HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 09/05/1989AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
'IuESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 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 &
Natural Resources Robert Lambert, Director
of Public Works Gene Dietz, and Recording
Secretary Deb Edlund
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
II. MINUTES OF JOINT CITY COUNCIL/HUMAN RIGHTS & SERVICES COMMISSION
MEETING HELD TUESDAY AUGUST 29 1989
I. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk's License List
B. Change Order No. 1 for Franlo Park Tennis Courts
C. Resolution Urging Minnesota's Congressional Delegation to
Sponsor and Support Plastics Recycling Measures (Resolution
No. 89-1g7j
D. Change Order No. 1 for Amphitheater Construction at Staring Lake
Park
E. Final Plat Approval of Eden Prairie Center 6th Addition (located
at the northeast corner of TH 169 and Prairie Center Drive)
Resolution No. 89:1W —
F. Resolution Authorizing Amendment No. 2 to the Cooperative
Agreement (No. 64140) for an EIS and Design Study Report for
T.H. ar(Resolution No. 89-077
G. Approve Supplement No. 1 to Agreement No. 64918 with MnDOT for
D esign at TH 5 between CSAH 4 and CSAH 17 —TRiiolution No. 89-193)
H. Approve Petition to Nine Mile Creek Watershed District for
Smetana Lake Outlet ImprovemenIT —TResolution N(7)787379-87
Page 2064
Page 2065
Page 2066
Page 2069
Page 2071
Page 2073
Page 2075
Page 2083
Page 2092
City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,September 5, 1989
I. PRAIRIE GREEN MINI-STORAGE by Prairie Green Associates. Adoption
of Resolution No. 89-195, Denial of Ordinance No. 52-88 for Zoning
District Amendment within 1-2 Zoning District on 0.69 acres and
attendent requests for Preliminary Plat of 7.2 acres into 2 lots
for construction of 8,575 square feet of additional storage space.
Location: East of County Road #4, South of Terrey Pine Drive.
(Resolution #89-195 - Denial of Zoning)
J. FAIRFIELD PHASES 2 THROUGH 6 by Tandem Properties. 2nd Reading of
Ordinance No. 59-88-PUD-15-88, Planned Unit Development District
Review, with waivers, and underlying Zoning District Change from
Rural to R1-9.5 on 92.7 acres and from Rural to R1-13.5 on 53.6
acres; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Fairfield Phases 2 -
6; and Adoption of Resolution No. 89-196, Authorizing Summary of
Ordinance #59-88-PUD-18-88 and Ordering Publication of Said
Summary. 148.2 acres into 299 single family lots, 28 outlots and
road right-of-way. Location: West of County Road #4, south of
Scenic Heights Road, east of Chicago and Northwesern Railroad.
(Ordinance No. 59-88-PUD-15-88 - PUD District and Rezoning;
Resolution No. 89-196 - Authorizing Summary and Publication)
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. EDEN PRAIRIE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT (FESTIVAL CENTRE) by Curt Johnson
Properties. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment
and Planned Unit Development District Review on 16.2 acres with
waivers, Zoning District Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser Zoning
District on 16.2 acres and Site Plan Review on 16.2 acres for
development of a 153,756 square foot commercial, retail and
entertainment complex. Location: East of Plaza Drive and south of
Valley View Road. (Resolution No. 89-194 - PUD Concept Amendment
to Overall Factory Outlet Center PUD; Ordinance No. 31-89-PUD-7-89
- PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment within C-Reg-
Ser District)
B. CARDINAL CREEK 3RD ADDITION by GAC Partners. Request for a Zoning
District Change from R1-13.5 to RM-6.5 on 1.21 acres for
development of three twinhome lots. Location: 6855-59, 6871-75,
6887-91 Stonewood Court. (Ordinance No. 32-89 - Rezoning)
C. A TO Z RENTAL AND EDEN PRAIRIE APPLIANCE by Rome Development.
Request for Zoning District Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser Zoning
District on 1.67 acres with variance, Site Plan Review on 1.67
acres with variances, Site Plan Review on 1.67 acres for
construction of a 21,014 square foot commercial facility.
Location: South of Valley View Road, west of Plaza Drive.
(Ordinance No. 33-89 - Zoning District Amendment within C-Reg-Ser
District)
D. VACATION 89-11 VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS WITHIN
A PORTION OF DONNAY'S ROUND LAKE ESTATE3 2ND ADDITION (Resolution
No. 89-191T
E. VACATION 49112_,_ VACATION OF TEMPORARY EASEMENT FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS PURPOSES WITHIN LOT riLNK 4 CEDAR RIDGE ESTATES Resolution
No. 89-1921----
Page 2095
Page 2097
Page 2112
Page 2130
Page 2132
Page 2138
Page 2139
City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,September 5, 1989
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
A. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 89-27, Amendment to City Code Chapter
9 Section 9.40, Relating to the Discharge of Firearms
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. EDEN PRAIRIE FUNERAL HOME by Marcus Corporation. Appeal from
Decision of Board of Appeals Regarding Variance Request for Lot
Size, Lot Depth, and Lot Width within Community Commercial
District. Location: South of Terrey Pine Drive, west of County
Road #4.
B. BRADLEY KUYPER. Appeal from Decision of Board of Appeals
Regarding Variance Request for Rear Yard Setback within R1-13.5
District. Location: 16534 South Manor Road.
VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
IX. APPOINTMENTS
X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
B. Report of City Manager
1. Reschedule Joint City Council/Historial & Cultural Commission
meeting from September 26, 1989 to November 14 1989
2. Reschedule Joint City Council/Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Commission meeting from September 12 1989 to
September 26 1989
3. Set Special City Council Date for Tuesday, October 24,, 1989
to Review Lawful Gambling Committee Report and to Discuss
Capital Improvement Projects
4. City Hall Lease Renewal
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
G. Report of Finance Director
XI. NEW BUSINESS
I. ADJOURNMENT
Page 2140
Page 2141
Page 2148
Page 2169
Page 2185
•
MINUTES
JOINT MEETING
CITY COUNCIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS AND SERVICES COMMISSION
TUESDAY, AUGUST 29, 1989
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COMMISSION MEMBERS:
COMMISSION STAFF:
7:30 P.M. - COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean
Harris, Patricia Pidcock and Douglas Tenpas
Gail Leipold - Chair, Bette Anderson, William
Jackson, Peg Johnson, Gary Perkins, and
Melanie Voris
Natalie Swaggert, Director of Human Resources
and Services, Pat Barker, and Karen Michael,
Recording Secretary
I. ROLL CALL
Council members Jean Harris and Patricia Pidcock were absent.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Tenpas, to approve the Agenda as
published. Motion carried unanimously.
III. INTRODUCTIONS
Director of Human Resources and Services introduced members of the Human
Rights and Services Commission and noted areas of interest and expertise
of each member.
IV. MISSION
Commission Chair Leipold stated that the Commission was a working
commission using sub-committees to focus on specific goals. Leipold said
the Commission was proud of its accomplishments and would continue to be
advocates for those who live and work in Eden Prairie.
V. GOALS
A. Funding
Gary Perkins gave an overview of the funding process and reviewed the
criteria used in determining funding. The forms used in the process
were explained. Perkins addressed how the Commission made its
recommendation to the Council for funding and the use of the
contingency fund. The Commission's on-going monitoring of agencies
was also outlined.
B. Human Services Coordinating Council
Peg Johnson, the Commission's representative on the Human Services
Coordinating Council, briefly reviewed the history of the Council and
noted the representation on the Council. She called attention to the
Mission Statement which was included in the packets. The Council has
looked into the need for and the possibility of United Way funding
for a human services center. She reported that the Council's current
issues are focusing on the needs of low-income residents and child
care. Johnson called attention to the joint meeting of the Human
Services Coordinating Council and the Human Rights and Services
Commission to be held on October 30th in the School Board Room in the
School Administration Building. At that time there will be a
presentation by the Hennepin County Health Department. Johnson noted
that this joint Commission/Council meeting is an annual event.
Pat Barker reported that a survey is being conducted on the income
basis used to determine sliding fee scales in the City. As a part of
that survey it was learned that 8% of the student lunches served last
year by the school district were subsidized. Council member Anderson
asked if the school district has a breakfast program. No one was
aware of one being offered at this time.
Mayor Peterson asked that the City Council be sent notices of the
October 30th joint meeting.
C. Transportation
Virginia Gartner said the Commission was increasing its awareness of
transportation problems in Eden Prairie as well as surrounding
communities. Beverley Miller, Southwest Metro Transit Administrator,
is scheduled to speak to the Commission during the coming year. The
transportation issue was an important aspect in the review of the
Elim Homes project. Gartner stated that the South Hennepin Human
Services Council is currently conducting a transportation survey.
Mayor Peterson asked if this survey would also examine the unmet
needs of the handicapped. Swaggert said she believed the survey
would cover all aspects of transportation.
D. Communication
Bette Anderson addressed the internal and external communication
networks. She called attention to the roles Commission members play
in other organizations and noted that Commission members have sought
out positions on other boards and commissions to broaden the
knowledge and influence of the Commission. Commission members have
conducted on-site visits this past year to the agencies funded and
have found these visits to be most helpful. Mayor Peterson asked why
the Commission was represented on Pride Institute's Board and not on
the Board of Humphrey Residents or Welcome Home. Pride Institute had
requested that a Commission member serve on its board.
E. No-Fault Grievance Training
Gail Leipold reported that seven of the nine Commission members have
been trained in the no-fault grievance process, the remaining two
members will be trained this fall. The Commission has a "Worksharing
Agreement" with the Department of Human Rights which outlines the
roles each will play. This year the Commission has submitted news
articles to local newspapers which explained the no-fault grievance
process; presentations have been made to various civic organizations;
and members are developing a bulletin board piece which will further
advertise the process. Mayor Peterson asked if people other than
Commission members can be trained in the process; Leipold said that
is not possible under the Worksharing Agreement.
F. Hennepin County
Kent Barker said that $500 million was spent on human services by
Hennepin County this last year. Because Eden Prairie has
approximately 4% of the County's population, it would seem that $20
million should be allocated to Eden Prairie's needs. Even though
human service needs seem to be less in Eden Prairie, the County does
spend about $12 million for AFDC, general assistance, medical
assistance, child protection, and family counseling. Barker related
that Hennepin County now has an intake worker at the PROP offices two
days each week to service Eden Prairie residents. He also called
attention to the fact that a representative from Hennepin County's
Health Department will be at the October 30th Joint Meeting with the
Human Service Coordinating Council.
Doug Tenpas asked if there were statistics available regarding the
number of families in Eden Prairie receiving assistance from the
County. Johnson said that Commission has figures as of October 1988
at which time there were 118 families receiving AFDC, 34 receiving
General Assistance, 119 receiving Medical Assistance, and 141
receiving food stamps.
G. Human Rights
Bill Jackson said that the Commission had been represented at a
recent dinner held by the NAACP and that the Commission had as a
speaker early last year Frank Taylor, President of the Southwest Area
Branch of the NAACP. The Commission has a sub-committee which will
meet next week to work on plans for a Martin Luther King celebration
on January 21, 1990. Jackson and Michael attended a meeting in
Bloomington recently at which time representatives from Edina,
Richfield, and Eden Prairie heard about Bloomington's successful
celebration last January. Jackson noted that Gary Gorman,
representing the State Department of Human Rights, will speak to the
Commission at its September meeting.
Mayor Peterson asked if the NAACP is reaching out to minority groups.
Jackson said that the Southwest Area Branch seems to be reaching out
to corporate executives and those in power such as mayors and council
members; this is not necessarily the way the organization does things
at the national level.
2ogie
H. Rental Code
Virginia Gartner stated that this was a project undertaken by the
Commission in about 1985. Kevin Schmieg, Director of Facilities,
Inspections & Safety, is scheduled to make a presentation to the
Commission this Fall. The questions posed to the City are usually
those which would not be covered under a rental code; many of the
questions can be addressed by referring to the Uniform Building Code.
I. Senior Services
Melanie Voris said that the Commission was increasing its knowledge
of services and programs offered to seniors. Burin .; the past year
Sandy Werts and Willie Emry had made presentations, a visit was made
to the Senior Outreach offices, Commission members made a
presentation on the no-fault grievance process at the Senior Center,
the Commission supported a program whereby a Senior Outreach worker
was present at the Senior Center three days each week; support was
given for strengthening the level of service provided by the H.O.M.E.
program, the Elim Shores project was reviewed, and a sub-committee
was established to research other senior programs.
Dick Anderson suggested that this is an area where there could be
more coordination between the seniors and the recreation staff. He
said he is especially concerned about those seniors who find
themselves without a partner and yet willing to do things. He said
it is particularly important to reach out to that population. Voris
said there is also a fear on the part of seniors to ask for help
because they are afraid of losing their homes.
M. Development Proposals
Peter Iversen said that a sub-committee had been formed to review the
Elim Shores project; once the project is completed, Commission
members want to schedule a tour. He said the Commission would like
to be viewed as a resource to the Council. He thanked the City staff
for its help in preparing Commission members to carry out their role.
VI. DISCUSSION
Leipold asked the Council if the Commission was fulfilling its charge.
The Mayor said it was and expressed its thanks to the Commission members
for an excellent presentation. Tenpas stated he had recently done a
"ride along" with the Police Department and was able to see some of the
community's needs at that time; he said he was impressed with the
Commission members involvement and what the Commission is doing in the
community.
Leipold said there are some very good services available and it is the
Commission's desire to bring the best of those to Eden Prairie. Mayor
Peterson said he was impressed with the organizational structure of the
Commission and how it is looking at the meeting the needs of the
residents. He said he wished there was a way for all the residents of
Eden Prairie to know what this Commission does.
2J6JC,
Tenpas said if the people in Eden Prairie were aware of how many Eden
Prairie residents are in need maybe the checkbooks would open and there
would be more money available to serve the needs of Eden Prairie
residents.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Tenpas moved, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn the meeting at
9:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
ALIO
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
September 5, 1989
CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.)
Alert Electric, Inc.
Proco Builders
CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY)
Terry W. Anderson
Freund Construction, Inc.
Lawrence L.Gilmer Builder
Gorco Construction Co.
Greenskeeper
Houghton Construction, Inc.
Rannow Contracting, Inc.
Stenbeck Builders
PLUMBING
City View Plumbing & Heating
Hanson-Kleven Plumbing
Holm Brothers Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
Pride Plumbing Services
GAS FITTER
Countryside Heating & Cooling Services
Holm Brothers Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
HEATING & VENTILATING
Countryside Heating & Cooling Services
Holm Brothers Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
J & R Refrigeration
These licenses have been approved by the department h
e
a
d
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
the licensed activity.
Pat Solle
Licensing
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
THUR: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources
FROM: Barbara Penning Cross, Landscape Architect...,
DATE: August 30, 1989
SUBJECT: Change Order Authorization for Tennis Court Construction
at Franlo Park
On June 6, 1989, the City Council awarded the contract for tennis
court construction to Finley Bros Enterprises. The contract for
$42,227 was to pave, color coat and stripe two tennis courts at
Franlo Park and two tennis courts at Wyndham Knoll Park. The base
for both sets of tennis courts was assumed to be ready for paving
and not part of the original contract. Mr. Finley found the base
at Franlo, which had been prepared by a contractor several years
ago, was about 50% too steep. The City crews were not able to do
the work in a timely fashion, so a Change Order was issued for him
to correct the base. Elevations were cut and additional fill and
granular base was brought in to correct the slopes. Topsoil was
also brought in to backfill where the grades had been raised.
Prices for materials were quoted as follows:
granular fill $5 per ton
limestone base rock $7.30 per ton
black topsoil $5 per ton
These prices all included hauling to the site and were comparable
to Staring Lake bid prices.
The total project cost with the Change Order is $49,227. The
additional money will come from cash park fees.
BPC:mdd
/ / AJ;Ai
P.O. NO.
BILL TO: City of Eden Prairie
ysoo Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, En. 55344
JosNa TC-89-070
Barb Cross
937-2262
Q FINLEY BROS. ENTERPRISES
5801 Baker Road Minnetonka, Mn. 55345
Telephone: 812-933-8272
DATE 8-14-89]
JOB NAME: 1989 Tennis Courts at
Wyndham Knoll & Franlo Parks
INVNO. 3417
Tennis Court & Hardcourt Construction 1989. K 28 K 29
Base Bid ( Original Contract Amount ) ... 42,227.00
Change Order Add No. 1 Franlo sub base ... 7,000.00
Total this invoice
$ 49,227.00
INVOICE
Put due accounts ant subject to a Gannon charge of lab% pm month (HM per annum)
The above noted work is to be billed as an add item to the
1989 Tennis Court Construction work already under contract.
Subgrade improvemqnts/corrections at $7,000.00.
Wpmji.tqd,
Raymond %. Finley
Partner
•TENNIs t A )1 tiff DLSIGN dnd CONS7RUCTION • It ESI %FM:1M • ACOSSORIES
July 10, 1989
City fo Eden Prairie
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344-3677
Ms. Barbara Cross
Re: 1989 Tennis Court Improvements for:
Wyndam Knoll Park & Franlo Park
Dear Ms. Cross;
Existing grades for the Class #2 crushed rock base material
show the subgrade to be sloped about 50% too steep.
We propose to do the the following work to correct the
subgrade deficency: for Franlo Park Tennis Courts & H.S.
1. Install approx. 400 ton granular fill leveling wedge.
2. Cut area on hard court to proper elevation.
3. Install approx. 650 ton Class #2 crushed limestone
base.
4. Install approx. 120 Cu. yds. top soil perimeter back fill
( lateral support ) for East Tennis Court area.
Note: contractor does not include any seeding or sodding work
as part of this proposal.
. FINLEY BROS. ENTERPRISES
5801 Raker Road Minnetonka, Mn. 55345
16)
Telephone: 612-933-8272
2.jg
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Waste Management Commission
SUBJECT: Resolution urging Minnesota's Congressional delegation
to sponsor and support plastics recycling measures
DATE: August 22, 1989
During its study of the proposed packaging ordinance, the Waste Management
Commission has had an opportunity to become familiar with the effects of
plastics in the solid waste stream. For example, packaging makes up over
40 percent of mixed municipal solid waste, and food and beverage packaging
Is 75 percent of this amount. Plastic is growing rapidly as a packaging
material by displacing other types of material. Most types of plastics are
recyclable; in this sense, they are quite similar to other packaging
materials. Unlike glass, metal, and some types of paper, however,
opportunities and techniques to recycle plastics are not well-developed.
The Waste Management Commission believes that the national level is the
appropriate one to provide the incentives to recycle plastics. Plastics
are made of many different formulations of resins; it makes sense to
establish a national system of coding or labeling the type of plastic
something is made of and to avoid potentially 50 different identification
systems. In so doing, plastics could be more easily separated and reused.
Additionally, Congress should consider changes to the federal tax code
which would provide incentives to reuse plastics in manufacturing processes
and consumer purchasing patterns. Such a broad public approach would lead
to efficiencies in the recyclability of plastics because plastics recycling
is in its infancy.
On August 10, 1989, the Waste Management Commission considered a resolution
which would urge the Minnesota Congressional delegation to sponsor and
support measures which will expedite plastics recycling. Commission
members voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council adopt this
resolution in order to lend the City's voice to the growing demand for
responsible management of this component of solid waste.
Recommendation: The Commission recommends adoption of Resolution No. 89-
187.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 89-187
A RESOLUTION URGING THE MINNESOTA DELEGATION IN THE CONGRESS OF
THE UNITED STATES TO SPONSOR AND SUPPORT MEASURES TO EXPEDITE THE
RECYCLING OF PLASTICS
WHEREAS, the current mix of solid waste management practices is producin
g
widespread pollution problems of such magnitude that they constitute a c
r
i
s
i
s
;
a
n
d
WHEREAS, sanitary landfills are proven sources of groundwater polluti
o
n
a
n
d
n
e
w
solid waste incinerators may pollute the air; and
WHEREAS, responsible actions to address this dilemma are those which red
u
c
e
t
h
e
amount of solid waste to be buried in landfills and processed in inciner
a
t
o
r
s
;
a
n
d
WHEREAS, to accomplish these objectives, measures need to be taken to
m
a
x
i
m
i
z
e
the recyclability, reusability, or degradability of materials; and
WHEREAS, plastics are materials which constitute a significant compone
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
solid waste stream, and indeed are among the most voluminous wastes gener
a
t
e
d
t
o
d
a
y
;
and
WHEREAS, while plastics are in use in ever-increasing quantities, the
a
m
o
u
n
t
o
f
plastics reused or recycled remains a very small percentage of plastics
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d
;
a
n
d
WHEREAS, overall waste management strategies will be more effective if
p
l
a
s
t
i
c
s
can be more easily recycled and reused; and
WHEREAS, as the presence of plastic products and manufacturers is ubiqu
i
t
o
u
s
i
n
the nation, the ability to establish uniformity and to encourage the reus
e
a
n
d
recycling of plastics is most effectively addressed on a national level d
u
r
i
n
g
t
h
e
inception of handling post-consumer waste plastics;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden
P
r
a
i
r
i
e
,
Minnesota, that the Council urges the Congress of the United States t
o
e
n
a
c
t
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
to expedite the recycling of plastics. Congress should mandate a unif
o
r
m
s
y
s
t
e
m
t
o
identify the type of resin in plastic products in order to more easil
y
a
c
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
t
h
e
separation and reuse of different types of plastics; the system devise
d
b
y
t
h
e
Society of Plastics Industry should be the model used by Congress. Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
,
t
h
e
Congress should make changes in the federal Tax Code which will provid
e
i
n
c
e
n
t
i
v
e
s
t
o
reuse plastics in manufacturing processes and consumer purchasing patt
e
r
n
s
,
r
a
t
h
e
r
than to have continuation of regulations and practices which encourage
u
s
e
o
f
v
i
r
g
i
n
resins. The Minnesota Congressional delegation should demonstrate lea
d
e
r
s
h
i
p
i
n
t
h
i
s
area in order to safeguard our precious environment.
ADOPTED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL this 5th day of September, 1989
.
Mayor Gary D. Peterson
SEAL
John D. Frane, City Clerk
n r e-10
(1 I
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
THUR: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources
FROM: Barbara Penning Cross, Landscape ArchiteciIiI1/
DATE: August 30, 1989
SUBJECT: Change Order Authorization for Amphitheater Construction
at Staring Lake Park
Work at Staring Lake amphitheater and the improvements around the
building are progressing smoothly and are nearly completed.
Several Change Orders to the Staring Lake contract were necessary
and are explained as follows:
1. The small plaza in the rear of the building has had drainage
problems and maintenance problems since the shelter was built
8 years ago. Once the front of the building was improved with
a new concrete plaza, the problems at the rear of the building
were strikingly evident. The City already had a contractor on
site with a good bid for concrete work, so additional concrete
was laid behind the building expanding the area for seating and
correcting the maintenance problems.
2/3. The slopes around the amphitheater turned out to be much
steeper than originally anticipated. The slopes needed to
be more gradual in order for our park crews to maintain them
properly. Free fill was trucked in from the airport across
the street and the two additional dozers were required to
spread the fill to a more desirable grade.
4. Buried timbers, logs and rocks were found during grading. In
order for no settlement to take place as they decayed, the City
required that it be hauled away.
The original contract amount for the Staring Lake project was
$235,247.05. Unit prices for each line item were set before the
contract was signed. Quantities are then measured and payment is
based on the unit price. The above Change Orders have all been
done at prices locked in by the signed contract. The additional
money for these Change Orders will come from cash park fees.
BPC:mdd
ao
117 Hansen Thorp
I I Pellinen Olson Inc.
1 Consulting Engineers & Land Surveyors
CHANGE ORDER #1
K-13
STARING LAKE PARK
TO: City of Eden Prairie
Changes made for work performed in this contract:
NATURE OF CHANGES:
1. Concrete work behind shelter
2. Case dozer to place dirt
3. D4 dozer to place dirt
4. Hauling trash
ADJUSTMENTS TO CONTRACT COST:
1. Add labor & cost
2. Add labor & cost
3. Add labor & cost
4. Add labor & cost
Total Additions
$ 4,406.62
1,208.00
195.00
525.00
$ 6,334.62
(612) 829-0700 • 7565 Office Ridge Circle • Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3644
go'lg
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 89-188
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF
EDEN PRAIRIE CENTER 6TH ADDITION
WHEREAS, the plat of EDEN PRAIRIE CENTER 6TH ADDITION has been submitted in a
manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and
under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been
duly had thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the
regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and
ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE:
A. Plat approval request for EDEN PRAIRIE CENTER 6TH ADDITION is
approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City
Engineer's report on this plat dated AUGUST 30, 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 SEPTEMBER 5, 1989.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
ot)
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT
TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members
THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
Alan D. Gray, City Engineer
FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician
DATE: August 30, 1989
SUBJECT: Eden Prairie Center 6th Addition
PROPOSAL: The developers, Eden Square General Partnership, have r
e
q
u
e
s
t
e
d
City Council approval of the final plat of Eden Prairie
C
e
n
t
e
r
6
t
h
Addition, also known as Eden Square Shopping Center.
Located in the northeast quadrant of Prairie Center Drive and Trunk Highwa
y
1
6
9
The plat contains 11.72 acres consisting of three underlying pa
r
c
e
l
s
t
o
b
e
combined into one lot.
HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council May
2
,
1
9
8
9
per Resolution No. 89-84.
The Second Reading of Ordinance No. 5-89-PUD-3-89, Zoning Cod
e
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
within the Regional Service Commercial District was finall
y
r
e
a
d
a
n
d
approved at the City Council meeting held August 1, 1989.
The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report wa
s
e
x
e
c
u
t
e
d
November 7, 1988.
VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board
o
f
Appeals.
UTILITIES AND STREETS: All municipal utilities and walkways will be installed
throughout the plat in conformance with City Standards and the
requirements of the Developer's Agreement. All roadways necessary to service this property are currently in place.
PARK DEDICATION: The requirements for park dedication are covered in th
e
Developer's Agreement.
BONDING: Bonding must conform to City Code and the Developer's Agre
e
m
e
n
t
.
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Eden Prairie Cen
t
e
r
6th Addition subject to the requirements of this report, the
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
'
s
Agreement, and the following:
1. Receipt of Engineering Fee in the amount of $1,172.00.
JJ:ssa
cc: Eden Square Shopping Center Partnership
Westwood Planning and Engineering
7 q
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 89-197
SUPPLEMENT TO JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
T.H. 212 EIS/DESIGN STUDY REPORT
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota, Depart
m
e
n
t
o
f
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
,
t
h
e
M
e
t
r
o
p
o
l
i
t
a
n
Council, Carver County, Hennepin Count
y
,
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
o
f
C
h
a
n
h
a
s
s
e
n
,
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
o
f
Eden Prairie, and the City of Chaska, he
r
e
i
n
a
f
t
e
r
r
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
t
o
a
s
t
h
e
"
A
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
"
,
did enter into an agreement identified a
s
N
u
m
b
e
r
6
4
1
4
0
f
o
r
t
h
e
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
o
f
a
n
environmental impact statement and a
d
e
s
i
g
n
s
t
u
d
y
r
e
p
o
r
t
f
o
r
t
h
e
T
.
H
.
2
1
2
corridor;
WHEREAS, the Agencies did thereby agre
e
t
o
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
a
n
d
c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
e
i
n
t
h
e
preparation and completion of the T.H.
2
1
2
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
I
m
p
a
c
t
S
t
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
Design Study Report;
WHEREAS, it was determined that a cons
u
l
t
i
n
g
f
i
r
m
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
s
e
l
e
c
t
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
Agencies' Task Force and hired by Carver
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
t
o
p
r
e
p
a
r
e
t
h
e
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
Impact Statement and Design Study Report;
WHEREAS, a contract was executed wit
h
a
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
f
i
r
m
a
n
d
a
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
portion of the required scope of work ha
s
b
e
e
n
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
;
WHEREAS, due to changes in the original roadway corrid
o
r
c
o
n
c
e
p
t
,
d
a
t
a
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
to the consultant was no longer valid;
WHEREAS, several sites/structures along
t
h
e
c
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
a
r
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
m
o
r
e
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
for Historic Significance than originall
y
s
u
s
p
e
c
t
e
d
;
WHEREAS, the consultant has been request
e
d
t
o
m
a
k
e
t
h
e
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
c
o
r
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
the data, and to perform the necessary re
s
e
a
r
c
h
f
o
r
t
h
e
i
m
p
a
c
t
e
d
sites;
WHEREAS, it was agreed in Section 2.01 of
A
g
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
N
o
.
6
4
1
4
0
,
t
h
a
t
a
l
l
e
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
for the study exceeding $320,000 would
b
e
t
h
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
t
h
e
M
i
n
n
e
s
o
t
a
Department of Transportation;
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
h
a
s
r
e
v
i
e
w
e
d
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
costs to perform the additional services
a
n
d
h
a
v
e
f
o
u
n
d
t
h
e
c
o
s
t
s
t
o
b
e
f
a
i
r
and reasonable;
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
i
s
o
b
l
i
g
a
t
e
d
t
o
r
e
i
m
b
u
r
s
e
Carver County for necessary payments to
t
h
e
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
f
o
r
t
h
e
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
w
o
r
k
requested; and
Page 2 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. 89-197
WHEREAS, Supplement Number Two to Agreemen
t
N
o
.
6
4
1
4
0
f
o
r
a
m
e
n
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
m
a
x
i
m
u
m
contract amount to $495,000.00 and the Minne
s
o
t
a
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
o
f
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
'
s
portion of this amount to $295,000.00 has be
e
n
w
r
i
t
t
e
n
,
i
s
a
t
t
a
c
h
e
d
h
e
r
e
t
o
,
a
n
d
is made a part hereof.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of
E
d
e
n
P
r
a
i
r
i
e
t
h
a
t
S
u
p
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
N
u
m
b
e
r
Two, a part hereof, is approved, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor an
d
C
i
t
y
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
b
e
a
n
d
h
e
r
e
b
y
a
r
e
authorized to execute the Agreement in behalf
o
f
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
o
f
E
d
e
n
P
r
a
i
r
i
e
.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
5
,
1
9
8
9
.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
2 A06
ao7')
CONSULTANT AGREEMENTS
AMENDMENT TO SECTION
AGREEMENT
64140
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AGREEMENT FOR
TECHNICAL SERVICES
Supplement No. 2 to
Agreement No. 64140
The State of Minnesota,
Department of Transportation, and
The County of Carver
Re: T.H. 212 Environmental Impact Statement
SUPPLEMENTAL
ENGINEERING AGREEMENT NO. 2
THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT made and entered into b
y
a
n
d
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
t
h
e
State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation (
M
n
/
D
O
T
)
,
t
h
e
Metropolitan Council, Carver County, Hennepin Count
y
,
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
o
f
Chanhassen, the City of Eden Prairie, and the City
o
f
C
h
a
s
k
a
hereinafter referred to as the "Agencies".
W/TNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Agencies did enter into Agreement No. 6
4
1
4
0
a
n
d
Supplement No. 1, whereby the Agencies did agree to
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
and cooperate in the preparation and completion of t
h
e
T
.
H
.
2
1
2
Environmental Impact Statement and Design Study Repo
r
t
;
a
n
d
WHEREAS, it was determined that a consultanting firm
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
selected by the Agencies' Task Force and hired by Carver County,
page 2
64140-2
to prepare the Environmental Impact Statement and Design Study
Report; and
WHEREAS, a contract was executed with a consultanting firm and a sub-
stantial portion of the required scope of work has been completed; and
WHEREAS, decisions have been made by the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) regarding 4(f) property impacts and Historical
Structures which increases the originally anticipated level of
analysis necessary for these impacts in this corridor; and
WHEREAS, review by Mn/DOT and the FHWA of the "affected environment"
and "environmental consequences" sections of the preliminary Draft
EIS has resulted in additional analysis of the wetlands and
wildlife habitat then originally anticipated; and
WHEREAS, the analysis and documentation, for this project in
general, has been much more extensive than originally expected; and
WHEREAS, the consultant has been requested to conduct the necessary
analysis and research, and provide the required documentation for the
potentially impacted sites along the corridor; and
WHEREAS, it was agreed in Section 2.01 of Agreement No. 64140, that
all expenses for the study exceeding $320,000 would be the
responsibility of Mn/DOT; and
ar7
page 3
64140-2
WHEREAS, Mn/DOT has previously agreed to reimburse Carver C
o
u
n
t
y
for all expenses incurred for Supplement No. 1 to Agreement
N
o
.
64140, to a maximum amount of $44,500.00; and
WHEREAS, the Mn/DOT has reviewed the proposed costs to perf
o
r
m
t
h
e
additional services and have found the costs to be fair and
reasonable; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation is obli
g
a
t
e
d
t
o
reimburse Carver County for necessary payments to the consul
t
a
n
t
f
o
r
the additional work requested.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
REVISION SECTION 2.0 - CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
Sections 2.01 and 2.02 should be revised to the following:
2.01 The consultant contract shall not exceed $451,890 and shall
be approved by a majority vote of the T.H. 212 Task Force
prior to execution by Carver County and the consultant. If
it appears at any time that the payments to the consultant
will exceed a total estimated payment of $451,890 for the
project, the consultant shall not perform any services that
would cause that amount to be exceeded unless the consultan
t
has been advised by Carver County that the additional funds
have been encumbered by Mn/DOT. However, the total amount t
o
be paid to the consultant shall not exceed the sum of $495,0
0
0
without an additional supplemental agreement being executed
between the Agencies. The costs to the municipalities, the
counties, and the Metropolitan Council shall not exceed
$200,000.00 and shall be shared as follows:
Acnq
page 4 64140-2
AGENCY
COST City of Chanhassen
$ 30,000 City of Chaska
30,000 City of Eden Prairie
$ 30,000 Carver County
$ 30,000 Hennepin County
$ 30,000 Metropolitan Council
$ 50,000 Mn/DOT
$ 251,890 (295,000 max)
$ 451,890 (495,000 max)
Should the final cost of the study exceed $495,000,
t
h
e
Minnesota Department of Transportation agrees to co
m
p
l
e
t
e
t
h
e
Environmental Impact Statement and Design Study Rep
o
r
t
a
t
n
o
additional cost to the agency members listed below:
City of Chanhassen
City of Chaska
City of Eden Prairie
Carver County
Hennepin County
Metropolitan Council
A final contract cost of less than $495,000 shall r
e
s
u
l
t
i
n
reduced agency costs proportional to each agency's
c
o
s
t
obligations stated as follows:
For Costs up $320,000: MAXIMUM $
OBLIGATION Chanhassen 30,000 Chaska $ 30,000 Eden Prairie $ 30,000 Carver County $ 30,000 Hennepin County $ 30,000 Metropolitan Council $ 50,000 Mn/DOT $ 120,000
Subtotal: $ 320,000
PERCENTAGE
OBLIGATION
9.375 %
9.375 %
9.375 %
9.375 %
9.375 %
15.625 %
37.500 %
100.000 %
For Costs exceeding $320,000, up a maximum of $495,
0
0
0
:
Mn/DOT
$ 175,000
100.000 % TOTAL:
$ 495,000
(Maximum without additional
supplemental agreement)
page 5
64140-2
2.02 Each agency's pro rata share, as defined
i
n
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
2
.
0
1
,
shall be paid to Carver County as contrac
t
i
n
g
a
g
e
n
t
,
f
r
o
m
time to time when and as payments are req
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
b
e
m
a
d
e
b
y
Carver County to the consultant firm pursu
a
n
t
t
o
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
.
Carver County shall invoice each Agency fr
o
m
t
i
m
e
t
o
t
i
m
e
a
s
payments are required to be made to the co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
f
i
r
m
.
S
u
c
h
invoices shall reflect each member Agency'
s
s
h
a
r
e
o
f
t
h
e
payment due and shall be paid within 35 da
y
s
f
r
o
m
r
e
c
e
i
p
t
o
f
the invoice.
STATUS OF ORIGINAL AGREEMENT
Except as amended and modified herein, th
e
t
e
r
m
o
f
said
Agreement No. 64140 and Supplement No. 1
s
h
a
l
l
r
e
m
a
i
n
i
n
full force and effect.
APPROVALS
Before this Supplemental Agreement shall b
e
c
o
m
e
b
i
n
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
effective, it shall receive the approval o
f
s
u
c
h
S
t
a
t
e
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
s
as the law may provide, in addition to th
e
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
e
r
o
f
Transportation.
aoz 1
page 10
64140-2
MUNICIPALITIES
City of Chanhassen
By:
By: Mayor
City Manager
Date:
Date:
City of Eden Prairie
By: By: Mayor City Manager
Date: Date:
City of Chaska
By:
By: Mayor City Manager
Date: Date:
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MN
RESOLUTION NO. 89-193
SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT NO. 64918
DESIGN OF TH 5 FROM CSAH 4 TO CSAH 17
WHEREAS the State of Minnesota and the City of Eden Prairie entered into
Agreement No. 64918 for final design of TH 5 from CSAH 4 to CSAH 17;
WHEREAS the State of Minnesota and the City of Eden Prairie have agreed that
additional work is required to complete said services, and
WHEREAS the State of Minnesota and the City of Eden Prairie desire to
continue the services of the City's Consultant to accomplish this additional
work.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council that said
Supplement No. 1 to Agreement No. 64918 is hereby approved and the Mayor and
City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the Agreement on behalf of the
City of Eden Prairie.
Adopted by the Eden Prairie City Council on September 5, 1989.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
9o78
AGREEMENT SERVICES SECTION AGREEMENT NO. 64918-1
ADJUSTED TOTAL FEE $355,463.00
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
CONSULTANT AGREEMENT FOR
ENGINEERING SERVICES
FOR
FINAL DESIGN SERVICES
Supplement No. 1
to
Agreement No. 64918
between
The State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation
and
The City of Eden Prairie
S.P. 1002 T.H. 5
In Eden Prairie and Chanhassen
;DIU
64918-1
INDEX
SUBJECT PAGE NO.
Parties to the Agreement
1
Explanation and Justification
1
Revision 1.0 - Services to be provided by the City
1
Revision 2.0 - Time Schedule
3
Revision 3.0 - Payment to the Consultant
3
Status of Original Agreement
5
Approvals
5
Signatures
;,)3T:
64918-1
This Supplemental Agreement made and entered into by and between the
State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation hereinafter referred
to as the "State" and the City of Eden Prairie hereinafter referred to
as the "City". Barton Aschman Associates, Inc. is referred to herein
as the City's Consultant.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS the State and City entered into Agreement No. 64918 for final
design services, and
WHEREAS the State and City has agreed that additional work is required
to complete said services, and
WHEREAS the State and City desires to continue the services of the
City's Consultant to accomplish this additional work.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
REVISION 1.0 - SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY THE CITY
Section 2.0 of Agreement No. 64918 is hereby amended and modified to
read as follows:
2.331 Complete the right of way preacquisition for sixty two
additional parcels.
- 1 -
Jab,
64918-1
2.511 Redesign required geometrics including cross-sections in
Eden Prairie and Chanhassen to accomodate various
intersections.
2.512 Prepare a tree inventory coordination and preservation
techniques as per the City of Eden Prairie tree transplant
policy.
2.5121 Incorporate tree transplants into the plan, estimate and
special provisions.
2.531 Prepare Signal Justification Report at Market Boulevard.
2.541 Design signal system at Market Boulevard and underground
conduit and cable work for signal at Heritage Road.
2.542 Design Temporary Bypass
2.543 Design Trail Illumination at underpass and extend trail
system in Eden Prairie.
2.821 Design and incorporate into plan estimate and special
provisions a retaining wall for the NSP transmission tower.
2.822 Redesign Sanitary sewer from a force main to a gravity
system, incorporate design into plan, estimate and special
provisions.
Relative to the scope of services as listed above, a more defined
description of said work is contained in the City's Consultant's
Financial Proposal dated March 28, 1989. Said proposal is made a part
hereof by reference with the same force and effect as though fully set
forth herein.
- 2
64918-1
REVISION 2.0 - TIME SCHEDULE
Section 5.0 of Agreement No. 64918 is hereby
a
m
e
n
d
e
d
a
n
d
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
t
o
read as follows:
5.21 The City's Consultant shall complete all work
a
n
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
required under the terms of this agreement by
M
a
r
c
h
3
1
,
1990.
REVISION 3.0 - PAYMENT TO THE CITY
Section 6.0 of Agreement No. 64918 is hereby
a
m
e
n
d
e
d
a
n
d
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
t
o
read as follows:
6.11 The State shall pay to the City as compensat
i
o
n
i
n
f
u
l
l
for the services performed by the firm of
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc., the "City's
Consultant", under this agreement the lump s
u
m
a
m
o
u
n
t
of $355,463.00.
In addition, the following entities shall pa
y
t
h
e
following amounts as compensation for the ser
v
i
c
e
s
performed by the City's Consultant:
1. Southwest Coalition
2. City of Chanhassen
3. City of Eden Prairie
4. City of Chaska
5. City of Waconia
6. County of Hennepin
$75,000.00
$74,395 .00
$50,000.00
$20,000.00
$15,000.00
$10,000.00
- 3 -
(-)7Z
64918-1
7. County of Carver $10,000.00
The total compensation to be paid to the City's
Consultant shall be $609,822.00. Nothwithstanding any
term or condition contained in this Agreement to the
contrary, the City shall have no obligation to do
anything or perform any act until and unless the State
and all of the other entities make the payments as
required by this paragraph. In the event that either
the State or any of the entities fail to make the
payments set forth above, then the city's obligations
under this Agreement shall be rendered void and
unenforceable.
6.21 If it appears at any time that the City's Consultant
will exceed a total estimated payment of $609,822.00
the City's Consultant agrees not to perform any
services that would cause that amount to be exceeded
unless the City's Consultant has been advised by the
City that additional funds have been encumbered, a
supplemental agreement has been issued and that work
may proceed. It shall be the responsibility of the
City to originate all requests for additional
encumbrances, compensations and for supplemental
agreements.
- 4 -
64918-1
STATUS OF ORIGINAL AGREEMENT
Except as amended and modified herein, the terms and conditions
of Agreement No. 64918 shall remain in full force and effect.
APPROVALS
Before this supplemental agreement shall become binding and
effective it shall receive the approval of such State officers as
the law may provide in addition, to the Commissioner of
Transportation.
- 5 -
,9,0?3
6 il9/8-/
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have caused this contract to be duly
executed intending to be bound thereby.
APPROVED:
CONTRACTOR:
(If a corporation, two corporate
officers must execute.)
By
laary U. Peterson
Title Mayor
Date
By
Lan J. JOilie
Title City Manager
Date
STATE AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT:
By
(Authorized Signature)
Title
Date
As to form and execution by
ATTORNEY GENERAL:
By
Date
COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION:
By
(Authorized Signature)
Date
COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE:
By
(Encumbrance Center
Authorized Signature)
Date
5
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 89-198
APPROVE PETITION TO
NINE MILE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
FOR SMETANA LAKE OUTLET IMPROVEMENTS
WHEREAS, the City petitioned Nine Mile Creek Watershed Dist
r
i
c
t
f
o
r
construction of the outlet for Smetana Lake in June, 1985, and
WHEREAS, the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District has been d
e
l
a
y
e
d
i
n
proceeding with the Smetana Lake Outlet Improvements due to co
m
m
i
t
m
e
n
t
s
to other projects.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Eden Prair
i
e
h
e
r
e
b
y
reconfirms its commitment to said petition to the Nine Mi
l
e
C
r
e
e
k
Watershed District for the Smetana Lake Outlet Improvements da
t
e
d
J
u
n
e
18, 1985.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on September 5, 1989.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
SEAL
John D., Frane, Clerk
PETITION OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE TO THE
NINE MIIF cnrEr WATERSHED DISTRICT
FoR THE CONSTRUCTION Oi 111E OUILLT for TANA
I. AUTHORITY
This petition, submitted pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota
Statutes SS 112.48 and 112.61, Subdivision 3, requests the Managers of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District undertake the Smetana Lake
Project within the City of Eden Prairie. The general concept and
objectives to be gained by said project are more fully specified on
page 26 of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Overall Plan, dated
1973, developed by the Watershed District pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes 1971, Chapter 112, the Watershed Act. The project is in conformity with the overall plan for the Nine Mile Creek Watershed
District (hereinafter District) and is part of the basic water
management plan of the District.
II. PURPOSE AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK PROPOSED
Fluctuating lake levels are a problem with Smetana lake. The
shoreline and banks surrounding the lake show the etterts of
continuously fluctuating lake levels. The purpose of the plan is to
reduce the problems associated with fluctuating levels, by in..talling
an outlet for the lake, and with a stabilized lake level, a flood
level for the lake can be established and urbanization can continue
in an orderly fashion.
III. DESCRIPTION OF THE LANDS OVER WHICH THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMINT IS
LOCATED
The lands upon which the project improvement will be located are
situated entirely in the City of Eden Prairie and are tributary to
Smetana Lake. The lands are located in Sections 12 and II, T116N,
R22W.
IV. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PART OF THE DISTRICT AFFECTED
The area to be served by the proposed outlet includes District lands in the southern portion of the Nine Mile Creek watershed that are tributary to Smetana Lake.
V. NEED AND NECESSITY FOR THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT
The Petitioner recognizes the need for the construction of outlets for lakes in an urbanizing area. The lake nutlet will stabili..0 lake
levels thereby allowing flood elevations to be estahlishod and enahlin9 development to proceed in an orderly fashion.
9,J4-2
VI. THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT WILL BE CONDUCIVE TO THE rwur HIALTH,
CONVENIENCE AND WELFARE
The City Council of Eden Prairie, on the fit. staff a. consultant reports, has determined that the proposed improveim!ni..
will be conducive to the public health, convenience and welfare.
Completion of the outlet system will provide a means 01 reducing th , problems associated with fluctuating lake levels. This project will
also minimize impacts on the shorelines and banks of the basin
associated with the fluctuating lake levels.
VII. FINANCING OF THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT
This project is included in the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District
Policy Statement regarding Project Financing as a First Priority
Project. As such, it is eligible for 100% financing by the District.
The project proposed by this petition is of common benefit to the
entire District and is a part of the basic water managemont plan of
the District. The petitioner requests that the cost of the project
be financed in the manner provided by Minnesota Statute S112.61,
Subdivision 3.
VIII. FINANCING OF THE FEASIBILITY STUDY
The Petitioner hereby states that it will pay all the costs and
expenses which may be incurred in case the proceedings ire dismissed
or for any reason no contract for the construction thereof is let.
Ifthe proceedings are not dismissed and a contract for construction
of the project is let, the Petitioner requests that the cost of the
feasibility study be financed as a cost of the project in the manner
provided by Minnesota Statutes S112.61, Subdivision 3 and that
Petitioner be reimbursed by the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District
for monies which it expends in connection with the feasibility study.
IX. PETITIONER RIGHT OF WITHDRAWAL
"Petitioner hereby reserves the right to withdraw this petition at
any time. If Petitioner does withdraw this petition. Petitioner's
liability for costs and expenses shall be limited to those incurred
up to the time of withdrawal unless such costs and expenses arise
under a separate contractural obligation."
Dated June 1985
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
Be
jori
CItyyMplager
The foregoing petition and its execution by the Ma§or and City Mananpr of
the City of Lden Prairie was authorized at a regular meeting of the (den Prairie City Council held on the 18th day of June, 1985.
J
ATTEST: %r
Clerk, City of MiT,Ai17c
/1 r.
osk.F1
a Birchwood Laboratories, Inc.
7900 Fuller Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
TELEPHONE: 6121937-7900
MX: 612/937-7979
August 16, 1989
Mr. Scott A. Kipp
City Planner
City of Eden Prairie
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344-3677
Dear Mr. Kipp:
This letter will confirm our telephone conversation regarding t
h
e
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
'
s
Agreement on the approval of an addition to our mini storage.
Prairie Green Associates does not wish to complete the Develo
p
e
r
'
s
A
g
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
or proceed with an addition to the existing mini storage. Will
y
o
u
p
l
e
a
s
e
withdraw our application from the agenda.
Sincerely,
/ A. hri
resident
Prairie Green Mini-Storage
Expansion
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 89-1)5
A RESOLUTION DENYING SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE #52-88
FOR THE PROPOSED PRAIRIE GREEN MINI-STORAGE EXPANSION
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 52-88, authorizing first reading of a rezoning of
property for the proposed Prairie Green Mini-Storage expansion, did receive first
reading by the City Council at a regular meeting on November 15, 1988; and;
WHEREAS, proponents for the development of the Prairie Green Mini-Storage
Expansion, Prairie Green Associates, have not, since that date, completed the
necessary steps for finalizing the development as was reviewed by the City at the
time of first reading; and,
WHEREAS, Prairie Green Associates have requested withdrawal of the request
at this time;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE, that second reading of Ordinance #52-88 is hereby denied and that the
attendant requests for Zoning District Amendment within the 1-2 Zoning District and
Preliminary Plat, are also hereby denied.
ADOPTED by the City Council on September 5, 1989.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
,q09 {p
Fairfield Phases 2-6
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 59-88-PUD-15-88
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 Planned Unit Development 15-88-
R1-9.5-R1-13.5 District (hereinafter "PUD 15-88-R1-9.5-R1-13.5".
Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of September 5, 1989, entered into
between Centex Real Estate Corporation and the City of Eden Prairie (hereinafter
"Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and
conditions of PUD 15-88-R1-9.5-R1-13.5, and is hereby made a part hereof.
Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings:
A. PUD 15-88-R1-9.5-R1-13.5 is not in conflict with the goals of the
Guide Plan of the City.
B. PUD 15-88-R1-9.5-R1-13.5 is designed in such a manner to form a
desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries.
C. The exceptions to the standard requirements of Chapters 11 and 12 of
the City Code, which are contained in PUD 15-88-R1-9.5-R1-13.5, are
justified by the design of the development described therein.
D. PUD 15-88-R1-9.5-R1-13.5 is of sufficient size, composition, and
arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation is
feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any subsequent
unit.
Section 5. 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
Planned Unit Development 15-88-R1-9.5-R1-13.5 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 6. 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 7. 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 13th day of December, 1988, and finally read and adopted and ordered
published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 5th day of
September, 1989.
ATTEST:
361—in D. Frane, City Clerk
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
FAIRFIELD
EXHIBIT A
Page 1 of 6
P.U.D. CONCEPT & DISTRICT REVIEW AND PRELIMINARY PLAT
All those parts of the following described land which lie southeasterly of the
southeasterly right-of-way of the Minneapolis, and St. Louis Railroad:
All that part of the South 3/8 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4
. of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22, lying West of County Road No. 4.
The West 2/3 of South 3/8 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of
Section 20, Township 116, Range 22.
All that part of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 20,
Township 116, Range 22, which lies West of County Road No. 4, except
that part thereof described as follows: Commencing at a point 279 feet
West of the Northeast corner of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4
of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22, which point is the center of so
called Murphy Ferry Road; thence West 442 feet; thence South 340.8 feet;
thence East on a line parallel to the North line of the Southeast 1/4 of
the Northeast 1/4 to a point in center of the so called road; thence
Northwesterly along the center of said road to the place of beginning,
and except the southerly 450.00 feet of said Southeast 1/4 of the
Northeast 1/4 of Section 20 and that part which lies southwesterly of
the following described line;
Beginning at a point 615.00 feet west of the east line of said
Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter and 300.00 feet
northerly of the south line of said Southeast quarter of the
Northeast quarter; thence northwesterly to a point on the west
line of said Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter, 750.00
feet north of the southwest corner of said Southeast quarter of
the Northeast quarter as measured along said west line of said
Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and there terminating.
That part of the North 5/8 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4
lying West of County Road No. 4, except Road, Section 20, Township 116,
Range 22. The Northwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 except Railroad right-
of-way, Section 20, Township 116, Range 22. North 5/8 of the Northwest
1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22. North
5/8 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 except Railroad right-of-
way, Section 20, Township 116, Range 22.
Continued next page
ri o 9
tAlktiELD
EXHIBIT A
PiCRTY-17 6
(Continued from P.U.D. Concept & District Review and Preliminary Plat)
That part of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 17, Township 116, Rang
e
2
2
,
described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner o
f
t
h
e
Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of said Section; thence North
a
l
o
n
g
the East line of said Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4, a distan
c
e
o
f
914 feet; thence deflecting to the right at an angle of 81 degree
s
,
3
7
minutes, a distance of 244 feet, more of less, to the center li
n
e
o
f
Shakopee Road; thence Northerly along the center line of said R
o
a
d
a
distance of 830 feet to the point of beginning of the tract of land to
be described; thence Westerly to a point 1748.95 feet North of the
S
o
u
t
h
line of said Section and in a line described as follows: Beginnin
g
a
t
the Southeast corner of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of
s
a
i
d
Section; thence West along South line of said Section 274 feet; th
e
n
c
e
deflecting to the right at an angle of 91 degrees, 68 minutes
,
3
0
seconds a distance of 1748.95 feet to said point; thence South a
l
o
n
g
said line a distance of 1748.95 feet to the point in the South lin
e
o
f
said Section distant 274 feet West of the Southeast corner of
s
a
i
d
Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4; thence West along said South li
n
e
t
o
the Southwest corner of said Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4; th
e
n
c
e
North along West line of said Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4
t
o
a
point 1 rod South from the Northwest corner of said Southwest 1/4 of
t
h
e
Southeast 1/4; thence East parallel with the North line of
s
a
i
d
Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 to a point distant 1
r
o
d
Southeasterly measured at a right angle from Southeasterly line of
t
h
e
right-of-way of the Minneapolis, and St. Louis Railroad; the
n
c
e
Northeasterly parallel with and 1 rod distant from said right-of-wa
y
t
o
the intersection of a line drawn North 87 degrees, 45 minutes West
f
r
o
m
a point in the center line of the Shakopee Road distant 528.3
f
e
e
t
Northerly form the South line of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southea
s
t
1
/
4
of said Section 17, which said point is determined by measurin
g
a
l
o
n
g
the center line of said Road; thence South 87 degrees 45 minutes East to the said center line of said road; thence Southeasterly along said center line to the point of beginning.
I. East 1/3 of South 3/8 of Northeast 1/4 of Northwest 1/4 and South
3
/
8
o
f
Northwest 1/4 of Northeast 1/4, Section 20, Township 116, Range 22
.
That part of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Secti
o
n
1
7
,
Township 116, Range 22, lying Southeast of the Railroad right-of-w
a
y
.
g 103
FAIRFIELD
EXHIBIT A
Page 3 of 6 GUIDE PLAN CHANGE FROM INDUSTRIAL TO LOW DENSITY RES
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
AND ZONING FROM RURAL TO RI -13.5
That part of the North half of the North
w
e
s
t
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
o
f
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
2
0
,
Township 116, Range 22 and the North half
o
f
t
h
e
N
o
r
t
h
e
a
s
t
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
o
f
said Section 20 and the Southeast Quarter
o
f
t
h
e
N
o
r
t
h
e
a
s
t
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
o
f
said Section 20; and the South half of the
S
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
o
f
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
17, Township 116, Range 22 and the South ha
l
f
o
f
t
h
e
S
o
u
t
h
e
a
s
t
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
of said Section 17 and the Northwest Quarter
o
f
t
h
e
S
o
u
t
h
e
a
s
t
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
o
f
said Section 17 described as follows;
Beginning at the Southwest corner of the Nor
t
h
w
e
s
t
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
o
f
t
h
e
Northeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 1
1
6
,
R
a
n
g
e
2
2
;
t
h
e
n
c
e
-South 08 7 degrees 43 minutes 53 seconds West, assu
m
e
d
b
e
a
r
i
n
g
,
2086.00 feet along the South line of said Nor
t
h
w
e
s
t
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
o
f
t
h
e
Northwest Quarter of Section 20 to the east
e
r
l
y
r
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
w
a
y
o
f
the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Comp
a
n
y
;
t
h
e
n
c
e
N
o
r
t
h
4
3
degrees 23 minutes A:10 seconds East, 981
.
8
2
f
e
e
t
a
l
o
n
g
s
a
i
d
.easterly right-of-way of said Minneapolis
a
n
d
S
t
.
L
o
u
i
s
R
a
i
l
w
a
y
Company; thence South 63 degrees 30 minu
t
e
s
0
0
s
e
c
o
n
d
s
E
a
s
t
,
223.00 feet; thence South 87 degrees 00 minu
t
e
s
0
0
s
e
c
o
n
d
s
E
a
s
t
,
246.00 feet; thence North 79 degrees 00 min
u
t
e
s
0
0
s
e
c
o
n
d
s
E
a
s
t
,
353.00 feet; thence South 80 degrees 00 min
u
t
e
s
0
0
s
e
c
o
n
d
s
E
a
s
t
,
424.00 feet; thence North 83 degrees 00 min
u
t
e
s
0
0
s
e
c
o
n
d
s
East, 198.51 feet; thence South 18 degrees 00 min
u
t
e
s
0
0
s
e
c
o
n
d
s
E
a
s
t
,
297.40 feet; thence South 5 degrees 00 minu
t
e
s
0
0
s
e
c
o
n
d
s
E
a
s
t
,
292.00 feet to the south line of the Nort
h
w
e
s
t
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
o
f
t
h
e
Northeast Quarter of Section 20, Township
1
1
6
,
R
a
n
g
e
2
2
;
t
h
e
n
c
e
North 89 degrees 35 minutes 18 seconds Wes
t
,
1
1
2
.
5
9
f
e
e
t
a
l
o
n
g
said south line of the Northwest Quarter of
t
h
e
N
o
r
t
h
e
a
s
t
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
of Section 20 to the point of beginning.
FAIRFIELD GUIDE PLAN CHANGE
EXHIBIT A FROM INDUSTRIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
Page 4 of 6
That part of the North half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 20,
Township 116, Range 22 and the North half of the Northeast Quarter of
said Section 20 and the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of
said Section 20; and the South half of the Southwest Quarter of Section
17, Township 116, Range 22 and the South half of the Southeast Quarter
of said Section 17 and the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of
said Section 17 described as follows;
Concmncing at the Southwest corner of the Northwest Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22; thence
South 88 degrees 43 minutes 53 seconds West, assumed bearing,
2086.00 feet along the south line of said Northwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 20 to the easterly right-of-way of
the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company; thence North 43
'degrees. 23 minutes 00 seconds East, 981.82 feet along said
easterly right-of-way of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway
Company to the point of beginning of the land to be described;
thence continuing North 43 degrees 23 minutes 00 seconds East,
1970.00 feet along said easterly right-of-way of the Minneapolis
and St. Louis Railway Company; thence South 86 degrees 00 minutes
00 seconds East, 1101.63 feet; thence South 2 degrees 58 minutes
23 seconds West, 736.51 feet; thence South 80 degrees 00 minutes
00 seconds West, 112.82 feet; thence North 87 degrees 00 minutes
00 seconds West, 123.00 feet; thence North 2 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, 113.00 feet; thence North 86 degrees 30 minutes 00
seconds West, 156.00 feet; thence South 5 degrees 00 minutes 00
seconds West, 154.00 feet; thence South 31 degrees 00 minutes 00
seconds West, 189.00 feet; thence South 48 degrees 30 minutes 00
seconds West, 292.00 feet; thence South 8 degrees 00 minutes 00
seconds West, 286.00 feet; thence South 83 degrees 00 minutes 00
seconds West, 453.00 feet; thence North 80 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West, 424.00 feet; thence South 79 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West, 353.00 feet; thence North 87 degrees 00 minutes 00
seconds West, 246.00 feet; thence North 63 degrees 30 minutes 00
seconds West, 223.00 feet to the point of beginning.
,u)49,
FAIRFIELD
EXHIBIT A
Page 5 of 6
ZONING FROM RURAL TO R1-9.5
That part of the North half of the Northwest Quarter of Sect
i
o
n
2
0
,
Township 116, Range 22 and the North half of the Northeast Qua
r
t
e
r
o
f
said Section 20 and the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quar
t
e
r
o
f
said Section 20; and the South half of the Southwest Quarter of
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
17, Township 116, Range 22 and the South half of the Southeast
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
of said Section 17 and the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Qua
r
t
e
r
o
f
said Section 17 described as follows;
Commencing at the Southwest corner of the Northwest Quarter of th
e
Northeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22; thenc
e
South 89 degrees 35 minutes 18 second East, assumed bearing
,
112.59 feet along the south line of said Northwest Quarter of th
e
Northeast Quarter to the point of beginning of the land to
b
e
described; thence North 5 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds We
s
t
,
292.00 feet; thence North 18 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West,
297.40 feet; thence South 83 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds We
s
t
,
198.51 feet; thence North 80 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds We
s
t
,
424.00 feet; thence South 79 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds We
s
t
,
353.00 feet; thence North 87 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds We
s
t
,
246.00 feet; thence North 63 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds We
s
t
,
223.00 feet to the easterly right-of-way of the Minneapolis
a
n
d
St. Louis Railway Company; thence North 43 degrees 23 minutes
0
0
seconds East, 1970.00 feet along said easterly right-of-way of
t
h
e
Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company; thence South 86 degre
e
s
00 minutes 00 seconds East, 1101.63 feet; thence South 2 degr
e
e
s
58 minutes 23 seconds West, 688.22 feet; thence South 89 degr
e
e
s
00 minutes 08 seconds East, 795.90 feet to the centerline
o
f
County Road No. 4 Plat 34 per Doc. No. 1227238 as recorded in
t
h
e
office of the Registrar of Titles; thence South 13 degrees
0
0
minutes 15 seconds East, 158.50 feet along said centerline; then
c
e
along said centerline a distance of 468.76 feet along a tangenti
a
l
curve concave to the northeast said curve has a radius of 2978
.
5
0
feet a central angle of 9 degrees 01 minutes 02 seconds and
a
chord of 468.28 feet which bears South 17 degrees 30 minutes
4
6
seconds East; thence South 79 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds Wes
t
,
529.52 feet, not tangent to the last described curve; thence Nor
t
h
82 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West, 139.99 feet; thence South
3
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, 185.69 feet; thence South
2
9
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, 71.00 feet; thence South
4
6
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, 182.00 feet; thence South 1
5
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, 66.00 feet; thence South
3
7
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, 56.00 feet; thence South
2
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, 97.00 feet; thence South
1
9
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West, 72.90 feet; thence North
8
9
degrees 35 minutes 18 seconds West, 1412.03 feet along said sout
h
line of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter to th
e
point of beginning.
k3:3
EXHIBIT A
Page 6 of 6
ZONING FROM RURAL TO R1-13.5
That part of the North half of the Northwest Quarter of
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
2
0
,
Township 116, Range 22 and the North half of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 20 and the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 20; and the South half of the Southwest Quart
e
r
o
f
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
17, Township 116, Range 22 and the South half of the Sout
h
e
a
s
t
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
of said Section 17 and the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 17 described as follows;
Commencing at the Southwest corner of the Northwest Quart
e
r
of the Northeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22; thence
South 89 degrees 35 minutes 18 seconds East assumed b
e
a
r
i
n
g
,
1305.15 feet to the west line of the Southeast Quarte
r
o
f
t
h
e
Northeast Quarter of said Section 20, Township 116, Rang
e
2
2
a
n
d
the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence South 1
degree 06 minutes 21 seconds East, 589.84 feet along sa
i
d
w
e
s
t
line of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
20; thence South 57 degrees 32 minutes 51 seconds East,
5
5
6
.
3
9
feet; thence North 89 degrees 49 minutes 54 seconds East,
8
3
8
.
8
2
feet to the centerline of County Road No. 4, Plat 34 per Do
c
.
.
N
o
.
1227238 as recorded in the office of the Registrar of Titles; thence North 0 degrees 30 minutes 31 seconds East, 150.
5
9
f
e
e
t
along said centerline; thence continuing northwesterly
o
n
s
a
i
d
centerline a distance of 365.25 feet along a tangential
c
u
r
v
e
concave to the southwest said curve has a radius of 698.70 feet a central angle of 29 degrees 57 minutes 06 seconds;
t
h
e
n
c
e
continuing along said centerline tangent to the last des
c
r
i
b
e
d
curve North 29 degrees 26 minutes 38 seconds West, 41.44
f
e
e
t
;
thence North 89 degrees 35 minutes 18 seconds West, 637.62
f
e
e
t
;
thence North 0 degrees 24 minutes 42 seconds East, 340.80
f
e
e
t
;
thence South 89 degrees 35 minutes 18 seconds East 442.00
f
e
e
t
t
o
said centerline of County Road No. 4; thence North 29 degr
e
e
s
2
6
minutes 38 seconds West 146.18 feet along said centerline;
t
h
e
n
c
e
along said centerline 263.38 feet along a tangential curve
c
o
n
c
a
v
e
to the northeast, said curve has a radius of 2289.18
f
e
e
t
a
central angle of 6 degrees 35 minutes 32 seconds; thence
a
l
o
n
g
said centerline tangent to the last described curve No
r
t
h
2
2
degrees 51 minutes 06 seconds West, 148.86 feet; thence alon
g
s
a
i
d
centerline North 22 degrees 50 minutes 15 seconds West
,
2
1
3
.
5
5
feet; thence along said centerline 42.42 feet along s tang
e
n
t
i
a
l
curve concave to the northeast, said curve has a radius o
f
2
9
7
8
.
5
0
feet a central angle of 0 degrees 48 minutes 58 secon
d
s
a
n
d
a
chord of 42.42 feet which bears North 22 degrees 25 mi
n
u
t
e
s
4
6
seconds West; thence South 79 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West,
529.52 feet; thence North 82 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds
W
e
s
t
,
139.99 feet; thence South 3 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds
E
a
s
t
,
185.69 feet; thence South 29 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds
E
a
s
t
,
71.00 feet; thence South 46 degrees 00 minutes 00 secon
d
s
E
a
s
t
,
182.00 feet; thence South 15 degrees 00 minutes 00 secon
d
s
E
a
s
t
,
66.00 feet; thence South 37 degrees 00 minutes 00 secon
d
s
E
a
s
t
,
56.00 feet; thence South 2 degrees 00 minutes 00 second
s
E
a
s
t
,
97.00 feet; thence South 19 degrees 00 minutes 00 secon
d
s
W
e
s
t
,
72.90 feet; thence North 89 degrees 35 minutes 18 second
s
W
e
s
t
,
219.47 feet to the point of beginning.
Fairfield Phases 2-6
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1989, by
Centex Real Estate Corporation, a Nevada corporation, hereinaft
e
r
r
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
t
o
a
s
"Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corpora
t
i
o
n
,
h
e
r
e
i
n
a
f
t
e
r
referred to as "City:"
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Planned Unit Development
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
Review, with waivers for street frontage and lot size on 11
8
.
2
a
c
r
e
s
,
w
i
t
h
underlying Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 82.7 acr
e
s
a
n
d
f
r
o
m
R
u
r
a
l
to R1-13.5 on 33.6 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 118 acres into 2
9
9
s
i
n
g
l
e
f
a
m
i
l
y
lots, 28 outlots, and road right-of-way, situated in Hennepin C
o
u
n
t
y
,
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto
a
n
d
m
a
d
e
a
p
a
r
t
hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred to as "the property;"
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance #59-
8
8
-
P
U
D
-
15-88, Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
,
a
n
d
maintenance of said property as follows:
1. Developer shall develop the property in conformance with the
materials revised and dated , 1989, reviewed and approved
by the City Council on December 15, 1988, and attached hereto as
Exhibit 8, subject to such changes and modifications as provided
herein. Developer shall not develop, construct upon, or maintain
the property in any other respect or manner than provided herein.
2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by
Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of
all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in
Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. Developer acknowledges that the development of the property
i
s
subject to the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of t
h
e
Southwestern Eden Prairie Development Phasing Study, Summary Repor
t
,
dated December, 1988, hereinafter "the Study." Developer
acknowledges that there are capital improvements, i.e. sanitary
sewer, watermain, streets, etc., required prior to development of
certain lands included in the Study.
Developer, therefore, agrees and acknowledges that the City, in its
sole discretion, shall determine the capital improvements and
utility extensions necessary for development within the Study area,
the timing of such improvements and extensions, and the subsequent
amount of land which shall be serviced by such improvements and
extensions. Developer herein agrees to abide by such determination
by the City.
Specific phased capital improvements and utility extensions
applicable to the property, excerpted from the Study, are attached
hereto as Exhibit D, and hereby made a part hereof.
Developer acknowledges that, from time to time, City may determine
that it is necessary to review and amend the contents and
conclusions of the Study. Any such review or amendment shall be at
City's sole discretion.
Developer further acknowledges that the construction of the capital
improvements and utility extensions as described in the Study and as
depicted in Exhibit D, attached hereto, will benefit the property.
Therefore, prior to release by City of any final plat for any
portion of the property, Developer agrees to execute a special
assessment for Developer's fair share of the costs associated with
installation and construction of any such improvements or
extensions, as may be required by City.
4. Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City
Engineer's approval of plans for streets, sanitary sewer, water,
irrigation systems, storm sewer, and erosion control for the
property.
Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall construct, or
cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said
plans, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit
C, attached hereto.
5. Prior to issuance of any grading permit upon the property, Developer
shall submit to the Director of Planning, and obtain the Director's
approval of, a tree replacement plan for 690 caliper inches of trees
which are planned to be removed from the property due to
construction on said property as approved by City.
Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer agrees to
implement, or cause to be implemented, said tree replacement plan,
in accordance with the tree replacement policy of the City, attached
hereto as Exhibit E, and made a part hereof.
6. Developer shall notify the City and the Watershed District 48 hours
prior to any grading, tree removal, or tree cutting on the property.
7. 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 1 imited to:
A. Grading shall be confined to that area of the property
within the construction limits.
B. Snow fencing shall be placed at the construction limits
within the wooded areas of the property prior to any grading
upon the property.
C. City shall perform an on-site inspection of said protective
measures on the property by the City. Developer shall
contact City for said inspection. Developer agrees that
defects in materials and workmanship in the implementation
of said measures shall then be determined by the City.
D. Defects in materials or workmanship, if any, shall be
corrected by Developer. Developer agrees to call City for
reinspection of the implementation measures, and to receive
approval by the City prior to issuance of the grading permit
by the City. Approval of materials and workmanship may be
subject to such conditions as the City may impose at the
time of acceptance.
8. Prior to issuance of any grading permit, Developer shall submit to
the Director of Planning and obtain the Director's approval of a
tree inventory of those trees within 25 ft. outside of the
construction area, which are not planned to be removed by
construction on the property as approved by City, indicating the
size, type, and location of all trees twelve (12) inches in
diameter, or greater, at a level 4.5 feet above ground level.
9. If any such trees are removed, damaged, or destroyed outside of the
construction area, Developer agrees that prior to issuance of any
building permit for the property, Developer shall:
A. Submit to the Director of Planning, and obtain the
Director's approval of a reforestation plan for all trees
removed, damaged, or destroyed outside of the construction
area. Said plan shall indicate that the trees shall be
replaced by similar tree species and that the trees used for
reforestation shall be no less than three inches in
diameter. The amount of trees to be replaced shall be
determined by the Director of Planning, using a diameter
inch basis, according to a cross sectional cut through the
diameter of a tree as measured 4.5 feet above the ground.
B. Prepare and submit to the Director of Planning, and obtain
the Director's approval of a written estimate of the costs
of the reforestation work to be completed.
C. Submit a bond, or letter of credit, guaranteeing comp
l
e
t
i
o
n
of all reforestation work as approved by the Directo
r
o
f
Planning. Developer agrees that the amount of the
b
o
n
d
,
o
r
letter of credit, shall be 150% of the approved e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
cost of implementation of all reforestation work a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
be in such form and contain such other provisions a
n
d
t
e
r
m
s
as may be required by the Director of Planning.
Upon approval by the Director of Planning,
Developer shall implement, or cause to be implemented, those impro
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
l
i
s
t
e
d
above in said plans, as approved by the Director of Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
.
10. Concurrent with street and utility construction on
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
,
Developer agrees to construct, or cause to be cons
t
r
u
c
t
e
d
,
t
h
o
s
e
trails and sidewalks depicted in Exhibit F, attach
e
d
h
e
r
e
t
o
,
a
n
d
made a part hereof. Said trails and sidewalks shall
b
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
e
d
in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhib
i
t
C
,
a
t
t
a
c
h
e
d
hereto.
City and Developer acknowledge that Developer is no
t
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
construction of the "proposed trail around pond" as
d
e
p
i
c
t
e
d
i
n
s
a
i
d
Exhibit F, attached hereto.
11. Prior to issuance of any building permit within the
c
l
u
s
t
e
r
l
o
t
a
r
e
a
depicted in Exhibit G, attached hereto, Developer
s
h
a
l
l
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
o
the Director of Planning, and obtain the Directo
r
'
s
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
plans indicating the following:
A. Overall street lighting, mail box location(s), and
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
.
B. Overall development landscaping and fencing, including planned privacy fencing within individual clusters.
C. Specific locations of all unit types on the p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
,
specifically keying housing designs to each indivu
d
i
a
l
l
o
t
within said cluster area. The housing designs
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
those depicted in Exhibit G, attached hereto and mad
e
a
p
a
r
t
hereof, including Traditional, Country, French Tu
d
o
r
,
a
n
d
the Mix.
12. As part of Planned Unit Development #15-88, City
h
e
r
e
i
n
g
r
a
n
t
s
waivers to the provisions and requirements of Chapter
1
1
,
Z
o
n
i
n
g
,
o
f
the City Code within the cluster area depicted
i
n
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
G
,
attached hereto:
Allowance for access off private drive, instead of
a
p
u
b
l
i
c
street.
Allowance for lots without street frontage
Lot size of less than 9,500 sq. ft., but no less th
a
n
8
,
0
0
0
sq. ft., with average lot size of 10,550 sq. ft.
For those lots within the cluster area which are fron
t
i
n
g
o
n
a public street, waiver to allow no less than 53 ft. of
frontage on a public street, but with an average frontage on
the public street of 70 ft.
Structure setbacks shall be as depicted in Exhibit B,
attached hereto.
Fairfield Phases 2-6
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 89-196
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY
OF ORDINANCE 59-88-PUD-15-88 AND ORDERING THE
PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 59-88-PUD-15-88 was adopted and ordered published at
a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 5th day of
September, 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. 59-88-PUD-15-88, which
is attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that
said text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of
said ordinance.
B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a
body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in
Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07.
C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for
inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office
of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance
shall be posted in the City Hall.
D. That Ordinance No. 59-88-PUD-15-88 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 September 5, 1989.
Giry D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
Fairfield Phases 2-6
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 59-88-PUD-15-88
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99,
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Summary: This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located west of
C.S.A.H. #4, south of Scenic Heights Road, from the Rural District to the PUD-15-88-
R1-90.5-R1-13.5 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
, 1985.
(A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.)
Rill
MEMORANDUM
TO : PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: SCOTT A. KIPP, ASSISTANT PLANNER
THRU: CHRIS ENGER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: 25 AUGUST, 1989
RE : SIGN REQUEST - FESTIVAL CENTRE
This memo is an update to the Planning Commission memorandum of August 24, 1
9
8
9
which is included in your packet regarding the Festival Centre sign request. T
h
a
t
memo, prepared by Jean Johnson, Zoning Administrator, addressed the Festival Cen
t
r
e
signage request in relation to City Code requirements. In addition, alternativ
e
s
for a proposed signage program for the center was suggested which would meet Ci
t
y
Code requirements. At the time of the memo the Planning Department had no
t
y
e
t
received any information regarding a revised signage plan consistent with Code.
On Friday, August 25, 1989, City staff met with the proponents to discuss t
h
e
revised signage plan. This revised proposal indicates the removal of the "Festiv
a
l
Centre" logo from the 40' marquee, and relocates it along the sign band area o
f
t
h
e
colonnade consistent with City Code. The proponents have also indicated tha
t
a
l
l
proposed letters for signage will be a maximum of 36" in height.
It is still the intent of the proponents to provide all signage on the sout
h
a
n
d
east elevations of the building. However, they wish to maintain the flexibili
t
y
t
o
provide signage around the entire building based on allowable signage area per C
o
d
e
.
Staff would recommend that the signage request be limited to the south and
e
a
s
t
sides of the building, or, based on City Code for location on all sides o
f
t
h
e
building. Granting a waiver to provide signage on two sides of the buildin
g
m
a
y
invite additional sign requests on the remainder of the building at a later
d
a
t
e
,
which may violate maximum square footage allowed per City Code.
When the Factory Outlet center was approved, a restrictive covenant was place
d
o
n
the property restricting signage to a 58' pylon and project identification sig
n
s
a
t
each building entrance. Staff would recommend that a similar restrictive cove
n
a
n
t
be used with this property, limiting the signs to one of the options requested,
w
i
t
h
a provision that a change to the signage program could take place based on Plan
n
i
n
g
Commission and City Council approval.
Staff would recommend approval of the P.U.D. Concept Amendment, P.U.D. Distr
i
c
t
Review with waivers for F.A.R., parking setback, number of parking spaces,
a
n
d
transfer of wall signs from the north and west elevations to the south and e
a
s
t
elevations based on plans dated June 9, 1989, revised June 30, 1989, Staff Rep
o
r
t
dated July 7, 1989, Planning memos dated August 11, 1989, August 24, 1989 and Aug
u
s
t
25, 1989, in addition to the following:
1. The proponent provide a restrictive covenant limiting the sign locations to
the east and south elevations, with an option to transfer signs back to the
north and east elevations based on approval by the Planning Commission and
City Council in conformance with City Code.
MEMORANDUM
TO : PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: JEAN JOHNSON, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
THRU: CHRIS ENGER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: AUGUST 24, 1989
RE : SIGN UPDATE ON FESTIVAL CENTRE REPORT OF 7-7-89
(ATTACHED, PP 4&5, SIGN REQUEST, 7-7-89 REPORT)
Festival Centre's site is zoned C-Reg-Ser (Commercial Regional Service) and permits
sales and service operations not typically found in the major shopping center zone
of Regional Commercial. The Eden Prairie Center is the City's regional center on
approximately 90 acres and having approximately 750,000 square feet of regional
retail. The recent sign approval for the Eden Prairie Center limited sign height to
20 feet.
Festival Centre's request to use the 40 foot high colonnade structure for a
'Festival Centre' sign does not conform to City Sign Code in the following areas:
1. Sign height is 40 feet, Code maximum is 20 feet.
2. Sign size is approximately 200 square feet, Code maximum is 80 square feet.
3. The sign is a 'roof-sign', Code prohibits roof-signs in all districts.
The City Sign Code defines 'Roof-Sign' as a sign erected upon or projecting above
the roof of a structure to which it is affixed. The prohibition of roof signs has
been strongly supported by past commissions, council and staff.
Approval of the Festival Centre 40 foot high roof sign will open the door for
similar requests at other C-Reg-Ser sites in the City, i.e., Vantage's Crossroads
Center, Prairie View Center, Lariat Center, Eden Glen Center, Eden Place Center,
Menards Center, Eden Square Center, etc. All these centers presently have 20 foot
high pylon signs and no roof signs.
Last year, the Prairie Village Mall at Co. Road 4 and TH 5 underwent an exterior
remodeling and used metal colonnades at the entrance doors. No signs were placed on
these turquoise colonnades, yet the structure gives the center the eye-appeal they
desired.
Many alternatives exist for innovative 'eye-catching' signs that would create an
image for Festival Centre and conform to City Code. Some of the alternatives are:
A. Detach from the building the colonnades supporting the oval sign and reduce
the height to a 20 foot maximum and 80 square feet.
This sign could be placed near the building or at a 20 foot setback from the
property line.
B. Use a scroll design of the Festival Centre words on the wall of the
building. This center identification could be larger than the 3 foot
maximum letter height for tenant signs.
C. Besides the 20 foot high 80 square foot freestanding sign outlined in Item
#A, the center could locate two (2) 20 foot high 36 square foot sized signs
upon the other 2 street frontages.
D. Remove any signage from the structure and use its design alone to "catch the
eye".
Requests have been made to the applicant for sign detail on: Wall theatre marquee
exact location, Festival Centre color and material for oval, illustration on how
wall marquee and oval marquee will be affixed to the building wall, etc. Todate,
plans have not been sent to staff for review.
If the Planning Commission chooses to recommend approval of the 40 foot high sign
staff recommends the sign structure be detached from the building so a precedent of
granting a roof sign is removed. The approval then would still include variances
from the Sign Code for height and size. Circumstances unique to this site or
beneficial trade-offs should be identified in the recommendation of approval on the
variances.
Staff believes this center can develop the image and eye-catching impact they desire
In signs while conforming to Sign Code regulations.
JJ:mmr/FESTIVAL
0.0
Festival Centre
-4-
July 7, 1989
Site Lighting and Pedestrian Systems
The proponent intends to utilize the
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
s
i
t
e
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
l
y
i
n
p
l
a
c
e
.
Additional fixtures will be installed
n
e
a
r
t
h
e
n
e
w
c
o
l
o
n
n
a
d
e
e
n
t
r
a
n
c
e
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
with City Code.
Local pedestrian systems consist of and
8
f
o
o
t
w
i
d
e
b
i
t
u
m
i
n
o
u
s
t
r
a
i
l
a
l
o
n
g
t
h
e
s
o
u
t
h
side of Valley View Road and a 5 foot w
i
d
e
c
o
n
c
r
e
t
e
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
a
l
o
n
g
t
h
e
e
a
s
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
Plaza Drive. The proponent indicates
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
u
r
r
o
u
n
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
drop-off area near the main entry of th
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
.
T
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
n
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
r
e
v
i
s
e
t
h
e
plan to connect the sidewalk from the
d
r
o
p
-
o
f
f
a
r
e
a
t
o
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
a
l
o
n
g
Plaza Drive.
Sign Request
The original factory outlet PUD requeste
d
o
n
e
l
a
r
g
e
p
y
l
o
n
i
n
l
i
e
u
o
f
a
n
y
w
a
l
l
s
i
g
n
s
.
The pylon is 58 feet high and 22 squar
e
f
e
e
t
i
n
s
i
z
e
.
L
a
t
e
r
,
t
h
e
o
w
n
e
r
r
e
t
u
r
n
e
d
and requested four wall signs. Two wall
s
i
g
n
s
2
6
°
h
i
g
h
a
n
d
t
w
o
w
a
l
l
s
i
g
n
s
2
0
"
h
i
g
h
were approved. These signs are still on
t
h
e
f
o
u
r
w
a
l
l
s
a
n
d
r
e
a
d
"
O
U
T
L
E
T
C
E
N
T
R
E
'
.
City Sign Code for commercial districts
a
l
l
o
w
s
w
a
l
l
s
i
g
n
s
u
p
t
o
1
5
%
o
f
t
h
e
w
a
l
l
a
r
e
a
when the wall does not exceed 500 squar
e
f
e
e
t
,
o
r
a
m
a
x
i
m
u
m
o
f
7
5
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
.
W
h
e
n
the wall area exceeds 500 square feet,
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
w
a
l
l
s
i
g
n
s
a
r
e
a
l
l
o
w
e
d
a
t
5
%
o
f
the area beyond 500 square feet with a
3
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
m
a
x
i
m
u
m
.
T
h
e
w
a
l
l
a
r
e
a
i
s
t
o
be computed individually for each tenan
t
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
e
x
t
e
r
i
o
r
w
a
l
l
o
f
t
h
e
t
e
n
a
n
t
.
A free standing sign no higher than 20
f
e
e
t
a
n
d
n
o
l
a
r
g
e
r
t
h
a
n
8
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
i
s
allowed for the first street frontage
,
p
l
u
s
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
3
6
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
s
i
g
n
s
f
o
r
other street frontages.
Through the PUD request, the developer
i
s
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
i
n
g
t
o
l
o
c
a
t
e
a
l
l
t
e
n
a
n
t
s
i
g
n
s
o
n
the south and east walls instead of u
p
o
n
t
h
e
w
a
l
l
t
h
e
t
e
n
a
n
t
o
c
c
u
p
i
e
s
.
N
o
f
r
e
e
standing sign is requested nor signs
o
n
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
a
n
d
w
e
s
t
w
a
l
l
s
.
T
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
pylon sign is proposed to be removed. In
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
,
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
n
e
n
t
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
t
o
l
o
c
a
t
e
the theater marquee and additional sign
a
g
e
o
n
t
h
e
m
e
t
a
l
c
o
l
o
n
n
a
d
e
e
n
t
r
y
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
.
This colonnade extends to the maximum
h
e
i
g
h
t
o
f
4
0
f
e
e
t
f
o
r
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
Commercial District. If it is utilized
a
s
a
s
i
g
n
,
m
a
x
i
m
u
m
h
e
i
g
h
t
a
l
l
o
w
e
d
i
s
2
0
f
e
e
t
with a sign area of 80 square feet. Th
e
s
i
g
n
p
l
a
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
r
e
v
i
s
e
d
t
o
r
e
m
o
v
e
a
l
l
signs proposed for the colonnade.
If each wall utilized maximum wall sig
n
s
b
a
s
e
d
u
p
o
n
c
o
d
e
,
(
1
2
w
a
l
l
s
)
a
t
o
t
a
l
o
f
2
0
6
square feet of sign would be installed
u
p
o
n
t
h
e
f
o
u
r
e
n
d
w
a
l
l
s
w
h
i
c
h
a
r
e
1
9
5
'
l
o
n
g
and 166 sq. ft. of sign upon the walls
w
h
i
c
h
a
r
e
1
4
5
'
l
o
n
g
,
n
o
t
t
h
e
3
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
feet listed in the brochure. (i.e.) Wall 16
'
x
1
9
5
'
=
3
,
1
2
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
,
7
5
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
sign for first 500 square feet + 2620
x
.
0
5
=
1
3
1
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
,
o
r
7
5
+
1
3
1
s
q
u
a
r
e
feet = 206 square feet).
The plans dated 6/9/89 illustrate 37 li
n
e
a
l
f
e
e
t
o
f
s
i
g
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
o
u
t
h
w
a
l
l
a
n
d
6
9
lineal feet of signs on the east wall.
I
t
i
s
t
h
e
i
r
d
e
s
i
r
e
t
o
h
a
v
e
a
m
a
x
i
m
u
m
o
f
9
0
0
lineal feet if 48" letters are used or
1
,
2
0
0
l
i
n
e
a
l
f
e
e
t
i
f
3
6
"
l
e
t
t
e
r
s
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
.
The proposal identifies the marquee fo
r
t
h
e
t
h
e
a
t
r
e
a
t
4
2
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
,
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
remaining tentants shareing 3,180 squa
r
e
f
e
e
l
o
f
s
i
g
n
.
T
h
i
s
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
e
d
t
o
t
a
l
e
x
c
e
e
d
s
the maximum sign area allowed by 1,448
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
.
T
h
e
s
i
g
n
p
l
a
n
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
r
e
v
i
s
e
d
to reduce the maximum sign area allowed
p
e
r
C
o
d
e
b
y
t
h
i
s
a
m
o
u
n
t
.
Festival Centre -5- July 7, 1989
STAFF REVIEW
Staff is concerned that a four foot high letter is out of proportion to the building
height and is larger than needed to be readable.
For comparison and discussion purpose, staff gathered sign information on the
projects listed below.
Sign Letter Height Wall Height Distance Readable
Hampton Inn 30" 37' 1100' (TH5)
A to Z Rental 14" NA 1150' (494)
Pylon
Outlet Centre 26" & 20" 16' 1300' + (494 & 5)
TCBY Yogurt 36" 12' 1100' (TH5)
Marquette Bank 36" 68' 1500' US 169/212
(Lunds) Rest. 36" 22' 1100' Pr. Ctr. Dr.
First Bank E.P. 30" 38' 2500' (494)
Staff believes a four foot tall letter on the buildings 16 foot wall height will be
too much coverage and greater than needed to be readable. A maximum letter height
of three feet would be more in proportion to the building height and be readable.
The letter visibility chart used by sign companies, indicates a 36" letter is
visible 1500 feet.
The PUD request to transfer all tenant wall signs to the south and east elevations,
will not serve tenants who will desire wall signs on the north and west walls which
are visible to Valley View Road and Plaza Drive. Although the proposal specifies no
wall signs for the north and west elevations, and no free standing sign, requests
may be submittted in the future as tenants negotiate leases and PUD amendment
applications may be filed for Commission and Council review.
If the project is approved, and tenant signs are transferred to the south and east
walls, staff recommends a maximum letter height of 36" and a maximum wall coverage
of 300 square feet per wall. With three east facing walls and three south facing
walls, a total of 1800 square feet of signs or approximately 970 lineal feet. The
transfer of tenant wall signs to the east and south walls is contingent upon no
north or west wall signs and no pylon sign as presented by the proponent. All signs
are to be located within a uniform sign band area.
This form of PUD sign approval would allow the applicant to transfer tenant signs to
the south and east elevations, gain additional coverage upon the six south and east
walls, and not restrict tenant sign size by the tenants wall area. The City would
limit the letter size to 36" and accept the trade of no signs on the north and west
walls or a freestanding sign.
Traffic
The 1985 Traffic Study for the Major Center Area indicates an allocation of 5,285
daily trips, with 391 p.m. peak trips for this site, based on the existing Factory
Outlet Centre. The theater and retail uses proposed at this time will generate
5,829 daily trips and 559 p.m. peak trips. With the recommended reduction in
theater seating as outlined above, the daily trips will be reduced to 5,781, with
p.m. peak at 511 trips.
MCI
MEMO
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Scott A. Kipp, Assistant Planner
THROUGH:
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
DATE:
August 11, 1989
SUBJECT:
Eden Prairie Entertainment Center (Festival Centre)
This project, originally scheduled for the July 10, 1989 Planning Commission, was
continued for thirty days so the proponent could justify the parking waiver request
for theater parking at one space for every four seats. City Code requires one space
for every three seats. Also, Staff suggested that the proponent meet to discuss and
work out details for a signage request that Staff could support.
PARKING
On Thursday, Staff received information from the proponent which identified the peak
times of use and the expected number of patrons for both the theater and restaurant.
The information is as follows:
Restaurant Use
Peak hours - Friday - 5 p.m. to 9 p.m.
Saturday - Noon to 4 p.m. and 5 p.m. to 9 p.m.
Maximum Capacity - 300 seats
Average Carload - 5 to 7 people
Theater Use
Peak Hours - Tuesday - 7 p.m. show/1,290 patrons
9 p.m. show/1,269 patrons
Saturday - 7 p.m. show/746 patrons
This information was based on a survey from a similar 8 screen second run movie
theater and the Chuck-E-Cheese restaurant. Translating the information into
required parking spaces at peak hour based on a worst case scenario for both theater
and restaurant peaking on Tuesday evening indicates the need for 490 spaces. Based
on City Code of one parking space for every three seats of theater or restaurant
use, a total of 600 parking spaces would be required for these uses, which total
1800 seats. The survey information indicates that these combined uses would be
short 110 spaces according to Code. The proponent is asking for a waiver through
the P.U.D. to allow the theater to park at one space for every four seats which
would be 125 spaces short of City Code based on both uses.
Staff would recommend approval of a waiver for parking of 110 spaces based on the
survey information for a second run movie theater and a Chuck-E-Cheese restaurant.
Should any other restaurant and/or first run theater with higher parking demand wish
to locate in this building, the amount of square footage possible will be based upon
the available parking on site to City Code.
:,Z 111
Memo
Festival Centre
Page 2
SIGNAGE
The proponent has not submitted any revision to the signage plan as recommended in
the July 7, 1989 Staff Report. Planning Staff recommends revisions to the signage
plan in acccordance with the previous Staff Report.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff would recommend approval of the P.U.D. Concept Amendment and District Review
with waivers on 16.2 acres, Zoning District Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser Zoning
District on 16.2 acres and Site Plan Review of 16.2 acres based on plans dated June
9, 1989, revised June 30, 1989, Staff Report dated July 7, 1989, this Memo, and the
following:
1. Prior to City Council review, proponent shall:
A. Submit detailed information regarding the location and design of
trash enclosure areas consistant in materials as the main structure.
B. Indicate a 5 foot wide, 5 inch thick concrete sidewalk connecting
the sidewalk around the main entrance to the existing sidewalk along
Plaza Drive.
C. Submit revised sign criteria based on a maximum of 36 inch high
individual internally lit letters located within a uniform sign band
area. Also remove all signs from the metal colonnade feature.
2. Prior to building permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Provide detailed erosion control plans for review by the City
Engineer and the Watershed District.
B. Provide detailed plans for the rooftop mechanical screening,
additional site lighting, and material and color samples for the
entry colonnade and celestry dome.
C. Submit a bond for the landscaping improvements consistant with City
Code.
D. Submit plans for review by the Fire Marshal.
3. Concurrent with building improvements, construct the 5 foot wide concrete
sidewalk connecting the main entrance to the sidewalk along Plaza Drive.
4. The waivers for F.A.R. and parking setback should be approved through the
P.U.D.
5. The waiver for sign location and sign area should be approved through the
P.U.D. based on the removal of the existing pylon sign, a maximum individual
).117
Memo
Festival Centre
Page 3
internally lit letter height of 36 inches, and the condition that no signs
shall be allowed on the north and west building elevations. In addition, no
future pylon sign shall be permitted.
6. The waiver for parking should be approved through the P.U.D. based on the
parking survey resulting in a reduction of 110 spaces. Parking and traffic
counts are based on information supplied at the time of this report. If
future proposed uses within the structure indicate the need for additional
parking and/or traffic generation beyond the site allocation, the proponent
may be required to submit a traffic analysis and return to the Planning
Commission and City Council for review.
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
Background
Scott A. Kipp, Assistant Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
July 7, 1989
Eden Prairie Retail Development (aka Festival Ce
n
t
r
e
)
East of Plaza Drive, south of Valley View Road
Curt Johnson Properties
Travellers Insurance
I. P.U.D. Concept Amendment on 16.2 acres.
2. P.U.D. District Review on 16.2 acres with waiv
e
r
s
f
o
r
F
l
o
o
r
Area Ratio, parking setback, number of parking
s
t
a
l
l
s
,
s
i
g
n
area and location.
3. Zoning District Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser Zon
i
n
g
District on 16.2 acres.
4. Site Plan Rev'ew on 16.2 acres.
r?.?
FROM:
THROUGH:
DATE:
PROJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
FEE OWNER:
REQUEST:
The Comprehensive Guide Plan depicts
a Regional Commercial land use for
this site and surrounding sites to
the south and west. This site is
bordered by Valley View Road to the
north, #494 to the east and south,
and Plaza Drive to the west. In
1983, the City Council approved a
Planned Unit Development concept and
zoned the property to C-Reg-Ser for
the construction of the Factory
Outlet Centre, consisting of 151,244
square feet of commercial wholesale
uses at a Floor Area Ratio of 21.11.
A waiver for parking was granted at
6.4 spaces per thousand square feet
of building, or 968 spaces. The
Factory Outlet Centre has been
closed for approximately three years
and is in need of landscaping
improvements and maintenance.
OFC
C -REC
C-REG
PROPOSED SITE
')AREA LOCATION MAP
Festival Centre 2 July 7, 1989
Site Plan
The site plan depicts a revitalization of the existing Factor
y
O
u
t
l
e
t
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
some architectural improvements and the relocation of the so
u
t
h
e
r
l
y
d
r
i
v
e
a
i
s
l
e
t
o
be used for the main entry. The construction of two new ent
r
y
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
w
i
l
l
a
d
d
a
small amount of square footage to the building bringing the
t
o
t
a
l
F
.
A
.
R
.
t
o
2
1
.
5
%
,
which is slightly above the previous waiver granted at 21.1
%
.
C
i
t
y
C
o
d
e
a
l
l
o
w
s
a
maximum F.A.R. of 20%.
A total of 959 parking stalls currently occupy the site. T
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
is based on preliminary uses consisting of 10 movie theater
s
,
t
o
t
a
l
l
i
n
g
1
,
5
0
0
s
e
a
t
s
,
and general retail. The parking required for these uses w
o
u
l
d
b
e
1
,
1
7
5
s
p
a
c
e
s
.
A
total of 1,076 parking stalls have been provided, of which 146
a
r
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
p
r
o
o
f
-
of-parking. If the proof-of-parking plan required implement
a
t
i
o
n
,
r
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
existing parking islands, and construction of a retaining
w
a
l
l
a
l
o
n
g
P
l
a
z
a
D
r
i
v
e
would be necessary to meet parking setbacks and screening re
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
P.U.D. Concept Amendment and District Review An amendment to the Factory Outlet Centre P.U.D. has been
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
e
d
,
c
h
a
n
g
i
n
g
t
h
e
use of the structure from a wholesale outlet center to a
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
r
e
t
a
i
l
a
n
d
entertainment complex. This would include a 10 screen mov
i
e
t
h
e
a
t
e
r
.
A
s
p
a
r
t
o
f
the request, the proponent is asking that waivers be grante
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
t
h
e
P
.
U
.
D
.
t
o
accommodate the proposed plan. The following waivers have be
e
n
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
:
1. Structure F.A.R.
2. Parking setback.
3. Number of required parking stalls.
4. Sign location and area (See sign request).
Because of two new entry features proposed for the struct
u
r
e
,
a
w
a
i
v
e
r
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
previous 21.1% F.A.R. to 21.5% F.A.R. will be necessary. Thi
s
m
i
n
i
m
a
l
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
m
a
y
have merit since these added features will create a necessa
r
y
f
o
c
a
l
i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
t
o
a
rather plain structure.
At the time of the original approval for this site, the plan
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
a
l
l
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
setbacks meeting City Code. When the parking lot was c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
e
d
a
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
encroachment took place along 20% of the Valley View Road fron
t
a
g
e
f
r
o
m
3
5
f
e
e
t
d
o
w
n
to 28 feet. A waiver for this existing parking setback condi
t
i
o
n
w
i
l
l
be required through this approval. Valley View Road sits at a much high
e
r
e
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
parking lot, and the upgraded landscaping plan provides
f
o
r
s
c
r
e
e
n
i
n
g
o
f
t
h
e
parking. The plan could be revised to meet Code by removing
t
h
e
s
e
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
s
t
a
l
l
s
.
However, since maximum parking is needed, the amount of stree
t
f
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
a
waiver is minimal, and the parking is screened, this waiver ma
y
h
a
v
e
m
e
r
i
t
.
A waiver for the number of theater parking stalls has b
e
e
n
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
e
d
.
C
i
t
y
C
o
d
e
requires parking for theaters based on one parking stall fo
r
e
v
e
r
y
t
h
r
e
e
s
e
a
t
s
.
T
h
e
request asks for parking to be at one stall for every fo
u
r
s
e
a
t
s
.
T
o
t
a
l
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
provided on site, including 146 proof-of-parking stalls is
1
,
0
7
6
s
p
a
c
e
s
.
C
i
t
y
C
o
d
e
requires 1,175 spaces. The parking plan is short 99 spaces
.
The proponent indicates that the amount of parking ava
i
l
a
b
l
e
o
n
s
i
t
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
intended uses will meet their needs. However, no documen
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
d
e
m
a
n
d
has been submitted which supports this.
ai2(
Festival Centre 3 July 7, 1989
Staff would recommend that the waiver not be granted at this time. The plan should
be revised to indicate the reduction in the parking demand of 99 spaces. This can
be accomplished through the reduction of 300 theater seats.
This parking analysis has been based on information provided at the time of this
report. The proponent has indicated an interest in some restaurant uses. Parking
for restaurant uses is similar to theater parking, therefore, should restaurant uses
be introduced, the need for additional parking may be necessary which could require
a return to the Planning Commission and City Council for review.
Grading, Drainage and Utilities
Minimal site alteration will take place for this proposal, except for modifications
to the entry drive and additional construction around the building to create parking
stalls. Site drainage shall be maintained as exists with the exception of a short
length of storm sewer for the proposed loading area. Relocation of two existing
fire hydrants is proposed.
Architecture
A facelift of the building's exterior will take place to enhance the site for
commercial use. The addition of a unified entrance, highlighted by a new colonnade
feature will lead visitors into the central mall area of the building. An
additional celestial metal and glass dome is to be located at the center of the
building to create a natural lighting element and focal interest. In addition, new
window openings are proposed along the east and southerly portions of the building
to create additional views into the structure. The proponent has indicated the use
of teal blue and rust as the colors for the colonnade and dome feature.
All new rooftop mechanical equipment screening is proposed to be centralized over
each wing of the building. These areas will be encompassed with pre-finished metal
screening to be architecturally integral with the main structure. A small loading
dock is proposed in the southwest corner of the building which is proposed to be
screened by an existing stand of maturing evergreen trees along Plaza Drive.
The existing Factory Outlet Centre utilized exterior trash enclosure areas screened
by earthern mounds and retaining walls. The current proposal removes these
enclosures and does not indicate where the new trash enclosures will be. Trash
areas should be incorporated into the building, or located outside and screened with
face brick enclosures and metal fronts to match the existing building.
Landscaping
Based on the building's square footage of 153,756 square feet, a total of 480
caliper inches of landscaping is required. The proposed landscaping plan
accomplishes this by providing a total of 490 caliper inches consisting of existing
healthy trees on site, replacement of dead plant material with new stock, and the
incorporation of additional new stock in order to meet the minimum caliper inch
requirement.
As part of the landscaping proposal, the proponent plans to install an irrigation
system throughout the property. This should greatly enhance the health and
condition of the existing landscaping and will minimize the maintenance requirements
for the proposed plantings.
Festival Centre
4 July 7, 1989
Site Lighting and Pedestrian Sys
t
e
m
s
The proponent intends to util
i
z
e
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
s
i
t
e
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
l
y
i
n
p
l
a
c
e
.
Additional fixtures will be in
s
t
a
l
l
e
d
n
e
a
r
t
h
e
n
e
w
c
o
l
o
n
n
a
d
e
e
n
t
r
a
n
c
e
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
with City Code.
Local pedestrian systems consis
t
o
f
a
n
d
8
f
o
o
t
w
i
d
e
b
i
t
u
m
i
n
o
u
s
t
r
a
i
l
a
l
o
n
g
t
h
e
s
o
u
t
h
Side of Valley View Road and a
5
f
o
o
t
w
i
d
e
c
o
n
c
r
e
t
e
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
a
l
o
n
g
t
h
e
e
a
s
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
Plaza Drive. The proponent in
d
i
c
a
t
e
s
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
u
r
r
o
u
n
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
drop-off area near the main ent
r
y
o
f
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
.
T
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
n
e
n
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
r
e
v
i
s
e
t
h
e
plan to connect the sidewalk f
r
o
m
t
h
e
d
r
o
p
-
o
f
f
a
r
e
a
t
o
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
a
l
o
n
g
Plaza Drive.
Sign Request
The original factory outlet PUD
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
e
d
o
n
e
l
a
r
g
e
p
y
l
o
n
i
n
l
i
e
u
o
f
a
n
y
w
a
l
l
s
i
g
n
s
.
The pylon is 58 feet high and
2
5
2
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
i
n
s
i
z
e
.
L
a
t
e
r
,
t
h
e
o
w
n
e
r
r
e
t
u
r
n
e
d
and requested four wall signs.
T
w
o
w
a
l
l
s
i
g
n
s
2
6
"
h
i
g
h
a
n
d
t
w
o
w
a
l
l
s
i
g
n
s
2
0
"
h
i
g
h
were approved. These signs are s
t
i
l
l
o
n
t
h
e
f
o
u
r
w
a
l
l
s
a
n
d
r
e
a
d
"
O
U
T
L
E
T
C
E
N
T
R
E
"
.
City Sign Code for commercial d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
s
a
l
l
o
w
s
w
a
l
l
s
i
g
n
s
u
p
t
o
1
5
%
o
f
t
h
e
w
a
l
l
a
r
e
a
when the wall does not exceed 5
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
,
o
r
a
m
a
x
i
m
u
m
o
f
7
5
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
.
W
h
e
n
the wall area exceeds 500 squa
r
e
f
e
e
t
,
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
w
a
l
l
s
i
g
n
s
a
r
e
a
l
l
o
w
e
d
a
t
5
%
o
f
the area beyond 500 square feet
w
i
t
h
a
3
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
m
a
x
i
m
u
m
.
T
h
e
w
a
l
l
a
r
e
a
i
s
t
o
be computed individually for ea
c
h
t
e
n
a
n
t
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
e
x
t
e
r
i
o
r
w
a
l
l
o
f
t
h
e
t
e
n
a
n
t
.
A free standing sign no higher
t
h
a
n
2
0
f
e
e
t
a
n
d
n
o
l
a
r
g
e
r
t
h
a
n
8
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
i
s
allowed for the first street f
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
,
p
l
u
s
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
3
6
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
s
i
g
n
s
f
o
r
other street frontages.
Through the current PUD request
,
t
h
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
i
s
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
i
n
g
t
o
l
o
c
a
t
e
a
l
l
t
e
n
a
n
t
signs on the south and east wal
l
s
i
n
s
t
e
a
d
o
f
u
p
o
n
t
h
e
w
a
l
l
t
h
e
t
e
n
a
n
t
o
c
c
u
p
i
e
s
.
N
o
signs are proposed on the north
a
n
d
w
e
s
t
w
a
l
l
s
.
T
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
p
y
l
o
n
s
i
g
n
i
s
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
to be removed. In addition, th
e
p
r
o
p
o
n
e
n
t
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
t
o
l
o
c
a
t
e
t
h
e
t
h
e
a
t
e
r
m
a
r
q
u
e
e
and additional signage on the metal
c
o
l
o
n
n
a
d
e
e
n
t
r
y
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
.
T
h
i
s
c
o
l
o
n
n
a
d
e
e
x
t
e
n
d
s
to the maximum height of 40 f
e
e
t
f
o
r
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
.
I
f
it is utilized as a sign, maxim
u
m
h
e
i
g
h
t
a
l
l
o
w
e
d
i
s
2
0
f
e
e
t
w
i
t
h
a
s
i
g
n
a
r
e
a
o
f
8
0
square feet. The sign plan shou
l
d
b
e
r
e
v
i
s
e
d
t
o
r
e
m
o
v
e
a
l
l
s
i
g
n
s
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
f
o
r
t
h
e
colonnade.
If each wall utilized maximum w
a
l
l
s
i
g
n
s
b
a
s
e
d
u
p
o
n
c
o
d
e
,
(
1
2
w
a
l
l
s
)
a
t
o
t
a
l
o
f
2
0
6
square feet of sign would be in
s
t
a
l
l
e
d
u
p
o
n
t
h
e
f
o
u
r
e
n
d
w
a
l
l
s
w
h
i
c
h
a
r
e
1
9
5
'
l
o
n
g
,
and 166 sq. ft. of sign upon th
e
r
e
m
a
i
n
i
n
g
e
i
g
h
t
w
a
l
l
s
w
h
i
c
h
a
r
e
1
4
5
'
l
o
n
g
,
n
o
t
t
h
e
300 square feet listed in the b
r
o
c
h
u
r
e
.
(
i
.
e
.
)
W
a
l
l
1
6
'
x
1
9
5
'
=
3
,
1
2
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
,
75 square feet sign for first 5
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
+
2
6
2
0
x
.
0
5
=
1
3
1
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
,
o
r
7
5
+ 131 square feet = 206 square f
e
e
t
)
.
The plans dated illustrate 37 li
n
e
a
l
feet of signs on the south wall and 69 lineal
feet of signs on the east wall.
I
t
i
s
t
h
e
i
r
d
e
s
i
r
e
t
o
h
a
v
e
a
m
a
x
i
m
u
m
o
f
9
0
0
l
i
n
e
a
l
feet if 48" letters are used o
r
1
,
2
0
0
l
i
n
e
a
l
f
e
e
t
i
f
3
6
"
l
e
t
t
e
r
s
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
.
T
h
e
proposal identifies the marqu
e
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
t
h
e
a
t
r
e
a
t
4
2
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
,
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
remaining tenants sharing 3,180
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
o
f
s
i
g
n
.
T
h
i
s
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
e
d
t
o
t
a
l
e
x
c
e
e
d
s
the maximum sign area allowed
b
y
3
4
,
A
r
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
.
T
h
e
s
i
g
n
p
l
a
n
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
r
e
v
i
s
e
d
to reduce the maximum sign area
a
l
l
o
w
e
d
p
e
r
C
o
d
e
b
y
t
h
i
s
a
m
o
u
n
t
.
22 3
Festival Centre 5 July 7, 1989
STAFF REVIEW
Staff is concerned that a four foot high letter is out of proportion to t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
height and is larger than needed to be readable.
For comparison and discussion pprpose, staff gathered sign infor
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
e
projects listed below.
Sign Letter Height Wall Height, Distance Readable
Hampton Inn 30" 37 1100' (TH5)
A to Z Rental 14" NA 1150' (494)
Pylon
Outlet Centre 26" & 20" 16' 1300' + (494 & 5)
TCBY Yogurt 36" 12' 1100' (TH5)
Marquette Bank 36" 68' 1500' US 169/212
(Lunds) Rest. 36" 22' 1100' Pr. Ctr. Dr. First Bank E.P. 30" 38' 2500' (494)
Staff believes a four foot tall letter on the buildings 16 foot wall h
e
i
g
h
t
w
i
l
l
b
e
too much coverage and greater than needed to be readable. A maximum
l
e
t
t
e
r
h
e
i
g
h
t
of three feet would be more in proportion to the building height and be
r
e
a
d
a
b
l
e
.
The letter visisbility chart used by sign companies, indicates a 3
6
"
l
e
t
t
e
r
i
s
visible 1500 feet.
The PUD request to transfer all tenant wall signs to the south and eas
t
e
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
will not serve tenants who will desire wall signs on the north and wes
t
w
a
l
l
s
w
h
i
c
h
are visible to Valley View Road and Plaza Drive. Although the proposal
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
e
s
n
o
wall signs for the north and west elevations, and no free standing si
g
n
,
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
may be submitted in the future as tenants negotiate leases and Ph
D
a
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
applications may be filed for Commission and Council review.
If the project is approved, and tenant signs are transferred to the so
u
t
h
a
n
d
e
a
s
t
walls, staff recommends a maximum letter height of 36" and a maximum w
a
l
l
c
o
v
e
r
a
g
e
of 300 square feet per wall. With three east facing walls and three s
o
u
t
h
f
a
c
i
n
g
walls, a total of 1800 square feet of signs or approximately 970 linea
l
f
e
e
t
.
T
h
e
transfer of tenant wall signs to the east and south walls is conting
e
n
t
u
p
o
n
n
o
north or west wall signs and no pylon sign as presented by the proponen
t
.
A
l
l
s
i
g
n
s
are to be located within a uniform sign band area.
This form of PUD sign approval would allow the applicant to transfer
t
e
n
a
n
t
s
i
g
n
s
t
o
the south and east elevations, gain additional coverage upon the six
s
o
u
t
h
a
n
d
e
a
s
t
walls, and not restrict a tenant's sign size by the tenants wall are
a
.
T
h
e
C
i
t
y
would limit the letter size to 36" and accept the trade of no signs o
n
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
a
n
d
west walls or a freestanding sign.
Traffic
The 1985 Traffic Study for the Major Center Area indicates an alloc
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
5
,
2
8
5
daily trips, with 391 p.m. peak trips for this site, based on the ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
F
a
c
t
o
r
y
Outlet Centre. The theater and retail uses proposed at this time
w
i
l
l
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
5,829 daily trips and 559 p.m. peak trips. With the recommended
r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
i
n
theater seating as outlined above, the daily trips will be reduced t
o
5
,
7
8
1
,
w
i
t
h
p.m. peak at 511 trips.
:42.4
Festival Centre 6 July 7, 1989
A 1988 MCA Traffic Study Update indicates a daily allocation of
7
,
0
4
9
t
r
i
p
s
f
o
r
t
h
i
s
site, with p.m. peak at 522 trips. Using this updated traff
i
c
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
,
t
h
e
proposed uses as outlined do not exceed the allowable trip gener
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
As stated earlier, the proponent has indicated interest in res
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
u
s
e
s
.
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
generation for restaurant uses is significantly higher than ge
n
e
r
a
l
r
e
t
a
i
l
a
n
d
m
a
y
warrant re-evaluation of the traffic generation. Should these
u
s
e
s
b
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
i
n
the future, a detailed traffic analysis may be required. This a
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
m
a
y
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
a reduction in traffic based on shared trips between uses. Shou
l
d
a
f
u
t
u
r
e
a
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
indicate traffic generations exceeding the 1988 study, a ret
u
r
n
t
o
t
h
e
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Commission and City Council may be required.
Summary
Staff is comfortable with the site plan and architectural revisi
o
n
s
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
f
o
r
t
h
e
existing property. Three issues concerning Staff regard par
k
i
n
g
,
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
,
a
n
d
signs.
A waiver for theater parking at one space for every four seats is
n
o
t
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
a
t
this time. No substantiation for this rate has been submitted w
h
i
c
h
w
a
r
r
a
n
t
s
t
h
i
s
waiver. Rather, the plan should be revised to reduce the number
o
f
t
h
e
a
t
e
r
s
e
a
t
s
b
y
300 to meet parking available.
The 1988 Major Center Area Traffic Study Update indicates t
h
a
t
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
t
r
i
p
generation will not exceed the allocation for this site
.
T
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
n
e
n
t
h
a
s
indicated interest in future rcstaurant uses which generates
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
a
t
a
h
i
g
h
e
r
rate than general retail. Should the proponent incorporate resta
u
r
a
n
t
u
s
e
s
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
site, a traffic analysis may be required to demonstrate that the
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
is consistent with the generation allocated for the site in th
e
1
9
8
8
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
S
t
u
d
y
.
All signs proposed for this building should not exceed a letter
h
e
i
g
h
t
o
f
3
6
i
n
c
h
e
s
.
Letter visibility charts used by sign companies indicate lett
e
r
s
o
f
t
h
i
s
s
i
z
e
a
r
e
visible at 1,500 feet. If all signs are allowed on the east a
n
d
s
o
u
t
h
s
i
d
e
s
o
f
t
h
e
building, no signs should be permitted along the north and we
s
t
w
a
l
l
s
a
n
d
n
o
p
y
l
o
n
sign should be allowed as presented by the proponent. In
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
,
a
l
l
s
i
g
n
s
proposed on the metal colonnade shall be removed.
Recommendations
Staff would recommend approval of the P.U.D. Concept Amendment
a
n
d
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
R
e
v
i
e
w
with waivers on 16.2 acres, Zoning District Amendment within
t
h
e
C
-
R
e
g
-
S
e
r
Z
o
n
i
n
g
District on 16.2 acres and Site Plan Review of 16.2 acres based
o
n
p
l
a
n
s
d
a
t
e
d
J
u
n
e
9, 1989, revised June 30, 1989, this Staff Report dated Ju
l
y
7
,
1
9
8
9
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
following:
1. Prior to City Council review, proponent shall:
A. Revise the building plan to indicate a reduction in theater se
a
t
i
n
g
from 1,500 to 1,200 seats in order to accomodate available park
i
n
g
.
B. Submit detailed information regarding the location and desig
n
o
f
trash enclosure areas consistant in materials as the main struc
t
u
r
e
.
Festival Centre 7 July 7, 1989
C. Indicate a 5 foot wide, 5 inch thick concrete sidewalk connecting
the sidewalk around the main entrance to the existing sidewalk along
Plaza Drive.
D. Submit revised sign criteria based on a maximum of 36 inch high
individual internally lit letters, located within a uniform sign
band area. Also remove all signs from the metal colonnade feature.
2. Prior to building permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Provide detailed erosion control plans for review by the City
Engineer and the Watershed District.
B. Provide detailed plans for the rooftop mechanical screening,
additional site lighting, and material and color samples for the
entry colonnade and celestry dome.
C. Submit a bond for the landscaping improvements consistant with City
Code.
D. Submit plans for review by the Fire Marshal.
3. Concurrent with building improvements, construct the 5 foot wide concrete
sidewalk connecting the main entrance to the sidewalk along Plaza Drive.
4. The waivers for F.A.R. and parking setback should be approved through the
P.U.D.
5. The waiver for sign location and sign area should be approved through the
P.U.D. based on the removal of the existing pylon sign, a maximum individual
internally lit letter height of 36 inches, and the condition that no signs
shall be allowed on the north and west building elevations. In addition, no
future pylon sign shall be permitted.
6. The waiver for theater parking at one stall for every four seats should not
be approved.
7. Parking and traffic counts are based on information supplied at the time of
this report. If future proposed uses within the structure indicate the need
for additional parking and/or traffic generation beyond the site allocation,
the proponent may be required to submit a traffic analysis and return to the
Planning Commission and City Council for review.
;_12 6
Planning Commission Minutes 7 July 10, 1989
could be Justified for the area, how was the City of Eden
Prairie progressing toward a balance of development, and
how many more R1-9.5 developments did the City want to
approve.
Anderson stated that his concern was the number of R1 -9.5
lots with R1-13.5 homes constructed on them.
Ruebling understood that based on the infrastructure the
City had approved, projects had already been approved by
the City Council to cover the 250 unit limit set by the
Southwest Area Study. Uram replied that at this time only
1 house had been constructed in the approved Cheyenne
Place subdivision and only 2 houses in the Fairfield
subdivision. Ruebling then asked if the numbers of units
was going to be controlled by the issuance of building
permits. Franzen replied that the control of the number
of units would be through the Final Platting process.
Anderson noted that no totlots had been provided for the
subdivision and that a sidewalk system would not be
available in all directions.
Bye concluded that the following issues needed to be
resolved:
1. The proponent provide a good defense for the MUSA
Line change.
2. The projects relationship to the Southwest Area
Study be specifically defined.
3. Specific requirements of the project be addressed
after issues 1 and 2 had been resolved.
MOTION:
Dodge moved, seconded by Fell to continue the public
hearing to the August 14, 1989, Planning Commission
meeting pending City receipt and evaluation of revisions
to the plans as discussed at this meeting.
D. EDEN PRAIRIE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT (FESTIVAL CENTRE), by curt
Johnson Properties. Request for Planned Unit Development
Concept Amendment and Planned Unit Development District
Review on 16.2 acres with waivers. Zoning District
Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District on 16.2
acres and Site Plan Review on 16.2 acres for development
of a 153,756 square foot commercial retail and
entertainment complex. Location: East of Plaza Drive and
south of Valley View Road. A public hearing.
The proponent had submitted a written request for a 30 -day continuance.
21'21
Planning Commission minutes 8 July 10, 1989
MOTION:
Anderson moved, seconded by Fell to continue this item to
August 14, 1989. Motion carried 6-0-0.
E. LAMETTRY CENTER, by Richard A. LaMettry. Request for
Zoning District Change from Rural to C-Regional Service on
1.88 acres, Site Plan Review, and Preliminary Plat of 1.88
acres into 1 lot for construction of a 32,698 square foot
auto body repair facility. Location: West of Plaza
Drive, southeast of Menards. A public hearing.
Richard Latiettry, proponent, stated that he was a resident
of Eden Prairie and intended to be the sole operator of
the facility, leasing space to two tenants. He added that
he operated an auto body shop in Richfield for
approximately 15 years and wished to move the business to
Eden Prairie. The proposal was for an upscale collision
facility.
John Smith, architect for the proponent, stated that
design had been a critical part of the project. The first
problem had been where to store the vehicles while they
were being worked on. A lower level was, therefore,
Installed to store the vehicles. The second problem was
how to give the facility a retail appearance. A canopy
was proposed for the front face of the facility which tied
to a stair tower penthouse where the office for the
business would be housed. smith stated that twice the
recommended amount of landscaping was being proposed.
Smith believed that the finished design was beyond that of
a typical retail business.
Sandstad asked what the on-site parking spaces would be
used for. Uram replied that the parking would be used for
employees, visitors, and customers stopping in to receive
estimates.
Fell was concerned that the lower level would be used for
work areas, reducing the parking space available inside
and then the cars would be parked outside. LaMettry
replied that the cars were either being worked on or
returned to the owner. There would not be cars sitting
around. LaMettry added that the parking area did not
encompass the entire lower level and areas could be used
to work on cars if necessary. Uram replied that the
parking requirements were based on the possibility of the
property turning over to 100% retail. Uram added that
outside storage of the vehicles would be prohibited by
City Code.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 89-194
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FESTIVAL CENTRE
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT AMENDMENT
TO THE OVERALL FACTORY OUTLET CENTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas located within the City; and,
WHEREAS, the Festival Centre development is considered a proper amendment to
the overall Factory Outlet Center Planned Unit Development Concept; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the
request of Curt Johnson Properties for PUD Concept Amendment approval to the overall
Factory Outlet Center Planned Unit Development Concept for the Festival Centre
development and recommended approval of the PUD Concept Amendment to the City
Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on September 5, 1989;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The Festival Centre development PUD Concept Amendment, being in
Hennepin County, Minnesota, and legally described as outlined in
Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a part hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept Amendment approval to
the overall Factory Outlet Center Planned Unit Development Concept
as outlined in the application materials for Festival Centre.
3. That the PUD Concept Amendment meets the recommendations of the
Planning Commission dated August 28, 1989.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 5th day of September, 1989.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
R I r
r"
PROPOSED SITE
AREA LOCATION MAP
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
Scott A. Kipp, Assistant Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
August 11, 1989
Cardinal Creek 3rd Addition
Lots 6, 7, and 8, Block 2, Cardinal Creek 3rd Addition
FROM:
THROUGH:
DATE:
PROJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER:
GAC Partners
REQUEST:
Zoning District Change from R1-13.5 to RM-6.5 on 1.21 acres.
Background
This property is part of Cardinal
Creek 3rd Addition, zoned RM-6.5 in
1982 for construction of 17 duplex
units. In 1983, Lot 1, Block 1 and
Lot 17, Block 2 were rezoned to RI-
13.5 for single family construction,
due to their relative closeness to
existing single family homes and
that the frontage lots along
Cardinal Creek Road are were all
single family. In October of 1988,
the proponent received rezoning
approval from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 for
Lots 1, 6, 7, and 8, Block 2.
Because of the difficulty in
marketing the lots, the proponent is
requesting that Lots 6, 7, and 8,
Block 2 be rezoned from R1-13.5 back
to RM-6.5 for construction of three
duplex units.
Development Plan
The three lots were platted for
duplex units back in 1982, meeting
City Code requirements. At the time
of the this approval, a variance was
granted for front yard setbacks from
Stonewood Court to 25 feet to
protect additional vegetation on
site. Since this request is to
rezone the property back to RM-6.5,
Cardinal Creek 3rd Addition 2 August 11, 1989
and that the original variance had no expiration date the 25 foot front yard setback
would still be valid and not require additional review by the Board of Appeals. All
site grading has been completed for these lots and are currently ready for
development. The architecture for this development varies, however, the proponent
should construct housing that would be comparable in value to existing structures in
the neighborhood.
Recommendations
Staff would recommend approval of the rezoning request from R1-13.5 to RM-6.5 based
on plans Staff dated July 18, 1989, and subject to the following:
1. Prior to building permit issuance pay the Cash Park Fee.
2131
AREA LOCATIONIAA15.t
',21?").
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM:
THROUGH:
DATE:
PROJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER:
REQUEST:
Background
Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
August 11, 1989
Eden Prairie Rental Center
Southwest corner of Valley View Road and Plaza Drive
A to Z Rental
1. Site Plan Review on 1.67 acres.
This site is the current location of
the A to Z Rental building which was
reviewed and approved by the
Planning Commission and City Council
in April, 1988. In response to a
potential lease for Phase III, a
series of changes to the approved
building plans have been proposed by
the owner. The Site Plan Review
ordinance requires Planning
Commission and City Council review
of significant plan changes. The
Planning Commission decided at the
July 24, 1989, meeting that the
proposed changes were significant
and would require review.
Site Plan
The original development depicted a
three phase building proposal
containing approximately 15,500
square feet. Phase I has been
constructed and is the current
location of A to Z Rental. Phases
II and III will be constructed as
part of the current proposal. Phase
II consisted of a two-story
structure containing 2,817 square
feet on both the upper and lower
levels, while Phase III depicted a
1,105 square foot retail building.
A to Z Rental 2 August 11, 1989
The current proposal depicts a two-story building throughout and will include a
hase III of 4,140 square feet on the upper level and 4,140 square feet on the lower
level. A total of 21,014 square feet is proposed as compared to 15,839 square feet
on the approved plan. The current Base Area Ratio (B.A.R.) is calculated at 14.5%
and the Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) at 28.8%. The proposed building meets the minimum
setback and building requirements in the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District. A variance for
a zero lot line rear yard setback to parking has been approved in order to allow for
parking along the rear of the building.
Based on a use designation of 10,557 square feet of retail space and 10,457 square
feet for warehouse space, a total of 70 parking stalls are required. The plans
depict a total of 71 parking stalls on site. Due to the location of outside storage
for A to Z and the buildings loading docks, approximately 16 of these parking spaces
are not useable. If additional parking is required, a reduction in outdoor storage
will be necessary.
Grading/Utilities
The proposed plan has been designed to allow for the construction of a two-story
building. This includes a cut of approximately thirteen feet along the rear of
Phase III. No other grading is required. The previous plan depicted a 2 - 4 foot
berm along the south property line designed to help screen the outside storage area.
This berm has not been installed. Prior to building permit issuance, the berm shall
be installed per the approved plans dated March 15, 1988. To futher help screen the
existing outside storage area, the parking lot should also be lowered approximately
2 feet.
iter, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer is available to the site.
landscaping
In order to help screen the parking and loading areas along the north property line,
Staff recommends the addition of six and eight foot evergreens within the 10 foot
setback area. (See Attachment A)
Architecture
The changes to the proposed building includes the introduction of a two-story
element for Phase III as well as an enclosed loading dock. The primary building
materials will be face brick and rock face block to match the existing materials.
All overhead doors shall be painted to match the existing brick colors.
Any proposed signage shall be consistent with that on the existing building.
Staff Recommendations
Staff would recommend approval of the request for Site Plan Review on 1.6 acres
based upon plans dated August 2. 1989 and subject to the Staff Report dated August
11, 1989 subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall revise the landscape plan to depict
the equal combination of six and eight foot coniferous trees along the north
property line in order to help screen the loading areas and overhead doors.
(See Attachment A)
13'3
A to Z Rental 3 August 11, 1989
Prior to building permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Complete the berm along the south property line as per the approved
plans dated March 15, 1988.
B. Complete the installation of the 5 foot concrete sidewalk along the
west side of Plaza Drive.
3. Concurrent with building construction, proponent shall provide bituminous
paving and curb and gutter for the entire parking area, including the
existing A to Z parking lot.
3. All building signage shall be consistent with the existing signs including
size, color, and letter style.
t.1
•A
MEMO
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
DATE:
RE:
Planning Commission
Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
July 20, 1989
A to Z Rental
The A to Z Rental project was approved April 18, 1988.
T
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
n
e
n
t
i
n
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
o
a potential lease for Phase III of the project has pro
p
o
s
e
d
a
s
e
r
i
e
s
o
f
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
t
o
the approved building plans. The changes to the plans
a
r
e
a
s
f
o
l
l
o
w
s
:
1. The building square footage has increased from 15,839 s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
t
o
1
9
,
7
4
4
square feet or a 24.6% increase. This change is due
t
o
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
t
w
o
story Phase III building as compared to single story whi
c
h
w
a
s
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
.
2. The Base Area Ratio has increased from 13% to 13.6%.
3. The Floor Area Ratio has increased from 21.7% to 27%.
4. The number of required parking stalls has increased f
r
o
m
6
2
s
p
a
c
e
s
t
o
7
0
spaces. This figure is based on 9,922 square feet of re
t
a
i
l
s
p
a
c
e
and 9,822 square feet of service space. If the use were to chang
e
t
o
1
0
0
%
r
e
t
a
i
l
o
r
office, a total of 119 spaces or 99 spaces would be requ
i
r
e
d
r
e
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
l
y
.
In detail, the changes to the plans include an increa
s
e
i
n
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
i
z
e
b
y
3,905 square feet and an increase in on-site parking
b
y
1
0
s
p
a
c
e
s
.
T
h
e
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
proposal is for a two story building with the lower lev
e
l
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
a
s
w
a
r
e
h
o
u
s
e
for the proposed tenant which is Eden Prairie Applia
n
c
e
.
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
,
t
h
e
p
l
a
n
s
depict an increase in the amount of grading on this
s
i
t
e
w
h
i
c
h
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
a cut of approximately 11 feet towards the rear of the build
i
n
g
.
T
h
e
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
minutes dated February 22, 1988 indicated a concern r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
s
c
r
e
e
n
i
n
g
o
f
t
h
e
outside storage area for A to Z Rental from Valley View
R
o
a
d
.
T
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
n
e
n
t
s
t
a
t
e
d
that this would be accomplished by a grade difference b
e
t
w
e
e
n
V
a
l
l
e
y
V
i
e
w
R
o
a
d
a
n
d
the proposed outdoor storage of approximately 12 fe
e
t
.
B
a
s
e
d
u
p
o
n
t
h
e
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
plans, this grade difference would be removed and view
s
t
o
t
h
e
r
e
a
r
o
f
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
may be evident. This concern was also raised in th
e
C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
m
i
n
u
t
e
s
d
a
t
e
d
March 15, 1988.
Other changes to the plans include the addition of
a
n
o
u
t
d
o
o
r
s
t
o
r
a
g
e
d
o
c
k
a
n
d
approximately 375 square feet of additional outsid
e
s
t
o
r
a
g
e
.
C
i
t
y
C
o
d
e
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
11.03, Subd. 2, I. 3. (A) states that "all docks
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
perimeter of the structure housing the principal or
a
c
c
e
s
s
o
r
y
u
s
e
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
completely enclosed". A variance will be required for
t
h
e
o
u
t
d
o
o
r
l
o
a
d
i
n
g
d
o
c
k
a
s
indicated on the proposed plans. In addition, a varia
n
c
e
w
i
l
l
b
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
f
o
r
t
h
e
outdoor storage area. City Code Chapter 11.03, Sub
d
.
2
,
J
.
2
.
s
t
a
t
e
s
t
h
a
t
"
i
n
districts N-Corn, C-Corn, C-Reg, C-Reg-Ser, C-Hwy and 1-
G
e
n
,
a
l
l
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
,
s
u
p
p
l
i
e
s
,
merchandise or other similar matter not on display for
d
i
r
e
c
t
s
a
l
e
,
r
e
n
t
a
l
,
o
r
l
e
a
s
e
to the ultimate consumer or user shall be stored within a completel
y
e
n
c
l
o
s
e
d
building within all Commercial Districts, and within the confines of sc
r
e
e
n
i
n
g
a
s
required by the performance standards of this Chapter". It is Staff's und
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
the outdoor storage area will be similar to that which currently exist
s
a
t
E
d
e
n
Prairie Appliance.
Ordinance #1-89 (Site Plan Review Ordinance) states that: "No building pe
r
m
i
t
s
h
a
l
l
be issued for the construction of an alteration or enlargement of a (i) bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
o
r
structure situated within any District, except, (a) those within the Rural
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
or One-Family Residential Districts, and (b) duplexes (dwellings desig
n
e
d
f
o
r
o
r
occupied by two families), or (ii) building or structure constituting
a
p
u
b
l
i
c
facility and service, including but not limited to Rural and One-Family Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Districts, unless it shall conform to a Site Plan and Architectural
D
e
s
i
g
n
a
s
described in C. hereof, or an amendment thereof, which has been approv
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
Council and such approval is effective as hereinafter provided. The Di
r
e
c
t
o
r
o
f
Planning may determine that an alteration or enlargement of a building or
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
Is minor and does not require conformance with an approved Site
P
l
a
n
a
n
d
Architectural Design or an amendment thereof, provided however, if the
D
i
r
e
c
t
o
r
shall not make such a determination an owner of the land on which the bui
l
d
i
n
g
o
r
structure intended to be altered or enlarged is situated may request the Co
u
n
c
i
l
t
o
make such determination."
Due to the changes to the plans and with the identified variances which
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
required, Staff does not feel that the changes are minor and has indicate
d
t
o
t
h
e
proponent that review per the Site Plan Review Ordinance is required. B
e
c
a
u
s
e
o
f
this, the proponent has requested that the Planning Commission make the dec
i
s
i
o
n
a
s
to whether the proposed changes to the plans are significant and would requ
i
r
e
b
o
t
h
Planning Commission and City Council review.
2I/1
VAC 89-11
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 89-191
VACATION OF UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTS
IN PART OF DONNAYS ROUND LAKE ESTATES 2ND ADDITION
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has certain utility and dra
i
n
a
g
e
e
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
s
described as follows:
All utility and drainage easements as shown over Lots 3, 5,
6
,
1
3
and 14, Block 3 of the record plat of Donnays Round Lake Est
a
t
e
s
2
n
d
Addition on file in the office of the County Recorded, Hennep
i
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
Minnesota.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on SEPTEMBER 5, 1989, after
d
u
e
n
o
t
i
c
e
w
a
s
published and posted as required by law;
WHEREAS, it has been determined that the said utility and dr
a
i
n
a
g
e
e
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
s
are not necessary and have no interest to the public, ther
e
f
o
r
e
,
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
vacated.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Counc
i
l
a
s
f
o
l
l
o
w
s
:
1. Said utility and drainage easements as above described are
h
e
r
e
b
y
vacated.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare a Notice of Completion
o
f
t
h
e
proceedings in accordance with M.S.A. 412.851.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on SEPTEMBER 5, 1989
.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
2133
VAC 89-12
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 89-192
VACATION OF TEMPORARY EASEMENTS FOR
EMERGENCY VEHICLE INGRESS AND EGRESS
IN CEDAR RIDGE ESTATES
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has a certain temporary easement described
as follows:
A temporary easement, recorded as Document Number 2007559 in the office
of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota, for emergency
vehicle ingress and egress over, upon and across that part of Lot 3,
Block 4, Cedar Ridge Estates, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying ten (10)
feet on either side of the following described line:
Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Lot 3; thence northerly
along the easterly boundary of said Lot 3 a distance of fifty (50)
feet to the point of beginning of said line; thence westerly
parallel to the southerly boundary of said Lot 3 and there
terminating.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on SEPTEMBER 5, 1989, after due notice was
published and posted as required by law;
WHEREAS, it has been determined that the said temporary easement is not
necessary and has no interest to the public, therefore, should be vacated.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
1. Said temporary easements as above described are hereby vacated.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare a Notice of Completion of the
proceedings in accordance with M.S.A. 412.851.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on SEPTEMBER 5, 1989.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
SEPTEMBER 5.1989
575.00
53302 APPLE RIVER CAMPGROUND TEEN VOLUNTEER PROGRAM/FEES PAID 31.00
53303 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 8-4-89 11940.74
5'7 '4 FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE PAYROLL 8-4-89 57748.59
5 3 PREMIER CAR RENTAL -CAR RENTAL-TEEN VOLUNTEER PROGRAM/FEES 492.00
35.61
672.00
1306.49
47.35
1032.85
53307 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY SERVICE 2435.52
53308 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 586.46
53309 VIKING CHEVROLET CO 1989 CHEVROLET 494 BLAZER-POLICE DEPT 15602.26
53310 PLASTICS RECYCLING CONFERENCE CONFERENCE-COUNCILMEMBER 125.00
53311 ICMA CONFERENCE CONFERENCE-ADMINISTRATION 430.00
53:12 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 42.02
53313 JAMES MATSON EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 500.00
53314 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SCHOOL-WATER DEPT 70.00
53315 NANCY BROWNE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 20.00
53316 NANCY CAUDILL REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 17.00
53317 ANNE FORENZANO REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 22.00
53318 LYNNE FORSTER REFUND-SAILING LESSONS 16.00
5:319 ROBIN FRIEDLANDER REFUND-MEMBERSHIP FEE 121.50
53320 NICOLE HEINZ REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 17.00
53321 CONSTANCE JOHNSON REFUND-DAY CAMP 45.00
53322 ANN KALIN REFUND-TWINS DAY 7.00
53723 CATHERINE KELLY REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 22.00
50324 CARL LANDBERG REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 7.50
53325 JANICE MOONEY REFUND-GOLF LESSONS 15.00
57326 PHILLIP PHAN REFUND-BASKETBALL LEAGUE 5.00
53:77 LORI WALTERSTORFF REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 15.37
5' BEER WHOLESALERS INC BEER 4317.55
DAY DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 9003.65
53330 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO BEER 21434.95
53331 KIRSCH DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 192.34
53332 MARK VII DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 19974.87
MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO MIX 753.75
53334 PEPSI COLA COMPANY MIX 711.95
573:5 ALL AMERICAN BOTTLING CORP MIX 469.35
53336 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 27:62.45
533:7 TWIN CITY HOME JUICE MIX 93.24
53338 THE BREHM GROUP -1989 HEALTH/LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM- 520.80
283.90
57745 JB LAWN LANDSCAPING & SNOWPLOWING -DRAINAGE DITCH/SOD/GRADING-DRAINAGE 1350.00
PAID
53306 CHARLES GOBLE -10 EMERGENCY MEDICAL TECHNICAN BAGS-FIRE
DEPT
COMMISSION MEMBERS
5:339 DELARIAS KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN EXPENSES-COUNCIL
53740 JIM STUKEL BOUNDARY WATERS CANOE OUIDE/FEES PAID
53341 FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE PAYROLL 8/15/89
53742 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 8/15/89
53343 CLUTCH & TRANSMISSION SER INC -FLYWHEEL/HOSE/CLUTCH PACK/BEARINGS/CLUTCH/
-CLAMP/WHEEL BALANCING-FORESTRY DEPT/
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
53344 INTL OFFICE SYSTEMS INC JULY 89 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-POLICE DEPT
CONTROL
5:346 NORTHDAIE CONSTRUCTION CO -SERVICE-MITCHELL/RESEARCH ROAD & WEST 147435.713
76TH STREET IMPROVEMENTS
53347 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE JULY 89 SALES TAX 25886.96
PETTY CASH CHANGE FUND-SUMMER PLAYGROUND 40.00
U S WEST CELLULAR INC SERVICE 111.40
794616
MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP SERVICE
AT&T SERVICE
AT&T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV SERVICE
U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE
KUO CHANG REFUND-TENNIS LEAGUE FEE
V CIOCHETTO REFUND-GOLF LESSONS
HEIDI GLOVER REFUND-GOLF LESSONS
SHELLEY GOODALL REFUND-SAILING LESSONS
JANE HERRICK REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS
SANDRA KOEPPEN REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS
TERRI MCQUILLAN REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS
ELIZABETH MADSEN REFUND-RACQUETBALL LESSONS
GALA REINA REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS
KATHLEEN SCHUTROP REFUND-PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND
PAMULA SKINNER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS
SUP VERDON REFUND-STARING LAKE PARK BUILDING RENTAL
VOID OUT CHECK
AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION CONFERENCE-ENGINEERING DEPT
AARP 55 ALIVE MATURE DRIVING DRIVING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID
NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE
CHERYL EASTBOURNE REFUND-BOUNDARY WATERS CANOE TRIP
FERN CARR REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS
HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-HUMAN SERVICES DIRECTORY
CITY-COUNTY CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 8/4/89
CROW WING COUNTY SOCIAL SUVICES CILD SUPFORT DEDUCTION
GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 8/4/89
GUARANTEE MUTUAL LIFE COMPANY AUGUST 89 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM
HENN CT" SUPPORT & COLLECTION SER CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION
ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION PAYROLL 8/4/89
INTL UNION OF OPERATING ENG AUGUST 89 UNION DUES
MINN UC FUND PAYROLL 8/4/89
MN TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 8/4/89
MUTUAL BENEFIT LIFE AUGUST 89 DISABILITY INSURANCE PREMIUM
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA SEPTEMBER 89 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 8/4/89
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 8/15/89
UNITED WAY PAYROLL 8/4/89
MINNESOTA C L E CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT
PETTY CASH PLAYGROUND EXPENSES-SUMMER PROGRAMS
MN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION & EXCISE TAX
TRANSPORTATION ELECTRONICS -PHONE REPAIR-POLICE DEPT/REAR AIR UNIT
ANIMAL CONTROL
53350
53351
5."
53354
53355
53356
53357
53358
53359
53360
53761
53362
53363
53364
53365
53366
53367
5:368
53369
53370
53371
53372
53373
53374
53375
53376
53777
c' 3
5,..9
53380
57381
53382
53383
53784
53365
53386
53387
53308
53389
53390
53391 HOPKINS POSTMASTER
53392 HOPKINS POSTMASTER
57393 CITY OF WHITE BEAR LAKE
53394 AT&T CREDIT CORPORATION
53395 AT&T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV
53396 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY
5:397 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO
53398 U S WEST CELLULAR INC
53399 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS
53400 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE
53401 FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE
ty 7 -,2 TARGET STORES
' TRANSPORTATION ELECTRONICS INC
POSTAGE-FALL BROCHURE-COMMUNITY CENTER
POSTAGE-UTILITY BILLING
EXPENSES-COUNCILMEMBER
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
PAYROLL 8/18/89
PAYROLL 8/18/89
REFUND-ROUND LAKE PAVILLION RENTAL
-2 MOBILE PHONES/AIR TIME-POLICE
FORFEITURE-DRUGS
SEPTEMBER 5.1989
55.25
538.91
32.10
4214.05
20.00
18.00
18.00
14.00
11.00
11.00
19.00
12.00
6.00
22.00
12.00
53.00
0.00
185.00
182.00
3527.29
92.00
19.00
1433.00
1463.00
166.00
4361.00
2450.38
194.76
1466.92
961.00
1194.67
25.00
2533.22
99.00
26374.55
647.63
246.50
165.00
11.06
1301.70
524.00
3362.00
663.15
16.00
93.67
65.00
29323.35
16882.87
408.30
571.41
11668.10
56803.13
50.00
2348.00
17915297
;
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
80.00
0.00
93.50
44.75
65.00
173.80
15.25
129.53
131.45
40.50
10.00
62.50
18.00
53.25
26.50
59.75
17.50
100.10
41.75
58.00
122.57
65.00
20.00
6.00
64.50
123.20
30.25
35.75
18.00
14.50
56.50
32.75
59.75
105.05
108.35
23.75
50.50
97.50
79.50
0.00
81.40
24.50
27.00
76.00
76.00
52.00
78.38
32.50
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
VAN METER & ASSOCIATES
VOID OUT CHECK
JULIE BAKER
M DAWN BAUER
SCOTT BARTEL
LINDSAY BERDAN
JENNIFER BERGMANN
BRENT BUSSEY
SHERRY BUTLER
PATRICK BYRNE
PHOEBE CANDLAND
RUTH CARR
NATHAN EAGLE
DAN EVANS
ERIN HONK
GIRISH IYER
MIKE JOHNSON
JEFF JUBERT
PAT KANUIT
TRAVIS KUSKE
MIKE LAMBERT
ALLISON LOCKE
AMY MAC DONALD
AMY MC GONIGAL
CHRIS MC INTOSH
TIM MARTIN
KELLY MORAVEC
CHRIS MUELLER
CHRISTINE MULDER
MEGAN MURRAY
SCOTT ODEGARD
TYLER 0 NEEL
JEFF OSTBY
KATIE PATTYN
MOLLIE PATTYN
ERIK PEHPOHL
JACKIE REMETA
GERALD ROGERS
PAUL ROGERS
VOID OUT CHECK
J TODD RUSSELL
JESSICA SELISKI
GREG SMITH
AMY THOMAS
AMAR VENKATAPURAM
LAURA LUOMA
TOM WALENTINY
SHELLEY WITCOFF
CLIFF AMUNDSON
BRIAN ANDERSON
JIM ANDERSON
KARI ANDERSON
STEVE ANDERSON
TIM ATKINS
CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY
53404
53405
53406
53407
53408
L,L,10
53411
53412
53413
53414
53415
53416
53417
53418
53419
53420
57421
53422
53423
53424
53425
53426
53427
53428
53429
53430
53431
53432
53433
9 -7 4
5
53436
53437
53438
53439
53440
51441
53442
53443
53444
53445
53446
53447
53448
57449
53450
5345!
53452
53453
53454
53455
53456
53457
318233
SEPTEMBER 5.1989
JEFF S AUFDERHAR
MICHAEL BECKMAN
LARRY BENNER
WILLIAM M BERANEK
DAVE BERGLAND
KATHY BERTCH
JOHN BRAUSEN
PATTIE BRODEN
DAVE BRUCKS
JEFF BULEN
JAMES HULTMAN
BARRY CAHOON
MIKE CAMPBELL
RICHARD A CARNEY
JOY CASE
PAUL M CHENEY
JIM CLARK
JUDY CLARK
GARY CLIFFORD
ROD CRIEGO
STEVE C DAHL
GREGORY DAMLO
STABLA DANIELSON
BECKY DEAN
RICHARD BEATON
LORI DENERT
JAMES P DENNISON
DAVID DOLLAHAN
KEN DREBENSTEDT
JOHN W DRISCOLL
THOMAS P DUNN
STEVE EGGERT
RON EISCHENS
DAVID J EVANS
SHERRY FELTMANN
JANE FLANIGAN
KENNETH W FOOTE
W BRYAN FUHR
G E CAPITAL FLEET SERVICES
KARI GABRIELSON
ALAN GALE
TIM GALLAGHER
DON GARDNER
MAARIE GAYTHER
JOHN D GILLEN
SUE GODWIN
RICHARD GRANNES
NANCY GRIEVE
COLEMAN GRIFFING
RON GRONFOR
SCOTT GRONHOLZ
PRASSANA GUNERATNE
BOB HALLSTROM
TOM HAMRE
DAVID W HANN
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILIT7 FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
v-se
9
53460
53461
53462
53463
53464
53465
53466
53467
53468
53469
53470
53471
53472
53473
53474
53475
53476
53477
53478
53479
53480
53481
53482
53 4 83
53486
53487
53489
53489
53490
53491
53492
53493
53494
53495
53496
53497
53498
53499
53500
57501
53502
53507
57504
53505
53506
53507
53508
53511
53512
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
00.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
200.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
200.00
200.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
58.)000 ezique
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
FEE
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100,00
100.00
100,00
100.00
100,00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
400.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
200.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
SEPTEMBER 5.1989
JOEL HANSON
GREG HASTINGS
RICK HATCHER
MAUREEN T HENSLEY
MICHAEL HERMANSEN
DAVID T HIBBISON
PAUL HINIKER
WILLIAM R HORS
ERVIN C HOFSTEDT JR
JOHN HOISVE
MICHAEL HOLTIE
MARGARET HOPKINS
BILL HORN
SHAWN HOSTAD
BRIAN HOVEY
MARY HOYSLER
SCOTT HUTCHINS
PETER IZMIRIAN
CHRIS M JESSEN
MICHAEL JENSEN
BARRY JOHNSON
MARK JOHNSON
TIM JOHNSON
MAPY ANN JONES
RANDY KELLOGG
DAVID KELLY
STEPHEN KINGSBURY
DAVID KNUTZEN
SANDY KOESTER
GREG KORTUEM
TIM KOXL1EN
SUE LANGER
SANDRA LAURING
KATIE LEE
DENISE LIEN
MICHAEL LIEN
STEVE LINDAHL
BILL LORNTSON
TOM LUNDIN
MARK MADDOX
MAGNETIC DATA INC
DAN MALONE
JOHN MARCINIEC
JAY MARTIN
JEFF MAY
SHAWN MC GINN
GARY NECKLEY
ALLEN MEINKE
JEFF MERBOTH
DEAN MEYER
CHRIS MILLER
STEVEN J MILLER
STEVE MILLMANN
JONATHON MOE
LYNETTE MULLANEY
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-PFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
ELIGIBILITY
53513
5 7 514
5
5.)16
53517
53518
53519
53520
53521
53522
53523
53524
53525
53526
53527
53528
53529
55530
53531
53532
53533
53534
53535
53536
53537
53538
53539
7 0
5 1
53542
53543
53544
53545
53546
53547
53548
53549
53550
53551
53552
51554
53555
53556
53557
53558
53559
53560
53561
57.562
53563
53564
5 7.F '5
,
53D67
5 9 00 00
zio D
SEPTEMBER 5.1989
53568 BETTE BETTS MURPHY
5"69 DANIEL I MURPHY
, 0 BOB NAGEL
5371 GREG NELSEN
53572 SHANNON NELSON
53573 ROB NESSA
53574 CHRIS NEWBERG
53575 BOB NEWSOME
53576 AL NIEDERHAUS
53577 DARON NYSTROM
53578 JOE O'CONNER
53579 DOYLE R OLSON
53580 DAVID E PAHL
53581 BOYD PALSGROVE
53582 JAMES PAULZINE
53583 JULIE PELZL
53584 RICHARD PERKINS
53585 RICHARD PERKINS
53586 JAN PERRY
53587 JODI A PETERS
53588 JOYCE T PETERSEN
53589 BRIAN L PETERSON
53590 CYNTHIA PETERSON
5359: DAVID PETERSON
53592 MARK PETERSON
53593 STEVE PETRICH
53594 HOWARD PETSINGER
ft' 1 LARRY PFAFF
0 TOM PIEPER
53597 KEITH W PLATH
53598 ANDY PLESHA
53599 DAVID PORTER
53600 MIKE POWER
53601 STEVEN E PREBISH
53602 LEE RECORDS
53603 RANDY BEHNKE
53604 STEVEN D RIEDEL
53605 SCOTT REIN
53606 JULIE ROCHE
53607 DAVID ROHR
53608 KEVIN ROQUETTE
53609 PHILIP ROSE
53610 TOM ROSCE
53611 MARK RUBENSTEIN
53612 STANLEY ROOD
53613 ST ANDREW LUTHERAN CHURCH
53614 PAUL SALENTINE
53615 TON SANDSTROM
53616 JANE SCANLON
53617 HANK SCHAFER
53618 JOSEPH SCHROEDL
53619 CHRIS SCHUGEL
5324 '0 JOHN SCHULTE
51, KENNETH SERDAR
53642 CHRIS SHELDON
570QQO
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
REFUND-SOFTBALL
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
ELIGIBILITY FEE
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
10.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
i00.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
300.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
AlquE
SEPTEMBER 5.1989
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-cOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
-REDEMPTION/PAYOFF OF COSTS & EXPENSES FOR
HOME AT 7875 EDEN COURT
EXPENSES-HUMAN RESOURCES
-BALANCE DUE AFTER EXPENSES FOR ACQUIRING
HOME AT 7825 EDEN COURT
-BALANCE DUE AFTER EXPENSES FOR ACQUIRING
HOME AT 7835 EDEN COURT
CONFERENCE-ASSESSING DEPT
POSTAGE-HUMAN SERVICES DIRECTORY
CONFERENCE-FIRE DEPT
1989 REIMBURSEMENT OF DEFERMENT PAYMENT
CONFERENCE-SENIOR CENTER
CONFERENCE-FORESTRY DEPT
2itio F
53623 RANDY SHIMANSKI
24 TOM SIERING
25 STEVEN SIMMONS
53626 LARRY SMITH
53627 ROBIN SMITH
53628 BOB SWELL
53629 DENNIS SOLIE
53630 RICHARD SPEAR
53631 BRUCE STELMAN
53672 DAN STENSON
53633 RONALD L STRAKA
53634 PETE STRONG
53635 KEVIN SZAFRANSKI
53636 VINCENT THOMAS
53637 RANDY THOMPSON
53638 ELIZABETH J TRACY
53639 DAVID TYPED
53640 DARRELL ULRICH
53641 DUANE ULRICH
53642 TIM UMPHLETT
53643 ALVIN VAN HORN
53644 BARRY B VAN LERBERGHE
53645 DENNIS VAN RAVENHORST
57646 THOMAS R VANDEPHEYDEN
53647 JEAN VERKUILEN
53648 PETE VERKUILEN
53649 LEIF WALLIN
'0 TIM WELDON
,1 JAMES WERDIN
53652 RICHARD WILSON
53653 SANDRA L WINEGAR
53654 ROBERT WINTERS
53655 KEVIN J WISHY
53656 BOB WOLFF
53657 GREG YEAKEY
53658 JULIE M YEDONI
53659 PATRICIA YOUNG
53660 CRAIG ZEMKE
53661 STEVE ZUMBUSCH
53662 SHERIFF OF HENNEPIN COUNTY
53667 VOID OUT CHECK
53664 BEST SOUNDS
53665 VOID OUT CHECK
53666 VOID CUT CHECK
53667 JUDITH MAE SORENSEN
53668 THOMAS J MILLER
53669 MARIBELLE FARR
53670 HOPKINS POSTMASTER
53671 HUTCHINSON TECHNICAL COLLEGE
5 7 '7 2 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL
3 REGION 7E AAA MN BOARD ON AGING
53674 MN SOCIETY OF ARBORICULTURE
1 96 749 69
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
200.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
10%00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
200.00
200.00
73516.63
0.00
100.00
0.00
0.00
10256.37
12016.69
95.00
125.00
30.00
96350.00
30.00
30.00
SEPTEMBER 5.1989
53675 NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON PARK CONFERENCE-FORESTRY DEPT
5,-7 6 FRANK SMETANA EASEMENTS
/ PETTY CASH EXPENSES-CITY HALL
53678 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-SENIOR CENTER NEWSLETTER
53679 CITY-COUNTY CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 8/18/89
53680 CROW WING COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION
53681 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 8/18189
53682 HENN CTY SUPPORT & COLLECTION SER CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION
PAYROLL 8/18/89
PAYROLL 8/18/89
PAYROLL 8/4/89 & 8/18/89
PAYROLL 8/18/89
PAYROLL 8/18/89
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
-EQUIPMENT RENTAL-WATER DEPT/FACILITIES
DEPT
OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL
CLEANING SUPPLIES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
DOOR REPAIR-COMMUNITY CENTER
SCOREBOARD REPAIR-COMMUNITY CENTER
PAGER SERVICE-FIRE DEPT/COMMUNITY CENTER
LAWN IRRIGATION SYSTEM REPAIR-WATER DEPT
-UNDERCOAT RAKES/COMBS-CANINE SUPPLIES-
POLICE DEPT
VCR STAND SAFETY BELT-SENIOR CENTER
SOD-PARK MAINTENANCE
EROSION CONTROL MATS-PARK MAINTENANCE
-LIFEGUARD TRAINING/CPR EOUIPMENT RENTAL-
RILEY LAKE BEACH/AQUATICS SUPERVISOR
BOOKS-WATER DEPT
DUES-WATER DEPT
-UNIFORMS-WATER DEPT/BUILDING INSPECTIONS
-DEPT/FACILITIES DEPT/COMMUNITY CENTER/
MATS-LIQUOR STORE
SIGNS/POSTS-STREET DEPT/PARK MAINTENANCE
EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT
HELIUM TANK/VALVE RENTAL-POLICE DEPT
SPRINKLER FITTINGS-FACILITIES DEPT
LOCK REPAIR-WATER DEPT/POLICE BUILDING
-BATTERIES/BRAKE FLUID/POWER STEERING
-FLUID/WINDSHIELD WASHER FLUID/CLAMPS/
FLASHERS/SPARK PLUGS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
-RATCHET WRENCH SET/CENTER PUNCH-EQUIPMENT
MAINTENANCE
SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
-REPAIR & PAINT POLICE VEHICLE-EQUIPMENT
MAINTENANCE
5766316
a.tcoe÷
53683 ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION
53684 MN TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNION
53685 NORWEST BANK HOPKINS
53686 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA
53687 UNITED WAY
53688 SHERRY BUTLER
53689 ALLISON LOCKE
53690 KATIE PATTYN
53691 MOLLIE PATTYN
53692 TIM RONHOVDE
53693 MIKE JENSEN
53694 CHRISTOPHER M JESSEN
53695 BILL LORNTSON
53696 A TO 2 RENTAL CENTER
53697 ACP0-MINNESOTA INC
53698 ACE CHEMICAL PRODUCTS INC
5 36 99 VOID OUT CHECK
53700 AIRLIFT DOORS INC
5(
AIM ELECTRONICS INC
5".. • AIRSIGNAL INC
53703 ALBRECHT
53704 RAY ALLEN MFG CO INC
53705 ALPHA VIDEO & AUDIO
53706 AL'S LANDSCAPING & NURSERY INC
53707 AMERICAN EXCELSIOR CO
53708 AMERICAN RED CROSS
53709 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOC
53710 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOC
53711 AMERICAN LINEN SUPPLY CO
53712 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC
53713 ANDERSON'S GARDEN
53714 ANDON INC
53715 AQUA ENGINEERING INC
53716 ARMOR SECURITY INC
53717 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC
53718 8 & S TOOLS
53 -'9 BRUCE BETTENDORF
BERGIN AUTO BODY
145.00
13000.00
63.40
72.36
1638.00
186.00
4361.00
194.76
1468,92
25.00
1000.00
27893.84
246.50
29.70
84.15
38.50
38.50
106.84
100.00
100.00
100.00
95.40
91.75
147.20
0.00
65.75
502.48
113.00
159.85
28.52
18.00
22.00
156.00
244.00
53.20
1559.00
614.12
1156.70
34.99
46.40
59.85
151.00
676.38
65.65
240.00
469.45
SEPTEMBER 5.1939
53721 BFI MEDICAL WASTE SYSTEMS SERVICE
51722 BFI RECYCLING SYSTEMS OF MN INC -7000 RECYCLING CONTAINTERS-SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT
t,i23 BIFFS INC WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE
53724 BIG A CHANHASSEN -FILTERS/BRAKE PADS/OIL/TRAILER CONNECTORS/
-TAPE/CARBURETOR FLOAT/FREON/BEARINGS/
-0-JOINT/BRAKE PARTS-WATER DEPT/EQUIPMENT
MAINTENANCE
53725 JAMES BITTNER SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
53726 BLACKS PHOTOGRAPHY -FILM/FILM PROCESSING-HUMAN SERVICES DEPT/
-POLICE DEPT/FIRE DEPT/FORESTRY DEPT/
PLANNING DEPT
53727 ISAAC R BLAKEY JR SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
53728 BRIAN BLANCH EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT
53729 BLEVINS CONCESSION SUPPLY CO -CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES/EQUIPMENT
-REPAIR-ROUND LAKE CONCESSION/COMMUNITY
CENTER CONCESSION
53730 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON 2 POLYGRAPHS-POLICE DEPT
53731 LOIS BOETTCHER MINUTES-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION
53732 BORCHERT-INGERSOLL INC PISTONS/LINING/REPAIR KITS-EQUIPMENT MAINT
53733 DOVER FORD TRUCKS INC TRUCK CHASSIS-STREET DEPT
53734 TOBY BOYUM HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
53735 BRAUN END TESTING INC SERVICE-SEALCOAT AGGREGATE TESTING
53736 BROADWAY EQUIPMENT To CLEANING SUPPLIES-FACILITIES DEPT
53737 BRW INC -SERVICE-TRAFFIC SIGNALS IN MAJOR CENTER
AREA
53738 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC GRAVEL-PARK MAINTENANCE
f' 7 9 NATHAN DUCK SOFTBALL & VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
0 CASE POWER & EOUIPMENT CABLE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
53741 GALE TYPE OFFICE EQUIPMENT CO -TYPEWRITER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS-FIRE
DEPT
53742 CARDOX CORP CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT
53743 JOHN E CARLON III MILEAGE/EXPENSES-SEWER DEPT
53744 CARLSON'S TREE SERVICE TREE REMOVAL-FORESTRY DEPT
53745 LARRY CARTER LICENSE FEE-SEWER DEPT
53746 CITY OF CHASKA SPRING GOLF LESSONS/FEES PAID
53747 CENTRAIRE INC -REPLACE BELT FOR AIR CONDITIONING UNIT-
SENIOR CENTER
53748 CLEVELAND COTTON PRODUCTS PAPER TOWELS-WATER DEPT
53749 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO BLACKTOP-STREET MAINTENANCE
53750 COMMUNICATIONS CENTER RADIO ADAPTER-FACILITIES DEPT
53751 ROBERT W COMPTON INC -SERVICE-CONCRETE WORK-SUNNYDROOK RD-
HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM
53752 COMPUTER PLACE COMPUTER REPAIR-POLICE DEPT
53753 CONCRETE RAISING INC CURBING-DRAINAGE CONTROL
53754 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC SEALANT-SEWER DEPT
53755 CMI INC -FILTERS/MARKERS/CAR WINDOW MOUNT-POLICE
FORFE1TURE-DRUGS
53756 CONTACT MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS INC RADIO REPAIR-POLICE DEPT/EQUIPMENT MA1NT
53757 CORPORATE RISK MANAGERS INC AUGUST 89 INSURANCE CONSULTANT
53758 CROWN PLASTICS INC PLASTIC SHEETING-PARK MAINTENANCE
53759 CULLIGAN SERVICE
53 7 60 CURTIN MATHESON SCIENTIFIC INC LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT
CUSTOM FIRE APPARATUS INC -2 STAINLESS STEEL PLATES/PUMPER TANK
REPAIRS/PUMP TESTS-FIRE DEPT
8422727
45.00
35000.00
1886.93
1141.65
105.00
304.65
882.00
40.00
1744.65
200.00
61.88
804.25
21345.00
306.50
68.40
127.44
1219,55
78.59
1473.00
20.66
315.00
226.73
165.45
2800.00
7.50
92.00
79.16
96.44
7307.01
20.00
2075.00
87.00
1425.00
90.00
178.45
120.30
560.00
243.00
56.60
157.48
1270.00
'11 12')
cN n• •
SEPTEMBER 5.1989
53762 CUSTOM REFRIGERATION INC -INSTALL ICEMAKER/WATER LINE & DRAIN-FIRE
DEPT
I 3 CUTLER-MAGNER COMPANY QUICKLIME-WATER DEPT
5.,/64 TOM DAHLEN SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
53765 DALCO -CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/FACILITIES
DEPT/COMMUNITY CENTER
53766 DAN & DAN'S MINUTEMAN PRESS PRINTING-FIRE DEPT
53767 DATED BOOKS -OFFICE SUPPLIES-SEWER DEPT/STREET MAINT/
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
53768 MONICA DAY
SERVICE-EMPLOYEE NEWSLETTER
53769 DECORATIVE DESIGNS SEPTEMBER 89 SERVICE-CITY HALL
53770 DEN CON LANDFILL INC JULY 69 WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE
5:771 SUE DENNIS MILEAGE-OUTDOOR CENTER
53772 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY CE BOILER & AIR TANK LICENSES-WATER DEPT
53773 EUGENE DIETZ AUGUST 89 EXPENSES-ENGINEERING DEPT
53774 DON EVE & SONS SERVICE-MOWING-STREET MAINTENANCE
53775 DRISKILLS SUPER YALU -EXPENSES-AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND/OUTDOOR
-ADVENTURE/ROUND LAKE CONCESSION/CENTER
-CARE/COMMUNITY CENTER CONCESSION
NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH PROGRAM
53776 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU -EXPENSES-COUNCIL/ROUND LAKE CONCESSION/
-SUMMER SKILL DEVELOPMENT/SPORTS/SPECIAL
-CAMPS/TEEN WORK PROGRAM/HISTORICAL &
CULTURAL COMMISSION/ORGANIZCD ATELETICS
53777 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT
53778 PAULA DUNNUM AEROBICS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID
53779 DUSTCOATING INC DUSTCOATING-STREET MAINTENANCE
Sr 1 CONSTRUCTION MIDWEST INC TUBING-STARING LAKE PARK
EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY JULY 89 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY HALL
53782 ECOLAB PEST ELIMINATION DIVISION AUGUST 89 SERVICE-FIRE STATIONS
53783 EDEN PRAIRIE ASSEMBLY OF GOD REFUND-VARIANCE APPLICATION
53784 E P PHOTO FILM/FILM PROCESSING-POLICE DEPT
53785 CITY OF EDINA JULY 89 WATER TESTS-WATER DEPT
53786 DEB EDLUND MINUTES-PLANNING COMMISSION
53787 JOHN H EKLUND WASTE DISPOSAL-FORESTRY DEPT
57788 ELK RIVER CONCRETE PRODUCTS JOINT SEAL/CULVERT RINGS-DRAINAGE CONTROL
53789 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC AIR PACK PACKING-FIRE DEPT
577 9 0 CHRIS ENGER AUGUST 89 EXPENSES-PLANNING DEPT
53791 EROCOA INDUSTRIES INC -PADDLES/PEDALS/STEERING ARM ASSEMBLY-PARK
MAINTENANCE
537 9 2 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC -21 MANHOLE ADJUSTMENT R1NGS-$1155.00/
STOOL/GRATE-DRAINAGE CONTROL
53793 LYNDELL FREY -VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID/EXPENSES-
BOUNDARY WATERS CANOE TRIP
53794 FIRE INSTRUCTORS ASSN TRAINING SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT
57795 THE FITNESS STORE EXPANDER SCREW-FITNESS CENTER
53796 FLOYD SECURITY -4TH QUARTER 89 SECURITY SYSTEM-CUMMINS
GRILL HOUSE
53797 POUR STAR BAR & RESTAURANT SUPPLY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES
53796 GARDNER HARDWARE CO LOCKS/KEYS-COMMUNITY CENTER
53 7 9 9 KATE GARWOOD MILEAGE-PLANNING DEPT
53800 DARRELL GEDNEY HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
53 90 1 GELLER'S AUTO PARTS INC DUMP TRUCK HOOD-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
5( GENERAL OFFICE PRODUCTS CO OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL
57'0, GENERAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT CORP -REPLACE VALVE & PLUMBING/REPAIRED HANDLES
-ON DROP TANK STORAGE COMPARTMENT-FIRE
381.7:0
6697.88
270.00
1172.40
105.25
97.00
230.00
49.50
40.00
40.00
50.00
200.00
420.00
333.02
223.1:
499.50
100.00
9240.00
95.00
616.80
317.25
125.00
33.24
328.00
250.00
735.00
310.17
14.00
200.00
96.50
1317.00
440.50
1382.00
16.75
60.00
549.65
96.50
44.25
23.00
750.00
64.00
453.10
2246119
214
DEPT
53804 GETTING TO KNOW YOU ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES
53805 GLASS SERVICE CO INC REPLACE WINDOW-FIRE STATION
57 ,06 JOE GLEASON HOCKEY & SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
5, ' GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD WATER CUPS-FITNESS CENTER
53608 CHARLES GOBLE EMERGENCY MEDICAL TECHNICANS BAG-FIRE DEPT 53809 GOODYEAR COMMERCIAL TIRE & SERVIC TIRES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
53810 w W GRAINGER INC 3 FANS-WATER DEPT 53811 GRANT mERR1TT & ASSOCIATES LTD -JULY 89 LEGAL SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD
LANDFILL
53812 GRIFFC0 INC SANDER BEARINGS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
53813 GROSS OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 53814 GT COMMERCIAL SERVICES INC SERVICE-MOWING-PLEASANT HILLS CEMETERY
53815 LEROY GUBA HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 53816 ROBERT HANNON HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
53817 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON INC SERVICE-STARING LAKE PARK
53818 HEIMARK FOODS CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER
53819 HENNEPIN COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE DISTRIBUTION OF FORFEITURE FUNDS
53820 HENNEPIN COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE DISTRIBUTION OF FORFEITURE FUNDS
53821 HENN CTY-SHERIFFS DEPT JULY 89 BOOKING FEE-POLICE DEPT 53822 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER -SERVICE-BAKER ROAD STREET IMPROVEMENTS/
JULY 89 WASTE DISPOSAL-FORESTRY DEPT
53823 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
FILING FEE-PLANNING DEPT
53824 VOID OUT CHECK
53825 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
POSTAGE-VOTER REGISTRATION VERIFICATIONS 5382" HENNEPIN TECHNICAL INSTITUTE
SCHOOL-FIRE DEPT 53827 HERZOG PETROLEUM
MOTOR OIL-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
53828 D C HEY COMPANY INC -DEVELOPER-PUBLIC WORKS DEPT/MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT-FIRE DEPT
HOFFERS INC
FIELD MARKING PAINT-PARK MAINTENANCE HOLMSTEN ICE RINKS INC -GAUGE/STARTER-ACRYLIC SHEETING-ICE ARENA-
COMMUNITY CENTER
53831 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL GIST 4272 -BUS SERVICE-SUMMER SKILL DEVELOPMENT/
-SPECIAL TRIPS/EVENTS/AFTERNOON ADVENTURE/
-NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH PROGRAM/ROOM RENTAL-
COMMUNITY BAND 53832 INTL OFFICE SYSTEMS INC -AUGUST 89 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY HALL/
POLICE DEPT 53833 GARY ISAACS
SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
53834 J & R RADIATOR CORP
RADIATOR REPAIR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
53835 DEAN R JACOBS
MILEAGE/EXPENSES-ASSESSING DEPT
53836 GARY JASPERS
MILEAGE-PARK MAINTENANCE 53837 JERRY'S NEWMARKET
EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT
53838 CHRIS JESSEN
SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 5:839 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC
OFFICE SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/CITY HALL 53840 N CRAIG JOHNSON MAI
APPRAISAL FEE-PIONEER TRAIL
53841 HERB JOHNSON
UNIFORM-RILEY LAKE BEACH
53842 CARL JULLIE
JULY & AUGUST 89 EXPENSES-ADMINISTRATION 53843 JOHN A KAZ
SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 53844 TOM KEEFE
SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 53845 KEYS WELL DRILLING CO
WELL 410 REPAIRS-WATER DEPT 53846 SCOTT KIPP
MILEAGE/EXPENSES-PLANNING DEPT
53847 BRADLEY KNUTSON
SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
53848 GREG KORTUEM
SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
;64
99.00
435.34
373.00
27.10
40.00
838.72
402.81
2566.70
377.29
26.32
265.00
46.00
80.00
3670.84
137.34
70.00
29.42
404.74
59914.77
268.00
0.00
45.75
270.00
48.00
86.69
566.40
701.13
718.04
435.63
807.50
91.50
50.25
6.25
95.72
60.00
225.58
1800.00
3.13
75.23
45.00
60.00
1272.55
6.90
357.00
345.00
)14/ar
-GAUGES/CONNECTORS/HOSES/SQUARES/FAN/
-ADAPTORS/WEED CUTTER/PAINT/BOLTS/NUTS/
-SPOOLIGHT/BRACKETS/PIPE/FITTINGS/TAPE/
-DRILL PUMP-WATER DEPT/FIRE DEPT/EQUIPMENT
MAINTENANCE/PARK MAINTENANCE
-JULY 89 LEGAL SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD
LANDFILL
AUTO CRANE-SEWER DEPT
SOD/BLACK DIRT-WATER DEPT/PARK MAINTENANCE
-TILE WORK-INDOOR POOL & WADING POOL-
COMMUNITY CENTER
-APRIL 89 LEGAL SERVICE/JUNE & JULY 89
FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL
-COVERALLS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/MATS-
LIQUOR STORE
-REPAIR & PAINT POLICE VEHICLE-EQUIPMENT
MAINTENANCE
FILM PROCESSING-FORESTRY DEPT
JUNE 89 SERVICE
BEAM REGULATOR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT
EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT
-TREATED LUMBER/PLYWOOD/TIMBERS-STREET
MAINT!EOUIPMENT MAINT/STARING LAKE PARK
PUMP REPAIR/GUTTER BROOM-EQUIPMENT MAINT
EXPENSES-OUTDOOR CENTER
-FINAL PAYMENT-HOCKEY RINK REPAIRS/1 PRINT-
COMMUNITY CENTER
-SEPTEMBER 89 COMPUTER MAINTENANCE-POLICE
DEPT
TOWING-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
-PRINTING-FALL BROCHURE-RECREATION
SUPERVISOR
SEPTEMBER 5•1929
53849 KRAEMER'S HOME CENTER
53850 L LEHMAN & ASSOCIATES INC
53851 LA HATS MEG & SALES INC
53852 LAMBENT SOD & LANDSCAPING
53853 LAND OF LAKES TILE CO
53854 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD
53855 LEEF BROS INC
53856 LESMANN ENTERPRISES INC
53857 LINHOFF CORPORATE COLOR
53858 LOGIS
53859 LP GAS EQUIPMENT
53860 TRACY LUKE
53841 LUNDS DELI STYLE RESTAURANT
53862 LYMAN LUMBER CO
53863 MACCUEEN EQUIPMENT INC
53844 RODERICK MACRAE
53865 MASTER FRAMES INC
MASYS CORPORATION
53847 MAILS AUTO SERVICE INC
53848 MBA DESKTOP PUBLISHING PLUS
262.98
5450.55
4268.00
833.50
5036.00
24905.83
105.00
574.00
16.05
13728.26
41.10
26.45
70.85
693.63
1009.00
107.99
363.12
1295.00
64.00
820.00
51.15
401.00
34.95
604.14
154033.51
22770.00
11942.01
156.01
1303.20
439.20
57.00
49.00
13.07
135.23
76.64
46.88
22.00
240.00
7.95
224.64
53869 MEDICAL OXYGEN & EOUIP CO OXYGEN-FIRE DEPT
57870 METRO PRINTING INC PRINTING FORMS-ANIMAL CONTROL
53871 METROPOLITAN FIRE EQUIP CO FIRE EXTINOUISHER-COMMUNITY CENTER
53872 METROPOLITAN MECHANICAL CONTRACTO -WATER HEATER REPAIR/PVC PIPE REPAIR-ICE
ARENA-COMMUNITY CENTER
53873 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS SEPTEMBER 89 SEWER SERVICE CHARGES
53874 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS JULY 89 SAC CHARGES
53875 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP BLACKTOP-STREET MAINTENANCE
53874 MIDWEST SIGN & SCREEN PRINTING SU -PAINT/ROLLER COVER-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL
COMMISSION
53877 MN CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY 8 ADAPTERS-FIRE DEPT
53878 MN SUBURBAN PUBLICATIONS
ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES
53879 MOTOROLA INC
RADIO REPAIR-POLICE DEPT
53880 MOP AIRPORT NEWS
ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES
53881 MCI DISTRIBUTING CO PACKS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
53882 WM MUELLER & SONS INC SAND-PARK MAINTENANCE
53883 MUNICILITE CO
STROBE LIGHT-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
53884 MCGRAW HILL PUBLISHING COMPANY
BOOK-PARK PLANNING
53895 N 7 0 A
MEMBERSHIP FEE-POLICE DEPT
53R 9 4 NAIL FIRE PROTECTION ASSN
MEMBERSHIP FEES-FIRE DEPT
5 ' NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE
BOOKING CAMERA-POLICE DEPT
5O,00 NATIONAL SCREENPRINT
T SHIRTS-TEEN WORK PROGRAM
09 9
SEPTEMBER 5.1989
53889 NOBLE & ASSOCIATES INC SERVICE-FLY1NG CLOUD LANDFILL 1886.52
5:5290 NORTH STAR INTL TRUCKS INC DUMP TRUCK & BODY-STREET DEPT 38255.85
NORTHERN ENGINE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
280.99
5./2 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO -SERVICE-PRESERVE BLVD/PRAIRIE CENTER RD/ 18394.25
-VALLEY VIEW RD/GOLDEN TRIANGLE DR &
VALLEY VIEW RD
53893 NORTHLAND ELECTRIC SUPPLY COMPANY ELECTRICAL CONNECTIONS-FIRE DEPT
507.37
53894 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC BLACKTOP-STREET MAINTENANCE
704.00
53895 OCHS BRICK & TILE CO CEMENT-DRAINAGE CONTROL 67.50
53896 OFFICE PRODUCTS OF MN INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL 118.20
53897 OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC -CABLE/TURNBUCKLE/EYEBOLT/ROD/WOOD AUGER 370.82
BIT/CLIPS-PARK MAINTENANCE
53898 DAVE ORLOWSKY SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 90.00
53899 PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CENTER
STRESS TESTS-FIRE DEPT 366.00
5:900 PEPSI COLA COMPANY -CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-ROUND LAKE 349.50
CONCESSION/COMMUNITY CENTER CONCESSION
53901 PERSONNEL FOOL -SERVICE-PARK & RECREATION DEPT/PLANNING 871.65
DEPT
57902 PERSONAL REPORT SUBSCRIPTION-FINANCE DEPT 51.72
53903 CONNIE L PETERS MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER 24.75
53904 THE PINK COMPANIES OFFICE CHAIR REPAIRS-POLICE DEPT 73.50
53905 FLORAL BLACKTOPPING INC PAVER RENTAL-STREET DEPT 1370.00
53906 PLYMOUTH PLUMBING INC REFUND-PLUMBING PERMIT 104.00
53907 POMMER COMPANY INC TROPHIES-PACQUETBALL LEAGUE 25.40
53908 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC -CIRCUIT BREAKER REPAIRS/INSTALL 554.85
-RECEPTACLE-COMMUNITY CENTER/POLICE BLDG/
LIQUOR STORE
' PRAIRIE HARDWARE SCREWS/ANCHORS/BRACKETS/HOOKS-FIRE DEPT 29.65
PRAIRIE HARDWARE -BATTERIES/RUBBER GLOVES/TAPE/GAS CANS/ 109.22
-CLASPS/SCREWS-ENGINEERING DEPT/FACILITIES
DEPT
53911 PRAIRIE HARDWARE -GASKET/LATCH/TAPE RULE/HOOKS/ANCHORS/ 211.57
-PLUGS/CHAIN/CABLE/SPRAY PAINT/SCREWBIT
-SET/SCREWDRIVER/SCREWS/DRILL BIT/CEMENT
PATCH-COMMUNITY CENTER
53912 PRAIRIE LAWN !, GARDEN -2 WEED TRIMMERS-$598.00/PARK DEPT/POINTS 602.10
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
53913 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING PRINTING-PLANNING DEPT 74.40
53914 PRENTICE-HALL INC BOOK-PARK PLANNING 65.46
53915 PRESERVE INSURANCE AGENCY LIABILITY INSURANCE-LIQUOR STORES 3656.35
53916 PRINT GALLEY INC PRINTING-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 58.28
53917 PRO BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS INC TELEPHONE SERVICE-CITY HALL 265.00
5391S PULSAFEEDER CHEMICAL FEEDER REPAIR-WATER DEPT 620.30
53919 CATHERINE PUTKA MILEAGE-UTILITY BILLING 45.75
53920 R 5 11 SPECIALTIES INC -ZAMPONI BLADES SHARPENED-ICE ARENA- 82.80
COMMUNITY CENTER
53921 MR RANDY RANNOW REFUND-DEVELOPMENT FEE 315.00
53922 RECREONICS CORP ROPE/STEP-ROUND LAKE BEACH/POOL OPERATIONS 364.30
53923 SCOTT REIN SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 480.00
53924 RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS OF MN CASH REGISTER TAPE-LIQUOR STORE 49.65
53925 CITY OF RICHFIELD -3RD QUARTER 89 DISPATCH SERVICE-$19910.91- 30496.91
-POLICE DEPT/C1TY'S SHARE OF ADAPTIVE
RECREATION COORDINATOR-110586.00
ROAD MACHINERY & SUPPLIES CO -WINDOW/TEMPERATURE GAUGES/KNOB/ELBOW- 141.44
EOUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
210L
FIRST AID RESCUE EQUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT
MILEAGE-OUTDOOR CENTER
WEED SPRAYING-CUMMINS GRILL HOMESTEAD
TOWELS-EQUIPMENT MAINT/PARK MAINT
-OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY MALL/POLICE DEPT/
COMMUNITY CENTER
VIDEO CASSETTE-WATER DEPT
CLEANING SUPPLIES-FACILITIES DEPT
-BELT/CLEANING SUPPLIES-EQUIPMENT MAINT/
PARK MAINTENANCE
SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT
SIGNS/LABELS/TAGS-WATER DEPT
SERVICE-COMMUNITY CENTER REPAIR
VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
AUGUST 89 EXPENSES-ASSESSING DEPT
-01L/LUBRICANTS/V BELT/CLEANING SUPPLIES/
-GAS-WATER DEPT/FACILITIES DEPT/EQUIPMENT
MAINTENANCE/COMMUNITY CENTER
SEPTEMBER 5.1989
53927 ROAD RESCUE INC
53"9 KAROL ROCKLER
ROSEWAY ENTERPRISES
53930 SAFETY KLEEN CORP
53931 ST PAUL BOOK t STATIONERY CO
53932 SAFETY & TRAINING SERVICES
53933 SANCO INC
53934 SAVOIE SUPPLY CO INC
53935 WILBUR W SCHULTZ
53936 SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS DIVISION
53937 SEXTON NAME PLATE COMPANY
53938 SETTER LEACH & LINDSTROM INC
53939 CYNTHIA SEVERTSON
53940 STEVEN R SINELL
53941 W GORDON SMITH CO
3113.73
40.00
103.74
191.25
44.85
180.00
6.50
171.00
409.00
143.84
83.15
2196.57
108.00
233.00
208.93
53942 SNAP ON TOOLS CORP -CHASER SETS/PUNCH/WRENCHES/SOCKET SETS/ 414.20
GAUGES-WATER DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
53943 THOMAS SOPCZYK MILEAGE-HUMAN RESOURCES 21.00 53944 SOUTH HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES CCU 2ND QUARTER 89 SERVICE-HUMAN SERV
I
C
E
S
2850.00 5:945 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC EMPLOYMENT ADS-POLICE DEPT/HUMAN RESOURCES 377.63 53946 SPORTS WORLD USA SOFTBALLS/ICE PACKS-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS 150.39 53947 DONNA STANLEY MILEAGE-SENIOR CENTER 27.13 53948 EMMETT STARK COMMUNITY BAND DIRECTOR/FEES PAID 785.00 57 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRIBUTION OF FORFEITURE FUNDS 35.00 53 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRIBUTION OF FORFEITURE FUNDS 14.71 53951 STATE TREASURER JULY 29 BUILDING SURCHARGES 5158.29 5:952 THE STOCK HOUSE INC FILM-POLICE DEPT
81.44 53953 STOREFRONT/YOUTH ACTION -2ND QUARTER 89 YOUTH COUNSELING &
2500.00
REFERRAL SERVICES-HUMAN SERVICES DEPT
53954 STREICHERS PROFESSIONAL POLICE ED -GUN HOLSTER/GUN POUCH/SPOTLIGHT/
P
A
I
N
T
/
4946.99 -TAPE/AMMUNITION/PROTECTIVE GLASSES/
-CLEANING EQUIPMENT/CHARGER/2 BALLISTIC
-VESTS/POINT BLANK COVERS FOR BALLISTIC
-VESTE/LOCK/LIGHTBARS/FLASHER/SPEAKERS-
-POLICE DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/
-FOREARM GRIPS/HEARING PROTECTION EARMUFFS-
POLICE FORFEITURE DRUGS 53955 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET -ARM ASSEMBLY/SOCKETS/STUDS/NUTS/SEALS/ 773.56 -BOLTSISPRINGS/SEAL ASSEMBLIES/LUBRICANT
-SEALS/FLYWHEEL/PAINT/VALVE/PIPES/MUFFLER-
WATER DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
53956 SULLIVANS SERVICES INC WASTE DISPOSAL-OUTDOOR CENTER 87.14 53957 SUN ELECTRIC CORPORATION -SPRING/HOSE ASSEMBLY/FILTER-EQUIPMENT 102.85 MAINTENANCE
53958 SUNSET PRINTING R. ADVERT SPECIALT FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES-FIRE DEP
T
:17.30 53 9 59 SUPERIOR PRODUCTS -REFRIGERATOR-$1195.00/FREEZER-$465.00/ 3408.47
53960 SUPRA COLOR LABS INC
539 ,.1 NATALIE SWAGGERT
ST SYSTEM CONTROL SERVICES
, TARGET STORES
ICEMAKER REFRIGERATOR-$1430.00-FIRE DEPT
FILM DEVELOPING-POLICE DEPT
AUGUST 89 EXPENSES-HUMAN RESOURCES
WELL POWER SOURCE REPAIR-WATER DEPT
-TAGBOARD/SAFETY PINS/CLOTHESPINS/PAPER
-TOWELS/CLEANING SUPPLIES-NEIGHBORHOOD
9.00
215.00
:13.45
14.66
„^s 1;'_)(11
OUTREACH PROGRAM
53964 TAYLOR SALES INC BEARINGS/SCRAPER BLADES-COMMUNITY CENTER
53965 TENNANT COMPANY -01L FILTER CAPS/DISTRIBUTOR CAP/POINT SET/
CONDENSER/ROTOR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
t , THOMPSON PLUMBING CO REFUND-PLUMBING PERMIT
5 -,>767 VAL TRADER AEROBICS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID
53968 YEN TRAM VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
53969 TROPICAL SNO OF MN -CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-ROUND LAKE PARK/
COMMUNITY CENTER
53970 TWENTIETH CENTURY PLASTICS ZIPPER BAGS-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT
53971 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO OXYGEN/ACETYLENE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
53972 TWIN CITY PRICING & LABEL INC TAPE-LIOUOR STORE
53973 UNITED LABORATORIES INC STAINLESS STEEL POLISH-WATER DEPT
53974 VALLEY INDUSTRIAL PROPANE INC GAS CYLINDERS-COMMUNITY CENTER
53975 VESSCO INC CHEMICAL FEEDER REPAIR-WATER DEPT
53976 VICOM INC -SEPTEMBER 89 WIRE MAINTENANCE-PUBLIC
-WORKS BUILDING/AUGUST 89 WIRE MAINTENANCE-
COMMUNITY CENTER
53977 VICTOR CARLSON & SONS INC -REPLACE DRIVEWAY/CONSTRUCT CONCRETE SLAB-
HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM
53978 VIKING LABORATORIES INC CHEMICALS-POOL OPERATIONS
53979 VOLUNTEER FIREMEN'S BENEFIT ASSN INSURANCE-FIRE DEPT
53980 KEITH WALL AUGUST 89 EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT
53981 WATER PRODUCTS CO -GASKETS/RISERS/LIDS/FITTINGS/2 3" 1000
-GAL METERS-$2600.00/PVC PIPE/SOLVENT-
WATER DEPT/DRAINAGE CONTROL
53982 wATERITE INC SKIMMER COVERS-POOL OPERATION
53983 PAUL WELIN SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
53984 SANDRA F WERTS MILEAGE-SENIOR CENTER
57 7 WESTBURNE SUPPLY INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER
5L , DAVID WHITEFORD SOFTBALL LEAGUE COORDINATOR/FEES PAID
53787 KAREN WILLYARD REFUND-UTILITY BILLING
53988 wINGFIELD PERFORMANCE ENGINEERING TRANSMISSION REPAIR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
57989 YELLOW PAGES OF AMERICA INC
ADVERTISING-FIRE DEPT
53990 YOUNGSTEDTS INC
WHEEL ALIGNMENTS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
53991 ZACK'S INC
SERRATED BARS/CONNECTORS-STREET MAINT
53992 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE
-30 FIRST AID KITS & SUPPLIES-STREET
MAINTENANCE/1ST AID SUPPLIES-PARK MAINT
53993 ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY
CLEANING SUPPLIES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
51994 KAY IUCCARO
AQUA AEROBICS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID
53995 ADVANCED
OFFICE SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER
52705 VOID OUT CHECK
57106 vOID OUT CHECK
53184 VOID OUT CHECK
53186 VOID OUT CHECK
1100633
)_1 6:3;‘\
67.60
87.90
85.50
75.00
256.50
478.46
1517.62
112.44
221.46
134.20
323.67
620.73
12.25
1725.00
61.60
252.00
200.00
4341.19
24.07
210.00
66.28
145.50
240.00
50.22
426.00
117.00
59.90
69.60
1265.70
451.05
307.50
215.70
575.00-
1032.85-
176.46-
1431.00-
$1394386.35
DISTRIBUTION BY FUNDS
4132737.30
82538.69
68406.2 9
41880.57.
265.00
7447.65
660 9 .81
12703. 60
1303.20
43675.00
207769.45
1219.55
47150.96
235105.05
149.117:
155404.85
3917.29
10 GENERAL
11 CERT IF ICATE OF I NOCDT
15 LIQUOR STORE-F . V M
17 L I QUOR STORE-PRESERVE
20 CEMETERY OPERAT I DNS
21 POL ICE DRUG FORFE.I TURF
31 PARK ACDUIST S DEVELOP
33
UTILITY BOND FUND
39 86 FIRE STAT ON CONST
45 UT IL TY DEBT ED ARD
51 IMPROVEMENT CONbT FD
57 ROAD IMPROVEMENT CONST ED
73 WATER FUND
77 SEWER FUND
80 POL ICE CONE I SCAT ED FUNDS
81 TRUST & ESCROW FUND
87 CODS FUND
$1394336.3
ORDINANCE NO. 89- 2 1
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNES
O
T
A
A
M
E
N
D
I
N
G
CITY CODE CHAPTER 9, SECTION 9.40 RELATING TO THE
D
I
S
C
H
A
R
G
E
O
F
FIREARMS, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHA
P
T
E
R
1
A
N
D
SECTION 9.99, WHICH AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PE
N
A
L
T
Y
PROVISIONS:
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MI
N
N
E
S
O
T
A
ORDAINS:
Section 1. City Code Chapter 9, Section 9.40 sha
l
l
b
e
a
n
d
is amended to read as follows:
"SECTION 9.40. FIREARMS REGULATION.
Subd. 1. Declaration of Policy. It is hereby fo
u
n
d
a
n
d
declared that inasmuch as the City is a developi
n
g
community wherein the land uses are becoming mor
e
i
n
t
e
n
s
e
thus reducing the amount of open land available f
o
r
t
h
e
discharge of firearms and dangerous weapons and t
h
a
t
i
t
has become necessary to limit the discharge of fi
r
e
a
r
m
s
and dangerous weapons to certain areas in the com
m
u
n
i
t
y
in which it will not pose a hazard to the safety
o
f
others.
Subd. 2. Definitions. Terms used in this Sectio
n
s
h
a
l
l
have the following meanings:
A. "Approved Archery Ranges" means those ranges
which have been approved by the City Manager
or designee where special target-tipped
arrows are used.
B. "Dangerous weapon" means any firearm, whether
loaded or unloaded, or any device designed
as a weapon and capable of producing death
or great bodily harm, or any other device
or instrumentality which, in the manner it
is used or intended to be used, is calculated
or likely to produce death or great bodily
harm.
C. "Discharge of firearms" means any shooting
whether it be for hunting game, target
practice or otherwise.
D. "Shotgun shotshell" means a shell fired in
a shotgun containing multiple shot.
-1-
241
E. "Shotgun slug" means a shell fired in a
shotgun containing one slug, ball, or
other single projectile.
Subd. 3. Permit Required for Discharge of Firearms or
Dangerous Weapons. No person may fire or discharge
a firearm or discharge or use any dangerous weapon within
the City without first securing a permit to do so from
the City.
A. Areas Where Permitted. A permit may be granted
to discharge firearms or dangerous weapons only
in the following areas:
(1) In that part of the City, West of
a line parallel to and 1600 feet
West of the East line of Sections
27 and 34, Township 116, Range 22,
South of Hennepin County Road 1
and East of the westerly line of
Hennepin County and there
terminating.
(2) In that part of the City which is
Section 18 and Section 19,
Township 116, Range 22, for the
remainder of 1989 when the
landowner is present.
(3) In areas approved by the City
Council where the issuance of
a permit is for the purpose of
wildlife management and is in
the best interest of public
safety.
B. Application For Permit. A permit may be
issued to individuals who comply with the
following criteria:
(1) Persons over eighteen (18) years
of age may apply for an individual
permit to discharge a firearm or
dangerous weapon. Persons under
eighteen (18) years of age may
apply for a permit to discharge
a firearm or dangerous weapon if
at the time of such discharge or
use, the youth is accompanied by
an adult parent or legal guardian.
(2) An application for a permit shall
be filed in writing on forms provided
by the City and accompanied by a fee
determined by City Council resolution.
No fee shall be required for a permit
for a landowner, his immediate
family, or his guests, to discharge
a firearm or dangerous weapon on
property owned by himself.
(3) A landowner may obtain a guest
permit for a maximum of four (4)
guests, who must be accompanied
by said landowner.
(4) The application shall include at
least the following information:
a) Type of firearm or dangerous
weapon to be discharged.
b) Location of the property on
which the discharge of the
firearm or dangerous weapon
will occur.
c) The permission and signature
of the landowner or designee
on whose property the discharge
of the firearm or dangerous
weapon will occur.
d) Such other information as
may be deemed necessary by
the City Manager or designee
in order to pass upon such
application.
C. Limitations on Permits. Permits issued for the
discharge of firearms or dangerous weapons shall
be subject to the following limitations:
(1) The property upon which the discharge
will occur shall be at least forty (40)
contiguous acres.
(2) The holder of a permit shall not discharge
a shotgun slug within fifteen hundred
(1500) feet of a building or a roadway.
(3) The holder of a permit shall not discharge
a shotgun shotshell within one thousand
(1000) feet of a building or a roadway.
(4) Permits issued for the discharge of
firearms or dangerous weapons shall be
limited to the use of bows and arrows,
B-B guns, shotgun shells, and shotgun
slugs.
(5) An individual who is hunting pursuant
to a guest permit must be accompanied
by the landowner.
(6) Permits issued for the discharge
of shotgun slugs shall be limited to
those times permitted for hunting deer
by the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources. Permits issued for the
discharge of other dangerous weapons
shall be restricted to the calendar
year during which the permit was
issued.
Subd. 4. Approved Archery Ranges. A permit is not required
for the discharge of special target-tipped arrows at
approved archery ranges. The use of crossbows are
prohibited from approved archery ranges.
Subd. 5. Cancellation of Permit. A violation of the
provisions of this Section or any permit issued here-
under on any property for which the permit has been
issued may result in the cancellation of all permits for
the discharge of weapons or firearms on such property and
the denial of applications for permits on such property.
Subd. 6. Lawful Defense of Person, Property or Family.
Nothing herein shall be construed to prohibit any firing of
a gun, pistol or other weapon when done in lawful defense of
person, property or family or by law enforcement personnel
executing their official duties.
Section 2. City Code Chapter I entitled "General Provisions
and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including
Penalty for Violation" and Section 9.99 entitled "Violation A
Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference,
as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective from and
after its passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Eden Prairie on the_____ of . 1989,
and finally read and adoptedordered published at a regular
meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of
, 1989.
-4-
ATTEST:
City Clerk Mayor
Published in the Eden Prairie News on the
, 1989.
day of
-5-
PAS
8/15/8','
M1NUIES OF THE 1989 EDEN PRAIRIE HUNTING COMMITTEE
The -First meeting of the hunting committee was held on this
date at 3:00 pm. Present for the meeting were:
Mr. DOUCI fenpas
Mr. Bob Bjorklund
Mr. Mike Farr
Mr. Darn! Peterson
Mr. Brett Hope
Mr. Paul Jacques
Mr. Bill Marshall
Mr. Jim Clark
Mr. Sever Peterson
The group decided that it would be in everyone's best
interest if they were able to move quickly with the upcoming
hunting season soon upon us. The group reviewed the proposed
ordinance 527-89 that was prepared by the City Attorney.
The following changes were suggested by members and agreed
upon by the group:
* Subd. 2. A., Mr. Jacques suggested that it be included
that crossbows be prohibited from use at archery
ranges.
* Subd. 3. A. (1), The members agreed that the hunting
area should be limited to the area south of Hennepin
County Road 1 and west of the east line of section 34.
Township 116, Range 22. Sections 18 and 19 (currently
known as "special areas" near Rice Marsh Lake) should
remain open, with the same conditions (landowner must
be present while hunting) for the remainder of 1989
and closed to firearms in 1990.
* Subd. 3. A. (3), Anyone requesting permits outside of
permitted areas for the purposes of wildlife
management should secure permit from the City Council
rather than the City Manager.
* Subd. 3. A. (4). Mr. Darril Peterson requested a small
expansion of the slug area to include some of his land
on the north side of Highway 169. Mr. Tenpas stated
that he toured the area and felt that it would not be
a problem. It was therefore recommended that slug
shooting be allowed in the riverbottoms and the lower
half of seF:tion 30 south and west of Riley Creak).
* Subd. 3. 8. (2), Mr. Brett Hope asked that the
language in this section be changed to allow the
landowner the ootion of appointing a responsible
Person to grant permission to discharge a firearm.
* njbd. . B. (2) a.. Mr. Darril Peterson asked that
the City allow the landowner to secure a permit that
would allow him to have 4 guests accompany him
(landowner) while hunting. He informed the group that
all to often a friend will visit for the weekend and
want to hunt. He is unable to secuie a permit on the
weekend and consequently is unable to hunt. Mr.
lenoas agreed that this could he done and felt that we
could issue a permit to the landowner that would cover
4 guests at no additional charge. The guests would
not be named on the permit but would have to be with
the landowner.
* Subd. 3. C. (2). Shotgun shotshell shall not be
discharged within 1000 feet of buildings or roads.
There was discussion regarding the 40 acre provision. The
only person who has expressed interest in discharging a
firearm on less than 40 acres has been Mr. Ed Schlamp on
Riverview Road. Mr. Schlamp has occasional interest in
allowing his son the opportunity to shoot trap on his
property. Mr. Clark indicated that he felt Mr. Schlamp would
understand this limitation. If there is great opposition to
the 40 acre provision Mr. Tenpas would like to see it
lowered to 38 acres. It was noted that the 40 acres provides
for some management of the hunting.
Mr. Marshall informed the group that he intended to manage
his area much better this year and only grant a small number
of permits.
All the landowners attending the meeting suggested that when
prospective hunters call City Hall or the Police Department
they should be told that if they do not already have
arrangements made with a landowner they will not find someone
who will allow them to hunt. (hey do not want people
referred to them. In return they will hold to a minimum the
number of hunters on their property.
Mr. Hope suggested that everyone do some public relations in
their neighborhoods concerning hunting. He indicated that
he grants permits to neighbors if they so desire.
(he meeting was adjourned at 4:30 pm and it was decided that
any additional meetings would be called only if the members
did not agree on the changes of the ordinance after they
review the draft.
arn
CONTENTS
Variance Request #89-42
1.) Memo dated August 15, 1989 from Board Member
2.) Public Hearing Notice
3.) Application
4.) Planning Department Staff Report dated July 21, 1989
5.) Final Order
6.) Appeal Letter dated August 11, 1989
7.) Board of Appeals Staff Report dated August 4, 1989
8.) Unapproved Board Minutes dated August 10, 198).
August 15, 1989
To: Mayor Gary Peterson and Members of the City Council
Re: Variance Request W89-42
City Code Sec. 2.11 states in part:
The duties of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments is to
hear requests for adjustments from the literal provisions of
the City Code in instances where their strict enforcement
would cause undue hardship
Minn. Statute 462.357 Subd. 6 defines Undue Hardship in
connection with granting a variance. The statute states in
Part:
The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use
if used under conditions allowed by official controls.
While a City Council certainly has the right to review the
decisions of a Board of Appeals and Adjustments, both bodies
has the same guidelines for granting a zoning variance as
stated in the Municipal Planning statute.
Alternatives to Variance Request 89-42:
Office Zoning: (no variances would be needed)
Minimum size = 20,000 sq. ft. (the site is 41,382 sq. ft.)
Minimum width = 100 ft. (the site is 165 ft. wide) Minimum depth = 100 ft. (the site is 245 ft. deep)
THE SITE CURRENTLY BEING DEVELOPED JUST EAST OF THE BURGER
KING SITE IS OFFICE ZONING.
Neighborhood Commercial: (smaller variances required)
Minimum size = 2 acres (the site is .95 acres)
Minimum width = 200 ft. (the site is 185 ft. wide)
Minimum depth = 200 ft. (the site is 245 ft. deep)
Because a reasonable use (as stated in the statute) is
available it is my belief that the present variance request
can not be granted.
Sincerely,
John E. Freemyer
149
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
REGARDING VARIANCE REQUEST
#89-42
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of Appeals and Adjustment
s
w
i
l
l
m
e
e
t
a
t
t
h
e
following time and places:
7:30 PM
Thursday, August 10, 1989
At the Council Chambers, 7600 Executive Drive, Eden Prairie City
Hall, Eden Prairie, MN 55344
to review and consider the variance request #89-42, submitted by M
a
r
c
u
s
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
for property located at 7808 Eden Prairie RoiTITEden Prairie, M
i
n
n
e
s
o
t
a
,
e
g
a
l
l
y
described as: See Reverse 5g0 -1W-Tiquest is for a variance from City Code, Chapter 11 —Siction 11.03, Subdivision B ill To permit a lot size of .95 a
c
r
e
s
.
Code requires 5 acres in the C-Comm Zoning District. in To permit
a
n
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
.ot width of City Code requires 300'. To permit an average lot depth of 245 1 7—Citirode—t7—.equires 306'.
Written or oral comments relating to this variance request will
b
e
h
e
a
r
d
a
t
t
h
i
s
meeting. Said variance application is on file for public review
a
t
t
h
e
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Department at Eden Prairie City Hall.
Published in the Eden Prairie News
July 26, 1989
City of Eden Prairie
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
of Adjustments and Appeals, explaining
n
a
t
u
r
e
o
f
v
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
to the literal provisions of the City's
c
o
d
e
w
o
u
l
d
c
a
u
s
e
h
a
r
d
s
h
i
p
.
7
ee Owner>5 ignature
.and Owner
Variance #
Receipt ft
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
VARIANCE REQUEST APPLICATION
/q1,pzi
APPLICANT'S NAME:
ADDRESS:
PHONES:
REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE AT:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
t/_5 r',Ic 7,7' 1 7 ieell
C1 C / LAAvZ 474 6tf 1 ,21/ f /a) 47/7'n S 3/
ZIP Work (/2) S 3 /177 Home C4.j)) V 7 - S-
',; y
r 4 Y 4(/'
FEE: A) $75.00 - Residential - (includes bui
l
d
i
n
g
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
,
d
e
c
k
s
,
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
B) $125.00 - Other - (includes varianc
e
s
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
o
f
f
i
c
e
,
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
,
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
property and variances associated with n
e
w
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
/
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
)
REASON FOR VARIANCE:
2,0A/ip/C., De5tc.,4/4-7-iew 61p14144- il Jr* C 4,04R E4e( 1 4=5-
//sf &r:i ,vur ze4241.z.,E Ay x i rh,f.,/ ,,,,wt, 7lr-4y a /vo A_,,,,,,, .7-, c,,,4t (4-4./2, /7(-0/4 -1..61-4 " Submission Requirements:
yx r—idential - 8 1/2" x 11" survey show
i
n
g
l
o
t
l
i
n
e
s
a
n
d
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
s
o
f
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
1. Jres and location of buildings on
a
d
j
o
i
n
i
n
g
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
.
A
l
s
o
s
h
o
w
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
e
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
architectural floor plans, and pertinen
t
t
o
p
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
a
l
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
s
u
c
h
a
s
t
r
e
e
s
,
f
e
n
c
e
s
,
b
e
r
m
s
,
steep slopes, ponds, roads, and existi
n
g
a
n
d
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
e
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
w
h
i
c
h
h
a
v
e
b
e
a
r
i
n
g
o
n
t
h
e
variance request.
2) Other - 8 1/2" x 11" survey showing
l
o
t
l
i
n
e
s
a
n
d
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
s
o
f
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
structures. Where surveys are larger t
h
a
n
8
1
/
2
"
x
1
1
"
,
1
1
c
o
p
i
e
s
o
f
s
i
t
e
p
l
a
n
f
o
l
d
e
d
t
o
8
1
/
2
"
x 11" will be required. Also include
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
p
l
a
n
,
p
e
r
t
i
n
e
n
t
t
o
p
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
a
l
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
s
u
c
h
a
s
trees, fences, berms, steep slopes, p
o
n
d
s
,
r
o
a
d
s
,
a
n
d
e
x
i
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
e
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
w
h
i
c
h
have bearing on the request.
3) Letter addressed to,Board
and reason(s) why(confOrmance
C.) ,
AP plicant's Signature
Notes to Applicant:
L. The Board meets on the 2nd Thursday of
t
h
e
m
o
n
t
h
,
7
:
3
0
p
.
m
.
,
C
i
t
y
H
a
l
l
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
C
h
a
m
b
e
r
s
,
7600 Executive Drive, Eden Prairie, Min
n
e
s
o
t
a
5
5
3
4
4
Applications must be filled, no later
t
h
a
n
2
n
d
T
h
u
r
s
d
a
y
o
f
t
h
e
m
o
n
t
h
p
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
t
o
t
h
e
meeting date.
3. Notices are published in the Eden Prair
i
e
N
e
w
s
a
n
d
m
a
i
l
e
d
t
o
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
w
n
e
r
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
5
0
0
feet. Applicants are encouraged to per
s
o
n
a
l
l
y
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
w
n
e
r
s
,
p
r
i
o
r
to the hearing, in order to explain th
e
v
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
a
n
d
t
o
b
e
p
r
e
p
a
r
e
d
t
o
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
t
h
e
i
r
concerns at the hearing.
4NOTE: SUBMIT 9 COPIES OF ANY SITE PLAN
S
O
V
E
R
8
1
/
2
"
X
1
1
"
cis-IROPOSED SITE
15,oicom
arl AREA LOCATION MAP
c..1g4C.Y ":43,143:5rt-)'
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner
THROUGH:
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE:
July 21, 1989
PROJECT:
Marcus Funeral Home
LOCATION: Southwest Corner of Terrey Pine Drive and County Road #4
APPLICANT: Marcus Corporation
FEE OWNER: Connie Anderson
REQUEST:
1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential
to Community Commercial on 0.95 acres.
2. Zoning District Change from RM-2.5 to Community Commercial
on 0.95 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of
Appeals.
3. Site Plan Review on 0.95 acres.
4. Preliminary Plat of 0.95 acres into one lot.
Background
This site is currently guided Low
Density Residential and zoned RM-
2.5. The adjacent property to the
south and west is guided for Medium
Density Residential while the
property to the north is guided for
Office. The property to the east is
guided Industrial. Specific land
uses and zoning districts include
the Elim Shores senior housing
project, zoned RM-2.5 to the south;
Eden Prairie Family Physicians,
zoned Office to the north; Mitchell
Lake Estates, zoned RM-6.5 to the
west; and vacant property, zoned 1-2
to the east.
The current proposal is to develop a
5,700 square foot funeral home on a
0.95 acre site. This request
requires a Comprehensive Guide Plan
rbange from Low Density Residential
Community Commercial and a Zoning
uistrict Change from RM-2.5 to
Community Commercial.
Marcus 'Funeral Home 2 July 21, 1989
Comprehensive Guide Plan Change/Land Use
The proposed funeral home is being co
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
a
s
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
because it is a business which provides
a
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
e
n
t
i
r
e
C
i
t
y
.
T
h
e
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
of the Community Commercial guide plan d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
z
o
n
i
n
g
d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
s
t
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
appropriately located areas for reta
i
l
s
t
o
r
e
s
,
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
,
a
n
d
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
establishments patronized primarily by
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
i
n
t
h
e
i
m
m
e
d
i
a
t
e
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
a
r
e
a
.
The district also permits the develop
m
e
n
t
o
f
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
s
h
o
p
p
i
n
g
c
e
n
t
e
r
s
i
n
t
h
e
appropriate locations as shown on the
g
u
i
d
e
p
l
a
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
i
n
g
t
o
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
t
h
a
t
minimize adverse impacts on the adjoinin
g
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
.
T
h
e
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
m
u
s
t
decide whether the use of this site for
a
f
u
n
e
r
a
l
h
o
m
e
i
s
o
f
a
n
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
s
i
z
e
a
n
d
in an appropriate location which mini
m
i
z
e
s
t
h
e
a
d
v
e
r
s
e
i
m
p
a
c
t
o
n
t
h
e
a
d
j
o
i
n
i
n
g
residential neighborhood.
Site Plan/Preliminary Plat
The minimum requirements in the Communit
y
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Z
o
n
i
n
g
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
a
l
o
t
size of 5 acres and a lot width and dept
h
o
f
3
0
0
f
e
e
t
.
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
s
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
a
3
5
f
o
o
t
front yard setback, 20 feet on each side
,
a
n
d
a
2
0
f
o
o
t
r
e
a
r
y
a
r
d
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
.
T
h
e
p
l
a
t
consists of 0.95 acres with a width of 1
6
5
f
e
e
t
a
n
d
a
d
e
p
t
h
o
f
2
4
5
f
e
e
t
.
V
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
s
will be required for lot size, lot wid
t
h
,
a
n
d
l
o
t
d
e
p
t
h
.
T
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
minimum required setbacks of the zoning d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
.
The development proposal involves the c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
x
i
m
a
t
e
l
y
5
,
7
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
feet in two levels for the proposed funer
a
l
h
o
m
e
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
r
e
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
home for use by the caretakers. In the Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Z
o
n
i
n
g
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
,
a
B
a
s
e
Area Ratio (B.A.R.) of 20% and a Floor
A
r
e
a
R
a
t
i
o
(
F
.
A
.
R
.
)
o
f
4
0
%
i
s
a
l
l
o
w
e
d
.
T
h
e
proposal, including the existing home, h
a
s
a
B
.
A
.
R
.
o
f
1
1
%
a
n
d
a
F
.
A
.
R
.
o
f
1
8
.
3
%
.
Based upon a parking requirement of one
s
p
a
c
e
p
e
r
e
v
e
r
y
t
h
r
e
e
s
e
a
t
s
i
n
t
h
e
c
h
a
p
e
l
and a 54 car parking lot, 162 seats coul
d
b
e
p
l
a
c
e
d
w
i
t
h
i
n
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
.
T
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
n
e
n
t
has indicated that approximately 100 sea
t
s
w
o
u
l
d
a
c
t
u
a
l
l
y
b
e
u
s
e
d
.
I
f
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
use changed to 100% retail or office, a
t
o
t
a
l
o
f
5
5
s
p
a
c
e
s
a
n
d
3
8
s
p
a
c
e
s
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
required, respectively.
Gradinq/Utilities
Elevations on-site range from approximate
l
y
9
0
0
i
n
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
e
a
s
t
c
o
r
n
e
r
o
f
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
to approximately 890 on the south proper
t
y
l
i
n
e
.
T
h
e
m
a
j
o
r
i
t
y
o
f
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
w
i
l
l
b
e
graded in order to allow for the constr
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
pad. Approximately 11 feet of cut for th
e
n
e
w
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
i
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
w
h
i
l
e
a
n
y
f
i
l
l
will be used for berming adjacent the ro
a
d
w
a
y
s
.
Utilities are available to connections ma
d
e
t
o
a
n
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
8
-
i
n
c
h
w
a
t
e
r
l
i
n
e
a
n
d
an 8-inch sanitary sewer line located with
i
n
T
e
r
r
e
y
P
i
n
e
D
r
i
v
e
.
A
d
e
t
a
i
l
e
d
s
t
o
r
m
w
a
t
e
r
run-off plan shall be submitted for re
v
i
e
w
b
y
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
a
n
d
t
h
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
d
u
e
t
o
t
h
e
proposed connection to the Hennepin Coun
t
y
s
t
o
r
m
w
a
t
e
r
s
y
s
t
e
m
w
i
t
h
i
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
R
o
a
d
#
4
.
Landscaping
Rased on a total of 120 caliper inches
o
f
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
t
r
e
e
s
o
n
-
s
i
t
e
,
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
ndicates a loss of 94 caliper inches. Be
c
a
u
s
e
t
h
e
t
r
e
e
l
o
s
s
e
x
c
e
e
d
s
7
5
%
,
t
h
e
T
r
e
e
Preservation Policy requires 100% replac
e
m
e
n
t
o
r
9
4
c
a
l
i
p
e
r
i
n
c
h
e
s
.
I
n
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
,
2
4
caliper inches are required for the buil
d
i
n
g
f
o
r
a
t
o
t
a
l
o
f
1
1
8
c
a
l
i
p
e
r
i
n
c
h
e
s
.
T
h
e
9,10
Marcus Funeral Home 3 July 21, 1989
landscape plan depicts a total of 57.5 -caliper inches. In order to increase the
level of screening from the adjacent senior housing projec
t
,
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
n
e
n
t
s
h
a
l
l
substitute 8 and 10 foot evergreens along the south propert
y
l
i
n
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
p
f
i
t
z
e
r
which is proposed. In addition, the proponent shall incr
e
a
s
e
t
h
e
s
i
z
e
s
o
f
t
h
e
overstory trees to a 3 caliper inch minimum. Because the scr
e
e
n
i
n
g
o
f
t
h
i
s
a
r
e
a
i
s
based primarily upon the landscaping, an irrigation system sh
a
l
l
b
e
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
t
o
h
e
l
p
Insure the survival of the trees.
Architecture
The existing single family -home on the project site will be r
e
n
o
v
a
t
e
d
a
s
p
a
r
t
o
f
t
h
e
construction of the new 5,700 square foot, two-level fun
e
r
a
l
h
o
m
e
.
T
h
e
p
l
a
n
s
indicate that the funeral home will be residential in style
a
n
d
h
a
v
e
t
h
e
s
a
m
e
r
o
o
f
pitch, windows, siding as the existing home. The primary buil
d
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
facebrick and glass. To add consistency to the project,
t
h
e
f
a
c
e
b
r
i
c
k
f
o
r
t
h
e
funeral home is proposed to match the existing chimney.
In order to take advantage of existing grades on-site, a tw
o
l
e
v
e
l
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
h
a
s
b
e
e
n
designed. The basement area will be used primarily for wo
r
k
i
n
g
s
p
a
c
e
a
n
d
a
g
a
r
a
g
e
while the upper level contains a chapel, lounge, offices, a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
u
s
e
s
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
with a funeral home.
Transition
In a memo dated June 23, 1989, a study of six communitie
s
r
e
v
e
a
l
e
d
t
h
a
t
f
u
n
e
r
a
l
,omes are allowed as transitional land uses between commer
c
i
a
l
a
n
d
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Jevelopments (see Attached). Special requirements ident
i
f
i
e
d
f
o
r
l
o
t
s
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
residential land uses include increased setbacks and specia
l
b
u
f
f
e
r
s
t
r
i
p
s
.
T
h
e
k
e
y
to the development of this property as a commercial site
w
i
l
l
b
e
i
t
s
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
t
o
transition to the adjacent residential development.
The property is 0.95 acres in size and is wide enough to all
o
w
f
o
r
t
h
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
of the building and the required parking while meetin
g
t
h
e
m
i
n
i
m
u
m
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
requirements. Because of the residential size and styl
e
o
f
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
,
t
h
e
required transition would be primarily to the 54 car p
a
r
k
i
n
g
l
o
t
.
W
h
i
l
e
t
h
e
transition can be accomplished in many ways includin
g
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
s
,
landscaping, and/or fencing, the size of the site limits t
h
e
a
m
o
u
n
t
o
f
s
c
r
e
e
n
i
n
g
which can actually be done. Because of this, Staff is reco
m
m
e
n
d
i
n
g
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
p
l
a
n
s
be revised to depict 8 and 10 foot evergreens and 3 calip
e
r
i
n
c
h
e
s
o
f
d
e
c
i
d
u
o
u
s
trees along the south property line.
Traffic
In the traffic study dated December 7, 1988, it was repor
t
e
d
t
h
a
t
o
n
d
a
y
s
t
h
a
t
services are held, the funeral home could generate between
8
a
n
d
3
2
0
t
r
i
p
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(if a funeral and visitation services are held on the sam
e
d
a
y
)
(
S
e
e
A
t
t
a
c
h
e
d
)
.
Average attendance levels for a visitation service is app
r
o
x
i
m
a
t
e
l
y
1
0
0
w
h
i
l
e
a
funeral service would draw approximately 75 people. Based u
p
o
n
a
n
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
occupancy of 2.5, average trips equal 80 and 60 respectiv
e
l
y
.
T
h
e
s
e
t
r
i
p
s
a
r
e
n
o
t
expected to occur during the peak hour of adjacent street tr
a
f
f
i
c
,
b
u
t
w
o
u
l
d
o
c
c
u
r
.ver an extended peak period (e.g., the hour after the p
e
a
k
h
o
u
r
)
.
T
h
e
r
e
p
o
r
t
Included that the maximum use of the property for commerci
a
l
u
s
e
w
o
u
l
d
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
approximately the same number of trips on a daily basis as the peak day for a funeral home.
MerOus Funeral Home 4 July 21, 1989
'Mete figUres were based on the assumption' that there would be two chapels within
the building with seating capacities of 80 and 100. The proposed plans indicate a
-seating area of approximately 100 seats. Based upon this figure, it is anticipated
that the amount of traffic could be reduced accordingly by approximately 25% to 30%.
'Pedestrian Systems
There is an existing 5 foot concrete sidewalk along Terrey Pine Drive which would be
_Maintained as part of this project. In addition, with the upgrade of County Road
#4, the County will build an 8 foot bituminous path along the left side of County
-Road 44.
Signage/Lighting
No plans have been submitted which indicate site lighting or signage. Due to the
nature and location of the proposed funeral home, minimal site lighting would be
recommended for this project site and include 20 foot downcast luminars. The only
signage anticipated would be a business sign located in front of the project site.
A detailed lighting and signage plan must be submitted prior to Council review.
Conclusions
The Planning Commission must decide whether or not the proponents have provided
compelling reasons for changing the Comprehensive Guide Plan from Low Density
Residential to Community Commercial. The Guide Plan Change question is not so much
'elated to the balance of land uses in the community or adding more Community
Commercial on a community wide basis in this case, but more of the relationship to
the adjoining residential properties. In other words, is the size and location of
the proposed Community Commercial use appropriate according to standards that
minimize adverse impacts on adjoining residential land use.
Infill sites that are not consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan are difficult
to develop in most cases because the sites are much smaller than the minimum zoning
requirements and there is not enough room on-site to accomodate development and
still provide an appropriate transition to the adjoining residential land use. In
this situation, since this site does not meet the 5 acre minimum requirement, the
transition must rely solely on landscaping since the setbacks to the adjoining
residential properties is much smaller than if the site was a 5 acre minimum. It
does not appear that there is a way to modify the current proposal to adequately
mitigate the neighborhood impacts with the exception of removing the existing home
and redesigning the entire project.
. _
Staff Recommendations
The Planning Staff presents the following alternative courses of action for
Commission consideration:
1. If the Planning Commission feels that the development as proposed is not the
appropriate use of the property, one option would be to recommend denial of
the request since the Comprehensive Guide Plan Change has not been
substantiated, the size and use of the property is inappropriate for the
location, and the impacts on the adjoining residential neighborhoods are
high.
Marcus Funeral Home 5 July 21, 1989
2.- If the Planning Commission feels that the proponent has demon
s
t
r
a
t
e
d
a
compelling argument for a change to the Comprehensive Guide Pl
a
n
a
n
d
a
r
e
comfortable with the technical aspects of the project, appropri
a
t
e
a
c
t
i
o
n
would be to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Guide Plan C
h
a
n
g
e
f
r
o
m
Low Density Residential to Community Commercial on 0.95 acre
s
,
Z
o
n
i
n
g
_ _District Change from RM-2.5 to Community Commercial on 0.95 ac
r
e
s
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
Preliminary Plat of 0.95 acres into one lot, and subject to the Sta
f
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
dated July 21,1989, revised plans dated July 21,1989, and subje
c
t
t
o
t
h
e
. following conditions:
1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall:
_ a. Revise the landscape plan to depict 8 and 10 evergreens and
3 caliper inch deciduous trees along the south property
line. An irrigation system will be required to help insure
the survival of the trees.
b. An overall signage plan shall be submitted depicting size,
color, letter type, and location on the project.
c. Provide colors and samples of the exterior building
materials.
d. An overall lighting plan shall be submitted depicting a
maximum pole height of 20 feet.
2. Prior to Final Plat approval, the proponent shall:
a. Submit detailed storm water run-off, erosion control, and
utility plans for review by the City Engineer.
b. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control
plans for review by the Watershed District.
3. Prior to building permit issuance, proponent shall:
a. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in
advance of grading.
b. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
4. Apply for and receive variances from the Board of Appeals for lot
s
i
z
e
,
l
o
t
width, and lot depth in the Community Commercial zoning district.
VARIANCE #89-42
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
FINAL ORDER
RE: Petition of Marcus Corporation
ADDRESS: 7808 Eden Prairie Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See attached Exhibit A
VARIANCE REQUEST: The request is for a variance from City Code, Chapte
r
11, Section iul, Subdivision 2, B (1) To permit
a
lot size of .95 acres. City Code requires 5 acres
i
n
the C-Comm Zoning District. (2) To permit an avera
g
e
lot width of 165', City Code requires 300 1 . (3) To permit an average lot depth of 245', City Code requi
r
e
s
300.
The Board of Appeals and Adjustments for the City
o
f
E
d
e
n
P
r
a
i
r
i
e
a
t
a
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
thereof duly considered the above petition and aft
e
r
h
e
a
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
e
x
a
m
i
n
i
n
g
a
l
l
o
f
t
h
e
evidence presented and the file therein does hereby f
i
n
d
a
n
d
o
r
d
e
r
a
s
f
o
l
l
o
w
s
:
1. Al] procedural requirements necessary for the review
o
f
s
a
i
d
v
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
h
a
v
e
been met. (YES X NO )
2. There are circumstances unique to the property unde
r
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
,
a
n
d
granting such variances does not violate the spir
i
t
a
n
d
i
n
t
e
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
City's Zoning and Platting Code.
3. Variance Request #89-42 is herein Granted N/A , De
n
i
e
d
X
4. Conditions to the granting N/A, denial N/A, of
s
a
i
d
v
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
a
r
e
a
s
follows:
5. This variance shall be revoked within 15 days after
n
o
t
i
c
e
o
f
f
a
i
l
u
r
e
t
o
meet the required conditions has been given.
6. A copy of this order shall be forwarded to the a
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
b
y
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
Clerk.
7. This order shall be effective August 10, 1989 ; however, this variance shall lapse and be of no effect unless the erect
i
o
n
o
r
a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
s
permitted shall occur within one (1) year of the
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
d
a
t
e
u
n
l
e
s
s
said period of time is extended pursuant to the a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
p
r
o
c
e
d
u
r
e
s
prior to the expiration of one year from the effectiv
e
d
a
t
e
h
e
r
e
o
f
.
8. All Board of Adjustments and Appeals actions are su
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
review.
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
BY: ....11-trint &dime&
DATED: August 10, 1989
a10
LEGAL:
Variance Request
#89-42
The East 320 feet of the South 168 feet of that !
part of Government Lot 2, Section 17, Township i
116, Range 22 lying North of a line drawn parallel f
to the North line of said Government Lot 2 from a
point on the East line thereof distant 511.5 feet
South from the Northeast corner of said Government
Lot 2, according to the Government survey thereof.
Exhibit A
151
MARCUS
Real Estate Development
CORPORATION
August 11, 1989
City of Eden Prairie
Attn: Steve Durham
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Mayor Peterson and Members of the City Council:
We would like to request that the Mayor and Council please
review the Board of Adjustments decision regarding lot size
variances requested for 7808 Eden Prairie Road, the property
for which we are representing Carolyn "Connie" Anderson. The
variance request number is 89-42.
The Board denied our request determining that a hardship did
not exist and that the Board did not want to create a
precedent (they as a Board, separate from the City Council)
they had not yet created. We respectfully submit that we
have shown hardship as defined at the City Council meeting
considering the Guide Plan, Zoning and Plat items.
Sincerely,
21'
Mark 0. Senn
MOS/bjm
10001 Wayzata Blvd. • Suite 100 • Minnetonka MN 55343 • (612) 593-1177
( I /II 'f-1 I / fr-( Page 7
e -V -e
F. Variance Request #89-42, submitted Marcus Corporation for property
located at 7808 Eden Prairie Road, Eden prairie, Minnesota, The request is
for a variance from City Code, Chapter 11, Section 11.03, Subdivision 2, B
III To permit a lot size of .95 acres. CiirTacie requires 5 acres in the
C-Comm Zoning District. (21- To permit an average lot width of —IgL, City
Code requires 300'. (3) To permit an average lot depth —Fir7457 ,--City Code
requires '.
Background
The property under consideration for variance request is currently in the
development review process and was before the Planning Commission on July
24, 1989 and City Council August 1, 1989. The proposal includes development
of a 5,700 square foot funeral home on .95 acres. The site is at the
southwest corner of Eden Prairie Road and Terrey Pine Court. The
development includes rezoning the property from RM-2.5 to Community
Commercial, a Guide Plan change from residential to Community Commercial and
associated variances. Please note the Planning Commission Staff Report
dated July 21, 1989 in the packet for background information.
The Planning Commission recommended denial of the development proposal,
finding the use was more Regional Commercial in nature than Community
Commercial. The City Council reviewed and approved first reading of the
development proposal on August 1, 1989. The Council determined the use and
size of development consistant with the adjoining and surrounding
properties.
Variance Request - The development meets applicable code requirements except
for lot size, lot depth and lot width. Variances requested include the
following:
1) Lot size of .95 acres, City Code requires 5 acres in the Community
Commercial Zoning District.
2) Permit an average lot width of 165, City Code requires 300.
3) Permit an average lot depth of 245', City Code requires 300'.
This particular site is an infill site. Infill sites that are not
consistant with the Comprehensive Guide Plan are difficult to develop
because they tend to be of a smaller lot size than the minimum Zoning
District requirements. It is anticipated these types of lots may require
variances as they develop. The City Code has different levels of Commercial
Zoning Districts including Regional Commercial, Community Commercial and
Neighborhood Commercial. Regional Commercial zoning services primarily the
Twin Cities metropolitan area, which would include surrounding communities,
and Eden Prairie respectively. Regional Commercial services 5 miles plus.
Community Commercial zoning services primarily the entire community of Eden
Prairie and may include serving surrounding communities respectively.
Community Commercial services 1.5 to 3 miles.
The major difference between the two Zoning Districts are minimum lot size
requirements. Regional Commercial requires 10,000 square feet minimum lot
sizes while Community Commercial requires 5 acre sites. Commercial/office
Paget:.
use may occur within either C-Reg-Ser or C-Comm zoning districts. Larger
commercial uses of 150,000 sq ft and above are more appropriate for C-Reg-
Ser zoning.
The proposed Funeral Home development falls into the Community Commercial
Zoning District primarily because of location. No C-Rer-Ser Zoning
Districts are located beyond the Major Center Area.
Based on the surrounding developed properties at the 4 and 5 intersection
which include a mixture of commercial, industrial, office, medium density
residential and high density residential land use, the proposed land use is
not inconsistant. The proposed .95 lot size is above the minimum lot size
requirements for office, C-Hwy and C-Reg-Ser Zoning Districts. The
variances required for lot size, lot depth and lot width may have merit for
the above mentioned reasons.
Conclusion
In review of this proposal the following actions and findings have been
identified.
1.) Action - The Planning Commission believed the use C-Reg-Ser in
nature versus a Community Commercial use. Based on this conclusion
the Planning Commission recommended a denial of the project.
2.) Action - The City Council believed the land use was appropriate for
this site and approved 1st reading. The Council was aware of the
variance associated with the development.
3.) Finding - The mixture of land uses at the 4 and 5 intersection
include residential, office, commercial and industrial. The
proposed use is not inappropriate land use.
4.) Finding - The variances may have merit in that a Commercial Zoning
District with lot sizes less than 2 acres does not exist outside the
Major Center Area.
5.) Finding - The Commercial Zoning is consistant with the surrounding
Community Commercial use.
The Board may choose one of the following actions:
1.) Approve variance request #89-42 as submitted finding: A commercial
zoning district classification with a lot size less than 2 acres does not
exist outside the Major Center Area. The commercial use is consistant with
surrounding land uses. City Council has approved First reading of the
zoning proposal.
2.) Deny variance request #89-42 as submitted.
ago'
4 VA-40(.ilt- 0 e.:.*o
TE 8-/0 -
F. Request #89-41 submitted by Eden Prairie Assembly of God for property located at 16591 Duck Lake Trail, Eden prairie, Minnesota,
legally described as: See Reverse Side. The request is for a variance from City Code, Chap ter —rIT Section 11703, Subdivision 3, K, to permit a building addition in a Public 5r7iFi District with TUO% wood exterior siding. City c5ae does not permit more than
wood exterior siding in the PubliE-aing District.
Withdrawn
G. VARIANCE REQUEST 89-42
Postponed for 10 minutes in order to adhere to the scheduled time.
It was decided to go to the approval of the MINUTES oF JUNE 27 and JULY 13
II. MINUTES OF JUNE 27 and MN 13
MOTION: Akemann moved that the Board approve the minutes of the June
27, 1989 Joint meeting of the Board of Appeals and City Council.
Arockiasamy seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
Akemann noted that on page 2 of the minutes for July 13, the square footage
in the motion should be 22,000. On page 6, the lotmentiontioned in the
second paragraph should be lots A and B (not lot C). On page 9, the first
motion passed 4-1.
Harvey noted that on page 14 would like the minutes to clearly state that
the applicant would be granted one original sign and one additional sign for
the entire 150 acres.
MOTION: Akemann moved that the Board approve the minutes of the July
13 meeting with the corrections as noted above. Freemyer seconded
the motion and it passed 3-0 with Arockiasamy abstaining.
G. Variance Request #89-42 submitted by Marcus Corporation for property located at 7808 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota, The request is Farr') for a variance from City Code Chapter 11 Section 11.03, Subdivision 2,1 To permit a TC size of .95 acres. City Code requires 5 acres in the C-Comm Zoning District. (7 To permit an average lot width of 165, City
1-14111::
Code requires 300'. ill To permit an average lot depth -af-T4S-r , City Code requires, 300.
Mark Senn appeared to represent Marcus Corporation. He explained that this
variance request deals with lot size. A funeral home typically is used as
a transitional use between commercial and residential. The structure will
consist of 5,700 square feet. The proposal has gone through the Planning
Commission and the City Council for review. It more than meets most all
of the other requirements in the other areas. There havebeen some minor
modifications such as additional landscaping.
Durham noted that the Planning Commission had first reviewed this item,
and they had denied it. Then, it went to the City Council and it had been approved.
Harvey asked how many feet were on the west side and the south side
from the homes to the funeral home.
Senn and Durham answered that on the west the distance was 140'. On the
south, the distance was 75-80 feet.
Harvey asked if the landscaping plan on the south side had been approved.
Senn noted that 6 additional trees have been added over and above what had
been approved by the Council.
Harvey asked how much of Elim Shores was visible from the funeral home.
Senn answered that they had two barriers for screening. There is an existing
barrier of deciduous trees and they would plant an additional barrier of
8-12 foot spruce trees. There is a berm already on the site which would be
retained. Only the top portion of the Twin Homes can be seen from the funeral
home site.
Harvey asked where in Eden Prairie there was guided community commercial
property.
Durham jndicated several sites that were guided community commercial.
Freemyer felt that if this request were granted, it would create another
parking lot problem. The funeral home itself is not an issue, but there
would be too much development for the site.
Akemann was concerned that if and when funeral procession came from the
funeral home, how would the intersection of Rd 4 & 5 be affected.
Senn answered that the only curb cut would be atTerre.Pine Dr. He noted that
funeral processions usually originate from churches, and only occassionally
from funeral homes. When that does happen, they are police escorted and
would proceed to the south. The facility is not designed for expansion. There
are 50-60 parking spaces and he could see no problem. If needed, additional
parking spaces can be leased from the office buildings across the street.
Akemann had questions concerning 11%ional Cannercial or Community Commercial.
Durham answered that C Regional Service Zoning requires lot sizes of 10,000
square feet or above. ThezoninR plan specifies that. Community Commercial
sites, such as Anderson Lake Shopping Center and the NorthwestRacquetClub
serve more of the communit/ r ,..6 must have 5 acres. Neighborhood Commercial
would refer to areas such as saip centers.
Senn noted that most communities allow funeral homes in any zone through special
use permits.
Arockiasamy asked about the seating in the proposed facility.
Senn noted that the facility is designed to meet the leasee's needs for now
and in the future.
Arockiasamy asked what would be done if there were more present in the funeral
home than the proposed 100 seats could handle.
6
Senn noted that most funerals are held in churches, and some of the smaller
ones are held in the funeral home. Visitors to the funeral home typically
come over a period of time. He felt there would be few times that the home
would need to accomodate 100 people.
Arockiasamy said the Board was not here to debate if the funeral home use
was appropriate, just to consider the variance.
Harvey noted that this was a site of less than one acre in an area that
required 5 acres for such a use. This has been guided and zoned 2.5 since 1969.
Although guide plans can be changed, the residents of the City have a right
to expect it won't easily be changed. This would be a 500% variance and
would set a precedent.
Senn said that the area was originally single family residential when the
home was built in 1930. The home cannot be rented begause of the location
on a busy intersection. They had held a neighborhood meeting and they indicated
that they did not want multi-family, commercial or office on the site. The
applicant is trying to find a way to use the property. The idea that had been
accepted the most by the neighbors had been a funeral home. A precedent has
already been set in the area when the flower shop on the north side of
highway 5 was opened.
Harvey commented on the future expansion probabilities. He noted that Senn
had predicted 75 deaths a year in Eden Prairie, and although this may be
the case now, the average age of residents is in the 40's. As this population
grows older, that number will change.
Nancy Soman of Ellin Shores appeared and expressed her concerns on the size
of the lot. She noted that it was less than one acre when 5 acres were required.
There is no room for expansion. oreach of the possible 75 funerals each
year, there will be at least 2 days use of the home. Not all will be in an
orderly sequence--sometimes there will be more than one funeral at the
same time. Even if one has good intentions of scheduling visitations at the
home, the needs of the family would have to be met. Many are requesting earlier
times for visitation so those who come from work can stop on their way home.
Regarding the screening issue, there was an architect present to explain their
concerns.
George Watson (architect) came forward and showed a sketch indicating the
site lines to the home from Elim Shores. Screening of 8' would be needed
to screen the first floor, 11' to screen the second floor, and 14' to screen
the third floor. An 3' spruce barrier would mean 50% opacity because of the
cone shape of the trees. He noted that the landscaping materials at Ellis
Shores were adjacent to the structure, and not on the property line.
Michael Peterson (lawyer) representing Elim Shores came forward and stated
that the hardship is on the proponent to prove the variance is appropriate.
If strict enforcement would cause undue hardship, variances could be granted,
but there is no undue hardship here.
Darrell Westling of Assured Performance, a marketing firm for Ellis Shores,
cane forward. He said they wished to establish a policy that would give
the residents of Elim Shores the best home possible. He does not feel that
a funeral home would be a good choice to have next door.
Harvey said that the land use issue cannot be addressed--only the variance.
Freemyer asked if the variancewere to pass, what would the hardship be? He
could see that the development that has taken place around the property is
an issue.
Akemann said it would he a hardship created by zoning changes.
Arockiasamy felt it could be difficult to find appropriate use for this type
of property without disturbing the neighborhood. If it were a 5 acre site,
the facility would be much larger with more parking and more use. This
situation seems reasonable to him. He added that this type of situation will
come up more and more often. Each situation must be looked at separately.
Some of the statutes need to he bent, it is not all set in stone. The neighbors
have already expressed that they do not want multiple residential there.If
the owner has difficulty in developing the site as RM-2.5, isn't that a hardship?
Freemyer said the owner can still so to the Ceuncil .and pursue development
as RN 2.5. This is a busy intersection and anythingwill have impact.
Akemann noted that the building was attractive and the funeral home would
be beneficial, but better alternatives are available. Too much is being
suggested for the property and the variances requested require a substantial
variation from the code. There should be a better use than this for the property.
Freemyer noted that the Planning Conmission did vote this down on the basis
of C Regional Service versus Community Commercial.
Harvey asked,if, when the Council concluded it was a Community Commercial use,
they were aware of the magnitude of the variance?
Durham said they were aware of that, and felt the use was appropriate.
Arockiasamy said he could not vote to deny the variance. He would like to
hear more from Mk. Senn.
Mr Senn came forward once again and stated that other alternatives have been
explored and none were interested in the site for two reasons: 1. Lot size
2. The corner was too busy for residential use. It will be commercial or
industrial property on that site. They had been researching and looking
for solutions for this site for lk years. There had been traffic studies
and neighborhood meetings. The only opposition was Elim Shores. Regarding
the regional commercial issue: the area is already that now--Super America,
Burger King, etc. The people who own the funeral home will live in the home--
it will be attached. The property is now guided community commercial. They
need a second reading on the rezoning and plat.
Akemann felt it was an excessive variance and he was not in favor.
Harvey felt it was an over-use of the property.
Soman noted that there were residents of the area who opposed the proposal
and had attended the neighborhood meeting. There had been an inquiry made
into the purchase of the property. They at Elim Shores were never notified
of the neighborhood meeting.
P.M
8
Arockiasamy asked what other possibilities were available for the property.
Durham answered office &corrercial would be the two most appropriate uses.
Akemann asked if one of those two uses came into being, would variances still
be needed?
Durham answered if commercial was the use, variances would be needed. For
office use, 20,000 square feet was the minimum.
MOTION: Freemyer moved that the Board deny variance request 89-42 based
on the fact that no hardship was demonstrated. There are other
adequate uses available that would not require variances to
the impact of these variances. Akemann seconded the motion and
it passed 3-1 with Arockiasamy voting nay.
IV.OLD BUSINESS
None
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. Sign face memo, dated July 10, 1989
Durham explained that a possible draft change could be expected for the
Board's review and comments in the near future regarding an amendment to
the City's Sign Code regulations which limits the double faced. signs to no more than 12. Staff is recommending increasing this distance to 18"
to give property owners more flexibility in designing internal sign
lighting sources and simplifying maintenance.
Akeamnn was opposed to the increase as he felt it would only encourage
requests for more than 18".
Durham noted that the Board could be strict in this area, as an increase
would have already been made to 18".
Harvey noted that the 18" width would eliminate ghosting.
Akemann asked that the Staff provide him with a listing of three signs
presently in use that have ghosting and three signs presently in use
that do not have ghosting.
Akemann felt that there should also be an ordinance restricting the number
of residential garage stalls to three or less.
Durham noted that code presently states 4 stalls can be allowed.
Harvey felt the dock issue should be addressed.
Freemyer felt the shore line issue should be discussed.
Akemann said some discussion should be given to the issue of when things
are brought to the Board of Appeals.
Freemyer noted that the City Council needs to work on the same criteria that the Board does. ait4
Elim Shores
Where the Unity of Love Cultivates Service
August 30, 1989
Mr. Carl Jullie, City Manager
City of Eden Prairie
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Mr. Jullie:
This letter is being sent to you to express our continuing
opposition to the proposed development of a funeral home on
Terrey Pine Drive. We would like to reiterate our reasons
for opposition as follows:
1. The proposed .95-acre site has been determined by both
the Planning Commission and Appeals Board as being too
small for a funeral home. In the past 19 years, 6
funeral homes have been built in suburban locations
with an average lot size of 2 acres.
2. The 10 foot buffer strip allowed for planting of trees
does not allow for adequate screening. A site line
section prepared by landscape engineers, Brauer and
Associates, proves the visibility of this project from
even the first floor of Elim Shores. Future residents
of Elim Shores who are aware of this proposed
development have indicated they will choose apartments
on the other side of the building so as not to "have to
look at the funeral home." Of the 15 apartments on the
north side of the building, 3 will have a view of the
lake and proposed funeral home, the remaining 12 will
only view the funeral home. We see this as a serious
threat to the success of Elim Shores.
3. The extreme closeness of this proposed project on
Terrey Pine Drive will be a constant reminder of death
to the residents of Elim Shores. Previous testimony
has mentioned other retirement communities and funeral
homes which were built close together. We are not
aware of any built on adjoining property. Apple Valley
Rental office
16570 tfiest 79tr Street Suite 4
Eaen Gra:fie. MN 55346
Office 612 934 3105
Opposition to Proposed Funeral Home
August 30, 1989
Page 2
Villa Retirement and Henry W. Anderson Funeral Home are
3 blocks apart with other commercial buildings offering
other views for the residents. Nile Nursing Home of
Minneapolis unfortunately was required to redesign
their building so residents of Nile would not see the
Henry W. Anderson Funeral Home. Windows were removed
and acute care patients who wouldn't be up and about
were put in the area which would face the funeral home
across the street. The retirement community in
Excelsior is 5 blocks from Huber Funeral Home, around a
curve, and those residents are only able to glimpse the
top floor of the funeral home which looks like a
residence.
4. There will be a marked increase in traffic congestion
in this area due to larger visitations, services held
on the site, and formation of funeral processions to
all cemeteries. Eden Prairie is a community of younger
people who have greater numbers of friends and
relatives who would be involved in a funeral home
visitatior. For convenience to these friends and
family, more and more families are scheduling
visitations between 4:00 and 7:00 p.m. Many funerals
are held in churches usually because there is not a
funeral home near by. The building of this proposed
project would give families a local funeral home in
which to hold services.
5. There are alternative uses that would be appropriate
for this site; a small office building, or multi-family
housing wouldn't require so many variance changes.
Before we were aware of the proposed project, Elim
Shores had made an inquiry, through a Realtor,
regarding the purchase of this site. We feel the
$200,000 asking price is high in view of the fact that
the assessed value is $77,900.
As representatives of seniors who have testified in previous
meetings of their strong desire to not be reminded of death
on a daily basis, we must oppose the development of the
funeral home on this site. Thank you for your consideration
of this matter.
Sincerely,
(Ji
William S. Myers
President
ai6Z
ADDRESS:
-1491
s7//P647/en, 4/
‘,1S,4„,f) /707e
50
I 7 .2_171 0
4
l(7ctis Torrey paie..V.
NAME:
Honorable Mayor Gary D. Peterson
Members of the City Council
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN. 55344
RE: Eden Prairie Funeral Home
We the undersigned and residents of the immediate affected area support the
rause of the single family house and development of a funeral home at the
Southwest corner of County Road 4 and Terry Pine. We view this as the best
alternative for reuse of the property, given the changes in the immediate area.
We view this as a good buffer between us and the commercial/ industrial areas
and would welcome this quie neighborhood use to our neighborhood.
(4)2;;;L
p CAlic4cLI4Z, I—h&c
/ 7 /SI 2ct
/7155 -6)73
TELEPHONE:
°.3
73 V—/74 V
9‘v e)OcK -
(--"1 3
1-17Y/
ctIc`i
ci3/-1 -‘64/Co
”c4-020/
93'7-2 920
731 -72 0
Ja46.7/9 127).-
2-1 a 11
917-7 5-3 o
cuivi divi)
tcts,„
Ate'"
2/
Honorable Mayor Gary D. Peterson
Members of the City Council
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN.
RE: Eden Prairie Funeral Home
We the undersigned support the reuse of the sin g le family house and development
of a funeral home at the Southwest corner of County Road 4 and Terry Pine. We
view this as the best alternative for reuse of tne property, given the changes in
the immediate area. We view this as a good buffer betwoen the residential and
the commercial/ industrial areas and would welcome this guie neighborhood use.
NAME: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE:
-7d,2
fs,--3/
_ ce) v:27-
-7410 trikrzo INN
75-3-6 "
9,5)/3 NoK
9-•k0 aL r)--e2.1(12Li
zo g Qs/. 9.7-
753/ czi 14,44-7 93 y -6 z 3)
fil/% r7 s-qr d_tt,
2 '99 ?.ak c,e4 9 68 - 61 -?j1
7a6 ij Cdthel,c. q et-e) - 04-46
P-1 D30 Rk_Ct ./. . 937 - 1095
/4,-2 214* 934-76f/
No,*
eah-tie
z), /1
7 g 7 - trt
914-W11
&6-70 -1-6,re ri;pr
SkOkl,t , WITT-orotlf94
a'n41
T r vi C C.71 F ir;s1 -ed (437-1606
ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE:
7,37..2gey
2-7o , r:444-3 7 5' 7 - .g_i oo ."7: 3=2
R7o c—c/4..).?-a.c..ret..„Wcar.1 137 - aFF4
/A ....Che=e eP
NAME:
_ 14;g43.
/‘.1 /62,ezeirt__ _
0-celo=
/ 7802 leye,, 0 4.
-
Len 73 s",9, 937- .1 7 6
eh„;.4., 9Z7 - j_SCR/ Sufrverte
1j1---Stow ,aeL,, EP
/2 /V '591_ V -6 6
---10/A/
bb tt —EEdd et vo ee„ kip'?
Honorable Mayor Gary D. Peterson
Members of the City Council
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN.
RE: Eden Prairie Funeral Home
We the undersigned support the reuse of th
e
s
i
n
g
l
e
f
a
m
i
l
y
h
o
u
s
e
a
n
d
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
of a funeral home at the Southwest corner o
f
C
o
u
n
t
y
R
o
a
d
4
a
n
d
T
e
r
r
y
P
i
n
e
.
W
e
view this as the best alternative for reuse
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
,
g
i
v
e
n
t
h
e
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
i
n
the immediate area. We view this as a good
b
u
f
f
e
r
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
t
h
e
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
a
n
d
the commercial/ industrial areas and would
w
e
l
c
o
m
e
t
h
i
s
g
u
i
4
'
n
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
u
s
e
.
,7
/6/- -74vgn
#?a, fie 93 >. >,12
A/4 fne"
_62
ci37-924 -7 Ce-1,1-4' lsal ‘91
Has% autui zir.
ezt 4',7o
ir 3 fc C 7,
49DDPESS:
!432.. 14? aCrj Ct
KL
43'4zr 74ee
/c7 5 0 1/1=4.ci
7 iek. - I
/5-70 0 _ q 37- Oirqg.
aa4 ;t-Pt
S LjOh.b,9?-6 cO
gW-,"
/5‘0/ ,S1,MM PI- Ph 9 3 7-1 1G 5- 7.,
/036/ &dam $7. 9e- r/7thi/P1
-424
71-0Y vairlse-o , ct7??1,7a,
guQu L3X ii LWg (1-46k .e.C( 9W- /0- „41,La"...J.cats9- r Xern4g_e2C2
,
(.0-2 r-24-(4
khvidokiliA/
(LC\Alits-Rn
723Y Pr0,41 L VW. •
2.29 ,4 Pi"0.1.0 42 1r; ve, CI 31 -algal
it,cga 1:volkt..76-elf -Iv.. EP. magovii#
zItle
Alte 44 ieR
f:147/4zee
7/7/Y1 a--Y•
79,Wedem,g4;,4Zi2 9,31440
7-85/r7
6
S1wv,I..k( (1..--te. 9'37- (76 7
ggo(0,7ew..0 • 93 -I oef ‘I
ja Cer.)snr_Lect9318 949- oe4(0
937— 9.7_?
"?37— grrt
q3 -1 - V174
/6317,9
84,11 EDE', PAA,R(4. /0.
deeLef Ysif- sib z z_
y3 7 _ S 3
/ , Agf
lY
/
IM
/t3ii g ApItiquu-`ritALI
Li(ôf 7",,i 4 (c___
04 -0 cL.a
I
zI
Honorable Mayor Gary D. Peterson
Members of the City Council
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN.
RE: Eden Prairie Funeral Home
We the undersigned support the reuse of the single family house an
d
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
of a funeral home at the Southwest corner of County Road 4 and Ter
r
y
P
i
n
e
.
W
e
view this as the best alternative for reuse of the property, given
t
h
e
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
i
n
the immediate area. We view this as a good buffer between the resi
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
a
n
d
the commercial/ industrial areas and would welcome this quid neigh
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
u
s
e
.
KIN-Jr".a-
•-••
MEMO
TO: City Council
FROM: Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE:
August 31, 1989
RE:
Planning Commission Recommendation on Eden Prairie Funeral Home
At its meeting on August 28th, the Planning Commission expressed concern regarding
the fact that the City Council did not have the benefit of the minutes from the
Planning Commission meeting when the Council reviewed the proposed funeral home.
The Commission asked that Council be made aware of their full discussion on the item
and that the Council receive their unapproved minutes regarding the funeral home
project prior to any additional Council action on the item.
The Planning Commission motion of July 24th is as follows:
MOTION:
Sandstad moved, seconded by Anderson to recommend the City Council denial of the
request of Marcus Corporation for a Guide Plan amendment from Low Density
Residential to Community Commercial on 0.95 acres for construction of a funeral home
based on the following findings:
1. The use was not appropriate for Community Commercial. (The Planning
Commission felt that a funeral home should be classified as a
Regional Commercial land use rather than a Community Commercial
land use.)
2. It was inadequately buffered. (The Planning Commission felt that
the 10 foot setback along the south property line area did not
provide an adequate transition from the Elim Shores senior housing
project to the proposed parking area and funeral home.)
3. Traffic. (Concerns of the Planning Commission included the impact
on the intersection of State Highway #5 and Co. Road 14 and traffic
congestion which may occur in the peak hours.)
AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Anderson to add the following finding to the previous
list.
4. Potential negative affect on surrounding property.
Motion carried 3-2-0, with Dodge and Bye voting "NO" because they did not believe
that there would be a negative effect on the surrounding properties.
2/6 71•1
CONTENTS
Variance Request #89-36
1.) Memo from Planning Staff dated August 7, 1989
2.) Public Hearing Notice
3.) Application
4.) Application letter
5.) Survey with Proposed Addition
6.) Interior Floor Plan
7.) Exterior Elevation
8.) Construction Details
9.) Final Order
10.) Appeal Letter dated August 4, 1989
11.) Board of Appeals Staff Report
12.) Board of Appeals approved minutes
i6,0
-7 MORANDUM
TO : MAYOR PETERSON & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: JEAN JOHNSON, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: AUGUST 7, 1989
RE : VARIANCE REQUEST #89-36
The Board of Adjustment and Appeals approved Variance Request #89-36 with amendments. The applicant requested a 11 rear yard setback. The Board approved a
17' rear yard setback. City Code requires a 20' rear yard setback.
The Board felt a 20 foot addition is larger than the typical 14 X 14 + foot deck or
porch that is built onto most homes. The Board considered the shape of the lot as a
hardship, but could not approve the degree of variance being requested. Therefore,
the Board approved a modified variance requiring the addition to be 17 feet from the
rear lot line. This allows an addition 14 feet X approximately 30 feet.
JJ:mmr/VR8936
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
REGARDING VARIANCE REQUEST
#89-36
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of Appeals and Adjustments will meet
at the following time and places:
7:30 PM
Thursday, July 13, 1989
At the Council Chambers, 7600 Executive Drive, Eden Prairie
City Hall, Eden Prairie, MN 55344
to review and consider the variance request #89-36, submitted by Bradley P.
Kuyper for property located at 16534 South Manor Road, Eden Prairie
Minnesota legally described as: OFR— MEE ETImber Criii— Woods nd
Addition. The request is for a variana-Fom CITY-Tode Chapter
(7•naiiii---11,_1752. Subdivision 2 -7s. to-fTFTRITa-dia addition 11' from the
5.7—f6k line. City. Code requires -70'.
Written or oral comments relating to this variance request will be heard at
this meeting. Said variance application is on file for public review at
the Planning Department at Eden Prairie City Hall.
Published in the Eden Prairie News
June 28. 1989
City of Eden Prairie
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
41 I
Variance f
Receipt #_
(
APPLICANT'S NAME:
ADDRESS:
PHONES:
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
VARIANCE REQUEST APPLICATION
,
A' rot/ P, Ki yper
A44,10,, kl ea.
Work S').:30 -7.37g Home
9_;7 - 5206
REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE AT: iCc -i m .", ks2
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lt7 P.1 , glokik C„ot (e„li
FEE: A) $75.00 - Residential - (includes building additions, decks, and Code interpretations)
8) $125.00 - Other - (includes variances associated with office, industrial, commercial
property and variances associated with new development/construction)
d'eve,, Ir. 4
( Residential - 8 1/2" x 11" survey showing lot lines and setbacks of existing and proposed
TITF4T-iTrTil location of buildings on adjoining properties. Also show building elevations,
arLfiitectural floor plans, and pertinent topographical features such as trees, fences, berms,
steep slopes, ponds, roads, and existing and proposed elevations, which have bearing on the
variance request.
2) Other - 8 1/2" x 11" survey showing lot lines and setbacks of existing and proposed
structures. Where surveys are larger than 8 1/2" x 11", 7 copies of site plan folded to 8 1/2"
x 11" will be required. Also include landscape plan, pertinent topographical features such as
trees, fences, berms, steep slopes, ponds, roads, and exiting and proposed elevations, which
have bearing on the request.
3) Letter addressed to Board of Adjustments and Appeals, explaining nature of variance request
and reason(s) why conformance to the literal provisions of the City's code would cause hardship.
tx.24.4.0LA:9-
Fee Ownerrt Signature (Land Owner)
Notes to Applicant:
1. The Board meets on the 2nd Thursday of the month, 7:30 p.m., City Hall Council Chambers,
7600 Executive Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
2. Applications must be filled, no later than 2nd Thursday of the month previous to the
meeting date.
3. Notices are published in the Eden Prairie News and mailed to property owners within 500
feet. Applicants are encouraged to personally contact adjacent property owners, prior
to the hearing, in order to explain the variance and to be prepared to address their
concerns at the hearing.
**NOTE: SUBMIT 9 COPIES FOLDED TO 84" X 11" OF ANY SITE PLANS OVER 84" X 11'
REASON FOR VARIANCE: PrIN,Ic e k Cp yli e,s wiT4in
14P rear ICT 110e,
Submission Requirements:
June 6, 1989
Bradley and Bambi Kuyper
16534 So. Manor Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55348
Dear Board of Adjustments and Appeals,
We are requesting a variance that would allow us to
build a deck that would come within eleven feet of our rear
lot line. The reason the deck will come so close to the lot
line is that the rear of our house is only 31 ft. from our
lot line. This means that if we were to comply with the 20
ft. standard setback our deck could extend only eleven ft.
from our house. The deck we would like to build would be
attached to the main floor of the house in the rear where a
sliding glass door already exists. There is not any other
location on our house where we could build and still have
access to this door. The portion of the deck that would
extend 20 ft. would be converted to a screened porch in the
future.
We have discussed our plans with all of our neighbors
behind and to the sides and none of them have any problem
with it.
Sincerely,
Lar
Bradley Kuyper
A119
Exiai'sns
House.
.9
owl
Dro.ina.3a.
6-
r Ettsem\.n+
15.0
.315.
-9•74:4
1 I\
6 *2431
SATHRE-BERGOUIST, INC.
106 SOUTH 11110ADWAV • WAYZATA. MN
E EE EE NO NE 6116 164060
6,7.34 .5. MAN0/7 WO.
• NOTICE •
• 11,••11 fork! \wily elevalk...4
•n4 11/viC“
prizy 14 d,sr.4 1r fooling, toilJer
/wow,: /11...r .. rvo;bility ler problems
:.• 1...!..de 10 th.V:. ..•
5 01/
941.10
.84—N78.
'291.4
'42,00=
2c
o Denotes Iron Monument
X000.0 Denotes Existing Elevation
1000.01 Denotes Proposed Elevation
Denotes Direction of Surface Drainage
ROAD
g 943.6
Proposed Top of Foundation Elevation = 944.7
Proposed Garage Floor Elevation = 944 Z
Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation = 936 o
I hereby certify that this is o true and correct representation of a survey of the botindaries of:
Lot 14, Block 5, TIMBER CREEK WOODS 2nd ADDITION • ,,
And of 011 - ocat ion of all build'ngs, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if
1 D L 0), iii [1 ,i.,' i c rtlinepin County, Minnesota
131DG. D::"1 11
or on said lanA;!As sur,yeed .by methisllth d5IY of June 1987 ..„.
'CITY C )VL I
rr,. :: [-Ii .'./ t; Ir .
1 " ‘ ' ' ' • xi';Thomas S. Berm I st f,
Registered Land Surveyor, Minn. Lie. No. 7725
ny, from
ID-
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
for .
THE ROTTLUND COMPANY, INC,
)01, woad/
' IgIfJor NI. 1 A1d
rtIV Z-g
r . • I "."11-:.3.C.:-1 7?Nl i
1..rvl 01'1114
111
Ectigurg
'11
•s;
• • •
11.4.. •
• .ft••*•••••
joists in this section
will be spliced (over-
lapped) over center bea
20 ft. _
3 ft.
stairum
triple 2"x10"
'V
14 ft.
t — triple 2 9 x10"
19' All posts
6"x6"
41,
8 ft.
7 ft. 7 ft.
a n?
Note: 14 1 x20 1 section may be converted to a
three season porch in the future
(roof to be gable type)
Entire deck to have 2"x6" deckir
fill joists to be 2"x10"-12"0.C.
• - footings 16"x16"x8"
42" deep
O - footings 8" dia. x 12" flar
42" deep
triple 2"x10" beam
VARIANCE #89-36
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
FINAL ORDER
RE: Petition of Bradley P. Kuyper
ADDRESS: 16534 South Manor Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 14, Block 5, Timber Creek Woods 2nd Addition
VARIANCE REQUEST: The request is for a variance from City Code, Chapter ILL Section
11-02 Subdivision 2 B to permit a deck addition 11' from the -L. _L
rear lot line. City Code requires 70'.
The Board of Appeals and Adjustments for the City of Eden Prairie at a regular meeting
thereof duly considered the above petition and after hearing and examining all of the
evidence presented and the file therein does hereby find and order as follows:
1. All procedural requirements necessary for the review of said variance have
been met. (YES X NO )
2. There are circumstances unique to the property under consideration, and
granting such variances does not violate the spirit and intent of the
City's Zoning and Platting Code.
3. Variance Request #89-36 is herein Granted X , Denied
4. Conditions to the granting X , denial , of said variance are as
follows:
A 17' rear yard setback must be maintained.
5. This variance shall be revoked within 15 days after notice of failure to
meet the required conditions has been given.
6. A copy of this order shall be forwarded to the applicant by the City
Clerk.
7. This order shall be effective July 13, 1989; however, this variance shall
lapse and be of no effect unless the erection or alternatives permitted
shall occur within one (1) year of the effective date unless said period
of time is extended pursuant to the appropriate procedures prior to the
expiration of one year from the effective date hereof.
8. All Board of Adjustments and Appeals actions are subject to City Council
review.
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
BY: , .A—ttAQA.0
DATED: July 13, 1989
a_r 1 7
August 4, 1989
Bradley Kuyper
16534 So. Manor Rd.
Eden Prairie, MN 55346
Dear Ms. Johnson,
This letter is to inform you that I wish to appeal the
decision made by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals on
July 13, 1989 concerning variance request 89-36. This
variance request was to build a deck within Ilft, of my rear
lot line. I have been in contact with Councilman Doug Tenpas
who came to my house to look at what I wanted to do. He
discussed my request with the other council members at the
council meeting on August 1, 1989 and asked me to get it on
the agenda for the next council meeting on August 15th. If
there is any problem in doing this please give me a call.
Sincerely,
Bradley Kuyper
Work U 830-7374
Home Si 937-5206
g 1 1 9
Page 15
K. Variance request #89-36 to review and consider the variance request #89-36,
submitted ta Bradley P. Kuyper for property located at 16534 South Manor Road Eden
Minnesota. The request is for a variance from Ci ty Code, Chapter -IT:
Section 11.02 SubdivisTOW 2, B, to peT-iit a deck add7an l' from the rear Tat linit—tity Code requires 20'.
Background - The property under variance request consideration is located in the
Timber Creek Woods 2nd Addition. The addition was platted and zoned R1-9.5 in 1983.
A home was constructed on the lot in 1987. The rear of the home is located 31' from
the rear lot line.
Variance Request - The applicant is proposing to construct a deck which at its
closest point, will be located 11' from the rear lot line. City Code requires 20'.
(Note Exhibit F ).
Alternative - One alternative is to construct a deck which would meet code. A deck
of 11' in depth could be constructed. (Note Exhibit G).
Should the Board identify a hardship, but is uncomfortable with a 11' rear yard
setback, alternatives to lessen the variance request may be appropriate.
Conclusion - A deck could be constructed on the property which will meet code and
not restrict use of the property. Should the Board approve the variance requested,
specific findings need to be identified uniquely qualifying such an action.
The Board may choose one of the following options:
1) Approve variance request #89-36 as submitted, identifying unique
circumstances supporting the approval.
2) Approve variance request #89-36 with amendments identifying unique
circumstances supporting the approval.
3) Deny variance request #89-36 finding a deck may be built and meet code.
An 11' deck is not restrictive. No specific hardship has been
substantiated.
?xew-ID
cFci gerc4a7
Existins
House.
-71
4
./
eme,,
INC. 008
s , 1
L4 .30
SATHRE-BERGOUIST, .
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
Exhibit F
IO 60101411110ADwAY • WAYZATA. MN 55301
EEEEE OMT 1124TO11000
4-77 -'1
-98,'77--N89°02: 35 7'1E -
6 1
.1n11,
1 11
1I
-7 5 01 ,...
‘7( H 441s7 f
ROAD „ :4 3.5
Denotes Iron Monument
X000.0 Denotes Existing Elevation Proposed Top of Foundation Elevation: 944.7
1000.01 Denotes Proposed Elevation Proposed Garage Floor Elevation: p44. 2
Denotes Direction of Surface Drainage Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation: o
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of:
Lot 14, Block 5, TIMBER CREEK WOODS 2nd ADDITION
"";l• !• :
-Ilennepin County. Minnesota L. i i. ti Ill
And of -location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if gny, from
or on said lorldz As luri veed .by me 1177ls 11th 7:: June
.(11 -tt
1987
••
rPi til
\ IV: \
-4
7.1 :1
Propoe<
1 1 A ; I I 41. \ Z rt co 1 s
as,In -, x
Ul 1.4... i
us . .... 44
(944.22 3.1
I // 7.4si • 7)" 1[1
7 7
CIA:.
\ :4 ••••n.. 4 1 .......,.. ,
1 VII: '3'2,tql76e. Do;c. 4.1%? 264.8 4..
OK by: CK -A178.3272 .. 49 ,
12 ' 77":'-'4228,9)
1 9433
4.1 t 5.4,•2e
f r Dro.ina.3e. 4 Ut\ili r Eissern\mt .7.7i4
KO
43/45,:, \ ,9386
n 40.1
\N,
NOTIC(
s1,11 Ilr vcrify P• 4
on4 woo, U.
raj:4 ic. ci tvadct
at!tonn to, plobleml
V.,!we cps .2 ,
.•
11 N o R
Fr .11;;,: ;Thomas S. Bergquist
Registered Land Surveyor, Minn. Lic. No. 7725
II I':30
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY SA THRE-BER GOUIST, INC. ,
106 SOUTH BROADWAY • WAYZATA, MN $13111
TELEPHONE 612.476.6000 I MO' 128
9.0
Exhibit G
4• :461
tt t
'513.77'" -"Nerd 35)E-
—1
zo` •
••6534 5. P•74,v04. p
• N311C1 •
skit lirld vtrify elo,Ari,as H. • , TerWer end sif•eict,
chir..its• forging, folder
worn:: til.....c.rans;trilily lot probkm,
1.. 1.:.!ure {krt.
o tiS C. 3.0
- 41.64- Om.
1 on 141
rt. A
(944.0
e.r.
1.3
wotor
hc;rn.e- 17-6.)
f'11:3,-2,•-.17.16 Dote 4713
I OK Dy: : • Cy(1 5 0ter H
94I f
ROAD
• g 943.0 0 Denotes Iron Monument
X000.0 Denotes Existing Elevation . Proposed Top of Foundation Elevation: 944 ,7 1000.01 Denotes Proposed Elevation Proposed Garage Floor Elevation: 944• Z
Denotes Direction of Surface Drainage Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation =
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a su
r
v
e
y
o
f
t
h
e
b
o
U
n
d
a
r
i
e
s
o
f
:
Lot 14, Block 5, TIMBER CREEK WOODS 2nd ADDITION
1.
P
1 L•
:! nnepin County, Minnesota 1
DWG. Dii"1 I And of Ittie location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and oll visible encroachments, if
or on said land "As lurveyed by me this 11th doy of June„
1987
'.cITY CA.i"
- S• ;Thomas S. Itergquist
•94 9
29
-R=422.,fp)
a' 54 1 26'
n
NoR
Registered Land Surveyor, Minn. Lic. No. 7725
ny, from
14
Travelle said they would forgo the sign at Pioneer Trail and Mitchell Rd.
(the 24 sign). They have studied this very carefully and it is not a whim.
Bozonie said he liked the sign, but it could be 3/4 of the height and
3/4 of the width.
Harvey asked if there were two area identification signs allowed on the
1st platt or the entire 150 acres.
Travelle said there would be no more significant signage. The collector
street is Mitchell Rd. No road systems have been developed as yet or
lot configurations laid out. This sign would be the master signage for
Boulder Point.
Anderson noted the following from the Staff report:
Lonaitions:
No additional Boulder Pointe signs within the 150 acre PUD be permitted
except for a 24 square foot sign at the Pioneer Trail entrance to Boulder
Pointe.
Travelle said more signage may be needed at the Twin Home section of the
development.
Bozonie felt that the liked the sign, but not the size.
Akemann said he was in favor of the sign, but saw no hardship. He liked the
idea of a trade off, but not for just one sign. Possibly there should be
an ordinance change.
Harvey said he had a problem with large signs unless something is given in
return-and one sign is not enough. He asked Travelle if he could live
with one other sign at the Twin Home section besides the one being proposed.
Travelle answered yes.
Akemann said he was undecided--according to the code there was no hardship.
MOTION: Anderson moved that the Board approve variance request
89-35 under the conditions that there be no additional
signage within the Boulder Point addition be permitted
except one additional sign up to 24 sq. ft. (area identification
sign) to be located at the developers discretion. Freemyer
seconded the motion and it passed 3-2 with Bozonie and Akemann
voting nay on the grounds that no hardship was demonstrated.
(One original sign and one additional sign granted for 150 acres)
S Anderson added that the City should look into a modification of the PUB
rules so issues like this do not come before the Board. This should be a
part of the PUD.
uest #89-36, submitted by Bradley P. Kuyper for property located
—7534 South Manor Road, Eden -Prairie, Minnesota, legally descrTER- as: Lot -74- Block 5:Timber Creek Woods 2nd Addition.
The request is for a variance from City code, Chapter 71:liEffiTi 11702, Subdivision 2 5:-E
ci
permit a eckition 11' from the rear
lot line. City Code requires. 20'.
15
Bradley Kuyper appeared to present the variance. He stated that the
lot was unique as it is perfectly square--the rest are rectangular.
As such, it allows only 11 in which to build a deck. Part of the
proposed deck will be turned into a porch in the future.
Harvey said he felt the size of the request could be reduced.
Akenann said he was not in favor of nassing anything this large--possibly
a continuance should be granted.
Kuyper asked how the Board felt about 16'. Then he asked about 14' by 14.
MOTION: Anderson moved that the Board approve variance request 89-36
with modifications:
That there be a maximum of 17' setback from the rear lot line,
or a total variance of 3' into the rear yard set back area.
Grounds for this motion were the unique nature of the lot,
the structure creates no negative impact, the lot is square,
and the constraints placed on the ability to construct a
deck. Harvey seconded the motion and it passed 4-1 with
Akemann opposed.
L. Request #89-37, submitted by James and Pauline Borucki for ro ert
located at 6517 Rowland Roid---EUFF 775-7Te, Minnesota, egally
described as Lot St Block 2, Carmel Addition. The request is for a
variance from City Code Chapter 11, Section ITTR, Subdivision 2, B., (1) to perm it proposed parcel B—F-1777I7—Ware feet. City
Code requires 3 500 square feet in the R1-13:5 Zoning District. (2) to permit the existing structure 177' from the front lot line.
City Code requires a 30' front yard setback. to pelt
with proposed tract B an average lot width of . City Co e
requires 88'.
James & Pauline Boucki appeared to present the variance request. He
explained that the variance request as tollows: 1. To divide lot
5 into 2 parcels, (A & B), with lot 5 maintaining the existing home.
The number of driveways would remain the same. The density of homes
along Roland Rd would have only a 1% increase. He asked the Board to
consider the following: The sethack from the road. The square footage--
he would need to purchase land and the NE side is part of Carmel Drive
(this would be impossible) and the east side is much too steep. If a
new home were to be built on the lot, it could not be brought to the
lot line to create a crowded situation. It would not create a precedent
in the area, because it is a unique situation (being a triangular lot).
The variance would be for lot B only--lot A is to code.
Johnson explained that this proposal is before the Board prior to the
Planning Commission review. A driveway to a possible new home nearby
would have poor site lines unless it was placed on the corner of the
property.
Harvey asked when the Borucki's had acqui ed the property and why they
were seeking to subdivide it. All
1:,2.0 Wes: 7b:.St
WelshCompanies
August 18, 1989
Mr. Steve Sinell
City Assessor
City of Eden Prairie
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Mr. Sinell:
We are pleased to present to you the following lease extension proposal for the
space located at 7600 Executive Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. As you review
the terms noted below, you should know that several recent transactions were
signed at $9.00+ per square foot of office area. However, we have reduced the
base rate to $8.50 per square foot as an accommodation to a valued tenant who
occupies a large portion of the building.
BUILDING:
PREMISES:
TERM:
ANNUAL BASE RENT:
Edenvale Executive Center
Approximately 22,000 square feet of office
space.
The Term of this Lease shall be for a period
of three years commencing March 1, 1990, and
terminating the last day of February, 1993.
The Annual Base Rent for the term of this
Lease shall be set out as follows:
For the period March 1, 1990, through and
Including the last day of February, 1992,
base rent shall be $15,583.33 per month.
For the period March 1, 1992, through and
including the last day of February, 1993,
tenant shall pay monthly base rental in the
amount of $16,500.
The above quoted rates are base rents only
and do not include Common Area Maintenance
costs and Real Estate Taxes.
Real Estate Development • Constructton • Brokerage • Prowl, management • I nvestment services
Mr. Steve Sinell
August 18, 1989
Page 2
COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE COSTS
AND TAXES: Tenant shall pay their prorata share of Com-
mon Area Maintenance costs and Real Estate
Taxes based on 19.78% of the building.
Tenant shall also be obligated to pay their
own utility charges.
OPTIONS TO TERMINATE: Tenant may elect to terminate the lease
extension agreement after Z4 months by
giving the Landlord 150 1DYYtten notice of
their intent to terminate. Should the
tenant elect this option, the tenant agrees
to pay to Landlord above and beyond the
monthly rental payments, a penalty of
$22,000 which shall be due the first day of
the last month of occupancy. However, if
the City should decide to relocate to any
land parcel owned by Equitable at any time
during this lease agreement, the Landlord
will release the tenant from the lease
agreement with no penalty charges.
This proposal is subject to the owner's final approval and completion of fully-
executed lease extension agreements by both parties. We would appreciate
receiving your acceptance or rejection of this proposal within seven days after
the September 5, 1989, City Council Meeting.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If you should have any questions
relative to the information presented above or if you require any additional
information, please do not hesitate to contact me at 829-5254.
Sincerely,
Linda Winer
Property Manager
LW/kak/8-18.2
Memorandum
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
Steve Sinell, City Assessor
August 28, 1989
City Hall Lease Renewal
The original lease has the city paying $14,116.66 per month or
$169,399.92 per year in base rent for the period November 1, 1987
through February 28, 1990. This base rent equates to $7.70 per
sq. ft. per year. The city paid no base rent for the period
March 1, 1987 through October 31, 1987. In addition to the base
rent the city is responsible for 19.78% of the Common Area
Maintenance and Real Estate Taxes on the property.
The attached lease extension proposal has the city paying
$15,583.33 per month or $186,999.96 per year in base rent for the
period March 1, 1990 through the last day of February, 1992.
This base rent equates to $8.50 per sq. ft. per year.
For the period March 1, 1992, through the last day of February,
1993, the monthly base rent will be $16,500 per month or $198,000
per year. This base rent equates to $9.00 per sq. ft. per year.
We will still be paying 19.78% of the Common Area Maintenance
costs and Real Estate Taxes. The city is being billed $15,448.20
Maintenance Costs and $53,721.36 per year for Real Estate Taxes
for 1989. The total rental costs for 1989 are $238,569.
There is an option to terminate after 24 months with a $22,000
penalty. The penalty is equal to the difference between paying
$8.50 sq. ft. and $9.00 sq. ft. for the period March 1, 1990 thru
the last day of February, 1992.
I've reviewed the confidential income and expense information
we've collected from other sources, reviewed the Towle Real
Estate Company Office-Showroom/Business Center Report (attached),
and have talked with N. Craig Johnson MAI of N. Craig Johnson
Appraisals.
My review of the confidential income and expense surveys supports
the $8.50 per sq. ft. rate but doesn't support the $9.00 rate.
The information I have is historical in nature and the surveys
don't attempt to ask for proposed rents 3 years in the future.
The Towle Office-Showroom/Business Center Report indicates stated
rental rates for the 3rd Quarter of 1988 in the southwest suburbs
at $6.00 to $10.00 per sq. ft. for office space and average rents
of $7.95 per sq. ft.
@,
I talked with N. Craig Johnson MAI on August 25, 1
9
8
9
t
o
s
o
l
i
c
i
t
his opinion as to "market rent" for our offi
c
e
s
p
a
c
e
.
H
e
indicated that new leases are in the $8.00 to $9.00 net rent range and that any number in that range would be
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
i
v
e
o
f
market rent. He also indicated that the best of
f
i
c
e
s
h
o
w
r
o
o
m
spaces have been offered at $10.00 net rent for off
i
c
e
s
p
a
c
e
a
n
d
$5.00 net rent for warehouse space.
We are currently negotiating with Equitable
L
i
f
e
A
s
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
Society through Linda Winer of The Welsh Compani
e
s
f
o
r
a
l
o
w
e
r
rate for year 3 of the extension. We have not received the
revised proposal at this time but should have i
t
b
y
T
u
e
s
d
a
y
September 5th. Linda Winer of The Welsh Comp
a
n
i
e
s
w
i
l
l
be attending the council meeting Tuesday September 5t
h
.
SRS/akn
attachments