1 to the rear of the building. As previously mentioned, a natural barrier was to have been constructed at the 852 contour elevation, but was never installed. The previous approval depicted a building to be built at approximately the 870 contour elevation. The proposed building extends to the 854 contour elevation. The Phase 2 building would either have to be relocated and/or redesigned in order to conform with the approved concept plan. In addition, an approved landscape plan was submitted which depicted all plant material placed above the 844 contour elevation. The current proposal has plant material to the 840 elevation. The plans shall be revised to include all plant material above the 846 contour elevation. Utilities Water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer service is available to this building by connections made to existing stubs in West 78th Street and along the western property line. Storm water run-off is proposed to sheet drain across the parking lot to West 78th Street as it is currently. An additional storm sewer pipe and catch basin will be installed to collect water from the building and from the parking lot and discharged into the ditch along West 78th Street. Detailed utility plans shall be submitted for review by the Engineering Department and the Watershed District. Landscaping Based upon a building square footage of 65,050 square feet, a total of 2D3 caliper inches are required. In addition, the development proposal indicates a removal of 74 caliper inches of trees which would equal 100% replacement. Based upon this information, 277 caliper inches are required. The landscape plan has depicted a total of 291 caliper inches of plant material being planted on the site and 96 caliper inches of existing material to be transplanted. The landscape plan is designed to help buffer the building and some parking areas from the adjacent neighbors to the east and south per the Developer's Agreement. Architecture Because of inefficiences in the original building design, the proposed building has been designed in a more diagonal fashion. As originally required in 1978, the building has been designed to step down the hillside in order to take advantage of the natural slopes on the site. Building materials and colors will be consistent with the existing building. The proposed parking structure shall also be constructed of the same building material as the proposed building. Samples and colors shall be submitted for review prior to Council action. Signage/Lighting All signage and lighting is proposed to be consistent with that approved and built with Phase 1. Prior to Council review, a detailed signage and lighting plan shall be submitted for review. Cabriole Center 4 March 10, 1989 .7 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Due to the amount of revision required to the current plans in order to conform with the originally approved plans, Staff would recommend that this item be continued for thirty days to allow the proponent time to complete the following revisions: 1. Revise the grading plan to eliminate all grading below the 852 contour elevation. 2. Revise the plans to depict the relocation of the building as originally approved. 3. Revise the landscape plan to locate all plant material above the 844 contour elevation. Implement the approved landscape plan. On the other hand, if the Planning Commission does not feel that a 30 day continuance would allow the proponent enough time to complete the revisions, then the appropriate action would be to close the public hearing and return the plans to the proponent. 3 Planning Commission Minutes 4 March 13, 1989 ✓B• CABR_IOLECENTER, by Hansen, Thorp, Pellinen, Olson, Inc. Request for Zoning District Amendment within the Office District on 10.3 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Preliminary Plat of 10.3 acres into 2 lots for construction of a 65,000 square foot office building. Location: South of I-494 and West 78th Street, and north of Anderson Lakes. Joe Ryan, representing the Lexington Company, stated that the company had purchased the Cabriole Center Phase I in 1985 from the original developer of the project. Ryan 11 3 Planning Commission Minutes 5 March 13, 1989 noted that the request was for a Preliminary Plat and Site Plan approval per the direction from City Staff. Ryan believed that the Site Plan for Phase II would be in compliance with the original Developer's Agreement of 1978 established between the City and Sutherland Corporation. Ryan stated that the goals of the proponent were to be sensitive to the concerns of the Bloomington residents and to keep within the Developer's Agreement guidelines. The four-story building which reduced to two-stories on the east side was designed to best fit the contours of the land. In the development of the building design and location the proponent had taken into consideration the existing vegetation in the front of the building, materials which would compliment the existing building and the introduction of an open atrium, which contained three levels on the lake side of the building. The exterior material to be used would be an exposed granite aggregate. Ryan noted that Staff had expressed a concern regarding the layout of the building; however, he believed the building layout was sensitive to the topography of the land, the trees, and the lake. Ryan stated that the project is preliminary in design. He added that a start date had not been determined; however, based on discussions with prospective tenants, construction could begin within 12 to 18 months. Enger reported that the proponent desired to split the parcel in order to be able to market the Phase II parcel, and to obtain a Site Plan approval based on the plans presented tonight; however, if the final plans changed substantially the proponent was aware that a return to the Planning Commission would be required. Enger added that if the Planning Commission was not comfortable approving the Phase II Site Plan, the proponent would desire the subdivision request to be considered. Enger stated that Staff was concerned with the present Site Plan because the building was being moved 80' closer to the Bloomington residents and the lake. Staff would suggest that if the Planning Commission approved the Site Plan that the proponent work further with Staff and the neighbors. Enger stated that if the Planning Commission approved the Preliminary Plat the following conditions were recommended: 1. Developer shall move immediately to bring the existing plan into conformance with Developer's Agreement to the degree possible. 2. Developer shall begin discussions immediately with the residents in Bloomington to mitigate their concerns regarding this proposed development. 3. Developer shall agree to site plan review according to City Code requirements prior to any Planning Commission Minutes 6 March 13, 1989 building permit issuance for Phase II of the Cabriole Center. 4. Developer shall draft all necessary cross parking and cross access easements prior to final plat review by the City Council. 5. Developer shall agree to a restriction on the vacant lot created to provide for all necessary permanent parking for the existing Phase I building and to provide all necessary parking for Phase II in a parking structure. 6. Developer shall proceed immediately to the Board of Appeals for review of variances for setback to lot line and parking off-site. Enger noted that a height variance had been given in the original request to allow a 45 foot height; however, a small percentage of the existing building was 52 foot in height, which would mean the existing building was in non- compliance with zoning ordinances. Dale Hubred, 8056 Ensign Road, Bloomington, stated that he had lived in his home since 1978 and had been concerned with :he Cabriole project from the beginning. Hubred said that the building for Phase I was to be a smaller building than what was constructed. He added that the 50 trees to be transplanted as a buffer between his property and the Phase I building were not taken care of and consequently the majority of them had died. Hubred believed that the Phase I building was very plain and was concerned that the Phase II building would not blend in well with the existing facility. Hubred suggested the establishment of covenants to provide evergreens to be planted to screen the garage. Hubred said that the Phase II building would not have a view of the lake, but would be looking directing into his yard. Hubred believed that the present berming was not adequate because it was planted at the bottom of the hill and the majority of the vegetation had died. Hubred was concerned about the City giving the proponent permission to build without any definite commitment to build until a firm tenant was found. Hubred did not want to see the property subdivided. He believed the property had been mismanaged from the beginning. Ryan stated that he appreciated the residents concerns related to Phase I and added that it was the proponents intent to work with the residents and the City regarding the concerns. He said that the model represented what the proponent wished to build and added that the proponent's intent was to be a part of the community on a long term basis. Enger shared the residents frustration with the original development; however, because of the new tree replacement ordinance and site plan review ordinance the developer / Planning Commission Minutes 7 March 13, 1989 would be held accountable to insure that the required amount of trees survived and that if the plan varied substantially or if the project was not constructed within the two year limit it would require additional review by the City. Anderson stated that he was uncomfortable with this proposal because of the controversial history of Phase I and that a neighborhood meeting had not been held recently. Ryan replied that a neighborhood meeting had been held approximately a year ago and the proponent had meet with the City of Bloomington regarding a drainage easement. Ruebling stated that the splitting of the property presented several complicated issues. He believed that the exterior of Phase I was bland but was concerned that the proposed exterior materials for Phase II would be too much of a contrast and recommended the proponent try to obtain consistency rather than contrast. Ruebling believed the curve of the existing building was attractive and recommended smoothing out the angles of Phase II to blend in with Phase I. Ruebling was concerned about the appearance of the building mass if moved 80 feet closer to the Bloomington residents. Dodge asked if the Planning Commission could request that the landscaping, berming, and screening for Phase I be upgraded as part of the conditions for Phase II. Enger replied that the Planning Commission could recommend that Phase I be brought into conformance with the original Developers Agreement. Enger noted that the issue for the Planning Commission to consider was if it was comfortable approving a site plan with the information presented tonight or if it preferred to wait until the proponent had a definite tenant. Sandstad asked what type of notification had been given to the residents. Enger replied that approximately 60 notices had been mailed out and notice published in the newspaper. Sandstad asked if Staff had received any other comments from residents. Enger replied that a couple of the residents had come into the office to look at the plans; however, no comments were made in writing. Sandstad said he would be comfortable approving the Plat; however, he agreed that Phase I should be brought into compliance with the Developers Agreement. Hubred asked how close the proposed building would come to the Bloomington property. Ryan replied within 35 feet. Hubred asked how the parking lots would be split if the property was subdivided. Hubred believed the property needed to remain as one parcel. II �� Planning Commission Minutes 8 March 13, 1989 Anderson asked if 35 feet would be within the City's height setback requirement. Enger replied that the 35 foot setback was in conformance with the existing City Code. An ordinance related to the exact proportion had not been developed at this time. Enger added that it had been suggested to double the setback to the lot line. Anderson believed the Planning Commission should have more information especially regarding the subdivision of the lots and parking lot requirements. Ruebling stated that he would favor the project if it were more consistent with the original plan. Ruebling did not see a rationale for the building being moved 80 feet closer to the Bloomington properties and the lake. Dodge asked if Phase II never came about would the City gain control again if the subdivision were approved. Enger noted that Staff had advised the proponent that in order for the City to consider a subdivision of the property, a rationale would need to be established. Enger said that presenting this speculative plan had placed the proponent in a difficult position. Enger added that he was not sure how strong the City's position would be if constructionthe property was subdivided related requiring r the oftheparking deck on PhaseIItogserve Phase I. Anderson stated that he would like to see the proponent work more with Staff and believed the plan should be closer to the original proposal. Hallett suggested that the proponent meet again with the neighbors to try to develop a good faith relationship. Ruebling stated that he would be comfortable with asking the proponent to withdraw the proposal. After a discussion regarding the pros and cons of a continuance versus a withdrawal of the proposal, Ryan requested a 30 day continuance. He added he would prefer to have the architect available for the presentation. MOTION: Ruebling moved, seconded by Dodge to continue this item to the Planning Commission meeting on April 24, 1989 according to the Planning Commission discussions. Motion carried 5-0-0. V. OLD BUSINESS VI. NEW BUSINESS Ii'1y Planning Commission Minutes 9 April 10, 1989 proposed development site. Staff to co-ordinate the meeting. Motion carried 7-0-0. L/B. CABRIOLE CENTER, by Hansen, Thorp, Pellinen, Olson, Inc. Request for Zoning District Amendment within the Office District on 10.3 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Preliminary Plat of 10.3 acres into 2 lots for construction of a 65,000 square foot office building. Location: South of I-999 and West 78th Street, and north of Anderson Lakes. A continued public hearing. Franzen reported that this item had been continued at the Planning Commission's March 13, 1989 meeting and that no major changes had been made to the plans. The proponent had withdrawn the zoning request; however, would like to proceed with the request for approval of the Preliminary Plat subdivided into 2 lots. Joe Ryan, representing Lexington Company, stated that the request for the subdivision of the property between the lot lines for Phase I and Phase II. The proponent was not prepared to address the neighbors and Planning Commission's concerns related to the building design for Phase II. The rationale for the subdivision was to allow adequate time to study Phase II and to re-evaluate the design of the building proposed for Phase II. The subdivision of the property would allow financing { alternatives. Ryan stated that the major concern raised against the subdivision of the property at the last Planning Commission meeting was the parking lot requirements. Ryan proposed a cross-parking easement agreement. Ryan concluded by stating that he was not requesting a revision to the Developers Agreement, only to separate the property into two lots. Anderson asked Ryan if the proponent had met with the residents since the last Planning Commission meeting to discuss the concerns regarding the commitments not upheld with the development of Phase I related to landscaping. Ryan replied that the proponent had not met with the residents at this time. He added that Phase I had been developed approximately 10 years ago and that Lexington Company had only been involved for the past 9 years. Lexington Company had not addressed the issues created by the former developer. Franzen stated that the question was whether the Planning Commission was comfortable with approving the Preliminary Plat with the Site Plan to be worked out in the future. There were several open-ended questions which remained unresolved.. Franzen questioned if the Preliminary Plat were approved for subdivision would the City necessarily be working with Lexington Company in the future or would the property be sold to another developer. Franzen I!`IJ Planning Commission Minutes 10 April 10, 1989 questioned what controls the City might lose if the subdivision was approved. Sandstad asked if it would be appropriate to include a time frame condition to bring Phase I into compliance with the Developers Agreement. Franzen recommended that Staff • consult the City Attorney. Franzen commented that the proponent wished to keep all its options open. The proponent did not have definite plans for the property at this time, while Staff would be more comfortable having more control. Ruebling stated that he was hesitant to ask the proponent to correct problems created by the former developer in order to receive approval for the Preliminary Plat. Ruebling was more concerned with the loss of control over the implementation of the City's policies. He believed a decision was complicated because of the cross-parking, cross easements, and the fact that Phase I would have no parking. Anderson asked exactly what controls would the City lose. Franzen replied that with the current Site Plan Ordinance the City would have more control than in the past. Ruebling asked if the City could take steps to require compliance with the Developers Agreement. Franzen replied that the City could state specific conditions under which the second site could develop; the Developers Agreement could be rewritten to require that the concerns of the neighbors and the Planning Commission be addressed to bring both sites into compliance with the Developers Agreement. Dale Hubred, 805G Ensign Road, Bloomington, stated that he was concerned about the property being subdivided and Phase II being sold to another developer, which would not work with the Phase I developer. The building location could be changed. The neighbors were afraid because of the past history of this project. Hubred said that the site had been graded for the building to be constructed together. Hubred asked if there was any way for the City to keep the two lots tied together and require that the developer work with the neighbors. Sandstad stated that the two lots would be legally connected through easements. Franzen suggested asking the City Attorney if it would be appropriate to have the Developers Agreement run with the property, which would make the owner of the property responsible to uphold the City's conditions. t IL?! • Planning Commission Minutes ii April 10, 1989 Ruebling stated that the cross-parking easement would tie the properties together. He added that the Fidnning Commission and Staff historically requested all developers to work with the neighbors and that major issues were resolved before the Planning Commission would approve a project. . Anderson stated that it would be difficult to enforce the consistency of the architectural design if the property was subdivided. Hubred stated that the Environmental Quality Control Board had worked on the original project and was concerned that the City not lose anything already established by that Board. Ryan reiterated that the main reason for the request was for the flexibility of financing. Fell stated that he was concerned about the control being lost by the City, that the Planning Commission was possibly overlooking some aspect. He encouraged review by the City Attorney before proceeding. Ruebling asked if the PUD would change. Franzen replied no. Ruebling concurred with Fell that the Planning Commission needed to review this carefully before proceeding and supported the recommendation for clarification by the City Attorney. Dodge stated that the Planning Commission should not proceed if there was concern about losing control of the project. Fell asked Franzen if Item 1 of the proposed Motion 2 in the Staff report was specific enough in reference to the wording "to the degree possible". Franzen noted that the building for Phase I was not in compliance with City Code and would require a variance. He added that the City needed to look at its legal controls without creating other problems. Anderson stated that this was a financial issue on the part of the proponent and added that this was not an uncommon request. Dodge requested clarification; if the Preliminary Plat was approved Phase I would require off-site parking and the building height for Phase II would require a variance, which would not be required if the property remained as one parcel. Franzen replied that the Board of Appeals would have to approve the height variance in order for Phase II of the project to proceed. • ,,1 • Planning Commission Minutes 12 April 10, 1989 MOTION 1: Anderson moved, seconded by Ruebling to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0-0. MOTTON .. Ruebling moved, seconded by Sandstad to accept, without prejudice, the withdrawal of the zoning district amendment of Cabriole Center at this time. Further, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Lexington Properties for preliminary plat of Cabriole Center, based on plans and written materials dated March 6, 1989, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated March 10, 1989, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Developer shall move immediately to bring the existing plan into conformance with requirements of the existing Developer's Agreement on the property to the degree possible. 2. Developer shall begin discussions immediately with the residents in Bloomington to mitigate their concerns regarding this proposed development. 3. Developer shall agree to site plan review according to City Code requirements prior to any building permit issuance for Phase II of the Cabriole Center. 4. Developer shall draft all necessary cross parking and cross access easements prior to final plat review by the City Council. 5. Developer shall agree to a restriction on the vacant lot created to provide for all necessary permanent parking for the existing Phase I building and to provide all necessary parking for Phase II in a parking structure. 6. Developer shall proceed immediately to the Board of Appeals for review of variances for setback to lot line, parking off-site, and height variance for the building on Phase I. 7. Developer shall agree to return to the Planning Commission with a Development Proposal in compliance with the current PUD or an amendment to the PUD. 8. Prior to City Council action Staff request the City Attorney to review this proposal and to identify any other restrictions necessary to maintain the normal amount of control for the City. Anderson asked if any Eden Prairie residents would be affected by this project. Uram replied no. Motion carried 7-0-0. • li`l�j James Development Company James L.Ostenson 7808 Creekridge Circle President Suite 200 uiucw=g on,Minnesota 55435 April 27, 1989 8121941-7805 Mayor Gary Peterson City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Eden Prairie Developer's Forum Dear Mayor Peterson: We wanted to take this opportunity to update you and other members of the City Council on the status of the Eden Prairie Developer's Forum. As you know, the Developer's Forum was initiated just over one year ago with the desired intent of creating a format in which the active developers in Eden Prairie, city staff and city council could come together and discuss the programs and policies of mutual interest. During the first year, we had five meetings an presentations were given on a range of subjects including the tree preservation policy, building permits, real estate taxes and transportation. All of these programs were presented by members of the city staff, whose cooperation was greatly appreciated. Now, as we approach our second year, we would like to further update the city council on our progress and solicit ideas for new programs. We feel that the Developer's Forum and city staff, working together, can enhance the relationship with the city council and help facilitate the planning process in Eden Prairie. In conclusion, we would appreciate the opportunity to meet, at your earliest convenience, with the City Council either at a special meeting or at the end of one of your regularly scheduled agendas. Thank you for your kind consideration of this matter and please contact us if you have any questions. Si cceAA V1re NN�}'� 1,1V 7T' ' 1 . Ji Ostenson 1 Ron Krueger / cc: Char Johnson f Marge Fredericks JO/RK/nr I./ • - MEMORANDUM - TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jeffrey Johnson Engineering Technicia DATE: May 11, 1989 RE: Land Alteration for Trammell Crow Company Trammell Crow Company has requested City Council approval of a land alteration permit to begin earth work operations on the McCartney property located West of Washington Avenue and South of West 76th Street. Please refer to the attached letter dated May 2, 1989 and the attached plans for detailed information of this request, also please refer to Don Uram's memo, attached, regarding planning and zoning issues. There is an existing residence on the site proposed for demolition with this application. Prior to granting of any permit on the site, the proponent would have to abandon any existing well and septic systems in conformance with City and State Standards. There are several governmental agencies that would have permitting authority with respect to this application, mainly; the Department of Natural Resources, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. Prior to issuance of grading permit by the City, the applicant shall secure a permit from each of the said agencies. If the City Council concurs with the applicant's request and grants a land alteration permit, Staff would recommend that applicant shall submit to the City a financial guarantee (with value to be determined) that would insure that if the site were not developed, the trees removed would be replaced and the site would be fully restored. JJ:ssa t { llZ 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: May 12, 1989 RE: Land Alteration Permit for McCartney Site Proposed Nine-Mile Creek Business Center - Trammell Crow Trammell Crow Company has submitted an application for early grading permit for the import of approximately 80,000 cubic yards to the site on West 76th Street. This property is bordered on the east by the Portnoy's Addition and on the west by Technology Park 4th Addition. The property includes a portion of Nine-Mile Creek which lies approximately 300 feet south from the proposed grading limits. The proposal is to fill the McCartney piece, which has been subject to a mining operation over the past years, with fill to allow for the creation of three building pads. The grading operation will fill to the approximate edge of the wetland, conforming with the Shoreland Ordinance. The filling and grading operation on this site would involve the elimination of the hill adjacent West 76th Street from an elevation of approximately 900, to a finished floor building elevation of approximately 860. The cut approximates 40 feet. Because the entire site is being graded, all existing trees will be lost. Based upon a tree inventory submitted by Trammell Crow's engineers, Staff has calculated a total significant tree loss of 322 caliper inches. Because no development proposal had been submitted at that time, it is important that as part of the restoration of the site, if the project does not proceed, the proponent provide a tree replacement plan for 322 caliper inches and a bond guaranteeing that the trees will be planted. The tree replacement plan and bond must be submitted as part of the restoration requirements for this site, prior to any grading permit issuance. The proposal indicates three future office/warehouse building pads on the site. It has been indicated that Trammell Crow will be proceeding through the land development process with the City of Eden Prairie in the near future. The plans as submitted do not indicate any specific details regarding the building square footage, number of parking stalls, location of loading facilities, method of screening etc... The detailed plans when submitted, will indicate these items and will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council as part of the land development process. Finally, because this property is located adjacent to Nine-Mile Creek, provisions of the Shoreland Ordinance will apply. As part of the detailed review of the project these items will be addressed in the Staff Report for the Planning Commission and City Council. In addition, because of its location adjacent Nine-Mile Creek, the proponent must receive permits from the DNR, the Watershed District, and the Army Corps of Engineers. Any City approval for building construction would be contingent upon receiving these permits.