Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 08/18/1981 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUcaDAY, AUGUST 18, 1981 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, George Bentley, Dean Edstrom, Paul Redpath and George Tangen COUNCIL STAFF: • City Manager Carl Jullie; City Attorney Roger Pauly; Finance Director John Frane; Planning Director Chris Enger; Director of Community Services Bob Lambert; City Engineer Gene Diet2, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael INVOCATION: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS II. MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1981 Page 167E III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List Page 168,-. B. Reguest for authority to advertise for bids for Flying Cloud Concession Page 168E Stand C. Accept bids on Round Lake Playground Structure Page 168C D. Temora y construction and slope easement from City of Eden Prairie Page 168" i to Tudor'Oaks Condominium Project for construction of Castlemoor Drive TResolution No.81-164- E. Approve_plans and_specifications for Bennett Place improvements and Page 169: authorize bids to be received September 10, 1981 at 10:00 AM, I.C. 52-001 1Resolution No. 81-1651 F. Request from ITT ISchadow) to set Public Hearing for September 1, 1981 to consider Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of $2,000,000 G. Reduest from Town R Country Claim Service, Inc. (Bryant Lake Center - Lakeridge Office Project), to set Public Hearing for September 15, 1981 to consider Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of $306,000 H. Award contract for Eden Road Improvements, I.C. 52-005 (Resolution No. 81-17ry- I. Final approval of Municipal Industrial Development Bonds for Wilson ✓ Page 169E Learning Corporation in the amount of 1750,000 (Resolution No. 81-170) J. Final approval of Municipal Industrial Development Bonds for Minnesota / Page 169F - SuJpply_ in the amount of $800,000 (esolution No. 81-169) Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,August 18, 1981 K. Final approval of Municipal Industrial Development Bonds for Anderson Page 1697 Lakes Ltd. Project Ibri aaole Office Building) in the amount of b40-O,b00i/ (Resolution No. B1-163) L. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 81-10, rezoning lot 1, block 1, from Page 1698 R1-13.5 to RM 6.5 for 1 duplex, Lake Trail Estates by Swenson & Schwartz IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. TIMBER CREEK by_8_-T Land Company Request for PUD Development stage Page 1699 approval,rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5 and R1-13.5 and preliminary platting of 94 single family lots, 120 townhouses, and 108 quadraminiums with variances. Located north of Duck Lake Trail and south of 62nd Street (Ordinance No. 81-12 and Resolution No. 81-158) B. EDENVALE 14 by Equitable Life Assurance Society of the US and Equitable Page 172E Life Mortgage and Realty Investors. Request for revised PUD Development stage approval, rezoning from R1-13.5 to RM 6.5 for approximately 15 of the 24 acres, and preliminary plat approval of 30 single family lots and 56 duplex lots with variances. Located NW of Edenvale Blvd., SE of railroad, and north and west of Woodhill Trail. (Ordinance No. 81-13 and Resolution No. 81-159) C. WOODLAWN HEIGHTS by Lyman Lumber. Request for PUD Concept approval. Page 1771 Located in the southwest corner of Townline Road and Duck Lake Road. (Resolution No. 81-160) V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS.7815 - 8090 Page 1787 "I. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS A. Planning Commission - Set date of September 1, 1981, 6:30 PM, to meet jointly with the City Council and Development Commission B. Development Commission - Report regarding the Economic Development Page 179Z District and Tax Increment Financing for Road Improvements VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. BURNING TREE CONDOMINIUM PLAT by Burnin Tree Corporation. Request Page 1795 to preliminary plat 12 acres into 2 lots 5 & 7 acres zoned RM 2.5. Located at 14000 Chestnut Drive (Resolution No. 81-162) B. Request from Sever Peterson to appeal the Board of Appeals & Page 180L Adjustments decision regarding a variance for a deck in Creekwood VIII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members I. Appointment of 1 representative to the Planning Commission to fill an unexpired term to 2/28/84 2. Appointment of 1 representative to the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission to fill an unexpired term to 2728/82 B. Report of City Attorney • C. Report of City Manager I. Resort on building on parcels under 5 acres in the Rural area Page 1801 Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,August 18, 1981 • 2. Resolution No. 81-172, calling for a Public Hearing for creation of Development District No. 1 and Economic Development District for September 15, 1981 3. Special Council meeting for consideration of the 1981-82 City Budget and Public Hearing for Special Assessments for September 22, 1981 D. Report of Director of Community Services 1. Request from the Hockey Association of Eden Prairie (HAEP) Page 1812 ' 2. Community Center Capital Outlay Page 1818 E. Report of City Engineer 1. Resolution approving plans and specifications for the improvement Page 1831 of the I-494/CSAH 18 interchange, State Project No. 2785-190, 207 (Resolution No. 81-166) 2. Consider resolution rescinding Resolution No. 352, restricting home Page 1832 construction until public improvements are constructed -- Nicholson property on Valley Road (Resolution No. 81-167) 3. Award contract for Sunnybrook Road Improvements, I.C. 51-381 Page 183g (Resolution No. 81-171 IX. NEW BUSINESS ( X. ADJOURNMENT. UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1981 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel, George Bentley, Dean Edstrom, Paul Redpath, and George Tangen COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, City Attorney Roger Pauly, City Engineer Gene Dietz, Plannir Director Chris Enger, Director of Community Services Bob Lambert, Director of Public Safe- ty Jack Hacking, Animal Control Officer Nancy Riley, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael INVOCATION: Councilman George 8entley PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Dean Edstrom and George Tangen were absent. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS The following items were removed from III. Consent Calendar: C. becomes IX. D. 4. Award bids for Round Lake irrigation system; K. becomes IX. E. 3. Receive 100% petition and authorize preparation of plans and specifications for "CPT/Eaton/SGL/ CPA" Road project, I.C. 52-010 (Resolution No. 81-153). The following item was added to the Agenda: IX. E. 2. Valley View Trails. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by 8entley, to approve the Agenda as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Penzel, to have Staff include estimated project costs whenever bids are awarded. Motion carried unanimously. II. MINUTES A. City Council Meeting held Tuesday, July 21, 1981 Page 1, para.1, line 10: change "five" to "three". MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the minutes of the July 21, 1981, City Council meeting as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously. 8. Joint City Council/Human Rights & Services Commission meeting held Monday, July 27, 1981 MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Penzel, to approve the minutes of the Joint City Council/Human Rights & Services Commission meeting held Monday, July 27, 1981, as published. Motion carried with Bentley abstaining. /ViJ City Council Minutes -2- August 4, 1981 C. City Council meeting held Monday, July 27, 1981 MOTION: Redpath moved, Bentley seconded, to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting held Monday, July 27, 1981. Motion carried unanimously. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 81-36, amending Ordinance No. 81-35, the Ordinance authorizing the declaration of a state of water emergency during which time the use of water shall be regulated and prescribing a penalty B. Extension of bid period for Round Lake Playground equipment and authorize addendL. C. Award bids for Round Lake irrigation system - removed to IX. D. 4. D. Award bids for grading of Staring Lake Park and Red Rock Park E. Change Order request for Round Lake Park Shelter F. Approve plans and specifications for improvements for Valle Place Offices, I.C. 51-409, and authorize bids to be received August 27, 1981 (Resolution No. 81-148 G. Award contract for Water Meter bid, I.C. 52-003 (Resolution No. 81-149) H. Award contract for 1981 Seal Coat Project, I.C. 52-002 (Resolution No. 81-150) I. Receive petition and authorize feasibility report and preparation of plans and specifications for Golden Ridge Utility Improvements, I.C. 52-008 (Resolution No. 81-151) J. Receive 10D%petition and authorize improvements for 7661 Atherton Way, I.C. 52-009 (Resolution No. 81-152) K. Receive 100% petition and authorize preparation of plans and specifications for "CPT/Eaton/SGL/CPA" Road project, I. C. 52-D10 (Resolution No. B1-153) - removed to IX. E. 3. L. Receive petition for Eden Road Improvements and authorize feasibility report, I.C. 52-011 (Resolution No. 81-154) M. Resolution appropriating Municipal State-Aid Funds for TH 169/Anderson Lakes Parkway Signalization, I.C. 51-3418 (Resolution No. 81-155) N. Receive feasibility report for drainage improvements in the vicinity of 69th Street between Washington Avenue and Shady Oak Road, I.C. 52-004, and schedule Public Hearing for September 1, 1981 (Resolution No. 81-156) 0. Approve Change Order No. 2 for water supply wells, Contract No. 1, I.C. 51-354 MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve items A - B, D - J, and L - 0 on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously. • /G')G City Council Minutes -3- August 4, 1981 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Federal Revenue Sharing Funds City Manager Jullie explained each year the City receives Federal Revenue Sharing allocations; the allocation for the coming year will be $154,828. A Public Hearing is required to commit these funds. In previous years they have been allocated to the Public Safety Department current expenses fund. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to allocate the 1982 Federal Revenue Sharing Funds for current expenses of the Public Safety Department. Motion carried unanimously. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 7632 - 7814 MOTION: Moved by Redpath, seconded by Bentley, to approve Payment of Claims Nos. 7632 - 7814. Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath, and Penzel voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously. VI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS A. Development Commission - Report on Development Costs Development Commission Chairman Tim Pierce said the Development Commission feels the completion of the ring route is necessary for development to occur in the "MCA" area. They suggest other alternatives be looked into to finance the completion of the ring route. Redpath asked if Pierce could come back at another time so the whole Council could hear the report of the Development Commission. Pierce said he would do so. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to ask the Development Conmision to undertake a study of completion of the ring route and alternate methods of financing the project; and to look at the kinds of projections for growth which are currently being used. City Staff will be available to work with the Devel- opment Commission as needed. Motion carried unanimously. VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. Smetana's Creekside Addition by Frank J. Smetana, Jr. Request to preliminary plat 3.6 acres from approximately 16 acres zoned Rural. Located west of 7722 Smetana Lane (Resolution No. 81-144) Planning Director Enger reported the Planning Commission had reviewed this proposal at its July 27, 1981, meeting as had the Board of Appeals in June. Both approved the request subject to Staff recommendations. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 81-144, subject to the recommendations contained in the Staff Report. Motion carried 9. unanimously. /07 City Council Minutes -4- August 4, 1981 B. Creek Ridge Estates by Brian Gensmer. Request to preliminary plat 31 acres zoned Rural into 5 lots of single family homes. Located in the northwest quadrant of Co. Rd. 18 and Riverview Road (Resolution No. 81-145) Planning Director Enger stated this had been reviewed by the Planning Commission at its July 27, 1981, meeting and recommended approval subject to the recommen- dations included in the Staff Report of July 23, 1981. Director of Community Services Lambert said the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission had reviewed the request at its meeting on August 3, 1981, and recommended approval with the addition of payment of cash park fees and that the scenic easement as proposed be made a part of the document. Gene Ernst of Ernst Associates and Brian Gensmer were present. Ernst gave a slide presentation showing how the area might possibly be used. He went on to review the access, topography, vegetation and elevations. Penzel questioned whether or not the County has looked at the entrance point to the area. Enger explained they had and had approved the location as there is already an access point there and instead of two access points to the pro- perty,as is the case now, there would just be one. Ernst said that Hennepin County did locate the road at the crest of the hill. Bentley also questioned the location of the access. Penzel said in some instances along the bluff the City has required dedication ( ,_ of land beyond a certain elevation and wondered if a different approach was now being used. Enger explained that dedication of the flood plain area is required ( and so is dedication of a conservancy easement with no building allowed within that easement. This is consistent with what has been done in other areas such as Hillsborough. MOTION; Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No. 81-145, approving the preliminary plat of Creek Ridge Estates, subject to the recom- mendations contained in the Staff Reports and those made by the Planning Commis- _ sion and Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. Motion carried unanimously, VIII. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS A. Resolution No. 81-147, approving amendment to Hennepin County Criminal Justice Coordinating Council Bylaws MOTION: Moved by Redpath, seconded by Penzel to adopt Resolution No. 81-147, approving amendment to Hennepin County Criminal Justice Coordinating Council Bylaws. Motion carried unanimously. /611X City Council Minutes -5- August 4, 1981 IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members Bentley - Said he has become aware of a large number of abstentions in votes by Planning Commission members and would like the Council to advise the Commission that their votes are needed and necessary in advising the Council. If an abstention is necessary, then the reason for doing so should be given. Penzel recommended a joint meeting with the Planning Commission at which time this could be discussed. Redpath thought this might be a good time to discuss the report of the Development Commission also. Penzel asked Planning Director Enger to have the Planning Commission give the Council two or three dates which would be convenient for them to meet with the Council. B. Report of City Attorney There was no report. C. Report of City Manager City Manager Jullie stated that no building permits are being issued in Rural zoned areas which do not meet the five acre requirement. The City had been issuing permits in areas which had been divided prior to the en- actment of the 1968 Drdinance. It is unclear just how this should be handled. Penzel suggested the matter be referred to City Attorney Pauly. Pauly noted he has been drafting an opinion on this which should take care of the matter. ( D. Report of Director of Community Services 1. Request to obtain quotes for an architect to design the Staring Lake Park Shelter and Neighborhood Park Shelters Director of Community Services Lambert spoke to his memorandum of July 31, 1981, which addressed this matter, MOTION: Moved by Redpath,seconded by Bentley, to obtain quotes for an architect to design the Staring Lake Park Shelter and Neighborhood . Park Shelters. Motion carried unanimously, 2. Creekwood Multi-Use Court Community Services Director Lambert explained that instead of two tennis courts at this site this requested change would call for one tennis court and one multi-use court which could be used for basketball, volleyball, and other games which would be painted on the surface. MOTION: Redpath moved, Bentley seconded, to change one of the tennis courts at Creekwood Park to a basketball/multi-use court for an additional $1,135.00. Motion carried unanimously. i(,79 City Council Minutes -6- August 4, 1981 3. Change Order Request for Community Center Director of Community Services Lambert noted the costs for which the City will be responsible in changes in the Concession Stand at the Community Center. Total cost to the City for changes required in the concession stand, to make this a full service concession stand is $4,311. MOTION: Bentley moved, Redpath seconded, to approve the change orders required to make the Community Center Concession Stand a full service stand. Motion carried unanimously. Lambert spoke to the fire protection package for the Community Center, Some portions of this are still being worked on so final quotes are not available this evening. The architects are working with the Building Inspector, Fire Marshall, and Community Services people to determine what will be best as well as necessary under the code. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to instruct Staff to discuss various alternatives relative to a fire protection package and to negotiate the most economical method, not to exceed $25,000.00, to accomplish the required protection, Motion carried unanimously. 4. Award bids for Round Lake irrigation system - formerly III. C. Director of Community Services Lambert explained that due to a mix up in plans which had been sent to various bidders, the low bidder had bid from the wrong set of drawings. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to move to proceed with re- bidding and to reject all bids received and opened on July 30, 1981, The new bids will be opened on August 27, 1981. Motion carried unanimously. 5. Senior Center Gazebo Community Services Director Lambert estimated the cost for renewing the Gazebo at the Senior Citizen Center to be about $850. This will be to repair the walkway, screening, and to paint the Gazebo. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to instruct Staff to proceed with the Gazebo refurbishing with the money to come from the Community Development Block Grant fund, Motion carried unanimously, E. Report of City Engineer 1. Receive petition and authorize preparation of Feasibility Report for drainage a improvements north of Martin Drive, I.C. 52.007 (Resolution No, 81-139) Continued from 7/21/81 Kayo City Council Minutes -7- August 4, 1981 City Engineer Dietz spoke to his memo of July 29, 1981, which ( reviewed the findings. M.E. Lane, Jr., project petitioner, indicated he and his partners are willing to pay about $5,000 - $6,000 of the cost which would probably take care of the School Road homeowners'share. Bentley asked Dietz if the Engineering Department had looked into the difference between corrugated and concrete pipe as far as costs go. Dietz indicated that had been done. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No. 81-139, receiving petition and ordering feasibility report for drainage improvements north of Martin Drive, I.C. 52-007. Motion carried unani- mously. 2. Valley View Trails Penzel stated a petition had been received from residents along the south side of Valley View Road objecting to the installation of an eight foot wide bituminous "walkway" which is soon to be constructed. Penzel felt the facility is needed and would provide direct access for bikers and walkers to the High School and Community Center. Bentley said he could appreciate the concern of the residents; however, in view of public safety, trails should be continuous. Redpath concurred. Pat Baxter, 7I51 Tartan Curve, asked to go on record as opposed to the { walkway. He is concerned about the width, feels they are unnecessary -- the walkways along Highway 5 are not used, and generally finds them un- acceptable. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to proceed with the trail as proposed and direct Staff to work with the residents who need any help in moving trees which have been planted in the right-of-way. Motion carried unanimously. Bentley suggested that real estate agents be made aware of what improvements are going to be made in an area prior to selling a home. City Attorney Pauly will review disclosure requirements which might be in effect in other communities. 3. Receive 100% petition and authorize preparation of_plans and specifications for "CPT/Eaton/SGL/CPA" Road project, I.C. 52-010 (Resolution No. 81-153) - formerly III. K. Penzel stated he wished to have this item removed from the Consent Calen- dar so reference might be made to the statements made by Dean Scheff, President of CPT Corporation, when he addressed a luncheon meeting of the Eden Prairie Chamber of Commerce recently. Scheff allegedly made statements regarding this Council's lack of cooperation. These statements genuinely offended Penzel. /6$1 City Council Minutes -8- August 4, 1981 • Redpath noted that he and Bentley are both on the Chamber of Commerce's Board of Directors and he will bring up the subject at their next meet- ing.l He agreed that this was not the proper time or place to bring up the matters which Scheff did. Bentley understood Scheff had discussed a general regulation problem. Redpath felt a letter should be written to Scheff expressing displeasure with the comments made at the luncheon, MDTIDN: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 81-153, receiving 100% petition, ordering improvements and preparation of plans and specifications for public improvements for CPT/Eaton/SGL/CPA Road Project, I.C. 52-010. Motion carried unanimously. F. Report of Finance Director 1. Clerk's License List Mayor Fenzel read portions of a letter regarding problems with dogs owned by Roger Farber, The letter had been submitted to the Council by Barbara Fischley and Julie Ruder both of 6533 Rowland Road. The letter is attached to these Minutes. Director of Public Safety Hacking noted that Council members had re- ceived a copy of a memo he had received from Nancy Riley, Animal Control Officer, which contained the findings of her license investigation. • Roger Farber, 6525 Rowland Road, explained they own 10 acres of land and have found they can keep their dogs under control and on their own property. The problems they have run into have been with the female Rottweiler and they have found they must keep her in a kennel while she is in heat. . Barbara Fischley, 6533 Rowland Road, spoke to the problems they have encountered with the Farber dogs. Director of Public Safety Hacking said the Council could put limitations on the license as to the number of dogs and how they are enclosed in the kennel. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to grant the Clerk's License List; including the Farber Kennel License which is subject to the following contingencies: 1) the kennel must be totally enclosed; 2) Public Safety is to monitor the situation; 3) if further incidents occur,the Council will review the license with the possibility of revocation; 4) the license limits the number of dogs to four with thr provision that three will be the limit when one dies; and 5) request Dr. Farber to keep his dogs under control. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes -9- August 4, 1981 X. NEW BUSINESS There was none. XI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adjourn the meeting at 9:40 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. ( } CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST August 18, 1981 CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 Family) BoMac, Inc. Bruce Construction Castle Building G & E Builders • PLUMBING Randy Lane Plumbing Heating & Ventilating ( Modern Heating & Air Conditioning UTILITY INSTALLER Dale's Water & Sewer VENDING MACHINE Griffin Company Coca-Cola Bottling Co. TEMPORARY BEER LICENSE Optimist Club of Eden Prairie These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the lic ed activity. Pat7Sof e, Licensing Clerk • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Robert A. Lambert, Director of Community Services FROM: Stephen Sullivan, Assistant Park Planner DATE: August 13, 1981 SUBJECT: Flying Cloud Concession/Storage Building Staff requests permission to advertise and receive bids for the construction of concession/storage building at Flying Cloud Fields. Bids will be received Thursday, September 3, 1981 at 1:00 p.m. • Funding for this project is from the 1979 Park Bond Referendum. Staff estimates the cost of the building to be $15,000. SS:md • • • • • • • ham, • MEMORANDUM TO: • Mayor and City Council ' ' Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services ' DATE: August 13, 1981 SUBJECT: Round Lake Playstructure On August 13, 19B1, the City received bids for the Round Lake Play- structure from Earl F. Anderson & Associates, Inc. and from Hilan Creative Playstructures Limited. Bids were as follows: Playstructure Delivered Playstructure Delivered to Site & installed Earl F. Anderson Associates $10,500 $12,800 (complete) Hilan Creative Playstructures $11,069 $12,694 (providing foreman only) City staff recommends that we purchase this equipment installed, as City staff are so far behind in all other construction projects that we will not be able to spare any maintenance men for the construction of this • facility. The bids for installation are not comparable because Earl F. Anderson & Associates bid includes all labor for installation, whereas Hilan Creative Playstructures provides only the foreman. City staff recommends the City Council accept the bid of Earl F. Anderson & Associates for purchase and installation of the Round Lake .Playstructure for a total amount of $12,800. BL:md S. YAI) Landscape Structures Inc. • • D.u...MMn•wa S$,n•gum 41 1I4 ttZ -. la ,t•••.' Sr. ik, ',fa'''. \_a iHr . 5 • � � t ( u. 41 I ._ Dt4 di =_' I ' . re:p, Letli ri i I i l - rr Pi-- - , � T `e r r ■ 1 I 2 � j � I' i �II k • 1. Z 1. t 1 s III . • • 0 a ■ • I - I( 1 August 18, 1981 • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 81-164 A RESOLUTION GRANTING EASEMENT TO TUDOR OAKS CONDOMINIUM PROJECT • WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has approved the development of Castle Ridge(previousiy known as Tudor Oaks) and WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has directed the developer of Castle Ridge to construct a road between said development and the property lying south and southwest, and WHEREAS, the TUDOR OAKS CONDOMINIUM PROJECT, an Ontario, Canada Limited Partnership need a temporary construction and slope easement in order to construct said road. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the easement documents received from Tudor Oaks, of which a copy is attached ( as Exhibit "B". ADOPTED by the City Council on the 18th day of August, 1981. . • Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL • John D. Frane, Clerk TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION AND SLOPE EASEMENT THIS INSTRUMENT, Made this day of , , 19 , by and between the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a Minnesota municipal corporation, Grantor (whether one or more), and TUDOR OAKS CDNDOMINIUM PROJECT, an Ontario, Canada Limited Partnership, party of the second part; • WITNESSETH, That Grantor does hereby Grant to said • party of the second part a temporary easement over and across the property (the "Easement Area") situate in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota, and described on Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof, for the purpose of (i) removal of trees and shrubs from the Easement Area, (ii) excavating and grading to construct slopes on the Ease- . ment Area, and (iii) entering on and crossing over the Easement Area with men, material and equipment, all to the extent party of the second part shall deem necessary or desirable, and all to facilitate and accomplish the construction of a public road on, and utilities on and under, land dedicated for Castlemoor Drive by the plat of Castle Ridge, on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Party of the second part, by acceptance hereof, hereby agrees: • j 1. To hold Grantor (and each of them, if more than • one) harmless from and indemnified against any loss, cost, damage or expense, due to any claims against Grantor (or any • of them) made as a result of or due to entry by party of the second part upon the Easement Area for the exercise of any of • the rights hereby granted; 2. To satisfy or release of record, without cost to Grantor, any lien for labor or materials filed against the Easement Arca, or the property of Grantor of which the•Easement Area is a part; as a result of or due to exercise by party of the second part of any of the rights hereby granted; pro- vided, that party of the second part may contest any lien by - appropriate court proceedings and so long as such contest U, ) exists such lien need not be satisfied or released of record, but in such event party of the second part, on demand of Grantor, o.£ credit or shall deliver to Grantor, as security, a letter bond or other security reasonably acceptable to Grantor for not more than one and one-half (1-1/2) times the amount of the lien, and if party of the second part does not satisfy or re- lease of record said lien promptly after final judgment in, or ' settlement of, such contest, Grantor may use such security to satisfy or release such lien of record, any excess to be returned to party.of the second part, and party of the second part shall remain liable for any deficiency. Party of the second part shall have no duty or obli- gation to restore the Easement Area to the condition it was in prior to exercise of the rights hereby granted. This temporary easement shall cease and terminate on December 31, 1981. • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has caused this instrument to be duly executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By Its• And „. Its 1 . . STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON: Exempt. THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: $ Dorsey, Windhorst, Hannaford, Whitney t Ha)laday 2200 First Bank Place East Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was duly acknowledged before me this day of , 19 , by and and —' respectively the of the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public Page 2 of 3 • • Exhibit "B" • i690 EXHIBIT A TO TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION AND SLOPE EASEMENT ("Easement Area") • That part of Tracts A and B, Registered Land Survey No. 423, files of the Registrar.,of Titles, lying northwesterly of a line connecting a point in the west line of said Tract A distant 45 feet south from the northwest corner thereof and the north— east corner of said Tract B, all in Hennepin County, Minnesota. • • • • • • • • L'r Page 3 of 3 Exhibit "6 August 18, 1981 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE •' HEHNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA • RESOLUTION NO. 81-165 RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS • • WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared plans and specifications •for the following improvements to wit: • • • I.C. 52-001, Bennett Place • • • • • . and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF • EDEN PRAIRIE: • • 1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file for public inspection in the City Engineer's office. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The adver- tisement shall be published for3 week(s), shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids shall be opened at 10:00 o'clock A.M. on Thursday, September 10 and • considered by the. Council at 7:30 o'clock P.M. on Tuesday, September 15 1981,in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond or certified check payable to the City for 5% (percent) of the amount of such bid. • ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on • Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor • • ATTEST: SEAL John D. Franc, Clerk I6Aa • i CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE • HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. R81-171 _ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID • WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the following improvements: I.C. 52-005, Eden Road Improvements bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law. Those bids received are shown on the attached Summary of Bids; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer recommends award of contract to • Asphalt Paving Materials. �. . as the lowest responsible bidder. . ( • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Asphalt Paving Materials - in the name of the City of Eden Prairie in the amount of • $93,938.48 in accordance with, the plans and specifications thereof approved by the Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL • John D. Franc, City Clerk 't q • August 18, 1981 • MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Eugene A. Dietz Director of Public Works THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie City Manager RE: Eden Road Improvement Project, I.C. 52-005 8ids were opened on August 13, 1981, for the Eden Road Improvement Project between Highway 169 and Eden Glen Road. Four bids were received and our c tabulated is as follows: 8IDOER_ TOTAL 8ID 1. Asphalt Paving Materials $93,938.48 2. Northwest Asphalt $95,348.70 3. Hardrives $96,313.31 4. 8arber Construction $102,398.40 Engineer's Estimate $98.213.30 Staff and 8RW recommend award of the project to Asphalt Paving Materials in the amount of $93,938.48. EAD:sg • • tt.,gy L ( TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John D. Frane, Finance Oirector - DATE: August 14, 1981 RE: Final approval M.I.O.B. second mortgage-Wilson Learning j Corporation Project The City authorized $1,750,000 in I.D.R.'s in June of 1980. In April of 1981 the City granted final approval for $1,000,000. ' The proponents now wish to complete their financing with a $750,000 second mortgage I.D.R. Resolution No. 81-170 which has been approved by the City Attorney will be in the Mayor's signature file on Tuesday. ( JDF:mb 8/14/81 IG ( TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John D. Frane, Finance Director DATE: August 14, 1981 RE: Final approval M.I.D.B's-Minnesota Supply Company The City authorized $1,072,500 on June 2nd, 1981. The proponent desires final approval of $800.000 of the amount authorized. Resolution #81-169, which is in the Mayor's signature file has been approved by the City Attorney. ( JDF:mb 8/14/81 IG96, • TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John D. Frane, Finance Director DATE: August 14, 1981 • RE: Final approval M.I.D.B. second mortgage - Anderson Lakes LTD. Project (Cabriole Office. Building) The City authorized $3,375,000 in I.D.R.'s in September of 1979. In February of 1980 the City granted final approval for $2,975,000. The proponents now wish to complete their financing with a $400,000 second mortgage I.D.R. Resolution No. 81-163 which has been approved by the City Attorney will be in the Mayor's signature file on Tuesday. ( JDF:bw 0/14/81 • • H_97 U(Ah4 •LULL Li.71.tl1.1:.`! RAP CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA Ordinance No. 81-10 • AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 135 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Appendix A of Ordinance No. 135 is amended as follows: The following described property, situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, a .. Lot 1, Block 1, Lake Trail Estates shall be and hereby is removed from the R1-13.5 District and shall be included hereafter in the RM 6.5 District. Section 2. The above-described property shall be subject to all of the ordinances, rules and regulations of the City of Eden Prairie relating to the RM 6.5 District. t ' Section 3. This ordinance shall bone effective fran and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 7 day of July , 1981, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of , 1981. 0 Wolfgang H. Penzel - Mayor ATTEST: Jan D. Frane - City Clerk T'UBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1981. /l97 • • Minutes-Parks, Recreation & approved Natural Resources Commission -3- July 20, 1981 MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Anderson b. Timber Creek Zoning and PUD Lambert said there are 2 issues involved in this development proposal: (1) due to the state of the economy, the developer wants to dedicate the park land in phases (4) • rather than as originally proposed at the time of final plat. (2) developer is requesting that the cost of the 8'. asphalt hike/bikeway along County Road 4. be . reduced from their cash park fee. Rick' Murray, BTL Land Co., was present on behalf of the developer. Murray said the developer wants some guarantee that when Phase 4 is approved., the developer will only be required to pay the cash park fees because the total 62 acres of park dedication for the project would have been dedicated in the 'first 3 phases.. Staff is concerned that if final plat on Phase 4 is granted now and BTL Land decides to sell the land to • someone else in a few years, the City may be faced with a different density and overall park dedication situation. MOTION: Jessen moved to approve the plat and withhold building permits in Phase 4 until upgrading of Townline Road is accomplished. The purpose of this is so both developer and Staff know what they've got in the way of land development and park dedication. trItl should uld also be clear that the City pay or County Road 4 and Duck Lake Trail. Breitenstein seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. approved i'laor,ing CL,I ission Minutes -2- July 13, 1981 MEMBERS ABSENT: Virginia Gartner B. TIMBER CREEK, by B-T Land Co. Request for PUD Development stage approval, rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5 and R1-13.5 and preliminary platting of 94 single family lots, 120 town- houses, and 108 quadraminiums with lot line and private street. Located N of Duck Lake Trail and south of 62nd St. A continued public hearing. The Planner stated that this was a continued public hearing from June 22, 1981, and that Mr. Jack Lynch, 6RW, and Mr. Rick Murray, of B-T land are present to review the changes, Lynch reviewed the concept plan that was approved ? year ago, the plan that was reviewed on June 22 and the problems with it, the revised plan and stated that the cul-de-sac has been revised, there is now 2 access points to the housing, guest parking is provided, and reviewed the phases of.construction. The Planner reviewed the recommendations made in the June 19,1981 staff report, and stated that the need for a retaining wall has been eliminated, that the units conform with the Shoreland Management Act, and that Planning Staff recommends approval. Torjesen asked what the density of phase IV was and if the road in phase IV was to he a public road. Lynch replied the density is 53 acres with 120 units, and that the road in phase IV will be public. Levitt asked the type of buildings to be constructed in phase IV. Lynch replied there will be four (A) four-plexes and the rest will be eight-plexes. Levitt stated that he was concerned with the status of the upgrading of Townline Road. The Planner stated that Hennepin County would be upgrading the road, and if they do not, it should be put on Eden Prairie and Minnetonka's capital improve- ment program. Levitt asked what Townline Road,will be upgraded to. The Planner replied a City collector road with two lanes. Levitt stated that he felt that Townline Road is not adequate to handle the traffic. Levitt then asked the timing of the project. Murray replied 31/2 to 4 years away. Levitt asked if development will be according to phases. The Planner replied yes. Rett.creth asked the Planner to explain the term 'possible variances'. The Planner did. Sutliff asked the outcome of the Scoping Report meeting held on June 9. The Planner replied that the City Council adopted a resolution relating to the information to be studied and stated that a consultant from Hennepin County will include the recom- mendation from the resolution in the study. Levitt asked that the changes he highlighted. The Planner stated that the cul-de-sac has been eliminated :with the road continuing, open spaces have been added, stated )'I0U { { approved Planning Commission Minutes -3- July 13, 1981 that the area that was included in the petition that was submitted last year is now included as open space, the consolidation from single family lots to multiple, and the open space dedication. Levitt asked if this conforms to the Coraprchensive Guide Plan. The Planner replied yes. Paul Choiniere, 15819 No. Eden Drive, was concerned with the dedication, feels there is too much density in area, and stated that he would like the money to go to the parks rather than a bikeway. • Levitt asked if the park north of Purgatory Creek is active. The Planner replied no, and that the cash park fee will not develop that park and stated that the Park and Recreation Department will decide what the money will be used for. Bearman asked if there is a possibility of developers coming in for development of phase IV before phase II. Murray replied that phase I & II will be developed first, and stated that phase IV will probably be developed before phase III because of the economy. MOTION Retterath moved to close the public hearing on Timber Creek. Sutliff seconded, motion carried 6-0, MOTION 2' Retterath moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the PUD Development Stage approval and rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 nd R+1 6.5 as outlined in the plan dated 7/10/81 and the staff report of June 18, 1981 adding that the Council seriously consider making construction of phase IV subject to construction of an improved Townline Road to a City Collector road. Hallett seconded. DISCUSSION Levitt moved to amend the motion to.add #14 to the recn;IFe ndatic::s of the staff report to read: Phase IV not be built until Townline Road is uperaded to a collector road. Retterath agreed. Bearman asked that the Hennepin County DOT letter dated 6/12/81 and the letter from B-T Land dated 7/9/81 be added. Retterath agreed. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION 3 Fetterath moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the preliminary plat dated 7/10/81 as per the staff report of June 18, 1981 with the same additions as Motion 2. Sutliff seconded, motion carried 6-D. h01 approved Planning Commission Minutes -3- June 22, 1981 MEMBERS ABSENT: Liz Retterath / B. TUBER CREEK, by B-T Land Co. Request for PUD Development stage a nroval, rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5 and R1-13.5 and prelim- . nary platting of 94 single family lots, 120 townhouses, and 108 quadrarniniums. Located north of Duck lake Trail and south of 62nd,Street. A public hearing. The Planner stated that Mr. Jack lynch, BRW, and Rick Murray of B-T land Co. were present to give the presentation. Lynch reviewed the concept plan that was approved in 1980, the current plan, and stated that it is basically the same plan. The Planner reviewed the staff report dated 6/18/81 and asked that no action be taken on phase IV because of needed revisions. • Sutliff asked if single family will be a part of phase III. The Planner replied yes, Levitt asked if the park located in the southwest corner of the site is active open space. The Planner replied yes. Levitt stated that he was concerned with the density of the project, and asked if Townline Road needs to be improved. The Planner stated that Townline Road has been surfaced, but further stated that the profile has not been approved. Levitt asked if more floodplain area is being preserved. The Planner replied yes. Levitt asked the acreage of phase IV. lynch replied 25 acres with 112 units. The Planner stated that when phases 1-III have been completed, there will be 50 acres left-over. Sutliff asked the acreage in the floodplain. The Planner replied 32 acres. Torjesen stated that he was concerned about the density transfers. The Planner recommended that the project be continued to work out the problems with phase IV. Murray stated that if setbacks would become a problem in phase IV, they will move the buildings back. The Planner explained density transfer. Rearman asked how far the cul-de-sac in Block 4 will be moved. The Planner replied 80-100 feet. [iceman then asked if that will eliminate 2 lots. The Planner stated that he felt that if the area would be redesigned that the woods could be preserved. Paul Choiniere, 15819 No. [den Drive explained that he felt that the location is wrong for this project, the plan is incomplete, and stated his understanding that when this project was before the City Council, it was to he considered as one project rather than phases or sections. lie also stated that he felt that the street going through Chatham Woods will end up a traffic jam which would be a serious problem. Ile also stated his concern for the floodplain, and felt that there should not be massive grading. if/C),2 approved Planning Commission Minutes -4- June 22, 1981 Joe Morin, 15820 So. Eden Drive, stated that he would like to see a complete plan before this proposal is approved. Bill Sonasal, 16689 Honeysuckle lane, was concerned with the amount of traffic that will be at the Co.oRd. 4 and Duck Lake Road intersection. The Planner stated that there will be a 90 intersection there in the future, but felt that more traffic would go to Valley View Road. Levitt asked the number of units proposed on the north and south half of the site if the creek were used as a divider. Morin replied 222 on the north half and 200 on the south half. Levitt asked about recommendation 03 in the staff report. The Planner replied that there would be a mass grade of phase I and then be restored before any grading would occur on phases II, III, or IV. Torjesen asked if the land allocation allows for waiting for definite plans for phase IV. The Planner stated that it would be most equitable for each phase to. have land with it. Torjesen asked if the City Council stated that the site should be approved at once. The Planner stated that he recalled that the open space should be dedicated ( to the City. MOTION Gartner moved to continue the public hearing to July 13, 1981. Torjesen seconded, motion carried 6-D. i`03 • • • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council • THRU: . Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services DATE: August 13, 19B1 • SUBJECT: Timber Creek • Attached is a letter from Rick Murray of BT Land Company clarifying BT Land Company's concerns with the dedication of the wooded knoll off Townline Road. Upon receiving this letter, I contacted Mr. Murray to discuss BT Land Company's concerns with the dedication of the property in the Timber Creek proposal. Mr. Murray indicated that at this time they would like to rezone the entire property but would only final plat in phases. He indicated that with the terms of the existing property owners, he cannot afford to final plat the entire area. Mr. Murray is concerned that if he dedicates all of the park property at rezoning he has given everything away prior to final plat. He indicates that some cities have "down zoned" property.and that there is no guarantee 'that some future Council might decide to down zone this property prior to final platting. Mr. Murray is also concerned with the recommendation of the Planning Commission to not allow any rezoning or final platting of the fourth phase until Townline Road is •upgraded. He refers to other development further to the west that has been approved by the City and if his property is not developed it will simply put off further into the future the need to upgrade Townline Road. • The intent of the motion of the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission was to recommend the City Council approve the zoning and final platting, if the developer wishes to final plat, of the entire parcel and • to have the developer dedicate all of the park property at rezoning. The Commission felt that legal staff for the City and the developer should be able to work out the necessary guarantees to assure the developer of the • density that the City is technically "purchasing" with this proposed plan. • BL:md • • • • 1'01 • ►J0tANDUN TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission , t FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services • DATE: .July 17, 1981 SUBJECT: Development Proposal Check List PROJECT: Timber Creek ' PROPONENT: STI land_Cn. REQuesT: . LocAnou:West side of Co. Rd. 4, north and south of Purgatory Creek, south of Townline Rd. BACKCROU.VD: See Planning Staff Report Dated: 'PARK AND RECREATION PLANNING CONCERNS 1. Type of development: Residential 2. Number of units in residential development: 322 ' 3. Number of acres in tho project: 162.37 . 4. Special recreation space requirements:None • dedication of 62.4 acres of open space s. Adjacent io any existing or proposed parks: Proposed a. Affect on the park: Development of the active use area should be completed upon completion of—P1 sa a I. 6. Need for a mini park: 7. Cash park fee or land dedication? Both • a. If Cash park fee dedication, amount based on existing ordinance will total: $87,55D b. If park land dedication, the number of acres to be dedicated is 62.4 . c. Existing or pending assessments or taxes on proposed park property total and will be paid prior to dedication. , 8. Adjacent to existing or proposed trails: Transportation trails ad.iat pnt to Co. Rd. 4 and Duck Lake,ypcaotl a Arens Transportation trails and pedestrian sidewalks b. Construction Material asphalt on transportation trails and concrete on c. Wedestrian sidewalks idth or trail 8 feet on transportation trails, 5 feet on sidewalks d. Party responsible fur construction Developer �. e. Landownership of trail location:(dedicated, purchased, ROW) RDI.l a NATURAL RESOURCE PRESTRVA1'l ON CONCERNS • 1. Site grading plan considers natural asenities of the site? cpp )?limning_Staff Rpnn_, r agg — 2 & 3 2. lost significant grading on the alte:See Planning Staff Report page 2 & 3 . i • • 11US • • 3, Significant vegetation on the site includes:Heavily wooded area in the southwest portion of the site adjacent to the park and over the entire hill on the north side. 4. The site grading plan indicates preservation of: See Planning Staff Report • S. Adjacent to public waters: Purgatory Creek o. Affect on waters:1)p0 cpmP_1.C.li4n gf the_plan Purgatory Creek will receive gr.rrittNAlaional run-off at a greater velocity. • 1. 1Wjor Center Arca Study: N/A • 2. Neighborhood Facilities Study:This neighborhood will be served by the 62 acres being • dedicated, 8 acres of active use area, the remaining acreage generally passive. ' 3. purgatory Creek Study: This area complies with the.Purgatory Creek Study. 4. Shorcland Management ordinance: See Planning Staff Report page 4 s. Floodplain ordinance: This development complies with the Floodplain Ordinance 6. Guide Plan: 1979 Comprehensive Guide Plan depicts this area as low density residential with the large floodplain area as public open space. • 7. Other: Nrco 2lI:nnal IONS 1. Adjacent neighborhood type, and any neighborhood opinion voiced in favor or opposed to the project: Adjacent neighborhood type is generally low density residential. Some neighborhood 'opposition to open space commitment. 2. Planning Commission Recommendation:July 10, 1981, th'e Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the PUD development stage approval and rezoning as per the Planning Staff Report of June 18i1981. 3. Cenmunity Services Staff Recormeudations: Community Services Staff recommends approval as per the June 18, 1981 Planning Staff Report with the following changes'to that report^—11 Pa.rk dedication with the phAsin9 should he as follows: the 8 acre park in the southwest area should be dedicated with Phase 1. 2) 21 acres of tEe hiii-in-the-northeast-portion-srouleF-be-ded1eeted-with-Phase 2-34—T4le-feNaitl4ng 33 plus acres should be dedicated with Phase 3. In number 5 of the Planning Staff Report, the following sentence shouTa-lie adaa:--This sitlewa 1-sliouTd-be` on--the-toutsido-'-of-the--loop-s.treot.—Uumber-.14, the_Duelniler__sbould_cnnttrUrt 6' asphalt walkways in the three access areas to the public parkland. • 1'10(0 ' • • STAFF REPORT TO: - Planning Commission FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Planning • DATE: June 18, 1981 SUBJECT: ' TIMBER CREEK APPLICANT: B-T Land Co. • REQUEST: PUD Development Plan approval for 322 total units of housing on 162.37 gross acres of land. This includes rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and pre- liminary platting of 94 single family lots; and rezoning and preliminary platting for 228 attached dwellings. The plan includes 62.4 acres of open space. • BACKGROUND The 1979 Comprehensive Guide Plan depicts this area as low density residential and depicts alarge floodplain area that crosses diagonally through this property as open space. The planned unit development concept plan was approved by the City for this property in 1980 but was based upon the 152 acres thought to be included within the property. Since that time a spedific survey has been done and the land area is found to be 162.4 acres. At 2 units/acre, total possible units on this property would be 325 units. The current request is for a total of 322 residential units on the property. The concept finally approved by the City Council included approximately 8 acres of neighborhood park land in the southwest corner of the parcel, and a significantly large park area adjacent to the creek in the north- east corner of the parcel which would encompass the majority of the large hill which is predominent on the north side of Purgatory Creek. This was accomplished through the use of the density transfer in the northern area of the site contemplating multiple housing to utilize the northwestern area of the site. This new concept brought the total open space acreage to be conveyed to the City to 63.4 acres. Since this acreage was to be provided because of a density transfer, and units were being credited in exchange, the park obligation was still outstanding and the proponent has agreed to pay the cash park fee as fulfillment of his park obligation. An additional feature that the Planning Commission recommended in the original planned unit development and the Council reinforced, was the deletion of multiple units on the western boundary of the site adjacent to other single family units and the replacement of them with single family lots. Therefore, on the western boundary of the site,only open space and single family lots ( border the properties west of this area and south of Purgatory Creek. Like- wise, in the northeastern area, only open space and large single family lots border the Edenview area. i• I10'1 Staff Report-Timber Creek page 2 The current specific preliminary platting and zoning plan is generally consistent with the approved planned unit development with minor exceptions. PHASING - 'Ihe developer had committed at the time of the approval of the planned unit development concept plan to convey all park land to the City upon final platting any portion of the property. The developer is now proposing to dedicate property in phases as outlined in his submission material on the phasing plan and site.data graphic. The Planning and Park and Recreation Staff would suggest that open space land be conveyed as follows: Immediately upon final platting of each phase, a proportionate amount of c•pen space shall be dedicated to the City to bring each phase into conformance with a two unit/acre maximum density. i.e., when Phase I is final platted, it is proposed for 48 units of quad- raminiums. At two units/acre density, this would require a total of 24 acres gross land area to be a straight density transfer. Only 16.73 acres is included in Phase I, therefore, staff would suggest that the additional seven+ acres necessary for a straight density transfer for Phase I come from the open space area denoted in Phase III just south of the northeastern cul-de- sac proposed as single family lots.This additional seven+ acres would be made up of the significant hill area. Likewise, in Phase II, 102 total units are proposed with slightly under 30 acres included in that phase. The Staff would recommend that the additional 21 acres of land be platted in an outlot in the area north of Purgatory Creek included in the open space in Phase III immediately adjacent to the Edenview area. The balance of the open space property would then be conveyed to the City upon the final platting of Phase III as proposed by the developer. The Staff feels that this is an equitable method of conveyance of the committed open'spaces to the City in a phased fashion by the proponent and helps guard against the possibility of problems in change of ownership as the project unfolds. • All taxes and special assessments against these open space areas and other encumbrances must be cleared up by the developer prior to the conveyance to the City. SITE PLAN Because of the tentativeness and problems with the proposed Phase IV, the Staff will divide its review comments regarding site plan into two sections Phases I through III and Phase IV. The site plans proposed for Phases I through III, are generally consistent with the fairly detailed plans provided at the time of PUD Concept approval in I980. However, more detailed grading plans have been submitted and the staff has the following concerns, There will • be an extensive amount of grading required,especially in Phase II and III adjacent to Purgatory Creek. Tnese areas are largely unwooded and may be reconformed without permanent damage if proper erosion control measures are followed. Erosion control is critical to the protection of the Purgatory Creek area and all slope areas should be either sodded and staked or properly seeded and mulched according to a sedimentation and erosion control plan to be compiled and submitted for review and approval to the Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed District. All areas on the site where existing vegetation is disrupted must be completely restored immediately after grading. • • 11U� Staff Report-Timber Creek page 3 • The grading of single family lots within •Phase III in the cul-de-sac lust north of the corner of Duck Lake Trail and Co. Rd. 4 (would be made up of lots 7-14 clustered around the cul-de-sac) will do extensive damage to the north facing,wooded slope which is the transition area between the quadraminiums and the single family homes. This area on the de- tailed grading plan,is proposed with four retaining walls totalling 20' in height which would completely destroy the woods for a distance of approximately 200'. This is not reflected on the concept plan which seems to indicate that the woods will be retained. The Staff would suggest that this cul-de-sac area be rethought and that the cul-de-sac itself be moved further north so that the building pad areas for the single family homes do not have to encroach upon the slope area. The Engineering Department indicates that because of the steep grades andthe amount of area to be drained that energy dissipation at the ends of the storm sewer pipes, as they outlet to Purgatory Creek will be a needed feature. Upon more detailed review by the City Engineering Department Staff and the Watershed District Staff, sedimentation plans may very well be required prior to entry of storm water to Purgatory Creek. The Engineering Department also notes that many of the proposed slopes are in excess of 21/2:1 (40-50% in slopes) and since sand is the predominent proportion of the soil composition in the area, erosion • will become an ongoing problem during 'construction. Therefore, as •mentioned earlier, a detailed erosion control plan must be submitted and reviewed prior to construction. ' Sidewalks and Trails Although the proponent has not indicated sidewalks on his detailed con- struction plans, sidewalks and trails were required as part of the planned unit development approval. A five foot wide internal sidewalk was required through Phases I, II, and III along one side of the loop road. The proponent has provided a 60' right-of-way along the loop road and should also plan to construct a five foot concrete sidewalk concurrent with streets and utility construction along this inner loop road. Since the proponent will be paying a cash park fee, but is also dedicating land to the City, even though the land would not be required to be dedicated in a density transfer situation, the Staff would suggest that the bituminous bike trails to be built along Duck Lake Trail and Co. Rd. 4 be constructed by the City with use of the cash park fee generated from this project. Public/Private Roads There are short loop road systems proposed in Phase I and Phase II which serve the multiple residential housing areas which are proposed to be private roads. The Planning and Engineering Staff would recommend the following regarding these private roads. 1. That the roads be constructed in specification of material, depth, and cross-section according to City Engineering standards, 25' in width with drive-over concrete curbing. 2. That no driveway length from a garage to the curb line of the private road should be less than 30'. With regard to the public roads, there should be right-of-way dedication along Duck Lake Trail to equal 40' from the center line. And dedication along Co. Rd. 4 to equal 50' from center line. The developer has also agreed to an additional bikeway easement of 15' along Co. Rd, 4. . 11 • Staff Report-Timber Creek page 4 Oedication of right-of-way equal to 40' from center line along Townline Road is required. With regard to Townline Road, the Engineering Department has the following recommendations: 1. Due to severe grades on 62nd Street, a permanent slope easement should be provided for future grading of an additional 20 feet beyond the 40 feet from center line. • • The public road loop proposed in Phases. I through III, south of Purgatory Creek would be constructed concurrent with each phase. Therefore, .a temporary tur,. around should be installed at the end of the road as required for Phase I. When the road is built for Phase II, it will connect this area to Chatham • Woods thereby giving a complete looping of the road system. Phase III south of the creek would complete the road system out to Co. Rd. 4. This seems to be a very workable phasing plan with regard to road systems. HOUSING RELATIONSHIPS As mentioned previously, the external housing relationships currently proposed are good for this planned unit development. However, there are several difficult transitions between housing types within the plan itself. One area of abrupt transition occurs in Phase II between the quadraminiums on the south side of the road and lot #1 of the single family area directly adjacet to the single family to the west of the property. The single family lot may possibly have to be eliminated along this west boundary in order to provide additional area for the multiple site to provide adequate berming and screening as a transition • tool between the two land use areas. Also all lots on the down-hill lie from the multiple housing could be• problem lots for single family sales. Therefore, in the landscaping to be provided in the multiple areas, significant planting areas should be included to help buffer the transition. This landscaping should be documented in a detailed overall master landscaping plan that should be submitted prior to City Council review of this project. RELATIONSHIP OF LAND USES TO PURGATORY CREEK The Shoreland Management Ordinance adopted in first reading form by the City with recommendations from the commission, requires that all lots abutting the normal ordinanry high water mark of a general development water meet certain restrictions. An abutting lot is identified as any lot touching or within 150' of the normal ordinary high water mark. Creek banks are the normal ordinary high water mark and all lots proposed in this subdivision are further than 150' away therefore, they may meet the standard of the R1-13.5 zoning district. However, the multiple area designated north of Purgatory Creek has a couple of multiple buildings which are closer than 150' to the Creek and this would have to be adjusted to be in conformance with the City ordinance. Erosion potential to the Creek is a possibility and must be carefully planned for in erosion control requirements during and after construction. • fIU • Staff Report-Timber Creek page 5 LOT SIZES All single family lots must be 13,500 sq. ft. or larger and'a minimum of 60' in width at the.right-of-way line and 90' in width at the building setback. There are several cul-de-sac lots which do not meet the 60' criteria at the right-of-way line. In light of the fact that all of the cul-de-sacs proposed have been enlarged in diameter to create greater frontage and allow more lots on a cul-de-sac and in light of the fact that even this modification does not bring these lots up to a 60' width, staff would recommend that lots be reduced to provide adequate frontage for each remaining lot in the cul-de-sac area. SITE REVIEW OF PHASE TV THE MULTIPLE AREA The Housing proposed in Phase IV seems very tentative in nature. For this reason and because of the following problems, the Staff would recommend that zoning and platting of Phase IV not occur until more detailed and definite plans are avail- able for Phase IV. 1. Access paints proposed in Phase IV to Townline Road are not consistent with Hennepin County recommendations. 2. The roadway system throughout Phase IV is completely private and is made up of a series of three lengthy dead-ends which would be rather difficult for emergency vehicle access. Because of the extensiveness of the road net- work it would become a maintenance burden to the home owners association, The City could expect to come under pressure for the dedication of these private roads in the future. 3. The private road areas should be studied to develop looping patterns which would require much less dead-end road use and should also be contemplated as public road. 4. The housing type proposed in Phase IV contemplates sin.2'e garages for each unit with parking space within the garage and counting an additional parking space behind each garage. Eden Prairie's ordinance requires 1 enclosed space and 1 exterior space per unit but also requires that each space be unobstructed when both are utilized. This is impossible with a single garage which contem- plates the use of the space directly behind it as the second space. Very short driveways and no additional parking seems to be indicated as the norm in Phase IV. 5. The line of open space dedication contemplated on the east side of Phase IV makes very little sense when viewed on the ground. The Staff would suggest that in redoing the plans for Phase IV the developer modify the line to include much of the major hill form as part of the public open space area. A suggestion for the general configuration of this line would be roughly following the 910 contour on the west and south faces of the hill. 6. Phase IV contemplates 112 units having one access only to Townline Road and depending entirely upon Townline Road. Somewhere between 800 and 1000 trips per day would be generated out of Phase IV. At this time the profile of Townline Road is not appropriate for this additional traffic. The City has in the past and is continuing to ask Hennepin County for an upgrading of Townline Road as a cart of any improvement of the Crosstown Highway west of 494. Upgrading of Townline Road by the County would be very helpful to the safe access of this property. 11II. B-T LAND COMPANY 1055 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 (6121 473.8511 July 9, 1981 Mr. Chris Enger City Planner City of Eden Prairie +. 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55343 RE: Timber Creek, Planning Commission Meeting July 13, 1981 Dear Chris: Please find enclosed our revised preliminary plat for the Planning Commission's consideration on July 13, 1981. You will note that our revisions follow the staff report of June 18, 1981 in that we have redesigned the single-family lots in Phases II and III to conform with the frontage recommendations of that report. This did eliminate 8 units in the southern portion of the site, however, in the realignments done in Phase IV on the north side of the creek we were able to incorporate an additional building in that area. Phase IV has been carefully reviewed considering the concerns expressed by the citizens, the City staff and the county highway department. The internal loop street and the one cul-de-sac have been designed to conform with City standards for public residential streets. This eliminates approximately 90%% of the private roads originally proposed and provides the preferred access points which the county and city require for circu- lations and water distribution. The off-street parking areas along the cul-de-sac and loop street address the concerns the City staff had with our off-street parking. The parking areas, as well as, the additional set-backs, should insure adequate off-street vehicular storage. We have redefined the phasing of the open space to coincide with staff's recommendations that the phasing be more representative of the density transfer taking place with each development phase. The following table reflects the units per acre being developed in each particular phase and redistributes the additional open space required to maintain our two unit per acre density for each segment of our development: Number Acreage Additional Phase Acreage of Units Required Open Space I 16.73 a. 48 units 24 a. 7.27 a. I1 29.94 a. 100 units 50 a. 20.06 a. IIi 32.15 a. 54 units 27 a. -0- IV 25.22 a. 120 units 60 a. 28.16 a. (balance) Mr. Chris Enger -2- July 9, 1981 We propose that the additional 7.27 acres required for the development of Phase I be allocated from the northwestern corner of Purgatory Creek as it enters our plat since the City owns the adjacent land in Chatham Wood. We would progress through the flood plain area in a southeasterly direction, with the last parcel of open space (the 28.16 acres in the wooded knoll) being dedicated with Phase IV. 1- We appreciate your continued cooperation in this matter and would be happy to discuss and review any questions you may have concerning these revisions prior to Monday night's meeting. Sincerely, B-T lA COMPANY ick D. Murray Vice President RDM/lg ( enclosure t (C" -�L,�J -��( i �"`� TRANSPORTATION L 0 1 IL AL1\kJ�\iJ, ENGINEERING L_ J ARCH17 ECTURE BENNETT. RINGRDSE. WOLSFELD. JARVIS. GARDNER, INC • 2829 UNIVERSITY AVENUE SE • MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55414 • PHONE 6121379.7879 • July 7, 1981 Mr. Chris Enger City Planner City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 RE: BT Land Plan Revisions Dear Chris: Jack Lynch requested that I forward to you 12 copies of the revised preliminary grading plan for Timber Creek. The general area of revision is in the cul- de-sac at the southwesterly corner of the site and the general area of the eight-plex development. We have reviewed the site grading in the eight-plex area and feel this grading concept fits the area well. As for the revisions to the grading plan at the cul-de-sac area, we have now preserved a much larger percentage of the existing trees at the upper level behind the lots. I trust this will take care of the requirements for the Planning Commission meeting; if not, please call my office. As a matter not related to the B-T Land project, would you place Fairway Wood 3rd Addition on the Council meeting of July 21, 1981 for final plat approval. Very truly yours, I (--- BENNET -RINGROSE-WOLSFELD-JA VIS-GARDNER, INC. -'' Frank L. Burg, r. r I Associate J FLB/dh , Enclosure File 3-B035 MINNEAPOLIS CFIEYENNE DENYER • B-T LAND COMPANY 1055 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 (6121 473.8511 June 17, 1981 • City of Eden Prairie Ms. Jean Johnson • Assistant City Planner 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55343 RE: Timber Creek - Eden Prairie Dear Jean: • Thank you for your recent inquiry requesting additional information concerning our proposed Timber Creek Subdivision in Eden Prairie. As you are aware, we are proposing that the one hundred and sixty two acre site be developed in four phases . (see the development plan dated June 1, 1981). As part of our development stage submmission, we supplied the City with renderings representative of the building types anticipated for each of the attached housing areas. These reflect samples of the housing types which many builders in the Twin City area are constructing to provide market-rate housing. In time, these dwellings may be altered or refined to reflect the changing conditions in our society and market- place. Therefore, these renderings are not submitted as the only buildings to be constructed upon our site, but merely examples of what we envision to be constructed by our builder/ clients as being responsive to the marketplace and housing needs in the coamanity. As I indicated by telephone, our attorneys are currently structuring a Homeowners Association to include all of Phase I and all the attached units in Phase II and the surrounding • canon ground. This Association will be a non-profit organization to provide service and benefit to the masbers of the Association. It will provide such services as landscape and lawn care, snow removal Lou' the driveways and private streets, exterior building maintenance and garbage and refuge service. These documents will be available for City Staff review prior to final plat submission. • • 11I(0 • • 1is. Jean Johnson - 2 - Jule 17, 1981 • The single family attached dwellings in Phase IV will be i ,. a separate Haneowners Association with essentially the sal benefits and restrictions as the previously mentioned Association. .' I have attached a copy of my October 2, 1980, letter to the ' City Council with respect to the trail and walkway easements and • 4mprovem nts•along Duck Lake Trail and County Road 4. Our position on the improvements to the easements has not changed since last . • October. We feel the dedication of forty percent of our site to the City, together with payment of the full park dedication fees • is more than adequate to relieve any burden that our development _may create for your community as well as satisfy the park needs of our own development. Any requirements in addition to these we would view as being unreasonable and exacting more than is required by the City Ordinance or allowed by the State Statutes since these . trail improvements are not solely to benefit our development, but • are to be enjoyed by.all residents in Eden Prairie as part of the City's overall trail plan. Our offer to install these improvements for the City, as part of our phasing, still remains providing we are reimbursed for the _ cost of the improvements. Otherwise we feel the improvements should be installed as a City project funded by City Park fees. Impruve- menus of this nature are the purpose of those funds. Thank you for your continued cooperation in this matter. We appreciate and welcome every opportunity to discuss our project and plans for our land with you. Sincerely, B-T . • / / Rick D. M rray Vice President Rillitp enclosure • • . Ij • vL B-T LAND COMPANY 1055 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 16121 473.8511 October 2, 1980 ' • Mayor and City Council Members City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55343 RE: Timber Creek Concept Proposal Dear Mayor and Council Members: Since the September 2, 1980 Council meeting we have continued our discussions with the City staff attempting to resolve the park issues and the City's requirement for additional park land from our proposed concept plan. The City staff has suggested an alternative to our concept which may be acceptable t.o us. The attached drawing is a "broad-brush" map of what the City staff has suggested. This concept is based upon donation of approximately 42% of the site for park and open space (green area) and payment of approximately $83,000.00 in park dedication fees at the time building permits are issued in accordance ( with the City's Park Dedication Ordinance. This approach would save the City both time and funds in that it would eliminate any potential condemnation proceedings while still acquiring the desired lands for public use. ' The City will be granting a density transfer to allow 100 row townhouse units and 10 single-family units on the northern parcel. This would allow a density of 1.89 units per acre for the overall site. In order for 8-T Land Company to donate roughly 42% of its site to the public, as well as pay the full park dedication fees as mentioned above, we would require the following understandings along with this concept approval: 1. The park fees mentioned above shall be set at the time that B-T Land Company presents the City of Eden Prairie with a deed for the area shaded in green. This would be at the time of final platting for our first phase. 2. B-T Land Company shall be treated in the same manner as all other property owners with respect to improvements on Towniine Road. • • I7I? - City of Eden Prairie -2- Actober 2,•1980 3. Should B-T Land Company be requested to install the public trails and bike paths along County Road 4 and Duck Lake Trail, then the cost of these improvements will be reimbursed 'to B-T Land Company from the park fees mentioned above ($83,000.00) as those monies are paid into the City Park fupd when building permits are issued. We are hopeful that this concept can be approved on Tuesday evening enabling us to proceed with our r_ngineering analysis and preliminary platting on a timely basis. Please feel free to contact me at any time should you have any questions concerning this concept proposal. Sincerely, • B-T LAND M Nj • Rick D. Murray • Vice President ( RDM/lg enclosure • cc: Bruce D. Malkerson Jack Lynch Roger Ulstad • • • • • • . 11 IC) DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 320 Washington Av, South , Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 '04ke HENNEPIN. , J1lL 935-3381 •June 12, 1981 Mr. Chris Enger Planning Director City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Dear Mr. Enger: • RE Proposed Plat - "Timber Creek" CSAH 4 £, Future CSAH 62 (Townline Road) Section 5, Township 116, Range 22 Hennepin County Plat No. 933 Review and Recommendations Minnesota Statutes 505.C2 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County review of proposed plats abutting County roads. We reviewed the above plat and found it acceptable with consideration of these conditions: -For future improvements to CSAH 4, the developer should dedicate an additional 10 ft. of right of way making the right of way 50 ft. from the center of CSAIi 4. -No additional right of way is required by Hennepin County in the area of the plat for upgrading future CSAH 62 (Townline Road). i -At the proposed street access on CSAH 4 the developer must construct a right i turn lane (Attaclmient 1) and a by-pass lane (Attachment 2). -The proposed easterly street access onto 62nd St. (Townline Road) directly opposite existing Woodland Road is approved by Hennepin County. -The proposed westerly access point, approximately 540 ft. from the NW plat corner, does not meet the minimum sight distance requirements to the driver's left for the posted speed limit. The proposed access should be moved approxi- mately 260 ft. west, to the crest of the hill, to meet minimum sight distance. -Any new access to a county road requires an approved Hennepin County entrance permit before beginning any construction. See our Traffic Division for entrance permit forms. • HENNEPIN COUNTY 11 Xr an equal opportunity employer Mr. Chris Enger - 2 June 12, 1981 ' -All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved utility permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. See our Maintenance Division for utility permit forms. -The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within County right of way. Please direct any response or questions tb Les Weigelt. Sincerely, . n. 'e. ames M. Wold, P.E. Chief, Planning and Programming • JMW/LDW:pj Attachments cc: B-T Land Company BRW, Inc. ( • . Z 0 `y A NN a Qli. a M t o I I . t U t k. z• Q z . w r I ;. • I-' ' W a /: 11 I Z N I aIt W 2 Z a I ^- a (� W 1-- G z 1-- 2 • _ 2 o fit. C4 o O . CC W V • • • . i • r I I W • . a• • • r . 'aa z . 0 N • . � . V a Lr NIIL a 1 ; W Q r j O. ai Io , i • h, z i Q W I t • I s£I I • z O Liz Z W Q 2 • O O .O . N O N W (n 0 Q W 1 2 >- V W 'Lice • 7 a r,,.ram O // • Y • c Ilia. d ila3. C. • PLANNINGI TRANSPORTAT ION/NO NE ERINGIARCNITECTURE TIMBER CREEK BT Land Company is herein submitting its preliminary development plan for Timber Creek. There have been very few modifications made from the approved concept plan. The most important modification has been to provide a western access point thru the Chatham Wood Subdivision. 'The following is a comparison of thb concept plan data to the preliminary development plan. Concept Plan Development Plan Total Area 159.0 A. 162.4 A. Park 66.0 A. 63.4 A Attached Units 216 228 Single Family 86 94 Total Units 302 322 Grass Density 1.9 2.0 Architectural drawings are included with the packet which illustrate the three various types of attached housing proposed. It is the intent that BT Land Company will develop these areas and sell each area to an individual builder. These three housing types are common to the Metropolitan Area and are each currently being offered by a number of builder's. For this reason It should be remembered that each builder's product is slightly different. It is assumed therefore, that as each of these attached housing areas is ready for development, the actual architectural details would again be I :: reviewed and approved by the City prior to any construction, thereby assuring overall continuity. It is also requested that as each phase is developed, the associated park and open space would be dedicated at that time. • b.LR R.c.AosC LVOLSTCLD JARJIS GARt..EA INC 2679 UNIYERS5TY AVE SE V,At.EAPOLIS VH S56.6 PHONE 6.71719?VG I�2� CITY OF EOEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 81-158 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT • OF TIMBER CREEK BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Timber Creek dated June 1, 1981 , a copy of which is on file at the City Hall and amended as follows: • is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances and amendments thereto and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the \ day of 19 Wo fgang H. Penzel, Mayor John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL ria • Parks, Recreation & unapproved Natural Resources Commission -2- Aug. 3, 1981 MEMBERS ABSENT: Larry Van Meter (he called in and stated he was resigning) a. Edenvale 14 Addition 'Lambert explained the background of the proposal, referring to the Planning Staff Report and actions by the Planning Commission. Mr. Krier , Westwood Planning Consultant, representing Edenvale and Equitable Life, assured the Commission that they intended to conform to the plans and what was good for ' the community. He answered questions from the Commission regarding the Kurtz Lane connection, grading and types of homes proposed. Lambert pointed out that the grading of the wooded area would be significant in the proposal, as this is a difficult site to develop. Anderson expressed concern for the additional traffic on Valley View Road that would occur from this development. • MOTION: Jessen moved to recommend to the City Council approve._ of the plan as per the Planning Staff Report of June 18, 1981 and the committments made by Equitable Life as per the memo of July 28, 1981, including the addition as outlined in Memo of July 30, 1981 from Community Services Staff. .Kingrey seconded the motion. DISCUSSION: krier questioned the trail committment as stated in Motion. He explained that equitable petitioned the City to assess these trails against all property, and the City accepted the petition. • Jessen asked who would be assessed? Lambert responded that the assessments would be against the remaining undeveloped property. Jessen request the following amendment be added to the Motion. AMENDMENT: If the City proceeds with the petition by Equitable Live to assess discussed trails against all undeveloped property, the additional clause from Memo of July 30, 1981 will be unnecessary. Kingrey seconded. 9 • VOTE ON MOTION: Amended motion passed, Freidcrichs abstaining. /22(1 Minutes-Parks, Recreation & approved Natural Resources Commission -4- July 20, 1981 MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Anderson C. Edenvale 14th MOTION: Jessen moved to table this item until the next meeting when revised grading plan is • available. Friedcrichs seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. • DISCUSSION: Ki.ngrey mentioned the City should keep In mind that the Chicago & Milwaukee Railroad track adjacent to this property may be abandonned, so development approvals should not curtail development of this right-of-way in the future. • ►12'1 approved Planning Commission Minutes -8- June 22, 1981 MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Hallett E. fD i;VAIE 14TH, by Equitable Life Assurance Society of the US and Equitable Life ilortgaye and Realty Investors. Request r revised PUD Development stage appi oval,rezoning from R1-13.5 to kM 6.5 for approximately 15 of the 24 acres, and preliminary plat approval of 30 single family lots and 56 duplex lots. Located NW of Edenvale Blvd. , southeast of railroad, and north and west of Woodhill Trail. A public hearing. The Planner replied that Mr. Dick Krier was present and requests a continuance to work out problems. MOT_I ON Levitt moved to continue the public hearing to July 13, 1981 on Edenvale 14th. Gartner seconded, motion carried 6-0. approved Planning Commission Minutes -5- July 13, 1981 MEMBERS ABSENT: Virginia Gartner D. EDEIIVALE 14TH k,DD1T1ON, by Equitable Life Assurance Society of the US and Equitable Life Mortgage and Realty Investors. Request for revised PUD Development stage approval, rezoning from 121-13.5 to RN 6.5 for approximately 15 of the 24 acres, and preliminary plat approval of 30 single family lots and 56 duplex lots with variances. Located NW of Edenvale Blvd., SE of railroad, and north and west of Woodhill Trail. A continued public hearing. The Planner stated that this is a continued public hearing because the proponent felt that changes could be made. He•stated Mr. Dick Krier of Westwuod Planning & Eng. was present to give the presentation. Krier reviewed the overall Edenvale land use plan that was approved in 1972, reviewed the surrounding land uses, site plan, access, density, buffering, and utilities. The Planner stated that many changes that were requested in the June 1B, 19B1 staff report were met and stated that Ilipp's Construction Co. built similar duplexes east of County Road 4. He also stated that he felt that additional types of units could be added, and stated his concern that the lot sizes would only allow one type of unit to he built on that particular lot. He also stated that much more concern has been made regarding Kurtz lane and feels that the neighborhood connection would be good. He stated that many letters and a petition have been submitted about the connection, which would be Belt with in the feasibiltiy study if one were to be required. The Planner suggested a limited sidewalk system connecting Edenvale Blvd. to Valley View Road be put in which would then connect with the City path sys- tem. He stated that the Park and Recreation Commission should look at the totlot, and further stated that Planning Staff'recommends approval.. 1121 approved Planning Cornnission Minutes -6- July 13, 1981 l Levitt asked what is being planned to the north and east of the site. Krier replied townhouses and stated that the 1972 PUD boundary is the boundary for the site. He further stated that the only variation to the 1972 PUD is Edenvale 11th Addition. Bearman asked if Edenvale and Equitable are two different firms, and if so, what happens to the commitments made by Fdenvale that have not yet been fulfilled. The Planner replied one of the coninitwents not fulfilled is the sidewalk system along Edenvale Boulevard. Bearman then asked who is obligated to do this. The Planner replied, by the proponents requesting each development. Krier stated that the time clement is a problem because of the change of ownership, but that all commitments will be met. David Miller, 6300 Woodhill Trail, stated that he was concerned with the density, felt that it should all be single family lots, and asked who would pay for the • sidewalk. The Planner replied the developer. C.0: Thompson, 6559 Kurtz Lane, stated that he felt that Kurtz Lane could not handle .- the traffic. A.R. Hirt, 6533 Kurtz Lane, was concerned with the width of Kurtz Lane, and stated his opposition to the request. Bearman asked if the 1970 Guide Plan showed the roads connecting. The Planner replies yes. Steve Cherne, 6931 Raven Court, stated that he opposed the connection of Kurtz lane, and stated his concern for the water supply.. The Planner stated that the water plant expansion was expected to be completed now but it was not, and further stated that when it is completed, there will be twide the amount of water then now and there should be no problem. Cherne asked the extirnated growth for the City. The Planner replied that it could be 8-10% higher in population next year. Caralyne rairchild, 6840 Woodhill Trail, felt that the site should be developed as single family and stated her opposition to the sidewalk. Addie Swenson, 15540 Kurtz Lane, submitted a petition and asked that it be made part of the minutes. Dennis Dartt, 15537 Park Terrace Drive, asked if this property has bce-n approved. The Planner explained that the original PUD was approved for 6units/acre in concept, in 1977 the proponent came to the City for single family lots, and now the proponent wants duplexes because of the economy. Dartt asked if the duplexes will be owned or rental. Krier replied owner occupant. Dartt. then expressed his concern that traffic will increase greatly if Kurtz Lane is connected and stated that he felt that visibility at Co. Rd. 4 and Kurtz lane is poor. approved Planning Commission Minutes -7- July 13, 1981 Julie Jacobs, 6527 Kurtz Lane expressed her concern for traffic on Kurtz Lane. { Fred Curtis, 6500 Kurtz Lane agreed with Ms. Jacobs. Bearman stated that a feasibility study will determine the traffic problem. Peter Zavoral, 6540 Kurtz Lane asked if residents would be able to attend if this . proposal went before the Board of Appeals. The Planner replied yes, and stated that it will also be a public hearing before the City Council, and that they will be renotified. • David Miller, 6800 Woodhill Trail, asked who makes the final decision. Bearman replied the City Council. Bruce Perkins, 15633 Park Terrace Drive, stated that he felt that traffic will increase greatly on Kurtz Lane, and stated his concern for noise pollution, etc. Retterath asked the time frame for a feasibility study. The Planner replied 30-90 days. Ed Yarborough, 6513 Kurtz Lane asked who would be assessed for Kurtz Lane's connec- tion. The Planner replied that the City Engineering Department would decide. Teri Strand, 6754 Woodhill, asked what will happen to the area that has been graded for the trail. The Planner replied that that is up to the Edenvale HOA to decide. Jack Steinmetz, 6435 Kurtz Lane, asked if taxes will go up because of the develop- cent. The Planner replied that the ccnunercial and industrial development will contribute wore than the residents. Peter Izmirian, 6540 Kurtz lane, asked when this would be before the City Council. Bearman replied that the residents will be renotified. Krier stated that the proponent is,willing to have a cul-de-sac rather than con- necting Kurtz Lane. • Hallett asked the cost of the duplexes. Krier replied that they are selling for $55,000/$65,000 per unit and $110,000/$130,000 per duplex. Hallett asked if staff is recommending more types of units than 3. The Planner replied yes. Mr. Thompson, 6559 Kurtz Lane, stated his opposition to the connection of Kurtz lane. Hallett stated that he felt that 2 access points would he sufficient rather than 3. MOTiON levitt 'moved to close the public hearing on Edenvale 14th Addition. Retterath seconded, motion carried 6-0. approved Planning Commission Minutes -8- July 13, 1981 JTION 2 Halleft imoved to recommend to the City Council approval of the preliminary plat dated 7/1/81 as per the staff report of June 18, 1981 with the addition of more f' designs fur the duplex lots and that Kurtz lane not be connected. Retterath seconded. DISCUSSION Levi{f stated that he felt that duplexes are riot suitable in this area and further stated that he felt that there was inadequate buffering provided. Beaman stated that he would like to see Kurti Lane connected. Motion failed, 1-5. Beal-man stated he voted no because Kurtz Lane would not be connected, Levitt stated he voted no because he felt duplexes should not be in this area. E. W00DLAWN HEIGHTS, by Lyman Lumber. Request for PUD Concept approval variances, rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and RM 6.5, preliminary plat approval, and finding of no significant impact. Located in the southwest corner of Townlmne Road and Duck Lake Road. A public hearing. The Planner reviewed the request and stated that Mr. Dick McCombs of McCombs- Knutson was present to give a presentation. • 1131 - . . .. , •.. ' . ,• .'. p•.:. Page 1 • ' . 4.• . • • .. '. ., •t.',. ', • ‘Y.••• - • '": •;;•",...,."*" ,' . . .. ' , • '. 7,:.. , . ,;• ' ..,-1. 1.:1: •:;,'1,i...'..,.:1.4'..' ' . '- • .. ' ' ,,...:3 •!•',.::,',...'.,1.110".'7-. ..• " . • , . .. . ,, ' • , WE, THE UNDERSIGNED,. ARE.OPPOSED T0,11AKI NG KURTZ LANE. A MAIN ' .,. • ACCESS ROAD TO THE NEW PROPOSED EDENVALE DEVELOPMENT• • • DATE NAME ' .. . . ADDRESS PHONE NO. :Xr___V___01. .elz-tj__Ea ':;:n.,a-- • c.' (i3V-v-7r - , • ?35I:-2'7.4.,, . 2 ' /t-1-14-Y- 640 FX4-(44.e-e--,Z(1. .''.•L ' ,-t/10.21L_ 7341 -145 6,-,9 • \ 'iç , 2a____XS30 Aq D 91 .6.A.45) C47,-, . ' 93Y-A737 6-2 1-7 i.-- rx1.--„,-3- - (1 ( , .- ‘Ak,„11-: (1,435- --,-,,A--.z. .'g'0,-,''' ' '' . (34 ,.. .. _..g,-, -__.. d-im4//t;,-7,34 • ' _. ' y..7y. -.. .: ,..!.. , __/ . '/.._ .,,„„-z--. e., (,•v,- r /Y; a(ha/ • •4157 /6/...,:77 ,' ,t) ' 95.(/--..?/ ,,14 ' • " --1: ak 1:).-4.1,--%V.-0--.Z. ',ca..-,.. Ca 52)W . e,t/2:156k e. V-p...:, : ki i. . , 1 i ,--,,-..• . i ) . ,/ 6-.73-P :.2jeziz,q4z.jt • ,5-0PX.,12:-) • y' i.i/— . '6-23.v Let_ei:-d 1 /5.ii..70,- 6 so?• -4-ttid;--,.-x4.,-,...._.— •• 93 Y—D 1 CC- d . et.-A)4'( 5..,..,2,.'12 . -i—....,,,,, c; 1'6 .1_ 4 l :e 7 Yr • -:4.1...L 0-23g) (t,1" 2.yi-/;A:(0_4C6.13 Twzt2 44,ti . / -7, , v (24J-74c 513 tvak C tco k1- '&0-,.. ..,______ (14 - 13_1. “,14 3 G--(2 -(01,-,i s- Ali,e9'7" („sig irt.,,,dc. L,,,,.c " • ‘. . 934-31?/ _ • 17- ' ' /' 4, ir:J.Z4,_ 1r--' e •, . • (z -d_c.) _.-ii.,..f I . • 73111-13 . ' -,_.7 --t, 7 . iz si -- , ,t.,A ":ye, 6 c,27 kallz 1,tor- 1 qyt.296-./ ITV. ' I tc ,... Page 2 • • } WE, THE UNDERSIGNED,' ARE OPPOSED .TO MAKING KURTZ LANE A,MAIN 1 .. ' '• ACCESS ROAD TO THE NEW PROPOSED EDENVALE DEVELOPMENT, DATE /NAME // ADDRESS PHONE NO. j^M 6,07 Ar71L• A,vc. 93V•79514' b'�s/ f I t�r�� I- ,1 ---1..., c. _ , _ ,____ _ . ..,. I , _____z_4„,6 . 4 s'if k• / vi<r e_ LA;',:.;' .s ' 1 f.3Y-IP/9: // ` li �/6 ��5-8-Z6CT7 `.A,i L1__. 3^� ff G -2( / ,9- - 15 .23 / 7 •G-,67'., • yjy y &-l5 Val, / 3e) ,(' �A/(10 535( if 1,—;<:..., ve.,i--....eef/tr . cc ,,a c Qv<40��0,, • / , Y. Y c:�SYo % j 1 93Y-Oo3Y6 cit.(_1 k ig -el- he-e(A-.1 /! 9-Q( t( t`-Ya- (T 3�-21( II ' , \-IR S (oS00 y +t ta ilk ._SZ(-314) `LL'111.4u.4> kL1 x . •.) (. 5 S? 1 _-1 _ 3,441i1 SS v CPS... 93y-3/c(. J , \y\t _ lo_C!.11_._ , ..- - ,, 12/&,,.,.„ ,l L ,.:� 6 c a IC E 53 VG 7 3 y—i 11 • I'Ia, -- , 1 • Page 3 y 4~ .. .1 a 1' •4 WE, THE UNDERSIGNED,: ARE OPPOSED TO. MAKING KURTZ LANE•A MAIN ,;,` • • ACCESS ROAD TO THE NEW PROPOSED EDENVALE DEVELOPMENT.Ir , DATE NAME ADDRESS PHONE NO. 007 &fli,.a rAl„e. .....,.,„„ - 6..T.,201f,--,-TA: . - .. Fi/-Vb 9/ goriigi UddL 155i10 KiAt Ad 931/-17/Y 6,29-8/ ov ker--/ ii. /SS�d /1"i/x77°'�A�� + 934/i4/ 7-/-PI Uvik�„ & 6V2( rfz LQ. . I' 'Y o` 7-4-1 14Q 9. (Q.P.,4 ' rGssy3 ( tn2 eac,e 7rt 93y 36? :r. 'I_6-P/ Oft... , • Cc,t.2aw /Sty3 t9oM.. 7 Y b 93 i-3ogy: 7-,4.-si L 6,_.,, )5,537 /-.J( Jam.- & 9.3 y ti a a'('_ iS-5-'5 Mg.1�, ,4 _ ,c-�,ito /5-6-6(0 6t i". '�/ Q341 30 77 1//G/8i 1,� 4..) /SS4n J-G„ .4_.‘11M•o0�t• .. 91 3' -3 o7 7 7/6(07. L.,4....e....:04- /SsS. ' ArK TeeR4c Z?L 3v4,6 74/ p7,1 s. �. `It- 1 c N� ,/1- 7-hit � °13-I-9cf ire l&( A ` ,t4 4 4 /5 ;12/ r to 1?- - pq— i( it ��' ? I SS. 31 F,.,IcT: DA_ 5' r-50s, • • 1 I`l')U ( :r Page 1 WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE OPPOSED--, TR,THE RE ONING OF. EDENVALE 14TH '. i(sinADDITION FROM R1-13,5(TO RI"116,5FOR APPROXIMATELY 15 OF THE'24 ACRES; .'-4 DATE NAME ADDRESS ' PHONE NO. , 1. 1. , Ala ' ••... •3N-la I B., , S ' G -3v . w ; • ' Rf _3( " :,. (( ez/z C/ '- .,)'",- di 1 0 _� �� 't . . L MN! 3 •- a-9 G s— �'3d1 _1/l2{ l SZ�flv' rv, - _ // /1,, � _ I. •, ,/ / , , ,i , . r, /,1 (IL - 7th.t_ _ , (sSC ,C ttrt,l. • ( ;j 51. aySS' 0., ' 1,0 . , . 1 . . ,.A.,-' r351 -1r r �.CA'`� 'c 11 . II (Pd -q(( tt _ ' /„ It//--- v 4lIrRi, 5-. „-; : Mil ci 3- _ - q ow a.T i I -e e>.. i Arfz 4/1,ve I,3 - 27.1V !/ J ' iI < _ 0MP S-W-'/c( a t- --I4 yl_v ,, ,, I I 4 4\ Z1: c '1 // it /I U .^ Page 2, „,t• WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE,OPPOSED TQ THE REZONING OF EDENVALE 14TH (-sin,l.e) �mu1�;inle family) , • ADDITION FROM R1-13.5/TO KM 6.5/FOR APPROXIMATELY 15,.OF THE 24 ACRES. ' . '." ' DATE NAME f ADDRESS' PHONE NO. 61 � f1 (L� " So?0 �; /,50 3 Kr4747Gi,/ :'ys6-�s/-t--) .. Cam,_ 1-. i,Y_. . 4 • • �. .. . Vila 4-... Gsyv /(c ` 93 -o8y6 44i ja_kztjA,3 urAil l- t 93c-3 S`0 II V L a"c.3S (oSroft Ficc 1tV\3 • • 93.11-y64 \ e vzt 46J3 1 ,n . %. q31-1- 30 e 7 -: '' ( c.,4. \\ " 6 f)1) \ ,),,e,to,:_:_. ' - . '1)-a ,, u) G?55/ ,A.a ,l3(/-3/6 4/ I/ ‘Vu 8`1. ASS` 01 w,w�: fr Jim .-e %G..r�� G, /jeclf. eg v3f..i v"z- •6-2 iv /L +,iCz �C of'FvA gele(1 0fit Lig AU-t c-) I5 51(0 I tti.. DIII 9aq /7/'Y 6?M_Z__ ./ a one n /s552a . i.esz 14. 9.:9/7/5� 7-/- `"7 mat .—Id . 7 's/ ,vvfa. 1a, /.SY- 3So 7-- -s( C.'• c-e (s-5y3 a 7`hovice D /3 c 95 7 G-8' at.e.4_,I) brs-Lis 90.hLL4 qjy-30gy 71f 8 I 4" - 16.1/ �.Via,,.-13)-- 9 (f /0 P y -- .7 r) 1 . zd2- /SsG 1{� J_PA,t4,• y3'/-3 o 77 % !_-� LI14 < .,40 /53-6 -a 9-2Si 30 77 7 ,•�c„-_--ae r G- .. /5-ws--f,e<71itrt4ct-442 13 •-30fa • • �-: Page 3 WE, THE UNDERSIGNED/ ARE OPPOSED TO THE REZONING OFEDENVALE KITH sin,le) ( ipl. family) ADDITION FROM R1-13.5/To RM 6.5/FOR APPROXIMATELY.•15 OF.THE ZU • DATE NAME ADDRESS PHONE NO. . /0/ /1/10_0_, • �SswclVn �ti�. 62 • °13=/ 7 �yEI s+uVox) • • (r$S3( � c 1CLF,� �rc. 934f-3D9• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 11'31 • MEMORANDUM TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services DATE: July 30, 1981 SUBJECT: Edenvale 14th Addition Attached is a memo from Chris Enger, Planning Director, regarding Edenvale 14th Addition. Mr. Enger notes tt,t the developer has addressed the concerns listed in the June 18, 1981 Staff Report. The Commission may recall that the Planning Commission reviewed this development and forwarded it to the City Council without a recommendation. The apparent controversy at the Planning Commission was the proposed connection of Kurtz Lane. The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission members should have a preliminary plat dated July 1, 1981. This plat reduces considerably the grading of the wooded oak hill located in the southwestern portion of the site. However, the grading plan still shows as much as 18 feet of fill in a low marshy area on the northeast f. portion of the site. This is a difficult site to develop and the July 10th revision is an improvement over the May 18th proposal. The Commission should be aware there will still be . considerable cut, fill and removal of vegetation on this site. The Community Services staff recommends approval of the Edenvale 14th Addition as per the Planning Staff Report of June 18 and the commitments made by Equitable Life as per the memo of July 28, 1981 with the following addition: Community Services staff recommends the developer commit to completing their portion of the 8 foot asphalt trail adjacent to Edenvale 81vd. by August 1, 1982 and to provide a bond for that commitment that the City may cash after August 1, 1982 to complete that project if the developer hasn't complied by that date. Furthermore, that the developer commit to construction of a totlot structure at Edenvale Park by August 1, 1982 and also bond $5,000 for'the completion of that structure by that date. That structure must also comply with Community Services staff approval. BL:md • • 1111 MEMO TO: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: July 28, 1981 REGARDING: EDENVALE 14TH ADDITION • The Planning Commission reviewed this development proposal at two meetings; June 22 and July 13. The staff report dated June 18, 1981 has not been updated. However, included in this memo are the concerns that have been addressed from the June 22, 1981 meeting. The plat has been revised to address previous concerns: 1) Less grading on western cul-de-sac. 2) Sidewalks committed to along Kurtz Lane and Lesley Lane. 3) Setbacks in the duplex area according to ordinance. 4) Street access provided to the western property. 5) A development plan illustrating committed variety of duplex units. 6) Ordinance size duplex lots. 7) Conmiittment to complete Edenvale Blvd and sidewalk system. 8) Should be a temporary turn around at east end of Lesley Lane. CE:ss MEMORANDUM • 10: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services . • DATc: JulY 16, 1981 . SURJCCT: Development Proposal Check List , PROJECT: Edenva]ej4th AdditiQn Pkopouma:Equitable Life Assurance Society of US & Equitable Life Nortgaoe & Realty QI.5 :y�st�r . R _evi��d PUD RV.t;]tlp_ment.,.a.tdqe_�'�=Oval, rs.;<of1?ng a1Ld prClminary plat. NW of Edenvale Blvd. and north and west of Woodhill Trail LOCATION: RACI:GR�•.SD: See Planning Staff Report Dated: PARK AND RECREATION PI.ASNING CONCERNS 1. Type of development:_ Residential 2. Number of units in residential development: 30 single family and 56 duplex units . s. Number of acres in the project: 94 4. Special recreation space requirements: N/A S. Adjacent io any existing or proposed parks:Portion of the Edenvale open space area is along the southern border pot,this site.(lone 6. Need for a mini park: No • • 7. Cash park fee or land dedication? N/A . a. if Cash park fee dedication, amount based on• existing ordinance will total: b. If park land dedication, the number of acres to be dedicated is e. Cxisting or pending assessments or taxes on proposed park property total and will be paid prior to dedication. 8. Adjacent to existing or proposed trails: Proposed transportation trail adjacent to • Edenvale .tli,edof trails b. Construction Material Asphalt c. Width of Vail 8 feet d. Party responsible for construction Developer e. Landownership of trail locntimi:(dcdicated, purchased, ROW) ROW NATUR•U. RESOURCE PRESERVATION CONCERNS • I. Site grading plan considers natural amenities of the site?_Me site_aCdd]ilg-.p1aILdIIPS_nnL consider preservation of any of the natural amenities on this site. 2. Most significant grading on the sitc:Jllerej _jna.5L9radLng Over the__Ileearly the_entire___ site with the most significant grading occurring in the southwest portion on the wooded oak hill side. . . 19 40 .{. • 3. Significant vegetation on the site includes: A low marsh area in the northeast corner and a wooded oak hill side.at the southwest corner as per the environmental impact - statement. • ' •4. The site grading plan indicates preservation of: The proposed grading' plan preserves very .little of the existing vegetation. 5. Adjacent to public waters: N/A a. Affect on waters: REFERENCE CIICCK 1. FLtjor Center Area Study: N/A • 2, Neighborhood Facilities Study: This area will be served by Edenvale Park • 3. Purgatory Creek studyN/A • 4. Shorelnnd Management ordinance:N/A ' 1 ' S. Floodplain Ordinance: N/A e. Guide Plan_ The 1979 Guide Plan shows this area as single family detached. • 7, other: RECOiNEN5AT1o95 1. Adjacent neighborhood type, and any neighborhood opinion voiced in favor or opposed to the project: • • 2. Planning Commission Recommendation:A motion to recQrullerld,ap rovdl of the preliminary • plat failed on a vote of 1-5. One of the major issues discussed at the Planning • ConiiiiM on was the connection —K z Lane. C • j • 3. Community Services Staff Recommendations: Community Services St2f{Soncurs with the Planning Staff and recommends the plan be returned to the proponent for modification as_per the June 8, 1981 Mannino Staff Report. • • • liul • STAFF REPORT ' TO: Planning Commission FROM: .Chris Enger, Director of Planning • Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner DATE:. June 18, 1981 PROJECT: EDENVALE 14TH ADDITION 'APPLICANT: Equitable Life Assurance Society of the U.S. and Equitable Life Mortgage and Realty Investors. LOCA(ION: Northwest' of Edenvale Boulevard and north and west of Woodhill Trail. REQUEST: 1. Revised PUD Development Stage Approval 2. Rezoning of approximately 10 of the 24 acres from R1-13.5 to RM 6.5 3. Preliminary plat approval of 30 single family • lots and 56 duplex units (28 buildings). 8ACKGROUNJ • 1974: Edenvale requested approval of 134 multiple units upon 30 acres. (This site and Edenvale llth:called Suncrest) 4.4 units/acre. • With the multiple site proposal, the 2 ponds were retained as storm water retention and open space amenity to be owned and maintained by Edenvale Homeowner Association. This project did not receive Council approval. 1975: Edenvale requested rezoning and platting of 6 acres (Edenvale 11th) for 22 single family homes. 3.6 units/acre with lot size and set- back variances, and no garages required. The variances were granted to provide modest cost housing. The homes sold for $36,000-$48,D00. 1977: Edenvale requested rezoning and platting of 24 acres for 66 single family lots with lot size and setback variances. (also called Edenvale 14th) 2.6 units/acre. Staff recommendations to eliminate square cul-de-sacs, double fronted lots, and severe cuts and fills were accepted by the developer. The developer also agreed to dedicate outlots A-D (see figure 1),.2 pond areas, and 2 pathway alignments. Pathway installation was agreed to as depicted in figure 2. These pathways have not yet been constructed. Edenvale 14th was rezoned but never final platted or constructed. • 11La • • . Staff Report-Edenvale 14th • page 2 1979: The City's Comprehensive Guide Plan depicts this area as single family detached. • STATUS OF EOCNVALE ASSOCIATION The 1,000 acre Edenvale PUO is covered by an overall homeowners association. The association has not been very active and is practically dormant at this time., It is understood that Equitable, as the majority landowner in Eden- vale now, is the controlling management over the association. This project and future projects will be part of the association. Presently association fees are $6.00/year. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Edenvale's PUU is covered by an approved E.I.S. The E.I.S. document commits to preservation of certain natural amenities. Two of these amenities are within this proposed plat and are depicted upon figure 3. The area character- istics are a low marsh area at the northeast corner and a wooded oak hillside at the southwest corner. Tt is required that these areas be preserved as outlined in the E.I.S. and approved by the Environmental Quality Board. The owner should submit scenic easement documents to the City for review and approval which will protect these areas from any grading, cutting, etc. SITE PLAN The plat crams lots on to a steeply rolling, partially wooded site, with a grading plan that all but eliminates the trees. The narrow frontages proposed for the duplex lots will be very restrictive in the variety of units that can be provided. Since no development plan was submitted depicting a unit type plan, we can only assume that these are speculative lots. Up to six cul-de-sac lots are crowded around the proposed cul-de-sacs. SIDEWALKS Kurtz Lane is illustrated with a 60' ROW in order to allow a 5' wide concrete sidewalk to be constructed. To our knowledge, with the exception of Summer- woods, there have been many counnittments/requirements•made but no sidewalk or hard surface trail has ever been built in Edenvale by Edenvale. Since the trail system originally designed by Edenvale is all but gone, we would suggest that the outlots remain the property of the H.O.A. or be reassigned to the adjoining lots and that the City sidewalk system be implemented immediately. Although Kurtz Lane, north of the railroad tracks, is a gravel road, connec- tion to the north will be important for both neighborhoods, since traffic will proceed north and south. As part of this development, Equitable should submit a 100" petition to the City for all of the sidewalks agreed to in 1977. This construction should now include the completion of Edenvale Blvd. out to the north to Birch Island Road. RECO`iMENDAT1ONS • The Planning Staff would eecrnianend 'the plan be returned to the proponent for modification to include the following: 1. Redesign of the plat to provide for much larger lots to preserve more .of the vegetation. i'1tl� Staff Report-Edenvale 14 page 3 2. A complete development plan for the duplex lots illustrating a variety of unit type and a definite range of units for each lot. The lot frontages should be increased to 90' with 60' minimums on cul-de-sacs. 3. Definite committments for completion of Edenvale's obligations on roads and sidewalks. • 4. Outlots should remain private. 5. Because most lots are steep, wooded, or smaller, the City's require- ment for 1 totlot (1 acre in size) per 50 units should be p;ovided for in this subdivision. • CE:ss • • • • • • • nu(1 1977 Proposed Knockdown ,�-!:=: f Barrier to Kurtz ane ;'% • i r, - ,/.4k -'' •'-'., 0----;AN 1 el t.v. \... , ( o 1 , ( \ • IF•,,0--) \, \ ,..,.,,,,,, , ,ii, .-i\`,li 1::...,'„.((.1/,... \: •i.-,..\.,---,.. --- ',:s!.\,...--,\••••;-::... ...,,..,,,,, ,,,.N.04, 1 • \ - , , /) Ji\-1, v.-... , ., \,, , , .... 1 . ..., _ ,, _ ,-,,. \, , . ..., , ‘,. ck. e ' libik„„-,- --i,` V°Z NI , 1 ,1 H. nus Figure ' . . .. , . • . . ., • . • . . i '---10!,•r. i . ,4t ,..%-- N. • 1 . , 1$6*--;t••0* . " 1 i it t''‘'tIglitil vv.#110. i. clili r AN, britf. I 4 4. l4$7141,17 .? /14471PhiAirdi I 7: 4 ' .P. Vik*A'W4* 111 lael'il*A-010 4 ql.- IPNv 41111 --4i7 •*1-11111 i .. ov ...gmi or liar A 1.10111iibi WPM 106;17.r. ft 1 11r/ ,. MO& (I., NKIIIIIIIV4'r- 4 IF-. 'ApprillPiiik.‘.,:„,,, irmulai• . .. • fol*ki t - ;\,,.„ , s4 • 414, • 1' n'llibblellis " 1411"4114.111111111-\:i4IS °.. 1111* •::•!*::.1 :':•,!:EIIIIIIM ' . .1 . • • . ) 1 1 / .%, • • • .\ .,, . • . • \\ \ , • . . . , 1 9 7 7 TRAIL COMMITMENTS Developer . • •••••■••-•• . , • . • • • 41 City . • • • 1 • • • \s, • . r • . ‘•• . Figure 2 , - . . :•• . , go • • 1---n-----"7-1.4 iiii . nL1(.0 , -" _ , __,. -• . , . . .. . . • 3V-i opoced . , r -7-i :iba_7. \ I /- ,, -r---' / riot iL, • ‘, \ .. - N'''. tip/4:A WWII I\ / /.. ii.".....1/4.7• ....2.....'>1... :;;::,..."C, ,c or e c \. -- ,, _ \� -/,; ,,;, a-N F es-; ,i <, zit/ ), , , ,,,,,,, , : _,_--,--,..:, .....:3,,,0 ,,,,,,,.. `13'1..._---..z_z.: , j,./ . \ ''04.1\\\‘ : ai+<': - jt ( (7,--.,, \ ''''"'":" ---1 ,00 .---...-z-- . m..,k /7--,—(-9;:., , ..,.. - • ,...,;,--,.. ; . , \ ,.._ , ,.,--.....,...) C.11A.is /*/ .1•111 ‘ !3%, ' 1," 7.-- '—"/ ' \\C-\;\ '":' u \--2): ., " 11J` ' {3 it. �. .�, AREA TO DE ,- , \ \-- '^' _\' \ `� PRESERVED �' � -� - ACCORDING / �, .ra i > > 1\ '11' II �!\ ` I 911 (%j / �\ .. \ .,_ 4 ^� to back' , _, 7--- -_ lots ID&I: r �'y\ ;_ ,N-<N\ c-- -i 14'. N' iN'—''STI:: \, ''' --?7---- - / ' . \ V\ '.I . . ,,\I,l, N•s. _/- _ --z_-_-::.-- , \ ''_,,I\ , --.\\.4-____:„..-\/A \ : . .„ t:i , \s , k, - .. ..-,,,,,- ,.. .-.....-„A, ,-,c,—, , t,...._ ,. -- „.ii 1 , _)\ / o AREA TO BE PRESERVED -.11.wy'/ � i 1 t ,\• �' ��0 a wd�y- ito f t+sJ,i ACCORDING TO E.I.S. t•..., / t t • ` - u•Ln 1,.,1. %c (Co�respon�fs to /ack of lots 5,7,&8) 0,' t/' Vicr+ts ' _ = orSlope mu El/ il l rr><Pwi Yci � 5s. J_ I F i a u r e 3 rnhl Tar r urc ! EDENVATE 14TH ADDITION j slat t 1 ".••I. � 4w ..:nv x1 `.G'L.tS.�e�n!SYlMia6*firai R:.:rdle1.*-21117a AM1.4t!4NF V,M14�:•.• v D.: ;LAN. ;•„��+Y1'Se�WMNtr'!^`J�'.'#4':Y}we"e41RdAY3A:MiC�.t:wWih.tlillYrll."`. WESTWOOD PLANNING & ENGINEERING COMPANY August 14, 1981 Honorable Mayor and Council City of Eden Prairie Eden Prairie, MN • Dear Mayor and Council: Subject: Edenvale 14 Rezoning & Preliminary Plat The Equitable Assurance Society, owners of a large portion of Edenvale PUD, has taken responsibility for future development in Edenvale. The Equitable first step, as the new developer, is to propose continuation of the city's approved PUD Plan by requesting the necessary zoning district changes. The zoning district changes allow The Equitable to develop single family and twin family hous- ing lots on property originally approved for 6.3 unit per acre townhouses, but later approved for 2.76 units/acre small single family lots. The proposed subdivision density is 3.62 units per acre. After working with the city staff, making several changes and agree- ing to several off site conditions, the project was submitted for Planning Commission consideration. The city staff is recommending approval of the proposed plan. The Commission took no action on The Equitable's rezoning and pre- liminary plat request. However, a few issues were brought up at the meeting. The dominant issue is the extension of Krutz Lane west across the railway track. To resolve this issue, The Equitable will agree to cul-de-sac the Krutz Lane east of the railway track-- with city approval. The revised plan design would also provide right-of-way for future extension, if desired, and a knockdown bar- rier for alternative public safety access. A loop street system will eventually be provided back to Edenvale Boulevard north of this site. Land use was also an issue brought up by a Planning Commissioner. The proposal is designed to provide 140 to 300 feet of horizontal separation between the proposed 3.62 unit/acre homes and the similar 3.5 unit/acre single family lots to the northeast in Edenvale Ilth Addition (Woodhill Court--see attached cross section). In addition, • up to 14 foot high berms are being proposed between the small lot Edenvale 11th single family homes and the proposed twin homes. 111E WAYZATA SOULEVARD.MINNEAMLIS,MINNESOTA 1•$4 M12I MEMO `�l V Honorable Mayor & Council -2- August 14, 1981 ( Also, the area north of this proposed development, the area closest to the twin homes, is approved for development of attached multi- family townhomes. So, the twin home provides a logical well-planned transitional land use between the single family homes and the pro- posed townhomes. Over the last few months, we have resolved the issues raised by staff. We are willing to make the necessary plan changes to resolve the Krutz Lane issue and have created a resolution to the land use separation issue. Equitable respectfully requests approval of the proposed plan with the above issues resolved. Respectfully, WESTWOOD PLANNING & ENGINEERING irit Richard C. Krier Vice President RCK/jw Attach. ( 1 111-1 • The EQ nCU:TA►BLE Life Assurance Society of the United States HOME OFFICE NEW YORK,NEW YOEI( SIMI IDS Town MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA tsrm 7ffi.FJHONBt On)DF44f4 MOITWGC AND 4Gl TSTATC INVTSTMD DONALD 3.MULLIN arrow»!,„MA August 12, 1981 The Honorable Mayor Penzel and all City Council Members: Re: Edenvale 14th Addition Gentlemen: On August 24 the City Council will consider a proposal, submitted by the Equitable Life Assurance Society, for the development of a residential parcel, Edenvale 14th, within the approved P.U.D. of Edenvale. The purpose of this letter is to call your attention to, and to state our interpretation of, the July 13 Planning Commission Meeting which resulted in a failure of the motion to approve. Please note that 90% of the discussion did not relate to approval or disapproval of the proposal as submitted and recommended by the Planning Staff but was overwhelmingly sidetracked to a discussion of the extension of Kurtz Lane. This, of course, has no particular bearing on the approval or disapproval of our project but is a question which must be decided by the City Engineering Department. Please note that the motion to approve failed because of a vote against the Kurtz Lane extension rather than disapproval of the project. We, at the Equitable, believe in Edenvale 14th as a viable project and believe it and further development within Edenvale is in the best interests of the City and the Equitable. All of our efforts concerning this proposal have been with the help and support of your Planning Staff and as noted jn the Planning Commission Meeting minutes, approval of the proposal was recommended by Mr. Enger. I thank you for allowing us to present our view on this matter and request your support in the continued orderly development of Edenvale. Sincerely, • ( Jack M. Humphreys Asst. Division manager JMH:lw nSU "-2 i '-''' _ R.-y r ',,,.'..4e-' ': ---re 'VP. _- . °L.'. i i ', 'tip• ---.... c 4- '�' tot%4 rri - .- - -p .;y -•0' e �•r 4 {_. ''.. _# — I f r _ •..}ma ,�� f �7� .. - 1 2 ILJoY!`I LINE lic>. r . _f sue: ..� ,q` r r___ a' ,� i.. ;. . fiz- ,.,,4"• .? gi' r- ' --i- V.A • �- a tt. �.,rt _� \ ys "".**."'L*44.. ..r.‘'' l'''''- ' $._.,_ 1 Vj t Ic. - • 4..-— al 1 y . �* i I' t I v_ ��- ', ' r. f .. "�-emu ' i �s .'I J LOCATION MAP EDENVALE 14th ADD ON 1-15I Ff)FN PRA:TF 11,,TI IFFIOTA 1. e UN 10..0 . . • : . I : , I E• •, • 1. 1 ! . . . 41) le 1" i L 13 I t ." . 4— is • • 1 • . 0 . : • • i . . 13) - ! • ; .4% E. : - i 0 • • : : - - 2 , i • : : . : I V'''''' ir:-. ; '' I " ; • i ; i i • t •P 1 !-T1 2 . • 1g a i 1 • c. z; 4 03 0 CI LU U. CI I — •••) /IL 0 0 . '..-e 1 ,r 1 , Z F. , utzt. -.1 a z <-'. 0 . 1 - ,. 2)_ 1,,ki ,>1 h, ) W : • '. C3 M ' • 1 I • / CI o , ''''s • .t .:E 2 09 ,. 0 t . _11 ---1-- 'el ).•;,•„.„.• `., \ ("E \4 1 ) LU . : ..2...„...,,,, N .... : . , 1 . 4 -' •. •, ----. , 1: ----it ..!.1 , z : LL1 u j • x • - . ''', 4.i-1's- v ,•• , I , . . .. . ** .. I1S), i . • • a.poled _"qq MwNi % 'Iy 1 ( _. _.., , ,, \ ; 2 77,_-_-_-:-; hei:14:7-Tr-r- ' 71---:' c \&-, - -.ii 1 ? . -04 "IF 147 ! � �1 . �; '__ Vt. Nip.ci,avi r ye! 7`4"00%"4. 9". •t ''.'... \\ \pt . \ "----Ns."." :,,,ii- • , i. .."-:;: .N",.. 7 : • `•- en - 0 i'--i- ) ' -,-.4Ni, '• , ).\\''\( --t -%%\ ' '1\;;001 ,_\_,,,z ,,, ,/:\ v‘vd. fro 1 ` \\\, . ..tr *'► \ 111 Mwe+c..I 4 �./W Ay lii ...... aK 6at ; ' ,. tZe, inn NW.sm.,yt i • L f 471flops IIMl el) . l X tV'""'""'° EQUITABLE LIFE EDENVALE 14TH ADDITION ©/ f I ____TYncAL 1.01 4. AT 1oN ►1A► J/ 40, � . MC �V � '.•• ' ET D.bNO)1 , `9vA,fo APO 's, ' 7\ A.Ci 4. AK �,, • ,j� .'.`Of ,u.f . anOT P J w A ��y_'unUTT 34 ACO MC ' . ^ / ,t 3' 1. EA.f!rtwr y . \ r - \ L•MC yr A -1.\,, E11EI1f �''- / •!'�. -1-►, ' - S. 4f%� ` .:ASC_.,• _-. •41 ----�---- .,. .».-W,..*... t. '�. / .�,.. r «,. ,{{��::... z �,./...i. �o� rrrr psi i lititt - ,, „ %,., ,,\>.,;.,.,, . ..,,, \ \,: . t � �' ♦ 7 ' 4r. : : ,. ..,--:':,. ,—•. t \.:;_N...-_- _,,i::,....!..,- ..---.....:.,,,, ,, ,., ..._- , - =7::::::t .,, , :, r ,, +, <• 1 ' '• $ • : $ '• •,' 1 ),,,,I, 1 ..././ /"'' /'.. •4.0 s%:) !--'''C.''‘ '.... '.:..' - iti.7.';;;:l..3!It..."..rj:Plii.24T-I--7.. �.• ` API'�' (Nowt mom '; • / r $ iOWO,7 VV 1�5(1Ix 04 fur-NKIMIfW n..� I. Iw►- -"-- `= EQUlTAbLE LIFE. EDENVALE 14TH ADDITION /: --__._ — -- 4 is . # ; • sk , ':...\ .. •''A ' ' . \ • ' ' 10 • s, '• , • ....•' • % ' \'\ 0• V. , '' .0 ,0 • -,/ • • a • ...9), . \ .o.., 0 A • • • . • ' ''''-'s ---.. s , s , —.--•-• 's \‘‘ ,c i ' ' ..,%' i ... • '•:•: 1‘\,\` / i•'0 \ ' • : /,'... / , 4 \ \` ;- __ \ '\ .. • 07‘; i \/ t-.. '''''. ,NA ' ' \ \ .4.:. t ...'<74 \ ' '').9. • ''''N 4 . . r • .,.'''''''''§ e i' .\\• ' \.--- • ;„.....- ',V .,..--- . ... --___1,,-----.„ •• - . - •• ,• - ) iii.„..„7,------ ...\..t, -.. ,\ • . -..!. ., = t.... __....' z--:- i --i,--- _ i • \ • , ....-- •, ---_ ,,t, • V * *•-•.‘,‘.: ). ,'''s ' • i . . \ / ' ,....,„_. . • 1 '\'' ;'' . ) s ,il::"--____ _.1. ,....)-11'..,... .."'''' , "• , -.. — , s .--.... / 1 ,:\ .. ''' /3---r— .. • • . ... li )LNN........ •4-A \ , ....., - .. N i /... •'`, '-, —_ .7 •:•„, '-„,,,,..,.., ,.,.., •\ , • • . ', \ \I ....——•• ‘1 •°‘°:1 . • . 0 n=1=1 • . , . . iiss ;.t..: ...... 91.I. flaurtruci 44.4 ilIfiesP4 egwIlloi co.:3 _ -. EOUITABLE LIFE EDENVALE 14TH ADDITION CD . . .., . . . .. . .,. ... ' •• q,•• , . , . . •\ "A .......\„....'.., \\ -- >,...,, , \ • *. .. \. '•.\ . *'''' • • ,10. . , . .. . , . , >. ,:„.••'.''.."\ \.... ?,,.., ', ." i •::. ".. ' A N ‘• • ..,„.. ........., . . ,......._ . . .‘„ . •• . . \ . • )4/ .:.\„,,,k,r, .. -. • \ -,-..L.:_. ,,,. : . . , . ,........,\., \.,\;....„ , ...,..., /;./. ...,,...... ,.....,,,„.., , ,\,.......„..), . . , . .•\ \\ ...„:„.-,:. , .. ., . . 7,,,( ,. .. 1 ,,e ..... . . . , , -. ..... \ . , - „-----, ,.....„•_. • I ...;.. . .. ..,,„ ,.. t s, ' . I -• ..-...--'3ir--- ._-,.' •---...-> ..._,:••••i• • -?;....,- .. ' .. . ,,, -,, -\,,,,:. I, ,i , , : .. , • , .. 1- . _: -,.- ,--_ . , . . .•,.:;'::-. \''. ‘ ' - . • -'\:, . • • '; \ \ •,., -‘ 47-- \;,:-. t •\-Y ..1'\ .., .,______ 1 -i . • .. ..\_,,,'-:. , \ .., ,_:: ., - ___---- .. <!--:,•---' . • ::..._._----r--'r- '.. j . ••----- - re11C41.ar smut "Lr4 . .-.::•/• .: 4,.'. .. ' -:"Pt‘, 1 fame . __ Ilk',wan-7 e : ..,....I I 1 itl .\...........:::......\.......„.1.-1 „..stialk.4.r.-1,.... -,.....Z...,,,,•:. ,• to....•maw 0 .'' : ' '''''. '•..4'-,=-----L .:-..."..":1 \ \ \ ' '. '4,-.,...7 •r"-:: . % \ . _ \ \ „,:, ,•7,--- .., ,..„,..: / .• .,. •\ , ....... , .. :•,..., / -.,.... .. • 2\7,•\,„ i .. ..-. ,,, ..- .. , . . : ..,..:2‹: • . ... , . ............-- --. • ... , ...,,..N... , c.,.., . . / . . . • .......„.....-.....- .• . . . •,,,,,,........., „. „, \,-\•\ ,...•'-;,,e' . 1 .. . • / . . de ......t..:00 .• Am. / •101*.-\LI•iitt..— .. • •••• :nal- • 6ti ./• ›..../:. -'••••,..1;tr.........,...i....-m, '• 1 . CP 011=r71/ '...// . -....• • . • lama aw• . .'..' marLeaar".". 7.,..,_-....... Fr::-....." EOUITABLE LIFE v-isco it_P4o4NAPI.arum PI4 Cr-D EDENVALE 14TH ADDITION CD .. - , . - • .-. , , , - . - ' . . . . lit PS. s1.00Evoos•\ -.7. \ \ N • .. \ % . \ \ .7 t % , . , • , \ Temr. , f \ \ . • .# r AG \ • ' roue, tow , s 1 tnocite sfitmlEr, '/'/' a I .- 3 [ ° 1- .. . lit‘ 9\ I ,A � rr ----- TN ,0,.,,,,,4,o,r,.. : 3 • ettita1 o EDENVALE 14th ADDrON • August 11, 1981 Mr. Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 Dear Mayor Penzel: SUBJECT: Proposal to Open up Kurtz Lane to Edenvale and Proposal to Rezone Edenvale Outlot F, 3rd Addition, Outlot B, 11th Addition from R1 to RM We, along with many of the residents on and in the vicinity of Kurtz Lane met with the Eden Prairie Planning Commission on Monday, July 13. Two Petitions were presented to the Planning Commission in opposition to each of the above items. Many, many comments were made as to why we want Kurtz Lane kept a dead end road as well as our opposition to the rezoning of that section of Edenvale located immediately east of the railroad tracks from R1 (single family) to RM (multiple family) units. At this time, we would like to give our comments and the reasons as to why these proposals should not be passed and are confident that we can pretty much speak for nearly all of the residents of this particular area as indicated by the Petitions that were presented to the City Planning Commission. We only hope that these comments will not be taken lightly. We bought our property because it was located on a dead end street and also in order to retain some of the wildlife in this area. One vacant lot is in a low area and is a terrific area for ducks, geese, birds, pheasants etc. At the time we purchased our property, the intention was to leave Kurtz Lane a dead end road. It was always our impression that Eden Prairie has an interest in keeping the area beautiful. If this road goes through, trees would have to be destroyed in order to widen Kurtz Lane; fill would have to be brought into the low area where the wildlife exists; with the traffic going through this area, all the wildlife would surely disappear and would, of course, have an enormous impact on the beautiful wildlife around Birch Island Lake. It could no longer be an area which can be used for jogging, hiking, horseback riding, skiing etc. First the Planning Commission voted against the recommendation of opening up Kurtz Lane to Edenvale. Then they proceeded to take a second vote and this time they decided the road should be put through. We don't feel they have given us one good reason why Kurtz Lane should be continued through to Edenvale. They did say that the City likes to have roads connect and they should be accessible to police and fire. • Putting Kurtz Lane through just for the sake that the City likes to have streets connect certainly does not seem like a valid reason. In our observation of current developments throughout Eden Prairie, they are putting in culdesacs in nearly every area of the city and there doesn't seem to be any problem. Why all of a sudden is it so important to make Kurtz Lane a through street? 115� Mr. Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor Page 2 August 11, 1981 Of course all areas should be easily accessible to the Police and Fire Depart- ments, but in view of the locations of these stations (see map attached), it would not only be more convenient for the Fire and Police Departments to enter Edenvale via Valley View Road and Edenvale Blvd., but in an emergency, they certainly would not take the chance of using an access road where they may very likely have to wait for a train. We honestly cannot envision a main railroad crossing here at Kurtz Lane. A most important aspect to consider is that it would be a prime accident area because of an immediate sharp turn just to the west of the crossing; it would be a very HAZARDOUS CROSSING, especially if school busses were to use this crossing. Even if signals were installed (and we are told by the Milwaukee Road that the cost would be approximately $I00,000 which, I'm sure, taxpayers would end up paying for), it still would be a dangerous crossing. Another HAZARD would be Kurtz Lane itself. This street was just not meant to handle heavy traffic. The street is not wide enough. Because of the hill and curve in the street and the way the driveways of some of the residents are situated, it would make it very dangerous for them to enter Kurtz Lane with the additional traffic. Some of them have already had some very close calls even with the few cars that are currently using this street. The Developer, Equitable Life, has indicated they would be very willing to put in a culdesac in that area of Edenvale where the road is proposed to continue through to Kurtz Lane. This would be much more desirable for everyone concerned. We are interested in knowing who would be financially responsible for widening Kurtz Lane. The residents are still paying for the improvements made on Kurtz Lane three years ago and to burden them with still more taxes just does not seem right. The residents on Kurtz Lane and in the vicinity do not want Kurtz Lane a through- fare; a good share of the residents on the other side of the railroad tracks do not want this; as pointed out, it is not necessary for the Police and Fire Depart- ments; the railroad crossing would be extremely HAZARDOUS. In summary, we want Kurtz Lane to remain a dead end street and to completely close off the railroad crossing which could very easily be accomplished by building a culdesac on the development side of the railroad tracks. We really hope that some THOUGHT AND PLANNING will be given to these proposals before any final decisions are made. We were always under the impression that government represented the citizens and that the citizens do have some say as to what they want or don't want. Here we have nearly 100% of the people in this area protesting the extension of Kurtz Lane to Edenvale (as noted by the Petition); apparently no thought has been given to the SAFETY of our citizens; and we really • have not been given any concrete reasons as to why this should be done. Maybe we DID NOT GET THROUGH TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION! 11SG) ( Mr. Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor Page 3 August 11, 19B1 Since the Planning Commission did not seem to have all that much interest in the residents who have to live with the decisions that are made, we certainly hope that the City Council will take the pleas of the citizens into consideration. We would like to see decisions made which will BENEFIT ALL CITIZENS IN THE COMMUNITY. Any help that you can give us on this matter would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Sincerely, 2 Don & Addie Swenson 15540 Kurtz Lane Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 cc: Mr. Paul Redpath Mr. Dean Edstrom Dr. George Tangen Mr. George Bentley Residents in the Vicinity of Kurtz Lane Mr. B. J. McCanna, Div. Mgr., The Milwaukee Road • 11(00 I,„11. 77'11- Ir{I ) u j'. •:tiO • . .1'1:.'--": G' l ` K . 1,4 :., I�l I I I` W CC •J 11 -..1 • ti W a gri : nr. 1 � l Th- -.:,:-.::.,'\... . ' ' ' --- :‘ .,i f, i111` > 'j; ; C�27 __I 1 L: o / 11� Ph u+-! i • - -./�r "r'�..s 1 • I Ig_7U- rq'VOS[ f _ . . / ---1.:.-----L------1--- i i POKY'IS / :!OJO i� )-p,N._.--_ t•: W/ \ �.I • f fLL==` 'OY J .:t / '' z la / _1 �Jrtir1NN/q^ n i\\..i`}t.•.1 �1 i- � � ��`' 411 5 ....]! 'V 1 ','it.-?-I 1:::-.. ,IZK, ;,• c'Fl.'1'2i' , U `\ g 1 [ y --/ 11 F. 'Ph,: MtJJ S III! ( b } (.......__'' 4Fd Y i1, V) (.411*, ( / J Y� \/ JPY ,h 4 I =Ni Cr-.\\,... *,.:--- ,i ---(1 -,-----,....... 5,0,3 , ,., . *,., .4,4 ‘r,'",) '.74. 'Ik- .J .-1 'i 3 3 i .../ • •..,.._._ '''all L_A___-, 1,._ .. _,J, ......II_1_____,_,,,_, 14.._...______. !E a• • a 1,.- 1) ' .74 ....7=-it-- —' 11 'Ht SIB +4 ' 1' ' ( �r , 1 {y i { ,r 1 • . , l �' rc;O u. +N r,riwo.1 N 11,N N. ' liI.1 - 11I AUS i 11981 qµs,A,4 9, t98/ PAUJL J.CELHAUS 7011 RAVEN COURT EDEN PfAIRIE,MN 65344 Dept C; lo%.4.3 c.� I Mevv.1.3ers, i :I I b e. uxv•c.10 I e 4e• mole +&e rKee71-,ki toke v` you... a rs CUt.s S s re 9 u.es 4- tx.n& G- srn ke -raw; �..orv.e Owner 0.Hd o,.t i nk ;3 cx-r c.a. to ec-aLLs e o� -I-Ci.e. I rvt 1-e d d K p l e x i �-s P la.xv�``e�. A)ow Y edov.a "IRA.e �7o,ln`r more, a.....y)I-ex ur s .ore ‘o``e,1A (e b�„ q e s 4-e -L ; 5 No+ r 4is A.av e. homes to u; 11- K. w>1:CIA.. ;C r t t J;es rna1ce -}-fie;r ;--) eS7 M0csA-vNe v.+- /oo)th 4o r Q t ��•• 1 � LAal ; c7t );te. 4- av� G aK od e a It, d cLplex -�v►� $ �o . )-� �— o P e.�o e u, `T�e,,retore .1 kAou,, w; II -)cry• clbaJ►ti + S re-et ule.s+. y DO f Z. Z. TC'1 •D CO C,•-•r_ D C- r 0 IV-0 •-.I-0 p -'.p (:1 fn•--• C m OGI 0 (' A N < -h a‘a .-i-. •-i-� •-G O' O rt V• -. > N O. fP CD : r C> m • O [:j.0 r ram. -••0 .In .w 71 m m ro o Q-5 a rt T�rt N _ z .3 CD -3 m z rD In p ..s V. rt in -n `m Cl 17 O. I .. CI.CD ry.. D . •..7 o oz - w Co-,m c corn z nr) n n c c Jo -co OD Z wao .. �-40. av rD n p :.T.-0rrm e • ID o7*< O.in o 0 0NfifDN cD •< Cl I... ID O N l0 rt rt 0 •rD 1 O O w O m CI S 3:O m . -f•O IO CO •T1.. V1 „_,I [i J .....0 0. m C'I'1 C "CCP rt CD U) O. -n • v -h19 m •E Cn•S 0 rt �J 0 m A > > �.m om a m m o -r�c to V 0.0 -h0 fD N •S N In'0 0 0 0 IN+ O<•C. OI•• �J ,..�, O w �cp0 •+ n < < .•• a • r) os p' -6 Nrt0 Cl C j ,- V rP w w < Sin D ..,•rt rt 0 0 fD N m 01 0 •rP , (<rD rr I w P. • a (DO n CD CDD 0 -• -r OD pl CD C 0. C)o' c 0.rP O rr 0. < -h N 0.N Q. '''C . 0 tOCT a-r s • 7'rI�3 7a C. O N •roan n '< rn C• •C CD C.10 7 a a CD 0 O Cn ct C S CD 0.• �...N , 0 C Cl In..... D .O C.0 w • W 0 1n C O CO C. CD I+.7 h• 'rot K et w 0 0 C. C O rD w Co.,. w Z • SO et OD 0 V-h-Q 0):,� OD (D 0 r* , .,,, N S"'h S In X V a N 0. o rD . C -'CD0 O c V 0 .... n-tp m U (D CD _ 0. SX ct NID 000. o w • 0 j wren j VS3V 3 �• rt • 00o.,,*�Q ww0 7 -0..< Cl) f+0 OD f+0 -r C0 •S ID1 . t 0 OD rt. o . fD N Co(<pa 0 tDw0 0 �.C ,..•IV ID m CD n •-• O O A D • • rt D•C tf• OCy -1 rD w ao r+CD C. CT ' 'i• i-! .•,--.••'•‘•..•..,1 -W•P-It f \\ ..<A>A., /'/Illfi--.-'--47 p,, i..,/,. .,..4:I\-1:1,6 .1.&e.1..i....Szowsi . ,,,/,,N...„ A.,..,,,\' ,,,,\ , -../ k ' ' , -----1 .- '''''"':71-1.'` ,.... \ iis\-.14k---------r- 7- ,„s, ,1, ,i;:At .rr`....., I. �.Nth=;~ ��• _•�W. .V:- , �r�� \\ i;� = o y • {..'4,3 •:).6 :j�•..„) 1 ' ':•^..{CY Si.' A mo•t, ` o =_ ro a' June 18, 1981 City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 City Council Members: We have just received notice regarding the development plan of the 24 acres west of Edenvale Blvd. and Woodhill Trail and legally described as: Outlot F, Edenvale 3rd Addition Outlot B, Edenvale 11th Addition We are the owners of property on Kurtz Lane on the other side of the rail- road tracks from this development area and we would like to take this opportunity to give our comments. First of all, we moved to Eden Prairie about three years ago and the one thing that attracted us to this area was the fact that the lots were so large. All the lots in the surrounding area were basically a half acre or larger such as the Paradise Valley area which is located directly behind us. We know that there is no way we can prevent houses from being built in the above mentioned area although we would certainly prefer to see some areas like this being left for some of the beautiful wildlife which, so far, does still exist in this area. However, I think now is the time for the City of Eden Prairie to stop these contractors from mutilating such a beautiful area. By allowing them to divide areas into tiny lots, to rezone_ duplex units, etc. is just plain disgusting. If we are going to live on top of each other, then we may as well move back to Minneapolis. Therefore, we oppose any rezoning of this area and we oppose crowding of people into this area - let's go back to one-half acre lots and keep our city a beautiful place to live! U/2/T/Na tHi5 [.F_TTE/.', Sincerely, •51Nc:L A" r/.E c.'rio' � a'i:E may;;4L. A ' ` f 'Cr` 42c--7 t, T/1ArThs PZAN5 6/2E re. AIAA6 Don and Addle Swenson 15540 Kurtz Lane eiN/ e'Ai: n r' 1r/! i.,N�y Aec r ss Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 7 T/,'/s NEu r1?E.,-? cP" /✓:, THE CcAI), cTL ?1.4'i✓e7;s^F1'14." ',2T) ' T/r -5JAES . /,d,zrea. %ANA', ey o A/7 _ 'EV '.'-. _.:T , j///ti. j f-r l��Aynn: ../ ^✓c•r- T r1/;,,=A /5 1-e, ///)i/r :knit I'i A/c C , /✓.A C;c,C Nn Te MN a'E 7 I/.5 av/r , E7//'EME-Air Nr47t ^!✓.') i .7 I`' G i.'/= /iD Tr^ (<t MN/N A^/L)14D END /iC AI) i' ^o co j.,.to J m N o n ra A t z z ]C l•1 . C .. .r+C A to n < o O •0 o m C7' O< 0 v-• O O .- r+ -4 a fD fD[1 a •.-•• w 2' o< �30 0 -i 3rrtD� a� w` ' m in Ay.x-P,rP O, o -a ofo ......o. ut •a 3 m m 'V0 7' 3 i-+ 0 0 m so.v 7 -1 vs-'r+N T fp co .� rP r+ V' m •• CO • C V r<N 0 Z n1 0. I -• o.CD r . -*-t v, ,. r. pa "-.� co T .A 0 00K -c DC t)-.•= 'V om 7 .. 7n7 'n v < 3vmn-1o7m0 cm cz Wa 0 • m m -•afo-'• fP CD -0 CO 0. 0. Aa C 7 -0 et m r -4 V 7 3 K 0.to CD CO CD fD r r+0 no 3 7 COO m -<x . CD '.CC o <too < < Z v...0 N•• • _ m • -n 7 to CD a a . W o `*�.a 0 m 7 CA..�-. X X 77 a 3 C N ffDD VV1 fD CD O. Ul• b 0�a fD C A m 7 0 7' j 0 ..t'< 7 P p 7 -.,CD 0 m r W < CD 3 •p CD 7 -hO et 'Y (� 0 a�w OfD O-+ z N -y w �v 7 .o- a -i �f�-P as rP O • - w C 0 7" A 0 3 V CD r*.,. a...7• a • -f r+n v to a o. o a < 7.7 '<-f CD 7•r.0. 7 n o. O. 0) •fotO -•••rP IV •1 co V• 3 o. 0. 7• • n Vf CD 0 O.CD CO ••I• ui m.cn r+ m c d rD 0 -c'o.too. m 7• c' to D• et R 0 -+ -ff fD 7 •fD et r. ' 1,1 .� 7 7 -� 0 C P.O. t< m 7 fD'O `t 7 y 7 O min 0. C mCD a_to 0 ^ f� CD 0...., nr+ C..=O �. �.fD O C ` \ J• CT 7 O C CCD 7 •< O. 7 U)O .S ^ 0. < r+0 CD a fD-.73 Krr a -+• m N C0n, a•D . -s Z • 7-0 rP fD 'O -h-'CT N w X fD 7 IA t`, N. • fD a•D CD Q+V to- vii 7'.-su+ X-0 3 �. tom. O fD 7' \ \ L fD n ••-'O fD c -• o c -f 7 to -f fD 3 c ? 7•i O•rP-fi7• fDm Vt fD rf.X+.•0 o CD •Jfp w Co r O. C ^ V• 3-S 7 7 O rP� '!1. Cu w 0•. 7 • -Pf fD • 1 .-.rP 7 -{z •p ▪ rP 7 fD r. /' • N CD r+fO -1 7 f... S t0 J 00-•O EC) o,to fD 0 _.� 7two O 'm 7 j ( • h v`Pi O a rro� fD 3 o a c • ' nc 73 mfrul • y rP fD w a -1 . 7'in r•0 • fD •• r+-• 7 • K CD k ,k; 117--:0./ '‘.::"71 ‘\ a \..----\:\""\t,:•,-o.), -_:: ( l • k, 1 m iti, _ •C �I ' 'ice a ;4 ' ':v`<�;� • \ _ n n \ o � �� ,.t if't;� r_ b t O • \`i. J .ti •. -fr:f • a0 .� ^„ 1�1_SI I�� ;�,'''fT • 0 C 1=t�• ' �•hv i j F..s,—• •,� ��.� • o M u N �`�� 1. • x n {. .�1k • July 8, 1981 Mr. B. J. Mc CQnna, Division Manager The Milwaukee Road 221 - 3rd Ave. So. Minneapolis, Mn. 55401 Dear Mr. Mcrgnna: The City of Eden Prairie Planning Commission is proposing to rezone an area of the Edenvale Development area next to the Milwaukee Railroad (as shown on the attached map) from single family to multiple family houses. They are also proposing to make Kurtz Lane a main access road from this develop- ment area to County Road W4 which means another railroad crossing at the end of Kurtz Lane. There currently is a crossing there but is used by only two residents who are not now in this development area. I have also attached a copy of the two petitions indicating that the people in the immediate area are against these two proposals. (1i'tTr? k c J' 1-0 P-C. m%NIJ�TES-�� 1 , As per our telephone conversation of today, I have attached a map and have highlighted in yellow the road which we propose should be used which would eliminate the use of any added railroad crossings. This road is basically there, but needs to be graded and tarred etc. which would be nominal in cost as compared to installing a signal at another railroad crossing which I under- stand would amount to approximately $100,000. This road which we are suggest- ing is merely an extension of Edenvale Boulevard and runs into Birch Island Road, goes underneath the railroad crossing and over to #67. Since there already are two railroad crossings in this vicinity - one at #67 and one at Birch Island Lake, we feel that it is highly undesirable for still another crossing at Kurtz Lane. We feel that with another crossing, there is always the probability of more accidents occurring. The City of Eden Prairie Planning Commission is meeting next Monday, July 13, 1981 at 7:30 p.m. at 8950 Eden Prairie Road, Eden Prairie to discuss these proposals and we would very much appreciate it if someone from your company could be at one meeting to give your views on the above. Sincerely, Don Swenson 15540 Kurtz Lane Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 Enc. 3 11(oO (- Mr. B. J. Mceenna, Division Manager Page 2 July 8, 1981 cc: Mr. E. C. Jordan • Assistant Div. Mgr. - Maintenance The Milwaukee Road 221 - 3rd Ave. So. Minneapolis, Mn. 55401 Mr. David Irving, Field Eng. The Milwaukee Road 221 - 3rd Ave. So. Minneapolis, Mn. 55401 Mr. Gene F. Bennett Attorney at Law 900 First National Bank Bldg. Minneapolis, Mn. 55402 Mr. Chris Enger, City Planner City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 ..Mc. Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 Eden Prairie City Planning Commission: Mr. Wm Bearman Mr. Hakon Torjesen Mr. Bob Hal let Ms. Elizabeth Retterath Mr. Grant Sutliff Mr. Matthew Levitt �.. . Ms. Virginia Gartner Mr. Carl Julie, City Mgr. City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Mn, 55344 no . - ---Tr Jt b / 1.....2. ofI' / 'AE4 I--iiF. -t Lip._._. n • }} tlU �y 3 r:�J u:, aw • ri \:..,. ; e11- 1 ^� - ra y �I `t• o 4- ;Z� I i •9 miwiP bo W F W� �fr rf �> ( 11— .+ KQ 1-m 7 y! l .�iWH714'r7ti \ a �, • I'�i"'��, tiN 36 �.,, . In d ,, ,- .In C. u...pr., i r-' SS�.�r .r .li 7 n 1 J O ,�. . � it = d t. ox a in e '/ � 7U `a ut �: 'L is // w� s1*s,`I� r.�„ewysQlG °Ca 1 ! � I 1 1`/ / 5!''J1,r�mfR,f���r art "•ee., n ___ n y wl 1 j;,,J-fr 3 _L 6 U. //';;� I CCC,,, Y 1311---{S� Q 1 + -- i i i57'7F1� i,y I j.t. ,�\l ' �; > f ,1., • 1 ,• i ,. ,., „4,--..T. i.,......A1.--,i7z7r,-:..i.,-_, 'g,Jotp,. 1,,' :FRI° U.Ml, . • - „k 14Y1 T89lQN _U f • — ys,�--17FIFn. mil mom.0 ill1,1 v 'l b _. , Y\ r.c Li, tS L. •I #k -- •• .\ ) clj . k 1era.•r , :,y ti ..1,c1.., 1 —.--. ><( Ls- •-•'e'J - - .1 11C) 3 i r... . / if—�, A �, ---� —�k„-- — — 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 a N t0 O 0 n N 'ICII a CO I U o I - l • June 18, 1981 • • To: Eden Prairie Planning Commission Subject: Request by Equitable Life Assurance Society for rezoning of Outlot F, Edenvale 3rd Addition and Outlot B, Edenvale 11th Addition from X1-13.5 to RM-6.5 for 56 duplex units. Over the years a comprehensive zoning plan for the future development of Eden Prairie has been produced with a great deal of effort and foresight by city officials, Planning Commission meaers and resident property owners. While presenting guidelines for developers, this plan also constitutes an agreement with existing property owners specifying land use in their neighborhood. Many long-term residents of Eden Prairie have used this development plan to make decisions on residency, buying, selling, landscaping, etc. Now we ask-- Of what use is such a development plan if it is to be amended willy, nilly for the benefit of a new developer? To amend this plan to include duplex units is a breach of faith with long-term residents who were led.to believe that single family homes would be built in these additions all along. It is our understanding that while Equitable may have been involved in the original financing of Edenvale, this company was never involved in the devel- opment process itself. Thus,.Equitable has no track record in working with city officials or the Planning Commission. Therefore, it would seem prudent that the Commission proceed cautiously and require Equitable to abide by the city's original development plan. The property in question lies near a corridor of undeveloped land that includes Birch Island Park, the Purgatory Creek flood plain and the railroad right-of-way. This area teems with wildlife including pheasant, deer, ducks, geese and even quail. This wildlife is one of the primary natural attributes of the whole area. An extremely high density development on the periphery of this corridor along•with increased traffic will seriously affect the populations of all these s. species. Of great concern to the residents of Park Terrace Drive and Kurtz Lane is the traffic problem northwestward to County Road #4 that will be created by any new development. Kurtz. Lane for the past 15 years has been a lightly used residential street that comes to a dead end at the Anderson farm on the east side of the railroad track. With this new development a northwest access to County Road f'4 will be possible for Edenvalc residents, not only those in the new development. It is not unthinkable that traffic on Kurtz Lane will increase more than tenfold because of improved access to the shopping center in Glen Lake. Thus, what can Equitable and the Planning Commission do to reduce neighborhood traffic problems? There is an additional safety problem with crossing the railroad track. Previous; out-of-town commitments prevent us from attending the Planning Meet- ing on June 22. Denis and Joan n:u•tt 1553'( Park Terrace Drive 110 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 81-159 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF EDENVALE 14TH ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Edenvale 14th Addition dated July 10, 1981 , a copy of which is on file at the City Hall and amended as follows: 1 is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances and amendments thereto and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council un the day of 19 Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL Minutes-Parks, Recreation & approved July 20, 1981 Natural Resources Commission -2- MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Anderson a. Woodlawn Heights PUD Concept j . ' David Squires of McCombs Knutson Co., was present to answer any questions regarding this proposal, Lyman Lumber and Ecklund Swedlund developers. The developer is requesting PUD approval, preliminary platting and rezoning for 54 single family lots and �. rezoning for 96 units. Squires said thu Planning Commission approved the proposal with modification to the single family development per report of July 10, 1981. • • Squires said the developer will grant theCity clear title to the 28 acres (corrected from 20.2 acres on Checklist) of park dedication land and pay the City back taxes and assessments as required. The developer will also develop 2 parks, one a passive natural recreation area and the other (8 acres) for active recreational use. ( MOTION: Jessen moved to approve Woodlawn Heights PUD Concept per terms in Staff report. Breitenstein seconded the motion and it carried unanimously, with Schwartz abstaining. IB'MIRANDUM TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services • DATE: July 16, 1981 SUBJECT: Development Proposal Check List PROJECT: Woodl awn Hei�c hts PROPONENT:^Lyman Lumber and Ecklpnd Swedlund • REQUEST: PUD approval, prliminary platting and rezoning for 54 single family lots and rezoning for it lim"l o�quad-liiomes LMMATlos: Northwest Eden Prairie in the southwest quadrant of Townline Road and Duck Lake Road BACKGROUND:_ See Planning Staff Report Dated: PARK AND RECREATION PLANNING CONCERNS • 1 I. Type of development: Residential 2. Number of units in residential development: 150 S. Number of acres in the project: 59.6 aG & a 20.51 acre tiX_.forfeited parcel 4. Special recreation space requirements: None S. Adjacent io any existing or proposed parks: The 20 acre tax forfeited parcel is a portion of the 100,plus Edenbrook opens spca�.,1evce area. n. AC ct on t w par :__ t .f(s i5_. e nprnent is complptpfl, thprp will hp prptcure �. for trails, picnic area and active use areas. ( 6. Need for a Minn park: No 7. Cash park fee or land dedication? Both a. If Cash park fee dedication, amount based on. existing ordinance will total: $41,550 b. If park land dedication, the number of acres to be dedicated is 20.2 acres c. Existing or pending assessments or taxes on proposed park property total $43,000 and will be paid prior to dedication. • B. Adjacent to existing or proposed trails: Sidewalk along Duck Lake Rd. a. Type of trails Pedestrain b. Construction Material Concrete c. Width of trail 5 feet • d. Party responsible for construction Developer e. Landownership of trail location:(dedicatcd, purchased, ROIt). Dd NATURAI. RrsouRCr. PRESERVATION CONCERNS • 1. Site grading plan considers natural amenities of the site?_des Planning Staff Report pag.e._2. 2. Most significant grading on the site:_ Signifitint nrrldina oCCUrs along the south facing slope toward the park area. Extensive grading is required in order to fill the gui-1 y-caused-by-years-of-Eros i of 1. • ►19z • 3. Significant vegetation on the site includes: Thp 11F portion of the site is generally wooded. 4. The site grading plan indicates preservation of: N/A S. Adjacent to public waters:_N/A •. n. Affect on waters: • REFERENCE CHECK • I. Major Center Area Study: N/A 2. Neighborhood facilities Study: The active use recreation facility proposed to be • . developed on this site as well as large open space area to the south and west • wiiH-adequately serve-park-needs-fu, this-area. 3. Purgatory Creek Study: N/A 3i • 4. Shoreland Management Ordinance: N/A . ... 5. Floodplain Ordinance pmeat-Meets-tbe_Floodp iJl-- dlnancP rar)I,iratnrntc 7, -., 6. Guide Plan: 19.g Guide Plan depirts this area AS low density rpsidpntial • �. • 7. Other: RECCRWhIATIORS 1. Adjacent neighborhood type, and any neighborhood opinion voiced in favor or opposed to the project: 2. Planning Commission Recommendation:On July 13, 1981,. the Planning Commission recommended to approve the PUD Concept as per the July 10, 1981 staff report. 3. Community Services Staff Recommendations_iolllmunity_Services staff recommends approval as per the July 10, 1981 Planning Staff Report. • IT] • . approved Planning Commission Minutes -7- July 13, 1981 ' MEMBERS ABSENT: Virginia Gartner (: E. WOODLP,';JN HEIGHTS, by Lyman Lumber. Request for PUD Concept;) approval, variances, rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and P.M 6.5, preliminary plat approval, and finding of no significant impact. Located in the southwest corner of Townline Road and Duck Lake Road. A public hearing. The Planner reviewed the request and stated that Mr. Dick McCombs of McCombs- Knutson was present to give a presentation. McCombs reviewed the proposal and stated they concur with the staff report. . Tile Planner reviewed the staff report dated July 10, 1981. . Levitt asked what the City receives from the density transfer. The Planner stated that the City gets parkland, middle income housing end.cash park fee. Levitt stated that he felt that there was massive grading to be done. Bearman asked who owns the land. The Planner replied the State does because it is under a tax forfeiture. • ( Bearman then asked how the City obtains the property. The Planner replied that if the owner does not pay the taxes the State allows them a one year grace period, and if after that time they have not paid their taxes, the land would go up for public auction. McCombs stated that his attorney told him that Lyman Lumber had a 50-50 chance of retreiving the land. Mr. Jim Hurt, of Lyman Lumber, stated that he felt that they could win the claim. Levitt asked if the land is buildable. -cCoebs replied that there could be up to 120-150 single family lots on the property. Hallett asked if they do not get the density transfer, how many single family lots - would there be. The Planner replied 150 single family homes or 150 quadraminiums. . Sutliff asked if Duck Lake Road becowiig a public collector road requires redesign. • The Planner replied yes. Levitt asked if there would he a traffic problem if the quadraminiums were built first since there is one access from Townline for the internal road system. The Planner replied no. Sutliff asked if the offset of the roads creates a problem for Minnetonka. The Planner replied no. Sutliff asked if the 20 acre parcel is land locked. The Planner replied yes. 11i4 L approved Planning Commission Minutes -8- July 13, 1981 Kenneth Schulke, 17071 Creekridge Trail, Mtka., asked if Eden Prairie works with Minnetonka and asked if the quads are being built on Townline Road. McCombs replied that there will be a 6' berm separating the quads from the road. The Planner replied that the City of Minnetonka is notified. Schulke felt that Townline Road could not be able to handle the traffic, and stated that he does not like quadraminiums. He then asked if this will increase the density of the land and if the quudraminiiris will be caned or rental. Burman replied the density is the sane. McCuAs replied that the quads will be owned. Beaman asked the price range. McCombs replied $75,000 - $115,000. - George Kissinger, 6601 Barberry Lane, submitted a letter dated July 9, 1981 and stated that he felt that saving the trees is important. Donald Jacobson, 6345 Duck Lake Road, asked how many units there will be and if r Lyman Lumber will be selling the lots. McCombs replied 96 quads and 54 single family lots and that Lyman Lumber will prepare and sell the lots. • Lynwood Erancico, 17400 West 66th St., stated that he felt that the property could be used better, wants to save the trees, and felt that 20 acres should be ietu..ed. Charles Gould, 6235 Duck I.aka Road, stated that he moved to the area because in 1975 the laud was proposed as a wildlife sanctuary. He felt that middle income hoes will , ake the crime rate go up. He-also stated that he felt there would a. be traffic problems and stated that he was opposed. James Bast, 17440 West 66th St., stated that he would like to see the road connect with the parkland in Sunset Trails and also stated that he eras opposed. Beerman stated that the final plan might not look like the current one. Hallett asked the developer to e.plain what their attorney said. McCombs replied that the plan has changed, stated the proponent is willing to work with staff, and also stated that he went to the site and found mostly boxelders and elm trees. MOTION 1 Hallett moved to close the public hearing on Woodlawn Heights. Retterath seconded, motion carried 6-D. _ SOT 1ON 2 Retterath moved to reco,r.nend to the City Council approval of the PUD Concept as per the July 10, 1981 staff report and including the suggestions of 14r. Kissinger's letter of July 9, 1981. Torjesen seconded. DISCUSSiON_ Levitt moved to amend the motion adding that particular attention be put on the ingress and egress on Townline Road. Retterath agreed. Sutliff stated the he felt that more traffic will go south rather than on Townline Road. Hallett stated that he felt that if no one lives on Townline Road, the road will not be upgraded as quickly as if people lived there. Motion carried 5-1. Sutliff voted no. 1195 • STAFF' REPORT i TO: Planning Commission • FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: July 10, 1981 SUBJECT: WOODLAWN HEIGHTS APPLICANTS: Lyman Lumber & Echlund-Swedlund FEE OWNER: Lyman Lumber & State of Minnesota REQUEST: PUD approval, preliminary platting, and rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 for 54 single family lots and rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5 for 96 units of • Quad-homes (in 24 buildings) PROJECT LOCATION: In northwest Eden Prairie, in the southwest quadrant .of Townline Road and Duck Lake Road. BACKGROUND • As stated in the development brochure, dated May 27, 1981, the request ( covers two adjacent pieces of land, one 59.68 acres (owned by Lyman Lumber) and one 20.51 acres that has been allowed to go tax forfeit and is currently in the title of the State of Minnesota. The over riding land use is: the Guide Plan designates this area at two units per acre; under a PUD, if the proponent owned the 20.51 acre peice, he may be able to utilize it for density. In this case, the proponent does not own it, but wishes to somehow redeem it and pay off past assess- • ments and taxes, quit claim it to the City, and claim density for it. The question is, why should the City entertain this possibility? 1) Any time a parcel goes tax forfeit, the tax payers at largeare the real losers. There are approximately $43,000 in back taxes and assessments that were not paid. { 2) If the City ends up with the property as park, and collects back taxes and assessments, who is hurt? 3) With many vacant single family lots already platted, the City has a need for middle income housing (good homes in this case). 4) No more density is being proposed than was planned for the area. 5) The developer would be responsibile for running a force sewer main westerly to the interceptor which would take pressure off of the existing Sunset Trails area. 6) The City would be able to build a neighborhood park in the area (being supplied with both land and money. Staff Report-Woodlawn Heights page 2 7) The additional 40 units (20 acres x 2u/a) allowed would pay a cash park fee amounting to approximately $10,000, otherwise lost. Obviously, for this concept to work, it must be both legally possible and the density transfer subject to the land's ability to accept development. Therefore, let us proceed with the review of the site. SITE PLAN Externally, the following facilities must be provided as a part of the site development: 1) Duck Lake Road is currently gravel past this site; it must be improved equal in cross section to Duck Lake Road south, with 5 wide, concrete, sidewalks on each side of the road. • 2) A sanitary sewer, force main must be constructed from this project • west to the Purgatory Creek Interceptor. 3) Townline Road is currently paved from Duck Lake Road easterly, so that is is travelable. However, in the event the County does not i improve the road (profile) Eden Prairie must be prepared for i eventually having to institute a City improvement project with Minnetonka. Legal instruments should be designed to make this entire development liable for 1 of the improvement costs of a normal 28' wide street. This amount would be applied to the total road cost in the future in the event it became necessary. • Roads , • Since Duck Lake Road is a north/south collector, units should not front directly on it. The single family layout should be modified to: eliminate i lots on Duck Lake Road; save vegetation; and conform more strictly to the existing land form. Proposed Grading I The site is very steeply rolling and varies from a low point at the marsh at the south end of 871, to a high point, in the center of the project of 952. The top of this large hill (currently being farmed) would be cut 16 feet. The northern face of this hill would also be cut considerably. Part of the fill would be utilized in the northwest corner, to provide additional pads for quads, however, it appears that the majority of this fill will be utilized as fill of a major ravine in the single family area. , Because of the single family lot layout, Grand View Drive crosses a ravine 1 that was diagonally up into the site from the southern marsh. This ravine is proposed for approximately twenty feet of fill, which will eliminate the trees that fill it. All of the tree vegetation in this ravine does not show on the topography submitted. One site inspection confirms aerial photos, that this ravine is wooded. nr • Staff Report-Woodlawn Heights page 3 • RECO'VU:HDATIOHS • The Planning Staff recommends that the Planning Commission request the proponent to revise the plan as follows: 1. lots directly fronting Duck Lake Road, can, and should be served di fferently. 2. The internal road system should be modified to work with the topo- graphy; ie., the ravine should be saved. . • 3. A 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk should be planned within the ROW of • the road leading from Townline, south and east to Duck lake Road. • A short section of sidewalk should extend west up to the active park. 4. The developer should grade the park for tennis courts and a ball field, and dedicate the land, however, the cash park fee would be applicable to this project and it would be utilized to construct the finished facilities. • 5. Utilities area illustrated in backyard areas, without easements, and very inaccessible. This must be revised in coordination with the City Engineering Staff. . 6.. Sanitary sewer and watermain systems as indicated appear sufficient. A watermain connection with the existing main located at Chatham Way and Townline Road should be considered at this time. Calculations for the stone sewer system design will be required prior to approval of construction plans along with support information on the capacity of ponding areas and the outlet location for the ponds located • in the northeasterly portion of the proposal. 1. Separate descriptions must be submitted for the single family and quad areas for R1-13.5 and Rti 6.5 zoning (respectively). • In light of these detailed problems, the staff feels that perhaps action on the preliminary plat and rezoning should be deferred. Appropriate action may be to forward the PUD Concept to the Council, pending site plan revisions, with a recommendation of approval of the land uses proposed subject to the City Attorney's legal opinion on the tax forfeit.piece. • CE:ss • • • • nr CCu /e /9,1/ .,2 vx .! nvi>rodtexliao C. 6 �/� L C �altLWLf C / ' i, D C/4,x7[ -oaa✓IU•y d"eee xi6:curYi' `1.i». c3 '3 ' tc4 ea, 9c a. yt'�9x ,,,,, ,e.<2 d�c," a .40,-/Zekx x a �0 ss3v3 ,,,de6# *''26a aerxl4-1, e0`. — rve'r as . 1&/ e :6 Yew t,te ette6 b?ea/'�< , ,1• a-2xlevee XAf.?' tkla-c. i-LC 0474. GL4i2e, a4af eet Ce4.,,,j 4,-/zd,Wce `i%v<e(aavx) /e is t ez,v �ZY ;re4, Y.r.cEG"a a 9 /..� c 62 eUe /uzuQ ,ch zectc •Gi vte ; z 1• kA ac�c.,--Ci?c(�c/ &_e.,9Cp Cei1Scc xeede2C u� G -z 4 Gt u • (/'X�'7'`L ?�c? GAG�� z`C'��Y Q'Zc'.Gic'c3[�� Q � !� d�Qrxacat �ect' �ri -e, y G424442cYo1 i -- Ce„—Mec?l_Za .L.�ne L.ZZ L Gw _e2zGteV �t et.j �w ��eGYlf'.,, LG2e -y 47., ...e[,e t / G e GLX [a t� C �u Ce Claa24 .� G�-, GDAui ''-'c ✓zecaieae /JiC.a thC(-n) zr�os yt IL'XCil,-&,eieK.i0. �[lr..6 l ct Z d °� ��' ca%x 'c l dh__71f,.f1 /74F2Z``4 , Golf— CCU __‘-‘cr,e6:7o��cG. i'ZL'C_4I7 Q,,-,tla .-G 1"/,L. de_.' -e _yi.G�Zlca. a..e., 7z,cd.-G� aay-z rxe-x-eae_ ,. iGa-i_t of w.601 e^t/xd /rnecl c vJC.' .ZZG;t a°G.2=,t,Z-�if a:.le azvaGGI ey— dGe GLe a��eh�y 6, • V' DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION .",, 320 Washington Av. South 71 :; 'i ( , Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 ,..;�,- HENNEPIN __IT__ 935-3381 • July 14, 1981 Mr. Chris Enger' I Director of Planning City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road + Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Dear Mr. Enger: RE Proposed Plat - "Woodlawn Heights" Future CSAH 62 (Townline Road) SW Quadrant of Duck Lake Road Sections 5 F, 6, Township 116, Range 22 Hennepin County Plat No. 940 Review and Recomenendations Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County review ( of proposed plats abutting County roads. We reviewed the above plat and found it acceptable with consideration of these conditions: -For future upgrading of Townline Road the developer should dedicate an additional 17 ft. of right of way making the right of way 50 ft. from the center of Townline Road. -The developer should realign proposed boodlawn Heights access directly opposite existing Creek Ridge Trail on Townline Road. At the time of our field inspection Barrington Court was not constructed onto Townline Road but it appears Woodlawn Heights could intersect Townline Road directly opposite Barrington Court safely. { Please direct any response or questions to Les Weigelt. } Sincerely, , /1). 1<, C''( . James M. Wold, P.E. Chief, Planning and Programming JMIV/LDW:pj HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer l July 9, 1981 Mr. William Bearman, Chairman Eden Prairie Planning Commission 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 Re: Lyman Lumber request for PUD concept plan approval for southwest corner of Townline Road and Duck Lake Road. Dear Commissioner Bearman: As you know, the subject PUD concept plan calls for an overall density of just under two units per acre. However, to arrive at this average density a 20 acre parcel, with title currently in the name of the State of Minnesota and located just to the southwest of the proposed development site, must be taken into consideration. This premise obviously puts considerable risk on the City of Eden Prairie. The Lyman Lumber proposal calls for the City to apply to the State for conveyance of this 20 acre parcel for public use. The State may or may not grant such a conveyance. It could very well happen in these tight financial times the State will choose to dispose of these 20 acres through some other method such as ( public auction: and any kind of development here would throw the Lyman Lumber density trade off out the window. To minimize this risk to the City of Eden Prairie it is recommended that, as a hedge, the total number of units allowed under the PUD be reduced and that additional park dedication, compatible with the parkland located directly to the south, be made along the southern edge of the development site. As specific guidelines relating to the natural environment, topography and slope, it is recommended that the PUD concept plan meet the following key objectives. 1. The proposed development should take advantage of the existing topography by: a. siting roads to avoid cut and fill b. siting housing to maximize walk out units 2. The proposed development should take advantage of existing trees by thoughtful layout of building lots. 3. The proposed development should take advantage of the superb views to the South and to the West. 4. The proposed development should preserve the "wood duck's pond, (and its natural shoreline) located in the northeast section of the site. r)'I Mr. William Bearman July 9, 1981 page 2. Official action following the afore recommended actions,•along with the creation of a suitable mechanism for insuring compliance, will serve the City of Eden Prairie well by promoting a highly desirable addition to this sector of the City. Sincerely, n . 1 j/P/ i.1,j/f.,/. • 1,-z-iddA-A4 • �ion �+��i�.,�-L-�_ � �� Mr. Chris Enger City Planner City of Eden Prairie February 18, 1981 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 • Re: Lyman Lumber Co. Residential Development Proposal Dear Mr. Enger: On Saturday, February 14th I, and a shall group of local residents had the oportunity to meet with Mr. Jack Miller, an attorney representing the Lyman Lumber Co. Mr. Miller had contacted me earlier on a referal from your planning office and had asked me to arrange the meeting. At the meeting Mr. Miller explained in detail the Lyman Lumber proposal and also the legal status of the two parcels of land involved in the proposal. As you know, the proposal calls for development of an approximate 55 acre site bordered by Duck Lake Road on the east and Town Line Road on the north. A very preliminary plan includes the development of 23 fourplex units and approximately 50 single family units, Lyman Lumber is proposing further that a second parcel of about 20 acres, adjoining the 55 acre parcel to the south and west, be used in a density trade off. It seems at this point, in all fairness to Lyman Lumber, that a decision should be made early on whether or not to allow the smaller parcel to figure into the density trade off equation. Further planning on the larger parcel can not reasonably proceed until that decision is made. Without getting into all the details of the possible claims Lyman Lumber may make toward the title of the 20 acre parcel, the fact remains that the title to this property is in the name of the State of Minnesota. In addition, it appears that the title of this parcel passed directly from Ecklund & Swedlund to the State, never having passed through Lyman Lumber. A sitiation which could lead to lengthy litigation should any party decide to take legal action. Because the City of Eden Prairie can not control the 20 acre parcel, the State could auction it off possibly even to Lyman Lumber, it seems clear that to consider the parcel in the density trade off equation would not be in the best interest of the City, With regard to the proposal for development of the 55 acre site, we expressed our concern over the fourplex units desity and traffic implications. We asked that alternative schematics be explored with attention given to preserving the natural contours and elevations, preserving the duck pond on the eastern portion of the parcel, and to preserving a major stand of mature trees that cross through the parcel from the east to the southwest then proceding along the southern boundary. Mr. Miller agreed to explore all of these possibilities. 4 Mr. Chris Enger In general, Mr. Miller was very helpful' and we are appreciative of both his willingness to meet with us and discuss the issues acid your referal at this early stage of the development process. We left Mr. Miller reiterating that the Lyman Lumber property is a high quality parcel, offering much in the way of natural amenities ranging from pleasing topography, ponds and woods to high view areas and that proper development there would be a great and welcomed asset to the community. • Sincerely, George M. Kissinger CC: Mayor Penzel • (2) 1 yy CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA +- RESOLUTION 81-160 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE WOODLAWN HEIGHTS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND AMENDING THE GUIDE PLAN AND THE MAJOR CENTER AREA PUD 1 ' WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of Ordinance 135 provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas lo- cated within the City, and WHEREAS, the Woodlawn Heights PUD is considered a proper amend- ment to the 1968 Comprehensive Guide Plan and the Major Center Area PUD, and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing �. on Woodlawn Heights on July 13, 1981 and considered Lyman Lumber's request for approval and recommended approval of the PUD Concept to the City -. Council, and WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on August 18, 1981. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The Woodlawn Heights PUD, being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, attached here- to and made a part hereof. 2. That the City Council does grant PUD approval as outlined in the application material dated May, 1981. 3. That the PUD meet the recommendations of the Planing Commission dated July 13, 1981. ADOPTED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie this day of , 1981. Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL o • • ( LEGAL DESCRIPTION The East half of the Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 6, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The Norhtwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 5 and the Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 5, lying north of the south 957.00 feet, all in Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota. August 18, 1981 STAT" OF MINNESOTA CIT. JF EDEN PRAIRIE • COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ' The following accounts were audited and allowed as follows: 7815 GLADWIN AGENCY Notary fees-Police Dept. $ 60.0 7816 HOPKINS POSTMASTER Postage-Happenings 463.1 7817 ED. PHILLIPS & SONS CO. Liquor 1,177.1 7818 MIDWEST WINE CO. Wine 296.4 7819 THE LIQUOR HOUSE Liquor 1,251. 7820 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE Liquor 634., 7821 MINNESOTA DISTILLERS, INC. Wine 1,495.E 7822 OLD PEDRIA COMPANY INC. Liquor 1,922.i 7823 TWIN CITY WINE CO. Wine 576.'i 7824 INTERCONTINENTAL PACKAGING CO. Liquor 758.1 7825 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO., INC. Liquor 4,369.E 7826 BRIDGEVIEW MOTEL Expenses-Police Dept. 86.0 7827 STATE OF MINNESOTA Notary fee-Finance Dept. 10.0 7828 7 HI ENTERPRISES INC. Rent-Liquor Store/Preserve 2,873.• 7829 PRAIRIE VILLAGE MALL ASSOCIATES Rent-Liquor Store/Prairie Village Mall 2,078.r. 7830 HENNEPIN COUNTY PARK RESERVE Expenses-Teen Volunteer 5.0 7B31 MINNESOTA ASSN. OF CIVIL DEFENSE Fee-Police Dept. 3.0 7832 MIDLAND PRODUCTS Equipment parts-Round Lake Concession 7.0 78rFr NORTHERN STATES POWER Rewire overhead to underground-Grill House 185.t 783, P D Q FOOD STORE Fuel-Squad cars 25.c 7835 HOPKINS POSTMASTER Postage 2,000.0 7836 NATIONAL FIRE PRDTECTION ASSOC. Books-Police Dept. 62.0 7837 STATE OF MINNESOTA Notary fee-Police Dept 20.0 7838 TWIN CITY WINE CO. Wine 135.,. 7839 INTERCONTINENTAL PACKAGING CO. Liquor 2,13D.` 784D PAUSTIS & SONS Wine 123., 7341 MIDWEST WINE CO. Wine 652. 7842 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO., INC. Liquor 2,240. 9' 7843 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING CO. Wine 7844 JOHNSON WINE CO. Wine 3,463.• 7845 ED. PHILLIPS & SONS Liquor 4,664. 7846 OLD PEORIA COMPANY, INC. Liquor 1,187., 7847 HOPKINS POSTMASTER Postage-Utility bills 234. 7848 MENARDS Supplies-Canine Program 193.'. 7849 HENNEPIN COUNTY PARK RESERVE Expenses-Teen Volunteer 5.1 7850 P D Q Fuel-Squad cars 51.t 9 7851 SHADYWOOD TREE EXPERTS, INC. Service-Forestry Dept. 7,592. 7852 BEER WHOLESALERS, INC. Beer 7,348.. 7853 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING CO. Beer 31. 7854 CITY CLUB DISTRIBUTING CO. Beer 8,883. 7855 COCA-COLA BOTTLING MIDWEST Mixes 610. 7856 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. Beer 5,134. 7857 •EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO. Beer 11,032. 11c GOLD MEDAL BEVERAGE CO. Mixes 294. 78J9 KIRSCH DISTRIBUTING CO. Beer 458. 7860 A.J. OGLE DISTRIBUTING CD. Beer 2,551. 7861 PEPSI COLA & 7-UP BOTTLING Mixes 741.. 7862 THORPE DISTRIBUTING CO. Beer 9,608. 111`z// Page two Au( t 18, 1981 7863 HENNEPIN COUNTY CHIEFS OF POLICE Conference-Police Dept. 135.; 7864 CRAGUNS PINE BEACH LODGE Expenses-Civil Defense Dept. 160. 7865 P D Q Fuel-Squad cars 62. 7866 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK Payroll 17,069.. 7867 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE Payroll 5,888. 7868 DON OMODT, HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF Payroll 113.• 7869 AETNA LIFE INSURANCE Payroll 165.i 7870 UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS Payroll 46. 7871 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING Dues 3OO.i 7872 PERA Payroll 10,969.. 7873 WESTERN LIFE INSURANCE Insurance 489.' 7874 BLUE CROSS INSURANCE Insurance 695.• 7875 P H P Insurance 7,033. 7876 GROUP HEALTH PLAN Insurance 1,083.: 7877 HMO SERVICES Insurance 624.' 7878 HMO SERVICES Insurance 1,658.• 7879 J. KRIS KRYSTOFIAK Expenses-Playgrounds 2O.0 7880 JOHN FRANE Expenses 184. 7881 A & H WELDING & MFG Steel-Street Dept. 44.• 7882 ACRO-MINNESOTA, INC. Office supplies 120.: 7883 ACTION RENTAL CENTER Equipment rental-Park Dept. 19.E 78$" ALCOHOL COUNTERMEASURE SYSTEMS INC. Supplies-Police Dept. 71.2 78l ALDY GRAPHIC SUPPLY, INC. Markers-Community Services 26. 7886 AMERICAN LINEN SUPPLY CO. Service 8.,' 7887 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOC. Dues-Water Dept. 343.0 7888 APMOCO OIL COMPANY Fuel-Street Dept. 9,712. 7889 EARL F. ANDERSEN & ASSOCIATES Signs, Playstructure 4,771.: 7890 MIKE ARBISI Expenses-Riley Lake Park 3.( 7891 ASSOCIATED ASPHALT, INC. Blacktop 1.338.:' ; 7892 AUTOTRAAC Equipment repairs 8.0 7893 B.I.C. PRODUCTS Bulbs-Water Dept. 4O9.. 7894 ISAAC BLAKEY Softball official 110.: 7895 J.E. BRAAS CO. Belts-Water Dept. 41. 7896 BRAUN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. Service-Valley View Phase II, Sunnybrook 2,378. Road & Homeward Hills Road, Luther Way 7B97 BROWN PHOTO Film-Fire Dept. 91.7 7898 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS, INC. Rock 12,769.; 7899 ROSLYN BURNSTEIN Mileage 14.; 7900 DAWN BUSCH Refund-Rec Dept. 3O.0 7901 BUSINESS FURNITURE, INC. Desk return-Liquor Store/Preserve 380. 7902 BUTCH'S BAR SUPPLY Supplies-Liquor Stores 555.: 7903 CASTLE CHEMICAL COMPANY, INC. Insecticides-Park Dept. 129.; 7904 CHANHASSEN AUTO PARTS Equipment repair & parts 42O.0 7905 CHAPIN PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal ads 117.( '3 7906 CHARLTON-MCCLAY, INC. Bags-Liquor Stores 350., 7907 .CITY OF BLOOMINGTON Service 580.i 7P" CHEMLAWN Service-Public Works & Water Dept. 181.E 75,,J CITY ENGINEERS ASSOC. OF MINN. Fee-Engineering Dept. 1O.( 7910 COMMUNITY DANCE CENTER Aerobic Dance classes 108. 7911 COPY EQUIPMENT INC. Supplies-Engineering Dept. 98. 7912 CROWN RUBBER STAMP CO. Stamps-Liquor Store/Preserve 78.' 7913 CURLE PRINTING COMPANY, INC. Business cards 102.t' I'l, ? I Page three AuQ i 18, 1981 • . 7914 CURTIN MATHESON SCIENTIFIC Chemicals-Water Dept. 91.6. } 7915 VOID OUT CHECK 7916 CUTLER-MAGNER COMPANY Quicklime-Water Dept. 4,083.: 7917 DAVIES WATER EQUIPMENT CO. Equipment-Water Dept. 176.c 7918 DORHOLT PRINTING & STATIONERY INC. Office supplies 582. js 7919 DYNA SYSTEMS Tape-Street Dept. 58.C ' 7920 EDEN PRAIRIE SANITATION CO. Service 90.0 7921 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT #272 Custodial service & Fall brochure printing 1,857.F 7922 CITY OF EDINA Tests 80.0 ;- 7923 ELK RIVER CDNCRETE PRODUCTS Rings-Street Dept. 100. 7924 SUE ELLEFSON Refund-Rec Dept. 16.1 7925 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC Grate-Public Works 76.1 7926 EXIDE BATTERY SALES Batteries-Street Dept. 179.` 7927 FAIRVIEW COMMUNITY HOSPITALS Tests 25.c 7928 FEED-RITE CONTROLS INC. Sulfate-Water Dept. 2.918. 7929 FLYING CLOUD SANITARY LANDFILL Service-Forestry Dept. 75.1 7930 JEFF FRAZIDEN Refund-Building Dept. 65.0 7931 FRONTENAC PRESS PRINTERS Envelopes-Animal Warden. 190.: 7932 FRONTIER LUMBER & HARDWARE Lumber-Public Works 146.: 7933 G. L. CONTRACTING, INC. Service-Westwind Drive & Windward Circle 776.: 7934 LAURA GEASON Mileage 3D..; 79/ GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. Equipment repair & parts 50.: 7 ... R.L. GOULD & CO., INC. Grass seeder-Park Dept. 73. 7937 DALE GREEN CO. Sod-Public Works 2•` 7938 GROSS INDUSTRIAL SERVICES Service 53.` 7939 JACK HACKING Expenses 12.E 7940 HAYDEN-MURPHY EQUIPMENT CO. Swenson spreader & Henke Snow Plow-P.W. 11,940. 7941 HENNEPIN COUNTY Radio rental & installment fee 4,532.: 7942 DIRECTOR OF PROPERTY TAXATION Taxes-Sunset Trails 388.:: 7943 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Wire-Fire Dept. 15.: 7944 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Service-Valley View Road 1.1.8,152. 7945 HENNEPIN COUNTY DIRECTOR Equipment rental-Forestry Dept. 4,137. 7946 HOIGAARD'S Steel stakes-Fire Dept. 15.' 7947 HOPKINS PARTS CO. Equipment repair & parts 177.: 7948 CHRIS HURTFORD Refund-Rec Dept. 7949 INGRAM EXCAVATING Service-Park Dept 1,632. 7950 I B M Service & typewriter-Water Dept. 1,057... 7951 JOSEPH JOHNSTON Expenses 3.. 7952 KARULF HARDWARE Concrete mix, staples, batteries, drill-Water 656. Dept., bulbs-City Hall, insect spray-Eng. Dept., keys-8uilding Dept., tape, paint, file, knife, bolts & nuts, rivets-Public Works, paint, concrete mix, pipe-Street Dept., hand cleaner, shovel, handles, staples, rope, clamps, washers, utility knife, tire gauge, hanmer, pinchers, nails, netting, floats, hooks, line, fly catchers, ( broom, anchor, rake-Rec Dept., sledge hammer, gloves, plastic-Forestry Dept. 7953 JOSEPH KASID Softball official 110.. 7954 TOM KEEFE Softball official 121. 7955 JENNIFER KENYON Refund-Rec Dept. 10. 7956 KENNEDY TRANSMISSION Equipment repair & parts 455.1 079 . Page 'bur AugL . 18, 1981 7957 KNOX LUMBER Lumber-Park Dept. 368.0 7958 KRAEMER'S HOME CENTER Paint, nylon rope 125.i i 7959 J. KRIS KRYSTOFIAK Mileage 71.5 7960 M.E. LANE INC. Insurance . 12,558.' l 7961 LANG, PAULY & GREGERSON, LTD. Service 7,925.` 7962 LEEF BROTHERS, Inc. Service 182. . 7963 LUANN LISILL Refund-Rec Dept. 16.C- 7964 LONG LAKE FORD TRACTOR Pulley, blades, hangers-Park Dept. 231. 1 7965 MAPCO SP D & GRAVEL CO. Sand-Park Dept. 45.1 7966 PETER MAYOU Expenses 80.0 7967 MEDOX Oxygen-Fire Dept. 24.1- 7968 METRO FONE COMMUNICATIONS, INC. Service 131.4 f 7969 METROPOLITAN FIRE EQUIPMENT CO. Fire extinguisher-Liquor Store/Preserve 28.5 7970 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION Blacktop 136.0 7971 MINNESOTA GAS COMPANY Service 20•C 7972 MINNESOTA RECREATION & PARK Omni theatre tickets-Rec Dept. 147.E 7973 MINNESOTA TORO, INC. Equipment parts-Park Dept. 61.+ • 7974 MODERN TIRE CO. Equipment repairs & parts 29,(. 7975 WM. MUELLER & SONS INC. Rock-Park Dept. 664.C' 7976 MUNICIPAL CLERK FINANCE OFFICER ASSOC. Dues-Finance Dept. 15.0 7977 NATIONAL SOCIETY OF PROF. ENGINEERS Dues-Eng. Dept. 25.0 79 ' NORELCO Equipment-Engineering Dept. 639.4 79 N S P Service . 5,975.1 7980 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE Service 2,472• 7981 NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK OF MPLS. Bond Payment 120,254 7982 NORTHW000 GAS Oxygen-Street Dept 5.0 7963 CURTIS R. OBERLANDER Expenses-Fire Dept. 124.: 7984 ART OLTMAN Equipment repair & parts 42.f 7985 PEPSI/7-UP BOTTLING CO. Pop-Beach Concessions 435.i 7986 RALPH PEREZ Softball official • 132.0 7987 JOLENE PETERSDN Mileage 30.7 7988 PETTY CASH-PUBLIC SAFETY Expenses-Police Dept. 15.0 7989 POMMER MFG. CO., INC. Trophies-Rec Dept. 488. 7990 PROGRESSIVE DAIRY INC. Ice Cream-Rec Dept. 650.2 7991 JAMES PUFAHL Softball official 99.0 7992 RICK RABENORT Dues, Conference-Canine Assoc. • 66. 7993 RAPID COPY, INCORPORATED Liquor ID Cards 30.0 7994 DAVID RAQUET Drawer liner-Street Dept. 4.0 7995 REGISTER MEDIA, INC. Ads-Liquor Stores • 59.( = 7996 REMKE BAG & SUPPLY CO. Baskets, bag liners-Forestry Dept. 496.0 7997 RENTAL EQUIPMENT & SALES Two chain saws-Forestry Dept. 785.'. 7998 R C M Service-Viking Press Drainage, Ind. Rd. 36,307..:= . Utility, Valley View Road, Franlo Rd. & Preserve Blvd Utilities, 70th St. Improve, Meadow Park, Cardinal Creek Phase II, Willow . Creek, Rymarland 2nd Add'n, Sunset Trails Estates, Valley Place Offices Improvements 7999 ROBERTS DRUG Supplies-Rec Dept. 32.E 8000 ROBERTS LITHO, INC. Printing newsletters 725.E 8001 PAUL ROGERS Discing-Park Dept. 120.( 8002 LAURA A. ROELL Mileage 72•C 8003 KEVIN ROHE Mileage 8 C • Page five Aug, . 18, 1981 . 8004 JEFF ROY Mileage 90.0 8005 SAILOR NEWSPAPERS Ads-Liquor Stores 365.5 8006 SALLY DISTRIBUTORS NOVELTY HDUSE Supplies-Rec Dept. 10.7. 8007 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES, INC. Portable restrooms 1,180.2. 8008 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES, INC. Portable restroom 162.0 8009 JON SCHEE Mileage 16.5. 8010 SEARS Drapes-Council Chambers, vacumn cleaner- - 591.4 Public Works, Socket/wrench set 8011 BARB SIEGLE Refund-Rec Dept. 12.0 8012 BRIAN SIEVERTSON Softball official 44.C. 8013 STEVEN R. SINELL Mileage 1O2.0 8014 SMILEY GLOTTER ASSOCIATES Service-Eden Prairie Community Center 1,865.2 8015 W. GORDON SMITH CO. Fuel, Oil & Lubricants 227.7 8016 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING INC. Legal ads 692.1. 8017 SPORTS WORLD-USA Supplies-Rec Dept. 2.9 j ' . 8018 DONNA STANLEY Service-Park & Rec Commission Meeting 5O.0 8019 EMh1ET STARK Summer Community Bans 48O.0 802D SUBTERRANEAN ENGINEERING INC. Service-Sunset Trails Estates 233.0 8021 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET CO. Equipment repair & parts 634.2 8022 SULLIVANS SERVICES, INC. Service 5O.0 8023 SUPPLEE ENTERPRISES, INC. Supplies-Liquor Store/Preserve 22.2 80?' SYSTEMS 3, INC. Equipment repair-Police Dept. 39.0 802... TAMS-WITMARK MUSIC LIBRARY Fees-Rec Dept. 11.E 8026 TAMI TATE. Refund-Rec Dept. 1O.0 8027 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Service-Round Lake Park 5OO.0 8028 VAN WATERS & ROGERS Chlorine-Water Dept. 358.2 B029 WATER PRODUCTS COMPANY Equipment repairs & parts 2,392.c. 8030 WEAVER ELECTRIC CO., INC. Service-Eden Prairie Community Center 16,200.+_ 8031 WEST WELD SUPPLY COMPANY Blade-Street Dept. 72.0 8032 ALLEN L. WHITTLEF Softball official 297.0 8033 XEROX CORP. Service 2,165.E 6034 JEFF BEAUVAIS Refund-Rec Dept. 1O.0 8035 DAVID ANDERSON Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 82.E .. 8036 CARL BLAD Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 54.C: 8037 PAUL BURKE Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 62.2 8038 PAUL CHARCHIAN Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 36.7 8039 DAVE DAHL Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 78.; 8040 LORI FERRIS Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 67.`- 8041 JIM FERRIS Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 1O5.0 1 8042 KEVIN GEASON Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 78.7 j 8043 JENELLE GILBERT Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 15.7' 1 8044 PEGGY GILK Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 69.0 8045 TIM GILK Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 66.C- 1 8046 MIKE GOERTEL Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 72.7 1 8047 BRENDA HOCKERT Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 56.2 8048 ANGELA FHARRINGTON Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 61.1 80 RICK HAUPT Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 68.2 805u STEVE HENRY Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 21.7 - 8051 PAUL HENRY Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 21.7 8052 GREG JOHNSON Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 58.e. 8053 SCOTT JOHNSON Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 27.7 8054 . JODEA JUDSON Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 114.7 (7(4 I Pag .,ix i i August 18, 1981 8055 CHRIS KELLY Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 97.1_ 8056 TONY KELLY Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 81.7: 8057 TERESA KRUSE Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 39.7. 8058 EVONNE KUNDEL Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 82.5 8059 DEBBIE LORENCE • Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 54.3 8060 ARIK NORDBY Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 69.0 8061 KAREN QUANBECK Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 59.0 8062 JIM RASMUSSAN Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 74.2 8063 SCOTT REEVE Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 20.2� 8064 LISA SARLES Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 52.C. 8065 JOEL SEVERSON Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 66.7 8066 JULIE EIMERSON Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 82.1 8067 RYAN SKARE Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 60.C. 8068 WENDY TRAASETH Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 49.5 8069 BRETT TREPTOW Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 51.C. 8070 KRISTINE TREPTOW Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 57.0 8071 STEVE WAGNER Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 53.2 8072 LISA WEYER Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 73.E 8073 TOM WHALEN Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 62.f 8074 DEAN VOLK Wages-Teen Volunteer Program 128.E 807 VOID OUT CHECK 5.0 8O7b SANDRA F. WERTS Expenses 8077 TIM PIERCE & ASSOC. INC. Service 270.1 8078 A & K CONSTRUCTION, INC. Service-Water Wells #4, 5 & 6. 103,966.T 8079 BARBAROSSA & SONS, INC. Service-Water Treatment Plant Addition 124,473.' 8080 BROWN & CRIS, INC. Service-Rymariand Camp 2nd Addition 43,435.: 8081 BROWN & CRIS, INC. Service-Norseman Ind. Park 4th Addition 15,000., 8082 BROWN & CRIS, INC. Service-High Trails Estates Utilities 13,638. 8083 EGAN-MCKAY Service-Anderson Lakes Parkway 6,076. 8084 HENNEN CONSTRUCTION CO. Service-Sanitary Sewer, Storm Sewer 52,886. 8085 KENKO, INC. Service-Luther Way & Meadow Lane 50,244 8086 NODLAND ASSOCIATES, INC. Service-Industrial Drive Utilities 16,074 8087 NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO. Service-West 70th Street Utilities 4,179 5 8088 PROGRESSIVE CONTRACTORS, INC. Service-Valley View Road Phase II 241,399.. 8089 PROGRESSIVE CONTRACTORS, INC. Service-Valley View Road • 52,716. 8090 SHAFER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Service-Anderrson son Lakes Parkway, Homeward 2,445. ills,TOTAL _1 278 454. UNAPPROVED DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTES WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 12, 1981 7:30 AM, City Hall Council Chambers COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Tim Pierce, Bill Behrenbrinker, Robert Hanson, Don Opheim and Roy Terwilliger COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Joe Adams and Kent Barker I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA All members agreed to approve the agenda as published. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM MEETINGS HELD WEDNESDAY, JULY 29, 1981, and WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5, 1981 MOTION: Opheim moved, seconded by Hanson, to approve the minutes from the meetings held Wednesday, July 29, 1981, and Wednesday, August 5, 1981, as published. Motion carried unanimously. III. ITEMS OF DISCUSSION A. Continued discussion on Tax Increment Financing Property owners from the Major Center Area were in attendance as follows: Don Hess, Lloyd Cherne, E. W. Echols, Bob Murphy, Ron Wesley, John Gertz, Tom Heiberg, Roy Falness, and John Teman. Mr. Pierce explained the purpose of the meeting was to receive input from property owners regarding a potential combination of general mill levy and special assessments in order to accomplish all of the road improvements which have been proposed in the City's Tax Increment District, including the Schooner Blvd./ 1-494 underpass. Mr. Jullie reviewed the memo of August 7th to property owners in the Major Center Area, listing the proposed projects, assessment methods and general mill levy. Questions and discussion followed and at the conclusion there were no objections to the proposed recommendations contained in said memo and there was a general consensus of support for the entire program. Mr. Jullie explained that any appeals of special assessments could result in a delay and possible deletion of some of the projects and he further recommended that the property owners consider withdrawing their appeals of the original Ring Road assessment. MOTION: Opheim moved, seconded by Pierce, to adopt the recommendations contained in the August 7, 1981 memo and to forward these to the City Council at the August 18th Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Pierce requested that notices again go out to all Major Center Area property owners explaining the action of the Development Commission and extending the invitation for any additional input. r1 c Development Commission Minutes - 2 - August 12, 1981 • IV. COMMERCIAL PERMITS, JULY, 1981 Received and noted. V. NEW BUSINESS No "New Business". • VI. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:00 AM. • • CITY OFFICES/8950 EOEN PRAIRIE ROAD/EOEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA 55344/TELEPHONE 16I2)931.2262 .rf { MEMORANDUM TO: Property Owners in the Major Center Area FROM: Tim Pierce, Chairman (f Development Commission REGARDING: Economic Development District and Tax Increment Financing for Improvements DATE: August 7, 1981 The Eden Prairie City Council has requested the Development Commission to review and formulate recommendations regarding a potential combination of general mill levy and special assessments in order to accomplish all of the road improvements which have been proposed in the City's Economic Development District, including the Schooner Blvd./I-494 Underpass. Accordingly, the Development Commission has scheduled a meeting for 7:30 AM on Wednesday, August 12, 1981 at the City Hall to receive input from affected property owners. { The Development Commission will be considering the following recommendations: I. The City should let construction contracts in 1982 for the following improvements - Estimated Costs in 1,000's includes utilities A. Valley View Rd.-Mitchell Road to I-494 & Schooner Blvd. from Valley View Rd. to T.H. 5 $ 3,461 B. Schooner Blvd. - T.H. 169 to T.H. 5 2,274 C. Schooner Blvd. - W. 78th Street to T.N. 169 and Valley View Road from T.H. 169 to I-494, including I-494 underpass and ramps 9,315 D. Valley View Rd./I-494 bridge widening and ramps to I-494 north 2,626 E. Mitchell/Baker connection - City share of County project 300 F. Valley View Road from Washington Avenue to 1/2 mile West 659 $ 18,635 • Page Two August 7, 1981 • II. Since Mn/DOT has now programmed the widening of T.H. 169 from Leona Road to Valley View Road for letting in 1982, this project should be deleted from the City's list of projects in the Economic Development District. III. The City should levy special assessments as follows for the proposed improvements - A. $50 per front foot for properties abutting the roads to be improved (17-year spread beginning in 1983). B. $1,000 per acre general benefit assessment to all parcels receiving special benefit [original MCA assessment area] (17-year spread beginning in 1984). C. Front foot assessments for water and sewer assessments where appropriate (17 year spread beginning in 1984). IV. The City should use tax increments from the Economic Development District and a general mill levy to fund the remaining costs of the proposed improvements. The general levy should be as follows: 1.0 mills in 1982, 1.5 in 1983 and 2.0 in 1984 and thereafter, any additional tax increment income from future tax increment districts should be used to offset the general levy. Also, any future cost participation by other government agencies should be an offset against the general levy. The Commission will welcome your input at the August 12th meeting. The City Council is also scheduled to have this matter on their August 18th agenda. We hope to have our recommendation finalized by that time. . • TP:jp 111(49 �� al an o3 � / I o 14i1}i , , uti 1, NSc � ' 3AV DHStlM 1�` +{ ( MI od OJ ' 30 p 1S1 fl`y MI d3lW133 1 _ o i}►C •illSN{, P 1611, v Ic Y �g {{ 1 (, lr W ® ki g m ,,i1,4 ' II- ..'�.. — y U tf 4 l'' Mi<f e j )q{lil}l{�I� da o00 °7 atttg>yP n 1 PI1 n �' � 1 ., n0 b� #1. N II �4 /�I {l,1 4X�1i il Ifc? -', 1 WJ ii, W ;j d31d3J N 11 D. u adlA \ ' . 11 W �l QIK .� I 1j o ill N >>/ ,,,,Nh i' O 1 Q a ay o n 'I114 „1, Ilit ` a i1 11'.'' 6 DA1B 3Ad353da ( } {y 1 yy 1 W W ., 0 Wn6r S S { {{7i(l, u FanNl pew 4Ill li 11 u .1 W ' xO ' ii Ovotl d30 UNP1 1 f ,f i A , ' 4 — - : E l3 v , \.!( jJl 1 ® \ ', ^ W 4 0a.0 y Aa I vu V G a s a fl W 11 s� I4 JC1 Gi l / \ 0 $$�` e", wig ►---•` Ti 4/"2 1/ . Asir Avel) \ 0 i ,, _, ( 'd0 1Q' , ' ev a 67A )\ 4,4 1"..\/ , 14.V.Prrs9/ a 3y /, u ? +w., • i - MEMORANDUM TO: Property Owners in the Major Center Area FROM: Tim Pierce, Chairman-l' Development Commission REGARDING: Economic Development District and Tax Increment Financing for Improvements j- i - DATE: August 13, 1981 This memo is to advise that on Wednesday, August 12, the Development Commission met at City Hall with several property owners from the Major Center Area to review and formulate recommendations regarding financing options for the proposed road improvement program in the City's Economic Development District. After considerable discussion, the Commission adopted the recommendations contained in our memo to you of August 7th, including the special assessment provisions. These recommendations will be forwarded to the Eden Prairie City Coul meetin . thenpropertyhe ownersst presentth Cthatithe proposedlt was the recormnendationsal werenfairus f and reasonable. If you have any questions about this matter, or if you desire further input, please contact any member of the Development Commission or City Manager Carl Jullie. Thank you. CJJ:jp Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes August 10, 1981 ALL MEMBERS PRESENT• A. BURNING TREE CONDOMINIUMS, by Burning Tree Corporation. Request to preliminary plat 12 acres into 2 lots (5 & 7 acres). Located at 14000 Chestnut Drive. A public hearing. The Planner stated that Mr.Jan Susee, of.Susee & Lee, LTD, representing Burning Tree Corporation could give the presentation. Susee explained that the platting request was to allow phase II of Burning Tree to be built as condominiums rather than apartments. The Planner reviewed the staff report dated 8/7/81. Torjesen asked if the setbacks for Lot 2 creates any need for variances. Mr. Susee replied no. The Planner replied that on the final plat lots 2 and 3 will he combined with lot 1. Carl A.G. Papenfuss, 8385 Mitchell Road, asked if the provisions made for another road to tie into Schooner Road is still planned. The Planner replied the proponent would build his section of Anderson Lakes Parkway and will tie into US 169/212. Torjesen asked if the project will have access from Chestnut Drive. The Planner replied yes. Papenfuss asked if the area west of 14000 Chestnut is still approved for apartments. ( The Planner replied yes. MOTION 1 Retterath moved to close the public hearing on Burning Tree Condominiums Plat. Sutliff seconded, motion carried 6-0. MOTION 2 Retterath moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the plat dated 7/30/B1 as per the staff report dated 8/7/81 adding that the term 'East-West Parkway' be changed to 'Anderson Lakes Parkway' for continuity purposes. Sutliff seconded, motion carried 6-D. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission • FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: August 7, 1981 SUBJECT: BURNING TREE CONDOMINIUMS PLAT APPLICANT: NW Nat'l Bank SW & Burning Tree Club Apts., a partnership REQUEST: Preliminary platting of 12 acres. LOCATION: South of the east end of Chestnut Drive, East of Mitchell Road and West of Purgatory Creek. BACKGROUND • burning Tree Apartments had been zoned by the City for construction of 120 a units. • The project was split into phases, and the first phase has been built as apartments. Becuase of financing, the second phase will be built as condominiums. This change of ownership requires a separate parcel. The piece could have been divided administratively, however, road ROW for Anderson Lakes Parkway was required in the approval of the original project to be completed with the second phase. A division which involves dedication of a road ROW must be platted. The proponent will plat the ROW and construct the road down to their en- trance. Anderson Lakes Parkway will be continued south in the future. SETBACKS 1'he property must be platted to allow sideyard setbacks on accessory buildings to be no less than ID', setbacks for parking to be no less than 10', and sideyard setbacks for main structure to be no less than 25'. RECOMMENDATIONS • Planning Staff reconmends approval of the preliminary plat dated July 30, 1981 subject to the following: 1. Cash park fee per unit is applicable to this project. 2. Must be final platted in accordance with City Ordinances. 3. Any grading on the property, must be reviewed and approved by the Riley- Purgatory Creek Watershed District. 4. Roads and utilities constructed to City Standards. 5. Provision of separate recreational facilities (totlot and multi-use court), for the condominiums. 1100 �, BURNING TREE CORPORATION c/o Jan Henry Susee Suite 220 - Richfield Bank Building 6625 Lyndale Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 • August 4, 1981 City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Attention: Ms. Jean Johnson RE: Burning Tree Corporation - Plat of Burning Tree Dear Ms. Johnson: Enclosed herewith please find seven copies of the proposed plat of Burning Tree. You have also requested information as to the reason for the requested platting. When we originally constructed the Burning Tree West Apartments, we processed an administrative subdivision by dividing off greater than five acres of the entire parcel. In now requesting a second division, we are no g` longer able to subdivide by an administrative subdivision and are therefor requesting the plat. You will note that we include three lots as part of the subdivision in addition to the road right-of-way to be dedicated. As to Lot 1, this was land which is now included in the Burning Tree West Apartments. It was included in that administrative subdivision because of the need for an emergency vehicle turnaround at the end of the project. $ As originally developed, Burning Tree consisted of 120 units to be built all at one time and would not have required the emergency vehicle turnaround. Because of the phasing of construction, it was needed in connection with the development of the apartments. In order to build the condominiums as originally approved by the Planning Commission, we must now return the Lot 1 area to the second phase. 1 • 1101 -2- ( Lot 2 is needed for purposes of obtaining the necessary setback for one of the buildings to be constructed with the condominiums. We would hope that the foregoing would be sufficient information and should any other information be necessary, please contact my office. Very truly yours, BURNING TREE CORPORATIO r`/��BY �..%" !?4,f4)r• Jan .Henry Susee, Secretary JHS/sb encs. ItOrds 1 : -17_ -� — _ ._ll]L'I]'L:Iii] .J • `` , ., J I ,, me� J "v '• N11 • , 11 a.\ ' r ' : • I a / „ ... ._ . —u i i C 1.1,.' ir.r Yam;ti11.,.� ","•^�- 3. .,).) i, ), . '',i' \\ :' , ,. '\ ; 1.: . '-1 I. n Li, r t i \ �" /i P` � t* , ``y l l 1 t its tl�ii---� 1112 . -I/I I ,ski/ •10 a 4414:> ` / to C :r,ry c_ I • 7o A �. j-� `.rl ..--ik —I \ , Ss' t° /.iI / / . /r % �I/ /i i f /( r' 0 • /./'/ 1 / • / n \..—, (/ !� 1q)� CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 81-162 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF BURNING TREE CONDOMINIUMS BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Burning Tree Condominiums dated July 30, 1981 , a copy of which is on file at the City Hall and amended as follows: is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances and amendments thereto and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the ' day of 19 Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor John 0. Frane, City Clerk SEAL • igoy All611 Sill L,____ Xe9,..,,_,P141..):...,,,LL,C?rc-s—,-tj, vi ct(210. — , ",,,,tiier ./4.01 „1 ,- G7.4\ i-suz:11,S161. C t raj,. 1 --tt,--Act .. ...- .,g3.3_,.sL..)\. )&3)-J\"4-d-A&-- . -,. 1 C. • • • Unapproved Board of Appeals Minutes July 20, 1981 3, ALL MEMBERS PRESENT 7. Variance request 081-22 submitted by Sever Peterson fo_f_prgperty located at 9391 Creekwood Drive_ Requesting a variance for side yard setbacks from 10' . Chairman Wedlund asked why this item is on the Agenda because it had been acted upon in January, at which time the Board said the request should be denied. The decision was not appealed to the City Council. Peterson was not the applicant initially. The Ordinance does not preclude an applicant from returning repeatedly to the Board, however unless new circumstances are present, the proper procedure would be to appeal the decision to the City Council. Discussion centered on due process and proper procedure. Peterson stated he was not present at the January meeting and explained the circumstances regarding the building of the deck. He felt the deck rather than a catwalk was not only more practical but greatly added to the appearance of the home. He said that Hustads had chosen to speak for him without his know- ledge at the January meeting. It was his opinion that the reason the variance had been denied in January was because of shoddy workmanship; this is not so and that is why he is back before this Board again. He feels he was not really represented at the January meeting. Dickey said he made the motion to have the deck removed. He said this was presented as a "simple builder's error" which was presented to this Board by the builder. It was his feeling that the builder misrepresented the case when it was presented in January. Sandvick wondered why the order to remove the deck was not carried out, The City must enforce the Board's orders, S _Dickey said this makes a mockery of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. Issues like this should go before the City Council. Sandvick suggested this be brought before the City Council and the Council should note that Peterson was not properly represented. Enger said the question should be who owned the property at the time this was first considered. He called attention to the letter of May 8, 1981, from Ruth Hustad, in which Mr. Peterson is referred to as the "new owner." MOTION: Moved by Sandvick, seconded by Dickey, to turn this matter over to the City Council in accordance with due process, Motion carried unanimously. (Mr. Peterson is to receive a $25 refund since the variance was not acted upon by this body.) AU61iIgal MEMORANDUM TO: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Roger A. Pauly, City Attorney DATE: August 5, 1981 RE: Issuance of Building Permits for Construction of Single Family Detached Dwellings on Parcels of Less than 5 Acres We have been requested to give our opinion as to the City's responsibilities with respect to the issuance of building permits for the construction of single family detached dwellings and accessory structures on parcels of not less than 5 acres situated in the Rural District as described in Zoning Ordinance No. 135. The specific question addressed to us for our opinion is: Whether a person who owns a parcel of land which presently, and prior to the effective date of Ordinance 135,consists of less than 5 acres is entitled to a permit to build a single family detached dwelling? At the outset, Ordinance 135 should be distinguished from Ordinance 93, which deals with the subdivision of land in the City. That ordinance becomes relevant only in the event of the desire of an owner to divide his land into two or more parcels. Parcels of land in existance at the time of adoption of Ordinance 93 continue to be properly subdivided parcels. The scope of Ordinance 93, by its own terms as described in Section 3, relates to "any division of a tract of land into two or more parcels" with certain exceptions as to minimum size parcels. Thus, if a division is not required, Ordinance 93 is not applicable. Ordinance 135 was adopted and became effective upon pub- lication on November 6, 1969. Section 3 relating to the Rural District provides in part as follows: "Subd. 3.2. Permitted Uses. a) Agriculture, accessory and related uses; b) Public and quasi public facilities and services required by the resident or working population; c) Single family detached dwellings and accessory structures without platting on parcels of not less than 5 acres." (Emphasis supplied) Ordinance 135 does not contain any exemption from the requirement imposed by Subd. 3.2 that single family dwellings must be on parcels of not less than 5 acres. Section 16 permits the continuance of nonconforming uses. A nonconforming use is one "lawfully occupying a structure or a site on the effective date of this ordinance . . .", Subd. 16.2 a). Obviously, if a dwelling did not exist on a parcel at the time of adoption of the ordinance, no nonconforming use existed at that time. It may be assumed that Ordinance 135 is valid unless it is found that it has no substantial relationship to public health, safety, morals, or general welfare, County of Freeborn v. Claeson, 295 Minn. 96, 203 N.W.2d 323. In that case the court said at N.W.2d 326, "The burden of proof is upon defendant to establish that the legislative body has acted arbitrarily or unreasonably and that there is no substantial relationship to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare. What best furthers public welfare is a matter primarily for determination by the legis- lative body concerned. . . Even where the reasonableness of a zoning ordinance is debatable or where opinions differ as to the desirability of the restriction it imposes, the courts are not to interfere with the legislative discretion." (citations omitted) Assuming the general validity of Ordinance 135, the question remains whether the City may deny issuance of a building permit for a dwelling in a rural district by virtue of Subd. 3.2 because the parcel for which the building permit is requested is, and was at the time of adoption of the ordinance, less than 5 acres. The application of a zoning ordinance to the owner of specific property may be invalid if it results in an unconstitu- tional taking of his property, U.S. CONST. amend. V; Minn. CONST. art. 1 §7; Krahl v. Nine-Mile Watershed District, 283 N.W.2d 538 (1979); Holaway v. City of Pipestone, 269 N.W.2d 28 (1978); Czech v. City of Blaine, 312 Minn. 535, 253 N.W.2d 272 (1977); McQuillin, Mun. Corp. (3rd Ad.), Section 24.45. The rule enunciated by the Minnesota Supreme Court is stated in Czech at 253 N.W.2d 274 as follows: "For there to be an unconstitutional taking a landowner must demonstrate that he has been deprived, through governmental action or in- action, of all the reasonable uses of his land. 1XU7 1 C.F. Lytle Co. v. Clark, 491 F.2d 834, 838 (10 Cir. 1974); County of Freeborn v. Claussen, 295 Minn. 96, 203 N.W.2d 323 (1972) ; see, generally, Freeman, Give and Take: Distributing Local Environmental Control Through Land-Use Regulation, 60 Minn.L.Rev. 833." In quoting the rule with approval in Krahl, the court reiterated that the burden of proof is upon the landowner when it said at 283 N.W.2d 543, "In the instant case, Krahl has not met his burden of showing that he can.make no reasonable use of the land." While it is clear that in order to prevail, the 3 landowner has the burden and must show that the questioned govern- mental action deprives him of all reasonable use of his land, 1 it is not so clear of what that showing must consist. R. In Krahl, the most recent case, the court held the t landowner did not meet the burden of proof. That case involved property situated within the Nine-Mile Creek Watershed District. Krahl purchased the property on a contract for deed from a party ; who was purchasing it from a previous owner, also on a contract for deed, dated July, 1959. In 1961 the Minnesota Water Resources j Board prescribed the Nine-Mile Creek Watershed District overall plan, which regulated encroachment into the flood plain of Nine- 1 ( . Mile Creek. In 1970 Krahl appeared before the watershed district managers with several plans for development which required filling the flood plain in excess of 20 percent permitted by the plan. He was denied a permit. In its opinion, the Court con- cluded that the denial of the permit did not constitute a taking of Krahl's property for which compensation must be paid. In concluding that Krahl did not meet his burden of proof, the Court stated at 283 N.W.2d 543, 1 " . the watershed district has persuasively 1, argued that a number of reasonable uses remain 1 for the land: for example, the district asserts that the land could be used agriculturally; to meet open-space requirements of the zoning code; as a density credit area; for golf driving ranges, parking lots, recreation uses, set-back areas; or for any other use which would not impede the flow of surface waters. Accordingly, Krahl's claim must fail." d Curiously, however, the court, in what seems to be an afterthought, gave the following cautionary advice, '' "It must be emphasized that we are very concerned with governmental action which significantly interferes with an individual's use of his property. This court, 1 . °) 1. therefore, in future cases will not hesitate to award a landholder damages where, contrary to the instant action, an unconstitutional taking is shown."1 In Czech the court reached a conclusion opposite that in Krahl. Czech involved an attempt by the landowner to have land adjacent to his mobile home park rezoned for expansion of the park. The rezoning was denied. On appeal of the ensuing legal action, the Supreme Court held the City's failure to grant the rezoning was an unconstitutional taking of his property. The holding was based upon the conclusion that the general characteristics of the property, including the high water table and general nature of the terrain, virtually rendered the property useless for any use other than a mobile home park, and a finding that the public health, safety, and welfare would not be endangered by such a development on the property. In County of Freeborn, the Supreme Court reversed the lower court's denial of the County's request for an injunction against landowner, without prejudice to the latter's right to petition for rezoning of his land on the ground that it is not suitable for use for the residential purposes for which it was zoned. In that case the land was being used in a nonconforming manner for the outdoor storage and repair of equipment. Thus, while the rule placing the burden of proof on the landowner to demonstrate that he has been deprived of all reasonable uses of his land is clear, the application of that rule is dependent upon the facts in each specific case. In addition to the facts relating to the suitability of a parcel of land for any of the uses permitted by Ordinance 135 evidence of valuation of the land for general tax purposes and special assessments as well as other evidence may be appropriate for consideration. 1The cautionary advice of the court seems to suggest the possibility that a court could award damages to a landowner who makes the required showing. This does not appear to be the thoughtful, reasoned attitude of the court as indicated in Holaway v. City of Pipestone, 269 N.W.2d 28 (1978), and McShane v. City of Faribault, 292 N.W.2d 253 (1980) , in both of which cases the landowners sought inverse condemnation because of the imposition of zoning ordinances against their properties. In Holaway, the court rejected inverse condemnation as an appropriate • remedy, holding instead that if the ordinance is improper, it should be declared invalid and its enforcement enjoined. Despite the League of Minnesota Cities position that no right of inverse a; condemnation exists where injunction is available, the court refused to so hold, stating that a zoning ordinance can so inter- • fere with an owner's use of his land as to constitute a taking where inverse condemnation would lie. In McShane, the court again concluded that inverse condemnation was not the appropriate remedy, but that an injunction would provide such a remedy. The court stated that only where the taking or damage is irreversible would an injunction against enforcement not provide an adequate remedy. lXlO • • M.S. Section 462.357 (6) and Ordinance 135, Subd. 17.2, as amended, by authorizing and establishing a Board of Appeals and Adjustments, provide a forum and procedure for determining the facts and applying them to the rule in each case. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments is empowered "to hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration . ." According to a landowner the opportunity to demonstrate to the Board of Appeals and Adjust- ments the deprivation of all reasonable uses of his land, will provide a forum for him to exhaust his local remedies prior to judicial intervention as required by the court in County of Pine v. State Department of Natural Resources, 280 N.W.24•1 625 (1979).2 This procedure is much preferable to (i) granting permits in all cases, some of which may be patently contrary to Ordinance 135 interpreted in the light of constitutional restraints, or • (ii) casting the judgmental responsibility upon the staff member • charged with issuing building permits. CONCLUSION L.; 1. An owner of a parcel of land consisting of less than 5 acres presently and at the time of adoption of Ordinance 135, situated in the Rural District is not entitled as a matter ( of right to a permit to build a single family dwelling on the parcel. • 2. The owner is entitled to a permit if adoption of the ordinance has deprived him of all reasonable use of his land. 3. The burden of proof that he has been so deprived is upon the owner. 4. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments is the appropriate forum for determination of the facts in each case and their application to the rules. • • tin County of Pine, the court refused to address the property owners' claims that the Kettle River ordinance is unconstitutional as applied to their property because they failed to exhaust their remedies by applying for a variance. MEMORANDUM TO: • • Mayor and City Council • THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services DATE: August 13, 1981 SUBJECT: Request from Hockey Association of Eden Prairie Attached to this memo is a letter from Larry Anderson of the Hockey • Association of Eden Prairie requesting the City of Eden Prairie to construct a warming house at the Middle School hockey rink for exclusive use by the Hockey Association of Eden Prairie, and for the City of Eden Prairie to maintain the hockey rink at the Middle School for the Hockey Association use. The Hockey Association identified this rink as one that will have little or no use with a relatively small investment compared to the construction of a new rink and warming house. The City could maintain this rink for .:their use thereby opening up many of the neigborhood hockey rinks for more use by neighborhood kids. The City would not provide a warming house attendant at this rink but would have to commit to paying for electricity and maintenance costs of this rink. Also, attached to this memo is the July 28 letter from Don Opheim suggesting that the City move the present warming house from the skating rink at Forest Hills School/Park to the skating rink at the Middle School and construct a new and larger warming house at the Forest Hills site. City staff feels that if this rink were used it would probably open up the existing neighborhood rinks for more "open use". The estimated cost for moving the warming house at Forest Hills to the Middle School site and making all necessary electrical connections, etc. would be approximately $1,500. Cost for a larger warming house build on the scale of the one at Edenvale would be approximately $5,500-$6,000. Recognizing the fact that hockey rinks are presently constructed in neighborhood parks mainly for the use of the Hockey Association, this request presents a reasonable alternative and if this is approved staff would recommend that the City designate one day on each of the other rinks when the rinks would not be scheduled for any use by the Hockey Association • or organized teams. It should be noted that an additional hockey rink is going to be constructed at Round Lake Park this fall and another hockey rink is scheduled to be constructed at Red Rock Park in 1982. (Staff would also like to point out tha Bob Lambert does recognize the proper procedure for these requests and has not "agreed to construct a warming house and maintain the facility, etc".) 17 I9- HOCKEY ASSOCIATION OF EDEN PRAIRIE Larry C. Anderson 13995 Holly Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 July 9, 1981 Mr. Robert Lambert Director of Community Services 8950 Eden Prairie Road . Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Dear Bob: A few weeks ago when we spoke about the possibility of utilizing the outdoor rink at Central Middle School, you advised me that you would pursue having a warming house constructed there if the appropriate arrangements could be made with the school district. The enclosed letter from Merle Gamm indicates the School Board's willingness to work with us and lays out the conditions under _ which they would allow this to take place. As I mentioned to you previously, it would be the intention of the Hockey Association to utilize this rink primarily for the traveling. hockey teams of Eden Prairie. Utilizing it in such a manner would eliminate the necessity of having to staff the warming house with paid attendants. The traveling teams would have keys to the warming house and it would be only those teams that would be using the facilities. This method of utilization would not_ only provide for very inexpensive facilities, but would also contribute substantially to our effort to leave the neighborhood rinks throughout Eden Prairie more available for free skating. Should you require any additional information in the pursuit of this _ matter, please feel free to contact me. My work number is 835-1874. Sincerely yours, 147--‘1444",r------ . Larry;Anderson Hockey Association of Eden Prairie LCA:cb enclosure 1813 • .1 I. to j ''r << ::f;",a•(n Ac:J� oSiON3 KI.AI.T0ItS Apo.vNNvol6..: • July 28, 1981 ISDN App'.lour.,A.. Apple Vent,MN 55121 (6121132.2533 9Io.14M91.n OM.: . 1900 Penn Ave So Blo.mm0lnn.MN 55431 16121654- 1 Mr. Bob Lambert Bbanbgbn 6..111 O16a: WM'NMI sr.Slree. Director of Community Services Bloomrn0l.n.MN 55420 (WNW-MD City of Eden Prairie ' Brooklyn Conte.OM.6500 Brook',ONO 8950 Eden Prairie Road Mmrleapol...MN 95429 16121 561/600 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Bern..Me OM.: 201 w.DurnMxle Parkway Dear Bob: Ikon/vino MN 55337 (MN 6906110 {!{ Coen Bpld.O16e. 2003 NOnn6Me BN0 As a result of our discussion on Tuesday morning Cron Rapids.5.790 MN SSa73 re12n5619oo I would like to recommend to the City of Eden Downtown ONlee: 2205.ywa Prairie that they move the present warming room M25Mu9gNIe nee MinneaN5 from the skating rink site at Forest Hill School 625 Wi a MN55102 j612)338fi46 Park to the skating rink site at the Middle School.1480 1.9enankee: Cagan Yankee F6. I believe that the School Board and school 1612)4 2.5l11, (6121157�3100 administration would go along with this move, 6 •.h Ba: Bt .nN..6IOI • enabling both the school system and the City to ). UN..e,aioe,MN 55316 (6,2j,,,.,2,0 share the use of this skating facility at the g. Bwne0111.: Middle School. This is a well-maintained facility 16,21 w».sons.. Imna.MN55126 7043 that is largely unused in the evenings and weekends Ce10 Veil. ewe.nvwe,olxa: end I believe that for a small expenditure the • ow nyyhuN55422 . youth of Eden Prairie could greatly benefit from . (612ji9'01 this opportunity. I would then recommend that the M.9M..6 0..,..: 3035wrrne 55109 floAr St V.W.MN 55 Are Cityconstruct a new warming room and equipment 16121210,900 Mv,m.pala storage facility at Forest Hill School Park much ..e: 5309Eynun.A A..so like the one at Eden Vale skating rink. The benefits M.nno.7.5321 5N,9 from this move would be increased availability of 6NEM"nneon.B„0 ice skating time and additional equipment storage D»pnnen,MN55391 for the Eden Prairie Park and Recreation Department. OM a132555 New Brighten O.no 21I Sayer Leke Boa0 N.Bn0nlon MN 55112 My primary reasons for making this recommendation 16121 136 16 70 Nor ke.,BBke: are twofold: 1) We have sensed a great deal of ,6,92 Ma.n A..SE pressure on our skating rinks over the past several Pr run lake MN 55372 MIN 411.6050 years due to the large number of participants in Dineen.01+10. the Hockey Association of Eden Prairie skating )9101N 5an51 Ed no MN 5N24 programs. While it is a nice problem to have, having 16121 921 1DI3 Betea Olen SeNN»OM: over 400 participants, it also makes it very ?NI SW., difficult for children and their parents to find 6••5 Mar quell.Ave 16,21379.17MN 55102 time to skate on the Eden Prairie rinks when they Contract..act..0 C.nn»,.e.o».t».9,.: are not scheduled for use by various organized 2210wealSansl 1. .MN•55e24 c1 7043 ,. ..NI S.NN»B„NMn: 5.1091,nmle A..So 61rn»epol,l MN.55410 MIN A.•1 5321 C.mma,Mk.Meeaklel 0,414144. [E.„ ' 210we,15an nl .. lane S.N 55124 16.219:]•7043 6..No ma I,lin1: I I)/ :I Minn lorr+Ian .n (_,// MIN 561.4 MN 55a29 I7I 4I I' 161fi 5AI4A .. . July 20, 1981 . Mr. Bob Lambert Page 2 • groups. 2) In the spirit of the Bond Issue which was passed two years ago, the addition of a ' warming house at the Middle School would help us to expand our skating facilities while not causing the City to spend a great deal of additional money. The addition of a warming house at the Eden Prairie Middle School would allow the Hockey Association of Eden Prairie to use that rink extensively fo.r practice by the PeeWee ar.d Bantam Traveling Teams. The added benefit here is that this would free up more of the neighborhood rinks in closer proximity to areas where many of the people live and allow the younger children to walk • to the rink for free skating both on the hockey rink and open skating rinks. I hope you and the Council will give_ due consideration to this request and that of the Hockey Association of Eden Prairie Board of Directors. Thank you very - much for taking the time to consider this. (Sincerely, Donald Opheim ' 13950 Forest Hill Road Eden Prairie, MN DWO:jc JJ 4 1 • district 272 { • business services • re Fs July 3, 1981 ZO • tD C 0 . . t d . Mr. Larry Anderson Hockey Association of Eden Prairie 13995 Holly Road M Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 • N • � REFERENCE: OUTDOOR ICE RIhIK AT CENTRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL :_ c E Dear Larry: m 'ro You have inquired about the possibility of having the Hockey Association of a Eden Prairie to be allowed to have a warming house cohstructed at the Central d Middle School site to permit additional ice facilities within the City of d Eden Prairie. You stated that Bob Lambert, City of Eden Prairie, has agreed . to construct the warming house and maintain the facility at no cost to the v school district. . ro O .> The School Board has reviewed your request and has agreed with the following O three conditions: N1. The construction of the warming house building should be of asthetically o appropriate quality and the plans for its construction should be approved by the school district in advance of construction. 2. The utilities and maintenance of the rink should not be the responsibility of the school district. 3. The school district should have the opportunity to use the rink on a first priority basis, however, the City of Eden Prairie should be responsible for scheduling its use. Sincerely yours, EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOLS ��.� ,.,+ Merle Gamm Director of Business Services MG:do Official Minutes of the July 2, 1981, School Board Meeting -13- • E. High School Change Orders A MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. LOBBEN AND SECONDED BY MR. FRIEDERICHS TO ACCEPT THE CHANGE ORDERS FOR HIGH SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION AS LISTED BELOW; Contractor Reason Amount Hoffman Electric Provide additional receptacle, additional labor for hanging light fixtures, and connecting wide belt sander in wood shop. $ 666.54 Midwest Mechanical Additional drafting time and providing 8 grilles in transfer duct in gym. 852.00 Valley School Additions and deletions for component 33.86 • Suppliers part changes for the checkout desks in the audio visual office and periodical library. • MOTION PASSED. • F. Central Middle School Hockey Rink A MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. FRIEDERICHS AND SECONDED BY MR. LOBBEN TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY OF [DEN PRAIRIE TO CONSTRUCT A WARMING HOUSE FACILITY ON THE CENTRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE HOCKEY RINK WITH THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS: k 1. That the warming house facility be asthetically acceptable to the • school district and that the construction plans be approved by the school district in advance of construction, and • 2. That the utilities and maintenance of said rink be the responsibility of the City of Eden Prairie, and 3. That the scheduling of the rinks' use be handled by the City of Eden Prairie, and' 4. That the school district has the opportunity to use the rink on a first priority basis. • MOTION PASSED. G. Adoption of Discretionary Levy A MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. LOBBEN AND SECONDED BY MRS. WIGEN TO AUTHORIZE THE DISCRETIONARY LEVY IN All AMOUNT EQUAL TO 2.25 EARC MILLS WITH THE LEVY TO BE INITIATED ON THE OCTOBER, 1981 LEVY CERTIFICATION WITH ASSOCIATED REVENUES BEING INITIALLY RECEIVED FOR THE 1982-83 SCHOOL YEAR. MOTION PASSED. • H. Other Business 1. high School Athletic Field Change Order A MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY MR. FRIEDERICHS TO ACCEPT THE CHANGE ORDER FOR THE HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC FIELD FROM GOMBOLD ELECTRIC, INC. FOR AN ADDITIONAL $24B.64 FOR ADDITIONAL CHAIN LINK FENCING. MOTION PASSED. i i1 i • • • • IAEMORANDUM 'T0: • Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural' Resources Commission THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services . • DATE: August 6, 1981 SUBJECT: Community Center Budget and Capital Outlay Request Attached is a copy of the proposed 1982 budget for the Eden Prairie Community Center and the 1981 capital outlay request. • The budget is being provided for your information prior to the remainder of the City budget because of the amount of this completely new budget item. The request for the 1981 capital outlay for this facility will be on the August 18, 1981 agenda. Many of these items have 90 days delivery time and are crucial to the operation of this facility. The City Council may want to consider holding a special meeting to discuss the capital outlay items and the Community Center budget. However, the capital outlay budget should be approved as soon as possible. Any questions regarding either the budget or the capital outlay request should be directed to Chuck Pappas, Community Center Manager. BL:md • • /8/ EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER i 1982 BUDGET Salaries of Regular Employees (current 1981 salaries) Manager $25,750 Building Superintendent 19,000 Assistant Building Superintendent 17,500 Aquatics Supervisor 13,500 Secretary/Receptionist 10,000 total 85,750 Temporary, Seasonal & Part-time Personnel Control office, admissions, receptionists $10,010 Part-time Maintenance 13,104 Lifeguards 24,408 Instructors 17,940 Locker Room Attendants 15,205 Rink Monitors 9,000 Disc-jockey 4,000 Concessions 16,380 Fitness Center 3,640 Ice Skating Pro 7,500 Racquetball Pro 2,500 total $123,687 i Supplies Office $500 Motor Fuels - Gasoline & Propane 1,300 300 Lubricants & Additives 125 Equipment, Parts & Supplies Pool Chemicals 3,000 Water Treatment Chemicals 3,000 Concession Supplies 10,000 General Supplies 12,000 total $3D,575 Other Services and Charges Postage $1,100 Telephone 2,400 Mileage 1,200 Printing and Advertising 3,500 Utilities electric 60,000 gas 9,600 Building Repair and Maintenance 21,000 Equipment Repair and Maintenance 1,600 3. • Waste Disposal 400 Subscriptions and Memberships MRPA 50 MIAMA • 50 NRPA ' 100 ISIA 125 r/119 • Conferences and Schools • MRPA $150 MIAMA 150 Holmsten Ice Arena Service School 100 Swimming Pool Seminar 50 • total • $101,575 TOTAL BUDGET: $341,587 1982 ANTICIPATED INCOME:$277,850 • 1982 DEFICIT: $63,737 • • • • /7ao EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER CAPITAL OUTLAY 1981 CONCESSION STAND 1 refrigerator $1,100 1 hot dog machine 510 1 commercial radar range 1,000 1 12 oz. popcorn popper 885 I cotton candy machine w/pan .949 1 slush or soft serve machine 2,270 1 flaker ice machine 1,270 I whip drink machine 700 1 sno-cone dispenser w/rack 519 2 coffe machines 180 1 nacho warmer 139 1 serve-a-lot warmer 172.50 1 regulator valve 40 • I cash register 1,495 miscellaneous utensils 100 aisle stanchions 700 total $12,0229.50 • • • /Bai EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER CAPITAL OUTLAY 1981 TOOLS 4 portable, canister ash trays $140.00 1 work bench 149.88 1 tool set with chest 1,369.97 1 100' tape 16.99 1 25' tape 11.99 1 71" circular saw 179.99 2 claw hammers 27.98 2 pipe wrenches 30.00 1 vice 49.99 1 20' extension ladder 119.99 1 8' step ladder 79.99 i 2 100' extension cords 110.00 2 50' extension cords 60.00 1 3/8" drill & set of 3/8" bits ' 274.98 1 commercial floor buffer 1,000.00 1 set 3/8" concrete bits 13.99 1 sabre saw 89.99 1 set sabre saw blades 21.99 1 hand saw 18.99 1 commercial vacuum 805.00 1 industrial scrubber 6,000.00 1 16" crescent wrench 24.99 1 1 12" crescent wrench 14.99 1 10".crescent wrench 9.99 2 2 in 1 hand trucks 154.34 1 hydraulic lift 3,000.00 miscellaneous cleaning equipment & trash 1,200.00 recepticles total $14,975.94 • 2,a EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER CAPITAL OUTLAY 1981 SWIMMING POOL 9 waveless lane dividers $2,466.00 1 lane storage reel 1,000.00 2 wall brushes with handles 70.00 1 leaf rake with handle 40.00 1 automatic chemical pool feeder .2,500.00 1 automatic chlorine change over valve 1;200.00 1 vacuum, portable 11 h.p. electric pump w/hoses 1,050.00 1 16 unit first aid kit 240.00 1 gas mask 270.00 3 shepperds hooks 79.50 2 4" polyline 90' long • 30.00 1 life line w/10 floats 100.00 3 60' manila ropes 3/16" 35.00 3 15" diameter life rings 120.00 3 life ring holders 20.00 1 spine board w/straps 120.00 50 insturctional paddle boards 275.00 25 instructional floating dumbbells 250.00 1 official red cross diving block 250.0052.50 10 lounge chairs 2 picnic tables with unbrellas 940.00 2 8' stanchions for backstroke and finish line 250.00 2 4'6" stanchions for recall 200.00 1 set of backstroke flags 15.00 1 set of false start recall ropes 34.00 Total $11,707.00 EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER CAPITAL OUTLAY 1981 ( MEETING ROOMS 6 8' banquet tables $546.00 100 plastic stacking chairs 2,860.00 4 chair racks 264.00 3 50 cup perculators 240.00 3 serving tables 90.00 3 table stand podiums 1E0.00 1 portable movie screen 145.00 3 coat racks 960.00 total $5,255.00 EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER CAPI1AL OUTLAY 1981 . FITNESS CENTER 1 shoulder press $1,095.00 1 chest press 1,095.00 1 leg press 1,295.00 1 high pull 710.00 1 low pull 710.00 1 leg flexion/extension •785.00 1 dip stand w/verticle knee raise 295.00 1 wrist & forearm developer 325.00 1 abdominal board & ladder 309.00 1 quad kick machine 1,099.00 1 exercise mat 185.00 2 ballet barre - 8' adjustable 260.00 2 cardio cycles 500.00 mounted wall mirrors 2,200.00 • • 128 sq. yds. carpeting @ $12.00/yd. installed 1,536.00 Total $12,399.00 EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER CAPITAL OUTLAY 1981 ( • ICE ARENA • 2amboni $410.00 2 cutting knives82.60 2 impellers 42.20 2 ice cloths Goals • 695.00 1 pair Art Ross goals - game 265.209 125.00 1 pair Art Ross nets - game 1 pair Art Ross goals - practice 265.20 1 pair Art Ross nets - practice . Miscelleanous 1 Thompson ice edger and attachments 553.00 • 1 set extra edger blades 250.00 • 200' fire hose 18.00 1 spray nozzle 18.00 200' garden hose w/nozzle 725 2 ice chippers 43.007.00 2 scoop shovels 47.00 2 curved squeegees • 228.00 8 rolls white paper 215 sq. ft. rubber interlocking tile 1,100.00 t 1 gas mask 270.00 ..1 amp/volt meter 64.99 1 quality air check kit - Draeger 255.00 6 packets of testing tubes 132.00 1 skate sharpener 3,345.00 water treatment pumps and sensor 599.,99___ • 2 power amps • 1,790.00 �. 1 GLI Mixer 495.00 2 turntables 105.00 560.00 1 microphone a 1 graphic equalizer 349.00 8 4 light helicopters 2,160.00 2 36" mirro balls 1,150.00 2 rotators 96.00 • 8 pinspots 508.00 1 entertainment lighting system 1,500.00 $8,713.00 1 American Flag 600.00 1 Minnestoa Flag 500.00 6 jackets - personnel 200.00 1 board and glass polisher w/lambs wool pads 290.00 1 roll of !2"x36"x22' rubber matting 375.00 1 cassette player and recorder 175.00 35 pair of youth sized rental skates 00 365, . @ $39.00 each = 1,365.00 1 OSHA gas can 00 1 compressor alarm system 475.00190. 1 propane storage cage total $21,8O1.19 dace - EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER CAPITAL OUTLAY 1981 ( ADMINISTRATION 1 secretaries desk with extension $398.00 3 small executive desks 780.00 2 secretaries chairs 256.20 _ 2 executive chairs 500.40 1 credenza 312.00 5 side chairs 1,063.00 1 IBM Correcting Selectra II 1,000.00 2 adding machines with tape 160.00 1 pocket sized calculator 10.00 .... 4 4 drawer file cabinets 840.00 1 2 drawer file cabinet 157.30 4 floor pads 194.40 4 waste baskets 25.40 4 organizer and card files 169.80 8 paper trays 125.00 4 paper tray backets 12.50 3 3'x5' bulletin boards 145.50 3 staplers 54.00 2 pencil sharpeners 10.00 1 3 hole punch 8.95 1 desk drawer file box 30.25 2 directing boards 132.00 4 sets of letters 25.60 ( 1 electric time card recorder 245.00 45.00 1 time card rack 1 pack time cards (1,000) 20.00 1 multi-department cash register 1,495.00 4 video cameras 1,140.00 2 special feature lenses 190.00 1 monitor 185.00 uniforms - stenciled shirts 500.00 1 telephone system 6,800.00 total S17,022.25 ( EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER CAPITAL OUTLAY 1981 FIRST AID EQUIPMENT • • • • • • 1"c EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER CAPITAL OUTLAY 1981 SIGNS & RULES* 2 public skating rules 1 swimming rules 1 diving area rules 10 no smoking @ $12 each 120 2 locker room rules for swimming 4 locker room rules for hockey 1 exercise room rules *The total for signage will be submitted by staff at a later date. • j8a9_ • EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER 1980 INITIAL CAPITAL OUTLAY • TOTALS • Concession Stand $12,029.50 Tools 14,975.94 Swimming Pool 11,707.00 Meeting Rooms 5,255.00 Fitness Center 12,399.00 Ice Arena 21,801.19 Admni strati on 17,022.25 Signs *additional cost not tootaled 120.00 ttal $95,309.88* *This total does not reflect additional signage needed for the interior of the '. • building. • • • • • • 18O I 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. R81-166 RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR ( • STATE PROJECT 2785-190, 207 (494-393) FEDERAL PROJECT I-IG-F 494-4 (139) 234 1494 AT C.S.A.H. 18 WHEREAS the Commissioner of Transportation for the State of Minnesota has prepared: plans, special provisions, and specifications for the improvement of Trunk Highway No. 393, renumbered as Trunk Highway No. 494, within the corporate limits of the City of Eden Prairie, at C.S.A.H. 18; and seeks the approval thereof; and WHEREAS the said plans for the C.S.A.H. 18 - I494 interchange will only allow inbound traffic to the northwest quadrant of 1494 and C.S.A.H. 18, therefore, requiring all outbound movements to the north and east to be concentrated at the Valley View Road - C.S.A.H. 18 interchange; and WHEREAS capacity deficiencies are expected to occur in the future at the Valley View Road - C.S.A.H. 18 interchange even with currently proposed improvements at that location; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that said plans and special provisions for the improve- ment of said Trunk Highway within said corporate limits of the City, be and hereby are approved including the elevations and grades as shown and consent is hereby given to any and all changes in grade occasioned by said construction contingent upon assur- ances by the Minnesota Department of Transportation that they will assist the City of Eden Prairie in the design and funding of a grade separated crossing of I494 along the approximate alignment of Washington Avenue to replace access removed by the pro- posed one way frontage road, at such time as development and traffic demand warrants; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City does hereby agree to require the parking of all vehicles, if such parking is permitted within the corporate limits of said City, on said Trunk Highway, to be parallel with the curb adjacent to the highway, and at least 20 feet from any crosswalks on all public streets intersecting said trunk highway. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on day of , 1981. mayor Attest City Cleek STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ss. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE I do hereby certify that at said meeting (of which due and legal notice was given) of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, on the day of , 1981; at which a majority of the members of said Council were present, the foregoing Resolution was adopted. Given under my hand and seal this day of , 1981. City Clerk 031 • • • August 18, 1981 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. R81-167 RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION 352 AND APPROVING A PROPERTY DIVISION • FOR PLAT 56780, PARCEL 6300, SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 116, RANGE 22, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA • WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has approved the division of property in Section 20, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota on the 12th day of May, 1970, by Resolution 352; WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie placed restrictions preventing the development of three of the parcels as residential sites until such time as the property were to be served by public sewer systems and approved Village road; • WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has reviewed the merits of this restriction and finds it to be inconsistent with the development progress of adjacent properties on Valley Road, NOW, THEREFORE, BE iT RESOLVED that Resolution 352 be rescinded and that the aforementioned property as hereinbefore described be accepted and approved without the restriction requiring public sewer and improved streets; and BE iT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City does hereby agree to allow building permits to be ussued for all lots in the subdivision subject to current zoning and building code requirements. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 18th day of August, 1981. Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, City Clerk • 1�32 JUL 15 • 19'81 July 13, 1981 • • Eden Prairie City Council Mr. Carl Jullie, Mayor 8950 Eden Prairie Rd. Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 • • • t ; Gentlemen: I am enclosing a May, 1970 subdivision approval for your consideration. • At that time the Village Council put a restriction on the southerly lots facing Valley Road. In view of the fact that acre lots have now been sold and homes built on the adjoining property, the restrictions on mine would appear outdated. I am asking that these restrictions be lifted as I have a potential buyer for one of these lots. • Sincerely, Kathlyn Nicholson (Mrs. Merle Nicholson) 16201 Hilltop Rd. Eden Prairie, MN, 55344 ;33 CITY OFFICES/8950 EREN PRAIRIE ROAR/EOEN PRAIRIE.MINNESOTA 55344/TELEPIIONEl612i 937.2262 • • • August 13, 1981 • Valley Road Residents: Re: Lifting Building Ban on Lots 20, 21 & 22 Block 2, Eden Heights Addition (Lots fronting Valley Road owned by Nicholson) Notice is hereby given that the Eden Prairie City Council will consider at their meeting at 7:30 P.M., Tuesday, August 18, 19B1, rescinding Resolution 352. This resolution required that three lots fronting on Valley Road could not be issued building permits until public sewer, water and streets are installed. The owner, M.S. Nicholson, has requested that the resolution be reconsidered. This notice is given to provide you, as a neighboring property owner, the opportunity to comment on this question. You may do so by writing to my attention or appearing at the meeting to provide verbal comment.. Tha you, Eu ene A. Dietz, P.E. • Director of Public Works • EAD:sg cc: M.S. Nicholson r • • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN' ) ss. • VILLAGE OF EDEN PRAIRIE) • I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Clerk of the Village of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, D0 HEREBY CERTIFY 352 No. that I have carefully compared the attached ResolutionI .. , of a meeting of the Village Council of said Village held on the date therein indicated with the original minutes thereof on file in my office and that the same is a full, true and correct transcript at meeting o.f May 12, 1970 WITNESS my hand officially and the official seal of the Village this 18th day of January , 19Z• • (SEAL) Edna M. Hnlmgren, Clerk • i45 . • . . • • • •. 'VILLAGE OF EDEN PRAIRIE • HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA . • RESOLUTION NO. 352 • ' • • '• A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PROPERTY DIVISION FOR PLAT 56780 . t• PARCEL 6300, SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 116, RANGE 22, HENNEPIN . ; • COUNTY, MINNESOTA. ItiEREAS, Merle Nicholson has applied to the Village Council of the Village of Eden Prairie for approval of division of property in • I Section 20, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota. • • • 144EREAS, the Village Cctmcil of the Village of Eden Prairie • ••• finds that said division of the above parcel does not interfere with the • purpose and intent of the Ordinance of the Village of Eden Prairie, • • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Village Council of the • ' Village of Eden Prairie that a division of the aforementioned property as hereinbefore described be accepted and approved subject to there being placed on the southerly most parcels a restriction preventing their use as • residential sites until such time as the property were to be served by a public sewer system and approved Village road. ADOPTED by the Village Council of the Village of Eden Prairie at a regular meeting thereof held this 12th day of May, 1970. • 4 , e.f 0177-ti " 7 . , • • -• ,„ • • David W. Ostorholt, Mayor • •• • AVESTs • in,u )7"). h<x/4-7-701?ea Edna M. Hotm9ron, Clerk' • • • • ,• • • • 111 (0 • a � I 1 1 ._ U LLT.a.P•: : P. .!-- OA:u. :. .. 3ao4 C4R(bf( A ` . A ti‘ • td . • IA . • •. • , • . ,,A. �Q . • Y• . . , . • o t t% ,°N• J . S I. 1 • i • �e• • • • 1 •'N q.e ' : • .. .. f�rN /,/r I. �;,t'i/r .4do/ . :.OTC 3__,`BLOC K...::2_....r,t1'J • -.1 7 y a y¢ 4 yr a. •f\-k .......... t b W �•\A `: V? V S 1 3 o i yY T ' G — I; m ; .a.0 N .• -.-.. .. _ s. A PI .L -1 N V y • ' �� • a a, PI - 4. V p --I' /� .17 i P' Id( ns G Of J A N Y. 1 r:'`..\06.ID a; IIIJ, c� : Ca Q ,♦ 1, ‘,...-..1?..) 4:,**'-.(..•.,...N..... • �fH W.. y^ T { Q 24 • — v,,., — _ 111111 ..,r i L i ..'• .. ... :... \\::s\ 72 T .•. PRaiR1E ROAD 4 , , 111 34, r.1' 14 August 38, 1981 • TO: Mayor and City Council • FROM: Eugene A. Dietz Director of Public Works THROUGH: ' Carl J. Jullie City Manager RE: Sunnybrook Road Improvement I.C. 51-381 • Approximately one and a half hours before bids were due to be opened for the � ..~ Sunnybrook Road project, an error was found in the proposal which could have had a dramatic impact on the price of the project. In order to meet the scheduling commitments we made to the Preserve, we elected not to open bids at the time - scheduled (August 13, 1981). Instead, we have issued an addendum calling for bids to be opened on August 18, 1981 at 10:00 A.M. and have revised the proposal form to correct the errors as mentioned. We will open bids on the day of the regular scheduled Council meeting and tabulate the results prior to the meeting. A bid tabulation and recommendation will be provided at the Council meeting under the City's Engineer Agenda Items. ( EAD:sg • • • tv (I