HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 07/06/1982CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
TUESDAY, JULY 6, 1982
7:30 PM, CITY HALL
Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, George Bentley,
Dean Edstrom, Paul Redpath and George
Tangen
City Manager Carl J. Jullie; City Attorney
Roger Pauly; Finance Director John Franc;
Planning Director Chris Enger; Director
of Community Services Bob Lambert; Directo!
of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and
Recording Secretary Karen Michael
INVOCATION: Councilman George Bentley
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
I. PRESENTATION OF A CHECK IN THE AMOUNT OF S2,000.00 BY DON OPHEIM, PAST PRESIDENT
OF EDEN PRAIRIE ROTARY, AS FINAL PAYMENT FOR THE SENIOR CITIZEN VAN
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
III. MINUTES
A. Re_sular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, June 1, 1582
E. Rcsular City Couocil Meeting held Tuesday„ June 15, 1962
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
Page 1178
Page 1184
A. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 82-09, rezoning Lorence Addition from RuralPage 1197
to R1-13.5 and RN 6.5 for forty-seven (-47) single family and fifty-six
-(86), attached units and approval of developer's agreement Located NW of
Round Lake.
B. Final_plat approval for Deer Creek (Resolution No. 82-153) Page 1207
C. Final plat approval for Lorence 1st Addition (Resolution No. 82-154) Page 1210
G. Final plot approval for Lorence 2nd Addition (Resolution No. 82-155) Page 1213
E. Approve ...plans and specifications for drainage improvements in the Page 1216
vicinity of West 69th Street and Washington Avenue, and set bid opening
date for July 29, 1982 at 10:00 AM, I.C. 52-004 (Resolution No. 82-156)
F. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 82-13, amending Park Use Ordinance
regul ati rig vendors
G. Resolution No. 82-172, final approval for Municipal Industrial Deelopr ient
Bonds in the amount of 52,550,000.00 for Twin City Christian Homes Page 1217 _
H. Resolution No. 82-173, approving 1981 Overhead Transfers to the General Page 1218
Fund
COUNCIL M":MBERS:
' COUNCIL S1AEF:
Page 993
City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,Jyly 6, 1982
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. BAYpOINT_MANOR APARTMENTS (revised)_by G &_D Enterprises. Request to Page 1025
rezone 6.3 acres from Rural to RM 2.5 and prelindnary plat approval
to construct a 4-story building with 152 apartment units. The property
64 ,part of The Preserve PUD 70-04 and may include granting of variances.
Located south of Preserve Community Center Barn and North of Neill Lake
(Resolution No. 82-129 - PUO Dev.; Ordinance No. 82-14 - rezoning; and
Resolution No. 82-130 - prel. plat) Continued from 6/15/82
B. GUSTAFSON REZONING by Paul R. Gustafson. Request to rezone .385 acres Page 1220
from Rural to 0-13.5 for construction of one (1) single family home.
Located across from 9635 & 9629 Bennett Place (Ordinance No. 82-17)
C. EDENVALE 9TH ADDITION by Equitable Life Assurance Society. Request for Page 1225
Guide Plan Amendment to change approximately thirty-six (36) acres
from Regional - Commercial to industrial. Located north of TN 5 and
west of proposed Schooner Blvd. (Resolution No. 82-162)
B. RIDGEWOOD WEST TWO PUD & FIRST PHASE DEVELOPMENT by Centex Homes Page 1238
Midwest, Inc. Request for: Comprehensive Guidm Plan change from low density
to medium density residential for 63.5 acres, Planned Unit Development
Concept approval for 172 detached cluster single family and 160 condo-
minium units, first phase development of 17 acres for 57 single family
detached units, preliminary plat approval, and variances from the R1-13.5
District and approval of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Located
east of Mitchell Road and north of Research Road. (Resolution No. 82-168 -
Guide Plan Change; Resolution No. 82-165 - PUD; Resolution No. 82-166 -
prel. plat, and Resolution No. 82-167 - EAR)
E. Vacation of utility easements in the Bryant Lake Office Park and Page 1283
preliminary plat approval. Vicinity of Market Place Drive and Valley
View Road (Resolution No. 82-157 - vacating easements, and Resolution No.
82-164 - prel. plat)
F. Vacation of right-of-way _easement adjacent to Anderson Lakes Parkway Page 1297
(Resolution No. 82-158)
G. Vacation of Media Lane and utility easements (Resolution No. 82-169) Page 1299
H. Tax Increment Financing District or Eenvale Apartments (Resolution No.Page 1300
. 82-17.4) , (4,„ ,/ /c
I. Request for Municjpal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of Page 1301
S9,110,000.00 for P & L Investment Company (Sheraton Inn) Resolution
No. 82-171
J. CHAPTER 11 (ZONING) OF CODIFICATION (Ordinance No. 82-18 )
VI. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 2430 - 2714
VII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
A. Historical & Cultural Commission
1. Discussion on Indian Mounds (Mona Finholt)
2. Request for expenditure of funds for the Restoration Committee
Page 1310
Page 1311
Page 1317
City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,July 6, 1982
VIII. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
A. ;Preliminary_ approval for Housing Revenue Bonds in the amount of
yit i7,000,000.00 for G & D EnterpriseS---(Baypoint Manor Apartments) and
authorizing _a Public Hearing_on a Housing Program for the City of
Eden Prairie (Resolution No. 82-170)
Page 1319
IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
1. Appointment of 1 Representative to the Development Comnission
to fill an unexpired term to 2/28/83
B. Report of City Manager
C., m Report of Director of Community Services
'Request from residents in Hidden Ponds regardia chemically
treating pond
2. Dedication Plaque for Eden Prairie Community Center
1. Fairview Southdale Hospital Proposed Donation Page 1338
D. Report of Director of Public Works
1. Award contract for Mitchell Lakes Estates 2nd Addition Improve- Page 1340
cents, I.C. 52-030 (Resolution No. 82-140)
E. Report of Finance Director
1. Clerk's License List (including Emswiler request for kennel license
continued from 6/15/82) Page 1344
X. NEW BUSINESS
XI. ADJOURNMENT.
BOARD OF REVIEW
TUESDAY, JULY 6, 1982
BOARD OF REVIEW MEMBERS:
BOARD OF REVIEW STAFF:
Immediately following Council Mtg.
President of the Board Wolfgang Penzel,
George Bentley, Dean Edstrom, Paul
Redpath and George Tangen
City Manager Carl J. Jullie and Recording
Secretary Karen Michael
I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING HELD TUESDAY JUNE 15, 1982 Pg. 1345
CLOSE MEETING.
Page 1335
Page 1336
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, JUNE 1, 1982
COUNCIL MEMBERS:.
COUNCIL STAFF:
7:30 PM, CITY HALL
Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel, George Bentley, Dean
Edstrom, Paul Redpath and George Tangen
City Manager Carl J. Jullie, City Attorney Roger
Pauly, Planning Director Chris Enger, Director
of Community Services Bob Lambert, Director of
Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Sec-
retary Karen Michael
INVOCATION: Councilman George Bentley
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Councilman Dean Edstrom was absent.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
MOTION: Redpath moved seconded by Bentley, to approve the Agenda as published.
Motion carried unanimously.
II. MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, MAY 4, 1982
Page 8, para. 1, last line: change "built" to "designed".
Page 8, para. 9, line one: change "little" to "moderately"; line 4, change "little"
to "moderately".
Page 14, last line: change "He" to "Bearman".
Page 15, second line of "Motion" under item C.: change "site" to "cite".
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve the Minutes of the City
Council meeting held Tuesday, May 4, 1982, as amended and published. Motion carried
unanimously.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Set Public Hearing for Easement Vacations in Bryant Lake Office Park for 7:30
ET. on July 6, 1982
B. Set Public Hearinifor excess Easements to be vacated adjacent to Anderson
Lakes Parkway for 7:30 p.m. on July 6, 1982
C. Request to set Public Hearing for Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in
the amount of S-9,170,000.00 for P & L Investment Co. (Sheraton Inn) for July
6,1982 (-Resolution No. 82-119)
/0?
City Council Minutes -2- June 1, 1982
D. Final Plat approval for Cooperative Power Association (Resolution No. 82-120)
E. Clerk's License List
F. 2nd Reading to Ordinance No. 82-12, amending Ordinance No. 78-36, ordinance
establishing the flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission of Eden Prairie
G. Northern States Power Relocation Agreement (Resolution No. 82-125)
H. Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Permit Application - Westwood Industrial
Park, I.C. 52-015 (Resolution No. 82-128)
I. Resolution No. 82-118, authorizing the submission of Community Development
Block Grant Activities to HLnnepin County as part of Year VIII
J. Tax Forfeited Lands (Resolution No. 82-127)
K. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 82-08 and approval of Deer Creek First Phase
DeveloP&77;--7greement for rezoning 26 acres from Rural to R1-13.5 for 64
homes. Located east of Mitchell Road and south of Morgan Lane.
L. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 82-13, amending Park Use Ordinance
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve items A - L on the Consent
Calendar subject to the revision of the indemnification portion suggested by City
Attorney Pauly on item "G". Motion carried with Bentley voting no on item F.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Hold Public Hearing for vacation of easements in Cardinal Creek 2nd Addition
CResolution No. 82-113) - continued from May 18, 1982
1. CARDINAL CREEK 5th ADDITION by Gregory D. Gustafson & Associates. Request
to replat Lots 10 and 11, Block 2, Cardinal Creek 2nd Addition and vacate
utility and drainage easements (Resolution No. 82-102 - plat) - continued
from May 18, 1982
City Manager Jullie stated there were three issues to be resolved after
the May 18th meeting. These were: 1) adequate water to serve the area,
2) looping of water mains, and 3) walkway. He went on to indicate the
water pressure problem had been resolved -- a smaller nozzle than should
have been used was used to test the pressure originally. Soil conditions
are such (very poor) that it is suggested looping be deleted at least for
any time in the near future. Greg Gustafson has agreed to provide the
easterly 10 of Lot 11 for a walkway/trail connection. He would like it
understood that this would be a connection and there would not be trails
on two sides of the property.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to close the Public Hearing
and to adopt Resolution No. 82-113, vacation of drainage and utility ease-
ments. Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes
-3- June 1, 1982
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to a
d
o
p
t
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
N
o
.
82-102, approving the preliminary plat of Cardina
l
C
r
e
e
k
5
t
h
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
.
Motion carried unanimously.
B. CARDINAL CREEK 3rd ADDITION by Gustafson & Ass
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
.
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
of a preliminary plat and rezoning from Rural to
R
N
6
.
5
f
o
r
1
6
a
c
r
e
s
f
o
r
c
o
n
-
struction of 1 tri-plex and 17 duplex buildings
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
w
h
i
c
h
i
s
p
a
r
t
of Cardinal Creek PUD 72-01. Included in the Pu
b
l
i
c
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
o
n
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
rezoning will be the consideration of granting o
f
v
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
s
p
u
r
s
u
a
n
t
t
o
S
e
c
.
11, Ord. 135 from the provision of said Ordinanc
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
t
o
t
h
e
R
M
6
.
5
District. 16 acres located east of Cardinal Creek
2
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
N
i
n
e
M
i
l
e
Creek and west of 1-494 (Ordinance No. 82-11 - r
e
z
o
n
i
n
g
;
a
n
d
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
N
o
.
82-100 - preliminary plat) - continued from May 1
8
,
1
9
8
2
City Manager Jullie said the water pressure proble
m
h
a
d
b
e
e
n
r
e
s
o
l
v
e
d
a
s
n
o
t
e
d
in the previous action.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to c
l
o
s
e
t
h
e
P
u
b
l
i
c
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
to give 1st Reading to Ordinance 82-11, rezoning
f
r
o
m
R
u
r
a
l
t
o
R
M
6
.
5
.
M
o
t
i
o
n
carried unanimously.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to ad
o
p
t
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
N
o
.
8
2
-
1
0
0
,
approving the preliminary plat of Cardinal Creek
3
r
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
.
M
o
t
i
o
n
c
a
r
r
i
e
d
unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to d
i
r
e
c
t
S
t
a
f
f
t
o
d
r
a
f
t
t
h
e
Developer's Agreement including the recommendatio
n
s
i
n
t
h
e
S
t
a
f
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
a
n
d
those of the Planning and Parks, Recreation & Nat
u
r
a
l
R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
.
Motion carried unanimously.
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 1938 - 2152
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to a
p
p
r
o
v
e
P
a
y
m
e
n
t
o
f
C
l
a
i
m
s
N
o
s
.
1938 - 2152. Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath,
T
a
n
g
e
n
a
n
d
P
e
n
z
e
l
v
o
t
e
d
"
a
y
e
.
"
Motion carried unanimously.
VI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
There were none.
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Request forapproval of the First Amendment to Agreement No. 2291 covering
Hennepin County's lease of real property for library purposes
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to a
p
p
r
o
v
e
t
h
e
F
i
r
s
t
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
to Agreement No. 2291 covering Hennepin County's l
e
a
s
e
o
f
r
e
a
l
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
f
o
r
library purposes. Motion carried unanimously.
!eV()
City Council Minutes -4- June 1, 1982
VIII. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
A. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 81-31, rezoning from Rural to 1-5 8.3 acres for
construction of an office warehouse building by SGL, Inc., located south of
of Eaton CharLy.nn and north of Eden Prairie United Methodist Church and
Developer's Agreement
Don Goetzman, representing SGL, stated neither of the parties which had been
interested in the property has made a decision regarding the property. Goetz-
man asked that sewer and water be connected into the property regardless of
whether they get the zoning or not at this time.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to deny 2nd Reading of Ordinance
81-31, rezoning from Rural to 1-5, by SGL, Inc, Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to reconsider denial of the 2nd
Reading; to rescind the action of denial and to accept the proponent's move
to withdraw the request. Motion carried unanimously.
B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 80-31, rezoning approximately 40 acres from 6.5
to R1-13.5 for Edenqate single family Catco, Inc., and Developer's Agreement.
Located in the northwest corner of Duck Lake Trail and Dell Road.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to give 2nd Reading to Ordinance
No. 80-31, rezoning approximately 40 acres from 6.5 to R1-13.5 for Edenate.
Motion carried unanimously.
C. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 81-29, rezoning 1.2 acres from Planned Study to
Highway Commercial for Standard Oil Comany and Developer's Agreement. Located
in the northwest corner of Duck Lake Trail and Dell Road.
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Bentley, to deny 2nd Reading of Ordinance
No. 81-29, rezoning 1.2 acres from Planned Study to Highway Commercial for
Standard Oil Company. Motion carried unanimously.
IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Report of Council Members
1. Aopointment of I representative to the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources
Commission to fill an unexpired term to 2/28/85
The names of Bob Gartner, Gary Gonyea, Allen Upton, and Diane L. Gramling
were placed in nomination.
Upon tabulation of the ballots Gary Gonyea was elected to serve.
MOTION:. Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to cast a unanimous ballot
for the appointment of Gary Gonyea to serve as representative to the Parks,
Recreation & Natural Resources Commission to fill an unexpired term to
2-28-85. Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -5-
June 1, 1982
2. Appintment of 1 representative to the Human Rights & Services Commission
to fill an unexpired term to 2/28/83
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to continue action on appoint-
ment of 1 representative to the Humans Rights & Services Commission to
June 15, 1982. Motion carried unanimously.
B. Report •of City Manager
1. Approval of Joint Powers Agreement with Richfield for Radio Communications
City Manager Jullie spoke to his memorandum to the Council dated May 27,
1982, in which he recommended approval of the "Joint and Cooperative
Agreement for Public SaFety Radio Dispatching Service" with the City of
Richfield.
Bentley stated he would like to see a Council member on the Commission
since it is a policy making board. Penzel said the only question would
be whether or not a Council representative would attend the meetings.
City Attorney Pauly said the Agreement could have an addendum if the
Council wished which would be subject to approval by the Richfield Council.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to adopt the "Joint and Coop-
erative Agreement for Public Safety Radio Dispatching Service" with the
City of "ichfield with an addendum which would allow for a representative
of each of the City Councils. Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath, Tangen
and Penzel voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously.
2. Set Public Hearing for adoption of Chapter 11 (Zoning'
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Bentley, to set July 6, 1982, as the
date for a Public Hearing for the adoption of Chapter 11 (Zoning). Motion
carried unanimously.
3. Approval of Joint Cooperative Agreement for Southwest Suburban Cable
Commission—(Resolution No. 82-126)
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the "Joint
Cooperative Agreement for Southwest Suburban Cable Commission" with
the change as recommended by the City Attorney's Office. Motion carried
unanimously.
C. Report of Director of Community Services
1. Update 5-Year Capital Improvement Program for Community Services
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to receive and approve
the 5-Year Capital Improvement Program for Community Services.
Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -6- June 1, 1982
D. Report of Director of Public Works
1. Award Contract for Martin Drive Drainage Improvments, I.C. 52-007
(Resolution No. 82-121)
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No.
82-121, awarding contract for Martin Drive Drainage Improvements, I.C.
52-007. Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath, Tangen and Penzel voted
"aye." Motion carried unanimously.
2. Award Contract for Mariann Drive Utility Improvements, I.C. 52-017
17R-JOlution No.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No.
82-122, awarding contract for Mariann Drive Utility Improvements, I.C.
52-017. Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath, Tangen and Penzel voted
"aye." Motion carried unanimously.
3. Award Contract for Westwood Industrial Park Improvements, I.C. 52-015
(Resolution No. 82-12T)
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No.
82-123, awarding contract for Westwood Industrial Park Improvements,
I. C. 52-015. Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath, Tangen and Penzel
voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously.
4. Award Contract for City West Improvements, I.C. 52-025 (Resolution No. 82-124)
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No. 82-124,
awarding contract for City West Improvements, I.C. 52-025. Roll call vote:
Bentley, Redpath, Tangen and Penzel voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously.
5. Grading for Technology Drive
Director of Public Works Dietz spoke to the grading which is proposed on
Technology Drive west of West 78th Street. He noted there will be some
surcharging along with the work in the southwest quadrant. Dietz noted
he will appear at the Watershed District meeting on June 2, 1982.
X. NEW BUSINESS
There was none.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adjourn the meeting at 9:12 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 1982
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL STAFF:
7:30 PM, CITY HALL
Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel, George Bentley, Dean
Edstrom, Paul Redpath and George Tangen
City Manager Carl J. Jullie, City Attorney Roger
Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Planning
Director Chris Enger, Director of Community Service
Bob Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A.
Dietz, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael
INVOCATION: Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel
'PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Councilman Dean Edstrom was absent.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The following item was added to the Agenda: X. A. Consideration of Purchase
Agreement with The Preserve.
The following item was moved from VIII. A. to III. G. 2nd Reading of Ordinance
No. 82-11, rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5 for 16 acres for Cardinal Creek 3rd
Wition by Gustafson & Associates and Developer's Agreement.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Agenda as amended
and published. Motion carried unanimously.
II. MINUTES
A. Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, May 18, 1982
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve the Minutes of the
City Council Meeting held Tuesday, May 18, 1982, as published. Motion carried
unanimously.
B. Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, May 25, 1982
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Minutes of the
Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, May 25, 1982, as published.
Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -2- June 15, 1982
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Set Public Hearing for Vacation of Media Lane and Utility Easements in CNR
Golden Strip for 7:30 p.m. on July 6, 1982
B. Approve Metropolitan Waste Control Commissionapplication for Technology Drive
Sanitary Sewer System, I.C. 52-010 (Resolution No. 82-137)
C. Removal of Webster House in Staring Lake Park
D. Change bid date for City Services Project from June 15, 1982 to June 25, 1982,
at 2:00 p.m.
E. Request to approve advertisement for bids for County Road 1 Bike Trail -
Highway #169 to Homeward Hills Road
F. No Parkin gl restrictions on Mitchell Road from Scenic Heights Road to TH 5
TResolution No. 82-14J
G. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 82-11, rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5 for 16
acres for Cardinal Creek 3rd Addition by Gustafson & Associates and Developer's
Agreement - formerly VIII. A.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve items A - G on the Consent
Calendar. Motion carried unanimously.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Vacation of Easements on Lot 1, Block 2, Starring Lake First Addition
TResolution No. 82-144)
There were no comments from the public regarding this vacation of easements.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to close the Public Hearing and
to adopt Resolution No. 82-144, vacation of easements on Lot 1, Block 2,
. Starring Lake First Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
B. Public Hearing for Feasibility Report of Street Improvements for West 76th
Street-7-West of Washington Avenue), I.C. 52-031 (Resolution No. 82-138)
There were no comments from the public regarding this feasibility report.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and
to adopt Resolution No. 82-138, ordering preparation of plans and specifications
for street improvements for West 76th Street (west of Washington Avenue.)
Motion carried unanimously.
II r
City Council Minutes -3- June 15, 1982
C. BAYPOINT MANOR APARTMENTS (revised) by 8 & D Enterprises. Request to rezone
6.3 acres from Rural to RM 2.5 and preliminary plat approval to construct a
4-story building with 152 apartment units. The property is part of The Preserve
PUD 70-04 and may include granting of variances. Located south of Preserve
Community Center Barn and north of Neill Lake (Resolution No. 82-129 - PUD
Development; Ordinance No. 82-14 - rezoning; and Resolution No. 82-130 - pre-
liminary plat)
City Manager Jullie stated the official notice was mailed to 483 property
owners within the project vicinity. However, due to an error (either on the
part of the City or the Eden Prairie News), the notice was not published in
the newspaper. The City Attorney's Office has advised that the City can open
and conduct the Public Hearing as planned and give preliminary approval as
usual, if the Council desires. The Hearing should not be closed, but rather
continued to July 6, 1982, which will allow time to properly publish the
notice.
Richard M. Smith, Miller Construction, addressed the proposal.
Director of Planning Enger noted the Planning Commission had reviewed this
project on two occasions. On May 24, 1982, the Planning Commission recommended
approval of the proposal, subject to the recommendations included in the May
20, 1982, Staff Report.
Director of Community Services Lambert sai6 the Parks, Recreation & Natural Re-
sources Commission had reviewed this at its June 7, 1982, meeting at which time
it recommended approval subject to the recommendations contained in the May 20th
Staff Report.
Redpath asked what the use would be of the marina. Enger said it would be used
for sailboats, canoes, paddleboats, and the like. There would be no motors
allowed. Lambert said control of the marina would be under the direction of
The Preserve Homeowner's Association.
Penzel asked if financing had already been arranged. Smith said they were
about to finalize the financing.
Bentley asked if the developer forsees this complex being converted to condo-
miniums. Smith said the financing package which they are putting together
negates the conversion for seven years. He said these will be middle to luxury
apartments for at least seven years.
Bentley questioned Larry Peterson, representative from The Preserve, regarding
the "big building" concept. Peterson noted this area was not intended to be
single family and was shown on the original PUD for The Preserve as being high
density. Bentley said he did not think this use was in keeping with what had
been presented to homeowners -- not what had been presented to the City, but to
the homeowners. Peterson said development concept maps had been circulated at
one time which did show this as a recreational area. Since 1976 homeowners have
had to sign a purchase agreement rider which states the area south of The Preserve
Center is not under the control of the Homeowner's Association. Bentley said
he does not believe there has been any intentional deception on the part of The
Preserve.
/16
City Council Minutes -4- June 15, 1982
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to continue the Public Hearing
to July 6, 1982. Motion carried unanimously.
D. LEE DATA CENTER by Rauenhorst Corporation. Request for PUD Concept for indus-
trial and open space on 36 acres, rezoning of approximately 20 acres from RM
2.5 to 1-5, preliminary plat approval of 36 acres for 1 lot and 3 outlots for
the construction of a 200,000 square feet office/warehouse building, and possible
variances. Located south of Shady Oak Road, east of US 169/212, and north of
Nine Mile Creek. (Resolution No. 82-131 - PUD, Ordinance No. 82-15 - rezoning,
and Resolution No. 82-132, preliminary plat.)
Bob Worthington, Rauenhorst Corporation, spoke to the proposal. He introduced
Ralph Robinson and John McKenzie of Rauenhorst and Bob Bissenger and John Lee
of Lee Data. Lee noted his company is three years old, manufactures terminal
display units, presently is in Eden Prairie and has 350 employees. They have
outgrown their Present facilities -- are in three locations -- and wish to
build so they can move into the facility early in 1983.
Director of Planning Enger stated this matter had been considered by the Planning
Commission at its May 24. 1982. meeting at which time it recommended
approval subject to the recommendations contained in the May 19, 1982, Staff
Report (item #10 was deleted by the Planning Commission.)
Director of Community Services Lambert noted the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Commission will review the proposal at its June 21, 1982, meeting
because Bob Worthington was unable to attend the June 7, 1982, meeting.
Bentley asked why the driveway to Flying Cloud Drive is not shown on the plat.
Worthington said this will be reflected on subsequent maps showing the plat.
Penzel asked what the rationale was behind suggesting high density residential
in the southwestern portion of this parcel. Enger said high density residential
was an objective near places of employment.
Penzel asked what considerations had been given to financing of public improve-
ments. Worthington said the initial (first phase) costs to obtain access to the
site would be included as development costs; the cost of sewer, water, and street
improvements would be paid for through assessments. They do not intend to apply
for Industrial Revenue Bonds to finance the project.
Bentley asked if this project would require a Guide Plan amendment. Enger
said it would not because it falls in an "either/or" category and therefore
falls within the Guide Plan designation.
Tangen asked if any of the trees would be preserved. McKenzie, project manager,
said they will attempt to preserve as many trees as possible. Greg Demondeaux,
architect with Rembrandt, had pictures of the site which showed the treed area
to which Tangen referred.
City Council Minutes -5- June 15, 1982
Bentley asked if there would be one or two entrances into the parking lot.
Worthington said the major entrance into the lot would be off of Flying Cloud
Drive with a secondary access off of 70th Street which will be extended to the
driveway coming out of their loading dock. Bentley asked why this is not shown
as a driveway on the plat. Worthington said they would do so if this City desires.
They had intended this to be a private drive.
Tangen asked at what point in the proceedings should exterior lighting be
considered. He expressed concern about the effect of lighting on the residen-
tial area across TN 169. Enger said that should be discussed at this point
and will be reflected in the Developer's Agreement.
Peter Beck, attorney with the Larkin, Hoffman firm and representing Richard
Anderson of AD!, spoke to his letter of June 11, 1982 (attached to the
minutes). In this letter he addressed the berm which ADI was required to
build at the time Shady Oak Industrial Park Fifth Addition was developed.
This was done because the proposed site was then going to be developed for
residential use. Because of the change in use, ADI wished to have the cost
of removing the berm shared by the new developer.
Penzel asked if West 70th Street was going to be extended. Director of Public
Works Dietz said it would be a good idea to do so but because the use on the
Hanson Auto Parts site does not warrant the extension it is probably not feasi-
ble at this time.
Bentley asked if the berm on the ADI property would have been required if there
had been Lumpati ble uses on both properties at the time the berm was built.
Enger said probably not, at least not to the extent that it was built. Penzel
said ADI might proceed by asking to have their Developer's Agreement amended
in light of the change in use of the site under discussion. Tangen concurred
that ADI should go through the formal process if it wishes to have the berm
removed. Wayne Field, Rembrandt Enterprises,said there had been a distinct
advantage to building the berm because it used all the muck which would have
had to be hauled off the site. Beck said once the rezoning is approved the
problem is ADI's alone -- they will get no help in removing the berm from
Rauenhorst or Rembrandt.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and
to adopt Resolution No. 82-131, approving the Lee Data Center Planned Unit
Development and Amending the Guide Plan. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to give 1st Reading to Ordinance
No. 82-15, rezoning of approximately 20 acres from RM 2.5 to I-5. Motion
carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to direct Staff to draft the
Developer's Agreement subject to the conditions included in the Staff Report
and the recommendations of the Planning Commission and the Parks, Recreation
& Natural Resources Commission; conveyance of the right-of-way for West 70th
Street shall be included; lighting shall be addressed; and access to Flying
Cloud Drive shall be resolved regarding ownership. Motion carried unanimously.
0 71
City Council Minutes -6- June 15 1982
Penzel requested Enger to look into the question of berms.
Bentley asked Enger to put together an up-dated transportation plan for
the area.
Action on Resolution No. 82-132 was deferred to June 29, 1982.
E. BRYANT LAKE CONDOMINIUMS by Metram Properties Company .„ Request for Compre-
hensive Guide Plan change from low density residential to medium density resi-
dential and park/open space uses, PUD Concept for 22 acres of residential and
43 acres of park/open space/ROW, rezoning from Rural to R1-22 for 3 single
family and NM 2.5 for 218 condos, preliminary plat of the entire 65 acre site,
and approval of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Located north of Bryant
Lake, south of proposed Crosstown 62, and east of 1-494 (Resolution No. 82-133 -
PUD; Ordinance No. 82-16 - rezoning; Resolution No. 82-134 - preliminary plat;
and Resolution No. 82-135 - EAW)
John Uban of Howard Dahlgren & Associates and Ron Erickson of Korunsky Krank
Erickson Architects were present and made the presentation.
Director of Planning Enger stated this had first been brought to the Planning
Commission in July of 1981. On May 24, 1982, after much revision, the proposal
was again presented to the Planning Commission at which time it recommended
approval subject to the conditions included in the May 21, 1982, Staff Report.
Director of Community Services Lambert noted the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Commission had reviewed the proposal at its June 7, 1982, meeting
at which time it recommended approval subject to the recommendations included
in the May 21, 1982, Staff Report and the recommendations of the Planning
Commission.
Tangen asked about the location of the trail through the development. Uban
said the trail would serve residents of the condominiums as well as those
living west of 1-494. Enger said a trail is shown on the Eden Prairie Trails
Map which will serve those west of 1-494 and this is intended to connect with
that trail to allow access to the Bryant Lake Park via a trail.
Uban and Erickson said the use of the park south of the condominium site will
be passive rather than active.
Penzel asked if financing had been arranged. Vasco Bernardi, owner of the
property, said it was no problem.
Don Poupard, 6251 Beach Road, said he does not like the location or size of
the building which is within 100 of his property line. He felt the building
was too massive and he would like to have it moved south or eliminated. Uban
said Poupard will be able to see the building during the winter months -- the
building will be about 400 feet from Poupard's house. Various locations for
the buildings were discussed. Uban noted the building locations were selected
largely due to the topography of the site as well as vegetation on the site.
City Council Minutes -7- June 15, 1982
Tangen said he felt this had been before the Planning Commission since
last July and many alternatives had been examined. He noted that there
was no opposition voiced tonight other than from Mr. Poupard. While he
can sympathize with Poupard, he felt the proposal to be a good one and
thought any delay or change would have some impact or affect on someone
else.
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing.
Motion tarried unanimously.
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 82-133,
approving the Bryant Lake Condominiums Planned Unit Development and Amending
the Guide Plan. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to give 1st Reading to Ordinance
No. 82-16, rezoning from Rural to RI-22 for 3 single family and RM 2.5 for
218 condominiums. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 82-134,
approving the preliminary plat of Bryant Lake Condominiums. Motion carried
with Bentley voting "no."
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to direct Staff to draft the
Developer's Agreement subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report,
Planning Commission, and Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission,
Trail access with the appropriate easements should also be included.
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 2153 - 2429
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Payment of Claims
Nos. 2153 - 2429. Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath, Tangen, and Penzel voted
"aye." Motion carried unanimously.
VI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
There were none.
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. GOLDEN STRIP 2nd REPLAT by Condon/Naeoele Realty Company. Request to replat
the Golden Strip 2nd, consisting of approximately 48 acres located north of
Highway 494, south of Smetana Lake, and east of Highway 169 (Resolution No.
82-136 - preliminary plat)
Don Brauer was available to answer questions.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to adopt Resolution No. 82-136,
approving the preliminary plat of Golden Strip 2nd Replat Addition. Motion
carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -8-
June 15, 1982
B. Resolution No. 82-146, establishing Public Hearings for the implementation
of a Tax Increment Financing Plan for Edenvale Apartments
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No. 82-146,
establishing the date for certain public hearings with respect to a proposal
to undertake and finance a project under Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 462.411
et seq. and 273.71-78. Motion carried unanimously.
IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
Regpath - Said he had received a request from the American Legion asking
about a gambling-type license which is supposedly allowed under State Statute.
He said the Legion would like the City to look into licensing provisions under
this Statute because the Legion would like to have "pull-tabs" and bingo and
would donate part of the revenue to civic projects. Tangen said he would have
a problem with granting this type of a license. City Attorney Pauly said it
would require an ordinance. The City Attorney was instructed to check into
this.
1. Appointment of 1 Representative to the Human Rights & Services Commission
to fill an unexpired term to 2/28/83 (Continued from 6-1-81)
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to appoint Liz Kelly to
the Human Rights & Services Commission to fill an unexpired term to 2-28-83.
Motion carried unanimously.
2. Appointment of officials as designated in Resolution No. 82-126 as follows:
Council member/Director; Alternate Council member/Director; Administrative
Appointed Director; and Administrative Appointed Alternate Director to the
Joint Powers Commission Southwest Suburban Cable
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Bentley, to appoint Paul Redpath as
Council member/Director;-George Bentley as Alternate Council member/Director;
Carl J. Jullie as Administrative Appointed Director; and John D. Frane as
Administrative Appointed Alternate Director to the Joint Powers Commission
for Southwest Suburban Cable Television. Motion carried unanimously.
B. Report of City Manager
There was no report.
C. Report of City Attorney
There was no report.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to continue the meeting beyond the 11:30 p.m.
time limit. Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -9- June 15, 1982
D. Report of Director of Community Services
1. Bryant Lake Park Master Plan
Director of Community Services Lambert introduced Greg Mack, Manager of
the Bryant Lake Park, and Don King of the Hennepin County Park Reserve
District who presented the proposed Bryant Lake Park Master Plan for
review by the Council. Lambert noted the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Commission had recommended approval of the master plan with
the exception of the overnight camping. Mack introduced other members
of the Park District staff who were present.
Penzel asked about the 40 acres in the northern portion which had been
discussed earlier this evening -- the property which is now owned by
Metram. Mack said the County would purchase this property from the
City.
Penzel said he understood the overnight camping had not been too well
received by the neighboring residents. King said there is a high demand
for this type of facility, however this usage can be removed from the
Park. Tangen suggested if overnight camping is allowed it would be best
in the center of the Park.
Kent Molde, 7040 Willow Creek Road, expressed concern about overnight
parking. He said he agreed with the ccicerns expressed by the Council
in regard to camping.
Wally Cruz, 7040 Willow Creek Road, said he is not in favor of overnight
camping and he is not happy about the boating provisions in the Plan.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt the Master Plan
for Bryant Lake Park with the provision that there be no overnight camp-
ing. Motion carried unanimously.
E. Report of Director of Public Works
1. Award Contract for Kilmer Avenue and Atherton Way Utility Improvements,
I.C. 52-0117Resolution No. 82-139)
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No.
82-139, accepting bid for Kilmer Avenue and Atherton Way Utility Improve-
ments, I.C. 52-013. Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath, Tangen and Penzel
voted "aye."
2. Award Contract for Mitchell Lake Estates 2nd Addition Street Improvements,
I.C. 52-030 (Resolution No. 82-140)
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to hold the bids for Mitchell
Lake Estates 2nd Addition Street Improvements, I.C. 52-030, at the request
of the developer. Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -10- June 15, 1982
3. Award Contract for Mitchell/Technology Drive, I.C. 52-010 (Resolution
No. 82-141)
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No.
82-141, accepting the bid for Mitchell/Technology Drive, I.C. 52-010
with the bituminous alternate. Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath, Tangen
and Penzel voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously.
4. Pollution Control Agency Indirect Source Permit (Resolution No. 82-149)
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No.
82-149, assuring compliance with PCA Indirect Source Permit. Motion
carried unanimously.
5. Award Contract for N.W. Quadrant of Prairie Center Drive and Valley View
Road, I.C. 51-340A—TResolution No. 82-142)
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No.
82-142, accepting bid for N.W. Quadrant of Prairie Center Drive and
Valley View Road, I.C. 51-340A, subject to State-Aid plan approval.
Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath, Tangen, and Penzel voted "aye."
Motion carried unanimously.
6. Award Contract for S.W. Quadrant of Prairie Center Drive, I.C. 51-398
TResolution No. 82-147)
MOTION . RPdpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to adopt Resolution No.
82-147, accepting bid for S.W. Quadrant of Prairie Center Drive, I.C.
51-398. Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath, Tangen, and Penzel voted
"aye." Motion carried unanimously.
7. Award Contract for N.W. Quadrant of Prairie Center Drive and Valley View
Road, I.C. 51-308A (Resolution No. 82-143)
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No.
82-143, accepting bid for N. E. Quadrant of Prairie Center Drive and
Valley View Road, I.C. 51-308 A. Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath,
Tangen and Penzel voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -11- June 15, 1982
F. Report of Finance Director
1. Clerk's License List
Farmers.L.Market: Patricia Wilson, 8100 Tierney's Woods Road, Bloomington,
was present to review the details of this request. Wilson stated this
request is for a solicitor's license which would allow a Farmers Market
to be located in the southeast portion of Menards' parking lot. The market
will feature Minnesota-grown produce, largely growers from Hennepin and
Carver counties.
Redpath expressed concern that this might expand and become a flea market
type operation also. Wilson said they will only sell personally grown
produce or the produce grown by a friend or neighbor. Sellers will be
charged $1 -- Wilson only hopes to recoup the cost of postage; she has
no other financial interest.
The question of zoning was raised. Enger said this particular portion
of the Menard site is zoned Rural. Tangen noted the ultimate use on this
particular PUD is commercial. Redpath asked who is responsible for the
liability insurance. That question was not resolved.
Wilson indicated they would like to begin the market on July 10th. The
hours of operation would be from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. each Saturday.
Sidney Pauly, 17450 West 78th Street, presented petitions in support of
the Farmers' Market to the Council (see attached.)
Tangen felt the market would be of positive benefit to the citizens of
Eden Prairie. Penzel stated he would, if the Council approves it, keep
an eye on the operation to see that there is not a problem with either
traffic or maintenance. If problems do occur with either, he will see
that are brought to the attention of the Council.
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the application
for a solicitor's license for a Farmers' Market. Motion carried unanimously.
Emswiler Kennel License: City Attorney Pauly gave the criteria for a pri-
vate kennel license. He noted a kennel license is necessary whenever three
or more dogs are kept.
Penzel stated numerous complaints have been received by Public Safety
from residents of the Coach Light Manor neighborhood regarding the Emswiler
dogs. He noted more money has been spent on animal calls in this area than
in any area of the City.
Joan Emswiler, 6580 Undestad, felt she and her family have been harassed
because of the dogs. She said they have a fence for the dogs; the dogs
don't bark; and the dogs don't run lose.
City Council Minutes -12- June 15, 1982
Penzel noted the complaints have been consistent and have not been
from just one neighbor. Captain Keith Wall said City Attorney Pauly
has a list of the citations which have been issued. Pauly said there
have been 19 instances since 1975 and presently pending is a formal
complaint.
Emswiler's son said in the past year they have had a dog neutered, built
a dog kennel which leads directly from the house, the dogs are put in
at night, there is no barking, and a 30 chain has been put in the
front yard. He felt perhaps a neighbor's Irish Setter puppy is to
blame and others may have thought that is the Emswiler's dog.
Tangen asked if the Council might be getting in the middle of a neigh-
borhood feud. He suggested the Public Service Animal Control Officer
inspect the premises and report to the Council. Tangen would also like
to know the source of the complaints. He stated he has difficulty with
granting this license due to the lot size.
Redpath asked what the basis for a citation is. Captain Wall said the
circumstances must be witnessed by an officer and the animal must be off
the property of its owner.
Emswiler said she disagrees with the Eden Prairie Police.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Takgen, to continue action of this
item to the July 6, 1982, meeting; and to have Staff report on the in-
vestigation by the Animal Patrol Officer regarding the premises (kennel,
chains, etc.) and the number of complainants, Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Clerk's
License List except for the Private Kennel License which was continued
to the July 6, 1982, Council Meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
X. NEW BUSINESS
A, Consideration of Purchase Agreement with The Preserve
City Manager Jullie outlined the the purchase agreement with The Preserve
for land to be purchased for the construction of Prairie Center Drive in
the vicinity of 1-494.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Purchase Agreement
with The Preserve. Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath, Tangen and Penzel voted
"aye." Motion carried unanimously.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Redpath moved seconded by Tangen, to adjourn the meeting at 1:13 a.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
THE FOLLOWING ATTACHMENTS ARE ON FILE IN THE CITY CLERK'S
OFFICE WHICH WERE RECEIVED AT THE JUNE 15, 1982 CITY
COUNCIL MEETING:
Item IV. D. Letter of June 1, 1982 from Peter
Beck, Larkin, Hoffman, Daly &
Lindgren, Ltd. and attachments
thereto.
Item IX.F.1. Petitions pertaining to the
Farmers Market.
Lorence Addition
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 82-09
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:
(a) The property, as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto
and made a part hereof,
shall be and hereby is removed from the Rural District
and shall be included hereafter in the PM 6.5 District.
(b) The property, as set forth in Exhibit El attached hereto
and made a part hereof,
shall be and hereby is removed from the Rural District
and shall be included hereafter in the R1-13.5 District.
Section 2. The abovp described property shall be subject to the terms
and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of
1982 entered into between K.P. Properties, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and
the City of Eden Prairie, which Agreement is hereby made a part hereof and
shall further be subject to all ordinances, rules and regulations of the City
of Eden Prairie.
Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the 4 day of May, 1982 and finally read and adopted and ordered
published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the
day of , 1982.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Irene, City Clerk
PUBLISHED in the Tden Prairie News on the day of , 1982.
//9?
RM 6.5 ZONING MULTI FAMILY PHASE DESCRIP110N
That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8,
Township 116 North, Range 22 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, Hennepin
County, Minnesota; lying South of the present right-of-way of the Chicago,
Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad, described as follows: Commencing
at the southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter
of Section 8; thence on an assumed bearing of North 01 degree 09 minutes
08 seconds West along the west line of said Northwest Quarter of Section 8,
a distance of 171.02 feet to the present southerly right-of-way line of
said Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad; thence North 61
degrees 37 minutes 30 seconds Fast along said present southerly right-of-way
line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad, a distance of
317.03 feet to the point of beginning of the tract to be described; thence
South 29 degrees 21 minutes 44 seconds East, a distance of 256.34 feet;.
thence South 57 degrees 50 minutes 55 seconds East, a distance of 524.50
feet to the centerline of lames Way; thence northeasterly alorg said
centerline of Parses Way to the centerline of Valley View Road; thence
northwesterly along said centerline of Valley View Road to said present
southerly right-of-way line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific
Railroad; thence southwesterly along said present southerly right-of-way
line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad to the point
of beginning. This tract contains 8.2 acres of land, more or less, and
is subject to any and all easements of record.
EXHIBIT A
R1-13.5 ZONING _ SINGIE FAMILY PHASE DESCRIPTION
That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8,
Township 116 North, Range 22 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, lying South of the present right-of-way of the Chicago,
Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad, described as follows:
Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 8; thence on an assumed bearing of .
North 1 degree 09 minutes OS seconds West along the west line of
said Northwest Quarter of Section 8, a distance of 771.02 feet to
the present southerly right-of-way line of said Chicago, Milwaukee,
St. Paul & Pacific Railroad; thence North 61 'degrees 37 minutes 30
seconds Fast along said present southerly right-of-way line of the
Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad, a distance of
317.03 feet; thence South ?9 degrees 21 minutes 44 seconds East,
a distance of 256.34 feet; thence South 57 degrees 50 minutes 55
seconds Fast, a distance of 524.50 feet to the centerline of
Names Way; thence northeasterly along said centerline of Hanes Way
to the centerline of Valley View Road; thence southeasterly along
said centerline of Valley View Road to the east line of said
Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8; thence
South 0 degrees 49 minutes 04 seconds East along said east line
of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8,
a distance of 633.97 fort to the southeast cbrn'er of said Southwest
Quarter of Section 8; thence North 88 degrees 05 minutes 12 seconds
West along the south line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest
Quarter of Section 8, a distance of 1303.13 feet to the point of
beginning, LXCEPT: the South 430.00 feet of the East 340.00 feet
thereof. This tract contains 16.3 acres of land, more or less,
and is subject to any and all easements of record. ' •
EXHIBIT
Lorene Addition
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1982
by and between K.P. PROPERTIES,INC., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter
referred to as "Owner" and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal
cp-poration, hereinafter referred to as "City",
W1TNESSETH:
WHEREAS , Owner has applied to City to rezone lands as follows:
from Rural to R1-13.5 approximately 16 acres described as Parcel 1, Exhibit A,
attached hereto and made a part hereof, and approximately 9 acres from
Ru-al to RN 6.5 described as parcel 2, Exhibit A, attached hereto and
mal.e a part hereof and hereafter referred to as "the property", and
WHEREAS, Owner desires to develop the property for construction
of 47 single family residential units and 56 attached single family
urits for a n aggregate of 103 units.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance 82-09
ani Resolution No. 82-84, Owner covenants and agrees to construction upon,
dcielopment, and maintenance of said property as follows:
1. Owner shall plat and develop the property in conformance
with the material dated March, 1982 reviewed and approved
by the City Council on May 4, 1.982 and attached hereto as
Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as
provided herein. Owner shall not develop, construct upon
or maintain the property in any other respect or manner than
provided herein.
2. Owner covenants and agrees to the performance and observance
by Owner at such times and in such manner as provided therein
of all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions
set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
0010
Developer's Agreement-Lorence Addition •.page 2 .
3. Owner shall, at the time of installation of utilities,
construct a totlot which shall be located upon the
City Park southeast of the property as depicted on
Exhibit B. Said totlot shall be constructed according
to the specifications set forth in Exhibit 0, attached
hereto and made a part hereof. Such totlot construction
shall be bonded as set forth in item XI, Exhibit C.
4. Owner shall, concurrent with street and utility construction ,
construct the following:
a. A 4 foot wide 5 inch thick concrete sidewalk within the
right of way and north of the driving surface of Lorence
Way cminencing at Hdmes Way west to the property's western
boundary;. within the right of way and east and south of
the driving surface of Park Place commencing at Lorence
Way and terminating at Panics Way, all as depicted in
red on Exhibit B.
b. An 8 foot wide 4 inch thick deep strength asphalt pathway
between lot 3,blockl and lot 1,block2. Such pathway shall
commence at the driving surface of Hames Way and continue
southeasE to the City park asphalt trail as depicted in
black on Exhibit B.
5. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, Owner shall
submit to City a detailed landscaping plan and obtain City's
approval thereof. Such plan shall include but not be limited
to v'eening of the single family from the multiple and
screening of the multiple from public roads.
6. Owner shall not be entitled to nor apply for any building permit
for outlot B, Exhibit B, until City has reviewed and approved
a rezoning and site plan request for said Outlot B.
7. Owner shall post a sign at the west end of Lorence Way at the
property's western most point as depicted on Exhibit B, with
information as to the street's temporary dead-end status.
8. For the purpose of constructing mode/. cost housing, Owner shall
not , nor allow others, with the original building permits,to
construct units with more than 1,100 square feet of finished floor
space or that cover more than 15% of the lot area(excluding garage)
or that total more than a 75% gross floor area ratio(house to lot area
)
u
p
o
n
lots 4-14,block 3, and all of blocks 4 and 5.
9. In implementation of the PUP and as variances from certain provision
s
imposed by City Ordinance 135, as amended, City authorizes the
following for lots 1-8,block5;lots 1-9,block4; and lots 4-14,block 3
:
a. platting of lots of 9,000 square feet or larger for Parcel 1.
b. sideyard setbacks for the R1-13.5,Parcel 1, as follows:
5 foot setback from garage to side lot line
10 foot setback from any living space to side lot line
c. lot widths of 63 feet or larger for the RI-13.5 , Parcel 1.
d. use of wood as an exterior material for structures to be
located on Parcel 2.
e. 0 lot line setback between living units for Parcel 2.
Wu')
9(4,41, "T-114
N-ori„ar-y- Public ..
Lorence Agreement page 3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have
c
a
u
s
e
d
these presents to be executed as of the day and year a
f
o
r
e
s
a
i
d
.
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged befcre me thi
s
day of
1982 by Wolfgang H. Penzel, the Mayor and Carl J. Julli
e
,
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corp
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
b
e
h
a
l
f
of the corporation.
Notary Public
K.P. PROPERTIES , INC.
19-1/)'"*Ififr2"2 " ./71-44
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing insvninenipps acknowle ed before le this eineday of
1982 by 62441,a-A
of K.P. Properties, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, on beh
a
l
f
o
f
t
h
e
corporation.
/
0 I
PARCEL 1 :
R1-13.5 70NING
SINGLE FAMILY PHASE I DESCRIPTION
That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8,
Township 116 North, Range 22 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, lying South of the present right-of-way of the Chicago,
Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad, described as follows:
Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 8; thence on an assumed bearing of .
North 1 degree 09 minutes 08 seconds West along the west line of
said Northwest Quarter of Section 8, a distance of 771.02 feet to
the present southerly right-of-way line of said Chicago, Milwaukee,
St. Paul & Pacific Railroad; thence North 61 degrees 37 minutes 30
seconds Fast along said present southerly right-of-way line of the
Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad, a distance of
317.03 feet; thence South 29 degrees 21 minutes 44 seconds Fast,
a distance of 256.34 feet; thence South 57 degrees 50 minutes 55
seconds Fast, a.distance of 524.50 feet to the centerline of
. Names Way; thence northeasterly along said centerline of Hanes Way
to the centerline of Valley View Road; thence southeasterly along
said centerline of Valley View Road to the east line of said
Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8; thence
South 0 degrees 49 minutes 04 seconds Fast. along said east line
of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8,
a distance of 033.9/ feet to the southeast CornCr of said Southwest
Quarter of Section 8; thence North 88 degrees 05 minutes 12 seconds
West along the south line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest
Quarter of Section 8, a distance of 1303.13 feet to the point of
beginning, EXCEPT: the South 430.00 feet of the Fast 340.00 feet
thereof. This tract contains 16.3 acres of land, more or less,
and is subject to any and all easements of record. '
PARCEL 2 :
RN 6.5 ZONING MULTI FAMILY PHASE LOLSCRIPTION
That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8,
Township 116 North, Range 22 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, lying South of the present right-of-way of the Chicago,
Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad, described as follows: Commencing
at the southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter
of Section 8; thence on an assumed bearing of North 01 degree 09 minutes
08 seconds West along the west line of said .Northwest Quarter of Section 8,
a distance of /71.02 feet to the present southerly right-of-way line of
said Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad; thence North 61
degrees 37 minutes 30 seconds East along said present southerly right-of-way
line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad, a distance of
317.03 feet to the point of beginning of the tract to be described; thence
South 29 degrees 21 minutes 44 seconds East, a distance of 256.34 feet:.
thence South 57 degrees 50 minutes 55 seconds Fast, a distance of 524.50
feet to the centerline of Hames Way ;thence northeasterly along said
centerline of Hones Way to the centerline of Valley View Road; thence
northwesterly along said centerline of Valley View Road to said present
southerly right-of-way line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific
Railroad; thence southwesterly along said present southerly right-of-way
line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad to the point
of beginning. This tract contains 8.2 acres of land, more or less, and
. is subject to any and all easements of record.
EXHIBIT A 0,0
Exhibit
MARC IA 198a
OWNERS
SUPPLEMENT
TO
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
JAMES J. LORENCE
AND THE
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
THIS AGREEMENT, rode and entered into as of
Lorence Addition
Supplement
1982 by
and between Janes J. Lorence, a single person, hereinafter referred
to as "Owner" and the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal
corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City",
For and in consideration of, and to induce City to adopt Ordinance
82-09 and to change the zoning of property owned by Owners from Rural to
RI-13.58RM 6.5, described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part
hereof, hereinafter referred to as the property", as more fully described
in that certain Developer's Agreement entered into as of , 1982
by and between K.P. Properties, Inc., and City, Owners agree with the
City as follows:
I. If K.P. Properties, Inc., fails to proceed in accord-
ance with the Develpoer's agreement within 48 months
of the date thereof, Owners for themselves, successors,
heirs, and assigns will not oppose the rezoning of the
property to Rural.
2. Owner agrees that it will not develop the property in
a manner inconsistent with the terms of the above
described Developer's Agreement. In the event that
Owner transfers the property, James J. Lorence,
agrees to obtain an agreem2nt from the transferee stating
that the property shall not be developed in a manner
inconsistent with the above-described Developer's Agreement.
3. This Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable
against Owners, successors, heirs, and their assigns
of the property.
OWNER:
1 -Jdines J. once
t10
Supplement-Lorence Addition
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me •his ._ day
of 1/1w44 ,1982 by James J. Lorence,
page 2
KEITH E. SIMONS
NOTARY FURIC — MIPqMSOTA
1-1ENN(PIN COUNTY
tv.9 commission expires April 19, 1989
Notary Public
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
by Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
by Carl J. Jiifffe, City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
1982 by Wolfgang H. Penzel, the Mayor and Carl J. Jullie,
the City Managerof the City Of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation, on
behalf of the corporation.
Nortary Public
PARCI1 1 :
R1-13.5 /ONING 5190IE FAMILY PHASE 11 DESCRIPTION
•
That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8,
Township 116 North, Range 22 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, lying South of the present right-of-way of the Chicago,
Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad, described as follows:
Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 8; thence on an assumed bearing of
North 1 degree 09 minutes 08 seconds West along the west line of '
said Northwest Quarter of Section 8, a distance of 771.02 feet to
the present southerly right -of way line of said Chicago, Milwaukee,
St. Paul & Pacific Railroad; thence North 61 'degrees 37 minutes 30
seconds last along said present southerly right-of-way line of the
Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad, a distance of
317.03 feet; thence South 29 degrees 71 minutes 44 seconds East,
a distance of 256.31 .feet; thence South 57 degrees 50 minutes 55
seconds Fast, a distance of 524.50 feet to the centerline of
lames Way; thence northeasterly along said centerline of lames Way
to the centerline of Valley View Road; thence southeasterly along
said centerline of Valley View Road to the east line of said
Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8; thence
South 0 degrees 49 minutes 04 seconds East along said east line
of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8,
a distance of 633.97 feet to the southeast corn'er of said Southwest
Quarter of Section 8; thence North 88 degrees 05 minutes 12 seconds
West along the south line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest
Quarter of Section 8, a distance of 1303.13 feet to the point of
beginning, 1XCLPT: the South 430.00 feet of the East 340.00 feet
thereof. This tract contains 16.3 acres of land, more or less,
and is subject to any and all easements of record. '
PARCEL 2 :
RN 6.5 ZONING
MULTI FAMILY PHASE 'I DESCRIPTION
That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8,
Township 116 North, Range 72 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, lying South of the present right-of-way of the Chicago,
Milwaukee, St. Paul F, Pacific Railroad, described as follows: Commencing
at the southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter
of Section 8; thence on an assumed hearing of North 01 degree 09 minutes
08 seconds West along the west line of said Northwest Quarter of Section 8,
a distance of 77).02 feet to the present southerly right-of-way line of
said Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad; thence North 61
degrees 37 minutes 30 seconds Fast along said present southerly right-of-way
line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad, a distance of
317.03 feet to the point of beginning of the tract to be described; thence
South 29 degrees 21 minutes 44 seconds Fast, a distance of 256.34 feet;.
thence South 57 degrees 50 minutes 55 seconds East, a distance of 524.50
feet to the centerline of Harris Way; thence northeasterly along said
centerline of HamesWay to the centerline of Valley View Read; thence
northwesterly along said centerline of Valley View Road to said present
southerly right -of way 1ine of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific
Railroad; thence southwesterly along said present southerly right-of-way
line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad to the point
of beginning. This tract contains 8.2 acres of land, more or less, and
is subject to any and all easements of record.
EXHIBIT A
July 6, 1982
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. R82-153
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT
OF DEER CREEK
WHEREAS, the plat of Deer Creek has been sub-
mitted in the manner required for platting land wider the Eden Prairie Ordinance
Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been
duly had thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and
the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordin-
ances of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EDEN PRAIRIE:
A. Plat Approval Request for Deer Creek is approved
upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's
Report on this plat dated June 23, 1982.
B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of
this resolution in the office of the Register of Deed and/or Regis-
trar of Titles for their use as required by MSA 462.358, Subd. 3.
C. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy
of this Resolution to the owners and subdividers of the above named
plat.
0. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to Execute
. the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon com-
pliance with the foregoing provisions.
ADOPTED by the City Council on duly 6, 1982.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
0 0'1
July 6, 1982
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT
TO: Mayor Penzel and City Council Members
THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager
Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works
FROM: David Olson, Engineering Technician
DATE: June 23, 1982
SUBJECT: DEER CREEK
PROPOSAL:
The developer, Ruscon Homes, Inc. is requesting City Council
approval of the final plat of Deer Creek. This is a single
family (RI-13.5) division consisting of 67 lots located east
of Mitchell Road, south of Old Farm Addition and Burning Tree
Club ApartEents and north of Ridgewood West in the South 1/2 of
Section 15.
HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on May 4, 1982,
per Resolution R82-82.
Zoning to RI-13.5 was finally read and approved by the City Council
on May 24, 1932, through Ordinance 92-08.
The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed
on May 24, 1982.
VARIANCES:
Variances to be allowed are described in the Developer's Agreement.
All other variance requests must be processed through the Board of
Appeals.
UTILITIES & STREETS:
Municipal utilities, roadways, and walkways will be installed through-
out the development in conformance with City standards and the
requirements of the Developer's Agreement.
The street name Saratoga Lane will be changed to Shiloh Court, to
conform with the future development plans of Ridgewood West and its
existing street name, prior to release of the final plat.
PARK DEDICATION:
The requirements for park dedication are covered in the Developer's
Agreement.
Pg. 2 Final Plat Deer Creek
BONDING:
The requirements for bonding are covered in the Develo
p
e
r
'
s
Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval of the final plat of Deer Creek su
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
t
h
e
requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement
a
n
d
t
h
e
following:
I. Receipt of fee for City Engineering Services in t
h
e
a
m
o
u
n
t
of $1,500.00.
2. Receipt of cash deposit for street lighting in th
e
a
m
o
u
n
t
o
f
$4,375.80.
DLO:sg
Ur,01
July 6, 1982
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. R82-754
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT
OF LORENCE FIRST ADDITION .
WHEREAS, the plat of Lorence First Addition has been sub-
mitted in the manner required for platting land wider the Eden Prairie Ordinance
Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been
duly had thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and
the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesuta and ordin-
ances of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EDEN PRAIRIE:
A. Plat Approval Request for Lorence First Addition is approved
upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's
Report on this plat dated June 28, 1982.
B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of
this resolution in the office of the Register of Deed and/or Regis-
trar of Titles for their use as required by MsA 462.358, Subd. 3.
C. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy
of this Resolution to the owners and subdividers of the above named
plat.
D. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to Execute
. the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon com-
pliance with the foregoing provisions.
ADOPTED by the City Council on July 6, 1982.
ATTEST:
TOTgang H. Penzel, Mayor
SEAL
John D. Franc, Cir
010
July 6, 1982
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
' ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT
TO: Mayor Penzel and City Council Members
THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager
Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works
FROM: David Olson, Engineering Technician
0_,/c
DATE: June 28, 1982
SUBJECT: LORENCE FIRST ADDITION
PROPOSAL:
The developer, K.P. Properties, Inc. is requesting City Council
approval of the final plat of Lorence First Addition. The plat
consists of 8 lots, intended for the construction of 56 attached
units (RM6.5), 2 outlots and roadway dedication. Ownership of
Outlot A will be retained by the current owners and could be
replatted at a future date. Outlot 8 will be dedicated to the
City for roadway and drainage purposes. This plat is located
southwesterly of Valley View Road and northwesterly of Names Way
in the North of Section 8.
HISTORY:
The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on May 4,
1982, per Resolution R82-84.
Zoning to RM6.5 is scheduled for second reading by the City Council
on July 6, 1982.
The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report is scheduled
for execution on July 6, 1984.
VARIANCES:
Variances to be allowed are described in the Developer's Agreement.
All other variance requests must be processed through the Board
of Appeals.
UTILITIES AND STREETS:
The requirements for the installation of utilities and streets are
covered in the Developer's Agreement.
PARK DEDICATION:
The requirements for park dedication are covered in the Developer's
Agreement.
BONDING:
The requirements for bonding are covered in the Developer's Agreement.
la II
Pg. 2 Final Plat - Lorence First Addition
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval of the final plat of Lorence First Addition
subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's
Agreement, and the following:
1. Receipt of cash deposit for street lighting in the amount
of $1,591.20.
2. Receipt of fee for City Engineering in the amount of $1500.00.
3. Execution of the Developer's Agreement.
DLO:sg
lav).
July 6, 1982
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN 'COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. R82-155
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT
OF LORENCE SECOND ADDITION .
WHEREAS, the plat of Lorence Second Addition has been sub-
mitted in the manner required for platting land
.
i
n
d
e
r
t
h
e
E
d
e
n
P
r
a
i
r
i
e
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota St
a
t
u
t
e
s
a
n
d
a
l
l
p
r
o
c
e
e
d
i
n
g
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
duly had thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and
the regulations and requirements of the laws o
f
t
h
e
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
M
i
n
n
e
s
o
t
a
a
n
d
o
r
d
i
n
-
ances of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUN
C
I
L
O
F
T
H
E
C
I
T
Y
O
F
EDEN PRAIRIE:
A. Plat Approval Request for Lorence Second Addi
t
i
o
n
is approved
upon compliance with the reconvendation of the
C
i
t
y
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
'
s
Report on this plat dated June 28, 1982.
11. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to
f
i
l
e
a
c
e
r
t
i
f
i
e
d
c
o
p
y
o
f
this resolution in the office of the Register
o
f
D
e
e
d
a
n
d
/
o
r
R
e
g
i
s
-
trar of Titles for their use as required by MS
A
4
6
2
.
3
5
8
,
S
u
b
d
.
3
.
C. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supp
l
y
a
c
e
r
t
i
f
i
e
d
c
o
p
y
of this Resolution to the owners and subdivide
r
s
o
f
t
h
e
a
b
o
v
e
n
a
m
e
d
plat.
D. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby aut
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
t
o
E
x
e
c
u
t
e
. the certificate of approval on behalf of th
e
C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
u
p
o
n
c
o
m
-
pliance with the z'oregoing provisions.
ADOPTED by the City Council on July 6, 1982.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
SEAL
John D. Frane, CliFk
July 6, 1982
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT
TO: Mayor Penzel and City Council Members
THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager
Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works
FROM: David Olson, Engineering Technician '9,1d2
DATE: June 28, 1982
SUBJECT: LORENCE SECOND ADDITION
PROPOSAL:
The developer, K.P. Properties, Inc., is reque
s
t
i
n
g
C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
approval of the final plat of Lorence Second A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
.
T
h
i
s
i
s
a
single family residential plat (RI-13.5) consis
t
i
n
g
o
f
4
6
l
e
t
s
located north of Round Lake Estates 2nd Additi
o
n
i
n
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
of Section 8.
HISTORY:
The preliminary plat was approved by the City C
o
u
n
c
i
l
o
n
M
a
y
4
,
1
9
8
2
,
per Resolution #82-84.
A final reading by the Council of Ordinance R82
-
0
9
r
e
z
o
n
i
n
g
t
h
e
platted area to RI-13.5 is scheduled for July 6,
1
9
8
2
.
The Developer's Agreement referred to within th
i
s
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
s
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
for execution on July 6, 1982.
VARIANCES:
Variances to be allowed are described in the Dev
e
l
o
p
e
r
'
s
A
g
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
.
All other variance requests must be processed th
r
o
u
g
h
t
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
o
f
Appeals.
UTILITIES AND STREETS:
The requirements for the installation of utilit
i
e
s
a
n
d
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
a
r
e
covered in the Developer's Agreement.
PARK DEDICATION:.
The requirements for park dedication are covere
d
i
n
t
h
e
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
'
s
Agreement.
BONDING:
The requirements for bonding are covered in the
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
'
s
A
g
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
.
/Ai,/
Pg. 2 - Final Plat Lorence Second Addition
RECOMMENDATION:.
Recommend approval of the final plat of Lorence Second Addition
subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement,
and the following:
1. Receipt of cash deposit for street lighting in the amount of
$3,580.20.
2. Receipt of cash deposit for street signs in the amount of $560.00.
3. The owner has petitioned the City to do the improvement design,
therefore, no fees are due at this time as per our customary policy.
4. Execution of Developer's Agreement.
DLO:sg
lar)
June 29, 1982
CITY OF FDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. R82-156
RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS
AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING
ADVER1ISEMENT FOR BIDS
WHEREAS, the City Engineer, through Rieke, Carroll Muller Assoc.
has prepared plans and specifications for the following improvements to wit:
I.C. 52-004, Drainage Improvements/Vicinity of West 59th Street
and Washington Avenue.
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 for 2 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, July 29, 1982, and
considered by the Council at 7:30 o'clock P.M. on Tuesday,
August 3, 1982, 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 June 29, 1982.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Franc, Clerk
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John D. Frane,Finance Director
DATE: July 1, 1982
RE: Final approval M.I.D.B.'s Twin City Christian Nursing Homes
$2,550,000
The proponents have completed their financing of the project and
are asking the City for final approval. The final documents have
been approved by the City Attorney's office. Resolution No. 82-172
will be in the Mayor's signature file Tuesday evening.
JDF:bw
7/1/82
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John D. Frane, Finance Director
DATE: July 1, 1982
RE: Resolution 82-173
Our auditors, Fox, McCue and Murphy, have asked the City to pass
a resolution authorizing the overhead transfer for the year 1981.
We have in the past taken in as revenue from overhead transfers
an amount of money sufficient to balance the General Fund budget:
and maintaining a "reserve" of tranfers not made. This procedure
maintains a stable balance in the General Fund which keeps the City
in good standing with the rating agencies.
JDF:bw
7/1/82
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
RESOLUTION NO. 82-173
OVERHEAD TRANSFERS
Be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie that: the
City Council approves the overhead transfers from the Special Assessments
Improvement Fund to the General Fund in the amount of $606,689 for the year
ended December 31, 1981. Be it further resolved that: overhead transfers
from the Special Assessment Utility Fund to the General Fund not made in
1981 will be made in 1982.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
Unapproved
Planning Commission Minutes -8- June 14, 1982
MEMBERS ABSENT: William Bearman and Dennis Marhula
D. GUSTAFSON RE7ONING, by Paul R. Gustafson. Request to
rezone .385 acres from Rural to R1-13.5 for construction
of .1 single family home. Located across from 9635 and
9629 Bennett Place. A public meeting.
The Planner stated that Paul Gustafson was present for any questions. He also
stated that Gustafson wants to bullet his own home on the property. Staff finds
that the proposal will be consistent with all City Ordinances and regulations.
MOTION
Gartner moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the rezoning from
Rural to R1-13.5 as per Lhe survey dated 5/12/82 and the staff report dated
6 6/7/82. Torjesen seconded, motion carried 5-0.
June 1, 1982
Jean JohnsOn
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Rd
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Jean:
This letter is intended to inform those concerned of the planned
use of Gustafson property before the Planning Commission at the
June 14th meeting.
The Gustafson property will be used for a single family personal
residence. I intend to have built an approximate 2,200 sq. ft.
English Tudor style home with construction beginning in late
summer. The style should blend well with the homes existing on
the block, as some of them are currently of similar styles and
sizes.
I expect that the remainder of the Welter property will be sold
and developed in one lump sum sometime near or after the decade.
My father-in-law, Ray N. Welter, is allowing us to buy this por-
tion of his land as a favor.
We will hook up to city sewer and water, which is located in the
street. I have cleared this plan through Gene Dietz, Director of
Public Works.
The area is currently zoned Rural and I am requesting rezoning to
R135. The division can be done administratively.
I believe my plan will enhance the neighborhood and will not
disrupt the orderly development of surrounding areas, and I am
requesting the Planning Committee's and City Council's approval.
Your help is certainly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Paul R. Gustafson
PRG/sp
MEMO
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
DATE:
PROJECT:
REQUEST:
Planning Commission
Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
June 7, 1982
GUSTAFSON REZONING
Rezone .365 acres from Rural to
R1-13.5 (platting will be via
Administrative Process)
BACKGROUND
-the prOposed 16,800 square foot sized lot is presently part of the
50+ acre Welter property. The Guide Plan depicts the 50+ acre
Welter piece as low density residential. Figure 1.
A future platting plan has been drafted for the Welter property and this
single lot rezon;ng is consistent with the draft platting plan. Figure 2.
SITE CHARACTER
Across Bennett Place is the Olympic Hills Fifth Addition single family.
Homes have been constructed on the lots directly across the street from
this lot.
The lot slopes from its northwest corner to the southeast corner adjacent
to Bennett Place.
Elm and box elder are the predominant trees. The larger elms have died
and the bark is sloughing off.
UTILITIES
Sewer & water are in place along Bennett Place and connection will have to
be as per the City Engineer's recommendations.
ACCESS
TiTiveway access will be to Bennett Place approximately 750 feet north of
Pioneer Trail.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Planning Staff recommends approval of the rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5
contingent upon building being consistent with the requirements of the
R1-13.5 District of Ord. 135 and other applicable ordinances, including,
but not limited to: lot size minimum of 13,500 sq. ft., connection to
City sewer and water, payment of cash park fee at time of building permit
.issuance.
JJ:sh
0 ,2Q
1 9 6'67 0-411 •n• A 866 6,47" rencc — /20 • '41' 14. 11 Cn73,- e7e- 710 / /109.1 , asNvErr -. , ,93 ,,/ z48 i .34. /-.. z sr , c ',. ,‘ / • /vv ••,... , r z ''\ ... 1. . 1 I; ii,-, I 1 i .... ., ' , 'c „ <.,.. •E' ,..• i 11 M M 1 .1 , , ....,,--2,. ...."9 cs,". i„<:" ‘4... .)' 1.," . . ' " ' ‘ .0" / .4 • ,..1, • .., < ' • t ••• • / 1 „1 , - / o ,-... , \/ i • , •-• 1.91= "" , ....e. x-4_ ...,/ ---4,%. i ..-- ..< „f/ ''',..i. --,...............4.• C = "‘ / ".... i • s , c. 1 ..> /• .'4 A I 4\ , i/Z:' "...... / . 1.3 ).• "' 1 / 5'-' t / p .-f/L 1-7.
N •
L ee :1"•=/001
6445.4601
Lot V,
143
PRELIMINARY FUTURE SUBDIVISION
PLAN-WELTER PROPERTY
FIGURE 2 14-2LI
Planning Commission Minutes -3-
MEMBER ABSENT: Hakon Torjesen
. approved
May 19, 1982
CAEDENVA1E_9TH ADDITION, by Equitable Life Assu
r
a
n
c
e
S
o
c
i
e
t
y
.
Request for a Guide Plan Amendment to change ap
p
r
o
x
i
m
a
t
e
l
y
36 acres from regional commercial to industrial
,
a
P
l
a
n
n
e
d
Unit Development Concept for office and indust
r
i
a
l
u
s
e
s
u
p
o
n
99 acres, preliminary plat approval with possib
l
e
v
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
s
.
Located north of TH 5, west of proposed Schooner
B
o
u
l
e
v
a
r
d
and south of proposed Valley View Road. A pub
l
i
c
h
e
a
r
i
n
g
.
Bearman asked why rezoning is being requested.
T
h
e
P
l
a
n
n
e
r
s
t
a
t
e
d
t
h
a
t
i
t
i
s
n
o
t
being requested, and that that is incorrect. He
s
t
a
t
e
d
t
h
a
t
D
i
c
k
K
r
i
e
r
o
f
W
e
s
t
w
o
o
d
Planning and Engineering was present to give a pr
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
.
Krier stated that they want an amendment to the
P
U
D
.
H
e
g
a
v
e
a
'
b
r
i
e
f
s
l
i
d
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
-
tation and stated the use would be office and of
f
i
c
e
/
w
a
r
e
h
o
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
some owner
occupied buildings.
Bearman asked if the land has been restored acco
r
d
i
n
g
t
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
.
K
r
i
e
r
r
e
p
l
i
e
d
that he understood that the gravelling was done p
r
i
o
r
t
o
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
o
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
.
Krier went on to review the grading, elevations,
u
t
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
,
a
n
d
s
t
a
t
e
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
middle entrance would be a one-way road and the
l
o
o
p
r
o
a
d
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
t
w
o
-
w
a
y
.
H
e
felt that a detailed landscaping plan would be i
n
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
a
t
t
h
i
s
t
i
m
e
.
The Planner reviewed the staff report dated 5/1
3
/
8
2
.
H
e
s
t
a
t
e
d
h
e
f
e
l
t
t
h
a
t
s
o
m
e
aspects of the pl,ins need to be more closely rev
i
e
w
e
d
.
H
e
s
t
a
t
e
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
r
e
a
r
e
m
a
n
y
unanswered questions with these plans as is. He
s
t
a
t
e
d
h
e
f
e
l
t
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
g
r
a
d
i
n
g
is reasonable. He felt that the concept plan was
g
o
o
d
b
u
t
a
n
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
p
l
a
n
o
f
w
h
a
t
will be on the site is needed (materials, contin
u
i
t
y
,
e
t
c
.
)
s
u
c
h
a
s
a
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
,framework'manual. Transportation will be via
V
a
l
l
e
y
V
i
e
w
R
o
a
d
.
H
e
s
u
g
g
e
s
t
e
d
a
sidewalk system be incorporated, and stated all
C
i
t
y
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
a
d
h
e
r
e
d
t
o
.
He recommended approval with changes.
Hallett asked if a restaurant was planned for o
n
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
.
K
r
i
e
r
r
e
p
l
i
e
d
n
o
.
Hallett asked the number of employees expected
.
K
r
i
e
r
r
e
p
l
i
e
d
1
0
0
0
-
2
0
0
0
.
H
a
l
l
e
t
t
stated he would like to see a restaurant and wa
l
k
w
a
y
s
p
l
a
c
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
.
Sutliff stated he felt that restrictions should
b
e
p
l
a
c
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
t
o
k
e
e
p
t
h
e
project uniformed (such as a design framework
m
a
n
u
a
l
)
.
B
e
a
r
m
a
n
a
g
r
e
e
d
.
H
a
l
l
e
t
t
a
l
s
o
agreed.
Sutliff asked the percentage of the site to be
g
r
a
d
e
d
o
f
w
h
i
c
h
t
h
e
e
x
c
e
s
s
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
moved and sold. Krier replied approximately 75
%
a
f
t
e
r
t
h
e
c
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
n
c
y
z
o
n
e
.
H
e
stated that an average cut is approximately 40
.
Sutliff asked the total earth moving. Krier re
p
l
i
e
d
3
0
0
,
0
0
0
c
u
b
i
c
y
a
r
d
s
.
H
e
s
t
a
t
e
d
that the proponent has authority to move 125,000
c
u
b
i
c
y
a
r
d
s
a
t
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
.
Bearman asked if the site was originally designa
t
e
d
f
o
r
r
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
-
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
.
T
h
e
Planner replied yes originally when the demograph
i
c
s
w
e
r
e
e
x
p
e
c
t
e
d
t
o
b
e
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
.
Beaman stated he would like to see a model of th
e
s
i
t
e
.
.approved
Planning Commission Minutes
'47 May 19, 1982
Sutliff asked how long the total mining of the project
w
i
l
l
l
a
s
t
.
K
r
i
e
r
r
e
p
l
i
e
d
60 days.
Vicki Koehnen, 1739 Topview Road stated she would like
t
h
e
c
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
n
c
y
z
o
n
e
protected.
Beaman stated he would like to see specifications, li
g
h
t
i
n
g
,
c
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
n
c
y
z
o
n
e
d
e
d
i
c
a
-
tion to the City, smaller buildings on the creek side,
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
i
t
y
o
f
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
,
pedestrian walkways, and a model of the site. Rettera
t
h
a
g
r
e
e
d
a
n
d
s
t
a
t
e
d
s
h
e
w
o
u
l
d
like the covenants in a brochure form so they will be easie
r
t
o
r
e
a
d
.
Vicki Koehnen stated she was concerned also for screen
i
n
g
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
n
d
a
s
k
e
d
if the hill by the gravel pit will be taken down. Krier
r
e
p
l
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
4
0
'
c
u
t
w
i
l
l
be the maximum and a 20' cut will be the minimum.
MOTION 1
Sutliff moved to close the public hearing on Edenval
e
9
t
h
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
.
H
a
l
l
e
t
t
s
e
c
o
n
d
e
d
,
motion carried 5 ,-0-1. Marhula abstained because he works for the fir
m
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
i
n
g
Equitable Life.
MOTION 2
'Sutliff moved to return the project to the proponent
f
o
r
c
l
a
r
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
Planning Commission and the Planner's concerns; cuts,
f
i
l
l
s
,
c
o
v
e
n
a
n
t
s
,
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
lighting, conservancy zone dedication to the City, sma
l
l
e
r
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
p
l
a
c
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
.
Creek side, continuity of building materials, pedestri
a
n
p
a
t
h
w
a
y
s
,
a
n
d
a
m
o
d
e
l
.
Gartner seconded.
DISCUSSION
-Salfff—expressed concern for the amount of cut and fill required.
AMENDMENT
Hallett moved to approve the Comprehensive Guide Plan change subject t
o
a
n
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
plan including but not limited to the above mentioned
c
o
n
c
e
r
n
s
i
n
M
o
t
i
o
n
2
.
S
u
t
l
i
f
f
agreed. Gartner did not agree. Amendment carried 3-2
-
1
.
R
e
t
t
e
r
a
t
h
a
n
d
G
a
r
t
n
e
r
v
o
t
e
d
no, Marhula abstained.
VOTE ON MOTION 2
Motion as amended carried 5-0-1. Marhula abstained.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL CHECK LIST
(ATTACHED TO PLANNING STAFF REPORT)
( •E: idaL
PROJECT:_1tanya1L9th
PARKS, RECRFATION'AND NATURAL RESOURCES CONCERNS:
1. Adjacent to any existing or proposed parks: No
a. Affect on the park:
2. Cash park fee or land dedication: Cash park fee will be required.
a. If cash park fee, amount based on existing ordinance will total:$138,600'
b. If park dedication, the number of acres to be dedicated:
c. .Existing or pending assessments or taxes on the proposed park property w
i
l
l
b
e
paid prior to dedication:
3. Adjacent to existing or proposed trails: See_Plannina Staff Report page 4 - Peduirian
_System. Developer would be responsible for the sidewalk along one side of the internal
loop road as well as a sidewalk alone B tape. Commynity Services staff also re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
'
,
-pcdectrian accecs t rhe'snuthwst,--asw11 -zs -a -20 -peUestrain-trraireasement --
a. Party responsible for tail constructio a djacen t t o p urga iory
P.—eloper - sidewalks, Lity - wailrs
Creek_Eloodplain
b. Landmmership of trail loration: (dedicated, purchasgg, sidewal4 within
. ROW. Pedestrian connection to the southwest & aajacent to itoodpla
i
n
-are -elealcaL.Ed -uaser•
4. Grading plan comments:se_e_mnaj ng_Staff Report-Pane 5.
5. Significant vegetation on the site:__N/4
6. Adjacent to protected waters: Purgatory Creek runs through the southern portion of
this site.
REFERENCE CHECK
1. 'MAC
2. Neighborhood Facilities Study
3. Purgatory Creek StudyThis proposal complies to the Purgatory Creek Study.
4. Shoreland Management Ordinance This proposal complies with the Shoreland Management Ord
5. Floodplain Ordinance This orgDP5a1 (Mlles with Ahg_110_4dP]ain OrdiTance
6. Guide Plan This prooesal requires a Gvi_de Plan change from Office_and Regional
Comerclal uses to Ilrfice and Industrial.
7. Other
) a:41
1,223
-2-
RECOMMENDATIONS
Adjacent neighborhood type, and any neighborhood opinion voiced in favor or opposed
to the project:
2. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommended to approve
the Comprehensive Guide Plan channe only.
3. Community Services Staff Recommendation: The Community Services Staff recommends
• approval of the Comprehensive Guide Plan ehanne from C-Regional Service to Industrial
and Office and the preliminary plat sUb....{e.c.LASLAIPLitems-11-latar-nati-vaA-af—the----
Planning Staff Report of May 13, 1982 with the followinn addition: Developer to
dedicate a 20 foot wide pedestrian trail easemPnt from Cirrlp A Road southwest to
the floodplain and the entire lennth of the creek ithin this project adjacent to
the tloodOain.
STAFF REPORT
Planning Commission
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
Equitable Life Assurance Society
PROJECT: Edenvale 9th Addition
LOCATION: South of proposed Valley View Road, between Mitchell
Road and proposed Schooner Boulevard
DATE: May 13, 1982
REQUEST: -PUD Concept for office and industrial uses on
99 acres
-Comprehensive Guide Plan change from office and
regional commercial uses,
-preliminary plat approval for road right of ways
and 5 outlots
BACKGROUND:
This area is part of the original 1970 Edenvale PUD and was designated
C-Reg-Ser4:ommprria1 Regional Service)and Multiple Residential. The
slope and floudplain was designated as open space.
The office use is in conformance with the 1973 Major Center Area
PUD, however, industrial use was not contemplated in that plan.
The Purgatory Creek Study designated a Conservancy Zone not to be
built in. The developerproposes an easement over the Conservancy Zone.
There is no filling proposed within the floodplain. The project is
in conformance with the Floodplain Ordinance, however, lot lines should
not extend into the floodplain.
The Shoreland Management Act applys to lots within 300 feet of the
Normal Ordinary High Water Mark of a creek. All offices shown on the
development plan are setback in excess of 250 feet. The impervious
coverage allowed is 30", and the total building height allowed is 30feet.
All lots affected are in conformance with the Shoreland Management Act.
The Comprehensive Guide Plan designates this area as Office on the
western half and commercial regional service on the eastern half.
Existing zoning on the parcel is Rural. Zoning and platting could occur
on individual pieces when actual building and site plans are proposed.
The individual zonings should be in conformance with the approved PUD
Development Plan.
TO:
FROM:
FEE OWNER &
APPLICANT:
Staff Report-Edenvale 9th
-2- May 13, 1982
An Environmental Assessment Worksheet is not required on this project
because it is part of Edenvale which was covered by a previous
Environmental Impact Statement.
EXISTING SITE CHARACTER
The site is bordered on the south and west by Purgatory Creek. The
creek valley elevation is at approximately 828. The slopes rise from
the creek valley rapidly at a rate averaging about 15%, up to elevation
s
around 890. The center of the site falls mostly between the 890 and 900
contours. The highest point on the site,and the most prominent feature,
is the hill on the eastern end of the site. The hill rises to 940
elevation, but has been gravelled extensively in the area roughly north
and west of the proposed road,(A Circle). The mined area is not
represented in the topography submitted with these plans.
Vegetation on the site is largely limited to meadow grasses and open
field except for a few scattered trees, and of course the creek valley
vegetation.
OFFICE AREA CONCEPT
The concept is to plan small office buildings ringing the west, south,
and east sides of the industrial park. The developer would not be the
builder, and has no end users identified at this time.
The sketch plan illustrates the "building block" concept for developing
the office lots. Basically, the office area has been planned in 100 foot
wide lot increments. This allows for the vcry small office, as well as
combining several of the blocks for larger buildings. To prevent the
possibility of having 37 small lots, or an indiscriminate mix of very
small buildings next to large buildings, the PUD concept, as submitted
should be substantially followed in subsequent plattings and zonings.
The concept of having the larger lots adjacent to the creek is important
in that it would present a much more controlled appearance to the south.
The smaller lots, possible in the southeast corner of the plat are
largely buffered by the large hill lying on highway property, directly
to the south.
Consideration should be given to platting the Conservancy Zone in an
outlot to help assure consistent treatment of it.
Several of the office lots in the southeast portion of the project
combine parking lot accesses, but pave the entire front yard to accomplis
h
this. The development plan should be revised to accoornodate joint access
e
s
and still allow significant 'green area' in the front yard. Accesses
for the office lots occurring on curves present sight line problems
and should be redesigned. irldr\ rtA,A.)
Staff Report-Edenvale 9th
-3- May 13, 1982
The plans presented contemplate or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
F
.
A
.
R
.
s
o
f
.
3
0
s
i
n
g
l
e
s
t
o
r
y
and .50 multiple story, although t
h
e
p
l
a
n
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
s
s
i
g
n
i
-
ficantly less than this. This disc
r
e
p
a
n
c
y
h
e
l
p
s
t
o
i
l
l
u
s
t
r
a
t
e
t
h
e
p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
which can be expected in the futur
e
,
i
f
t
h
e
f
l
o
o
d
p
l
a
i
n
a
n
d
C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
n
c
y
Zone are sold with individual lots.
INDUSTRIAL AREA CONCEPT
The concept of placing the indus
t
r
i
a
l
a
r
e
a
i
n
t
h
e
c
e
n
t
e
r
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
was to be able to buffer it from
t
h
e
s
e
n
s
i
t
i
v
e
a
r
e
a
t
o
t
h
e
s
o
u
t
h
a
n
d
west. However, all of the area no
r
t
h
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
s
g
u
i
d
e
d
a
s
medium density residential, and i
s
v
i
s
u
a
l
l
y
e
x
p
o
s
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
.
In addition, because of the locati
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
N
S
P
p
o
w
e
r
l
i
n
e
e
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
through the project, loading areas
a
n
d
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
s
m
u
s
t
f
a
l
l
u
n
d
e
r
the powerlines. The development p
l
a
n
s
h
o
w
s
a
l
l
l
o
a
d
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
s
a
l
o
n
g
Valley View road completely expos
e
d
t
o
v
i
e
w
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
.
I
n
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
,
parking and loading areas are not
p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
i
n
f
r
o
n
t
y
a
r
d
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
s
.
Out of the six industrial lots alo
n
g
(
n
e
w
)
V
a
l
l
e
y
V
i
e
w
R
o
a
d
,
f
i
v
e
o
f
them are planned conceptually wit
h
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
o
r
t
o
u
t
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
50 foot setback. The amount of pa
r
k
i
n
g
i
l
l
u
s
t
r
a
t
e
d
f
o
r
m
a
n
y
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
industrial buildings appears inad
e
q
u
a
t
e
.
A
d
d
i
n
g
a
l
l
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
p
r
o
b
l
e
m
s
together, we question whether the
c
o
n
c
e
p
t
u
a
l
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
p
l
a
t
t
i
n
g
i
s
done correctly.
To assure that there is not an ad
v
e
r
s
e
i
m
p
a
c
t
u
p
o
n
t
h
e
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
area to the north by the proposed
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
u
s
e
,
o
n
e
o
f
t
h
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
,
or combinations, should occur:
1. Office land use should be planned
a
l
o
n
g
V
a
l
l
e
y
View Road.
2. A revised plan should be submitte
d
i
l
l
u
s
t
r
a
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
concept of industrial development
w
i
t
h
l
o
a
d
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
s
oriented entirely away from the n
o
r
t
h
.
3. A substantial setback from Valley
V
i
e
w
R
o
a
d
s
h
o
u
l
d
be planned and a master grading a
n
d
p
l
a
n
t
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
adopted to completely screen the i
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
u
s
e
r
s
from the north.
I31
Staff Report-Edenvale 9th
-4- May 13, 1982
TRANSPORTATION
New Valley View Road will be under construction on the north side of
this project this Sunnr-l982. This road will provide the access
to this project. An internal industrial loop road is planned with
full accesses to Valley View on the east and west and a right-in/right-out
only in the center of the project. The project, at total development
could generate 7,000-9,000 ADTs. Valley View Road is to be constructed
as a four lane road with controlled access , and will be able to handle
this traffic.
Location and spacing of the access points to Valley View Road have been
taken into account in the design of Valley View Road.
The internal roads are planned as 38 foot wide industrial streets,
with a 70 foot right of way. Access to the internal roads should
be addressed according to: sight distances, proximity to intersections,
and offset from other accesses.
PEDESTRIAN SYSTEM
There will be a sidewalk dnd a bikeway along new Valley View Road.
With possibly several thousand employees within this office/industrial
park, a sidewalk along one side of the internal loop road would be
desireable as well as a sidewalk along 'B lane. In addition , a platted
outlot and trail connection to Edenvale's Commercial Services area to
the southwest would not only provide access to restaurants during nice
weather , but also provide access to a future Purgatory Creek trail
for noon time or after work use.
UTILITIES •
The entire project would be served by sewer , water , and storm sewer.
Water would loop from Valley View Road, through the site and back to
Valley View Road again. About half the project would be served by
sewer from Valley View Road and about half from the south directly from
the Purgatory Creek Interceptor. Storm sewer would flow to the Valley
View Road system for the northcentral and northeastern portions of the
Site and the balance would be directed toward Purgatory Creek. The
Watershed District would review the sedimentation pond and outlet to
Purgatory Creek.
Although schematic at this stage, catch basin spacing and location
appears to stretch City engineering standards in several cases, especially
considering the large percentage of impervious surface in the industrial
portion.
051).
Staff Report-Edenvale 9th
-5- May 13, 1982
GRADING
The developer wishes to grade the entire propoerty as
s
o
o
n
a
s
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
.
The major grading on the site is of the hill on the e
a
s
t
e
n
d
o
f
t
h
e
project. The topography submitted is not up to date
a
s
r
e
l
a
t
e
s
t
o
t
h
i
s
hill because it has been substantially gravelled on t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
a
n
d
w
e
s
t
sides. Because of the lack of substantial vegetatio
n
o
n
t
h
i
s
h
i
l
l
,
the past gravelling, and this development's relations
h
i
p
t
o
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
Valley View Road; the grading of the balance of this
h
i
l
l
i
s
i
m
m
i
n
e
n
t
.
. There is no grading or development proposed on the
c
r
e
e
k
s
l
o
p
e
i
n
t
h
e
Conservancy Zone, and the balance of the grading of
t
h
e
s
l
o
p
e
t
o
c
r
e
a
t
e
walk out office lots is reasonably natural in appear
a
n
c
e
.
I
n
n
o
c
a
s
e
should the grading exceed a 3:1 slope.
The western 3/4 of the industrial area basically is
1
0
-
2
0
f
e
e
t
o
f
c
u
t
.
Although the lots could be left ungraded, there is ver
y
l
i
t
t
l
e
m
e
r
i
t
in not finishing up the grading outside the loop road
.
G
r
a
d
i
n
g
t
h
i
s
area all at once will, in this case, presenta more fi
n
i
s
h
e
d
a
p
p
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
initially, and providesmore overall grading control.
•
Grading plans for the interior industrial lots should
b
e
r
e
d
o
n
e
a
l
o
n
g
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
development layout .
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The following alternatives are possible:
A. Return the proposal to the developer for submissi
o
n
o
f
more complete topographic information(ie. up to date
t
o
p
o
or a model, grading phasing and restoration plans).
Modification of the plan would also include:
1. Platting of the Conservancy Zone into an outlot.
2. Redesign of some of the smaller office lots'
accesses to the internal road.
3. Inclusion of a pedestrian system.
4. Redesign of industrial area to assure no setback
violations and no loading areas visible from differing
adjacent land uses.
5. Preparation of a more detailed design framework manual
to help assure high quality development.
6. Preparation of a master landscaping plan to assure
continuity of appearance throughout the office/indust
r
i
a
l
'
park. •
Staff Report-Edenvale 9th
-6 - May 13, 1982
B. Recommend approval of the Comprehensive Guide Plan change
from C-Reg-Ser to Industrial and Office, and the preliminary
plat, subject to the items in Alternative A.
C. Recommend denial of the change because:
1. Use is not the highest and best use.
2. Use is not consistent with the Guide Plan.
3. Not a compatible land use.
CE:jj
I2g
Riley- Purgatory Creek Watershed District
8950 COUNTY ROAD P4
EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55344
June 4, 1982
Mr. Chris Eager
City Planner
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
Re: Edenvale 9th Addition: Eden Prairie
Dear Mr. Enger:
The engineering advisors to the Board of Managers of the Riley-
Purgatory Creek Watershed District has reviewed the preliminary plans as
submitted to the District for the Edenvale 9th Addition in Eden Prairie.
The following policies and criteria of the Watershed District are appli-
cable for this project:
1, In accordance with Section E (2) of the District's revised
Rules and Regulations, a grading and land alteration permit
for this project will be required. Accompanying the permit
application, a detailed erosion control plan outlining how
sediment is to be controlled, both during and after con-
struction, must be submitted to the District for review and
approval.
2. A detailed utility plan must be submitted to the District
for review and approval.
3. Because of the size of the proposed development, the District
will require that grading operations on the project be staged.
4. Because of the size of the project and the steep grade
differential present throughout the site, a performance bond
will likely be required from the District for this project.
5. Any encroachment into the 100-year frequency floodplain of
Purgatory Creek must be in accordance with the District's
floodplain encroachment criteria.
ncerely
Ro ert/C. Obermeyer
B R ENGINEERING CO.
Engineers for the District
Mr. Chris Enger
Page 2
June 4, 1982
6. The District notes that a portion of this project is
within the conservancy area, as designated in the Purgatory
Creek Corridor Study. This project must conform with the
criteria set forth in the Purgatory Creek Trail and Open
Space Study.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this development at an
early date. If you have any questions regarding the District's comments,
please call us at 920-0655.
RCO/gs
c: Mr. Frederick Richards
Mr. Frederick Rahr
12G
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 82-162
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE COMPREHENSIVE
GUIDE PLAN CHANGE OF EDENVALE 9TH ADDITION
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted
t
h
e
Comprehensive Municipal Plan("Plan"), and
WHEREAS, the Plan has been sumitted to the Metropolitan Cou
n
c
i
l
for review and comment, and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has reviewed the Plan an
d
has required modifications thereto, and
WHEREAS, the proposal of Equitable Life Assurance Society
for development of industrial within the Edenvale 9th Add
i
t
i
o
n
Planned Unit Development requires amendment of the Plan,
a
n
d
WHEREAS, the Nanning Commission did conduct a public hea
r
i
n
g
upon the request and did recommend to the City Council ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
the Plan change from Regional Commercial to Industrial.
NOW , THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Council of the City
o
f
Eden Prairie hereby approves the Plan change and submits
s
u
c
h
c
h
a
n
g
e
to the Metropolitan Council for review as outlined in the s
u
b
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
material dated March,1982.
ADOPTED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie this day of
, 1982.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
i
ATTEST:
John D. ane,Ci ty . Clerk
231
Unapproved
Planning Commission Minutes -2- June 14, 1982
MEMBERS ABSENT: William Bearman and Dennis Marhula
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. RIDGEWOOD WEST TWO PUD & DEVELOPMENT, by Centex Homes
Midwest, Inc. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan
change from low to medium density residential for 63.
5
acres, Planned Unit Development approval for 168 deta
c
h
e
d
cluster single family and 168 condominium units, firs
t
phase development of 17 acres for 57 single family
detached units, preliminary plat approval, variances
from the R1-13.5 District, and approval of an Environ
-
mental Assessment Worksheet. Located north and south
of Cumberland Road, east of Sycamore Court. A public
hearing.
The Planner stated that Tim Eller representing Centex
H
o
m
e
s
M
i
d
w
e
s
t
,
I
n
c
.
,
D
i
c
k
Krier, Westwood Planning and Engineering, and Tom Bois
e
w
e
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
.
Eller, President of Centex, stated that in 1978 they
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
d
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
f
o
r
1
7
6
single family homes at 2 units/acre on a 13,500 sq. f
t
.
l
o
t
s
i
z
e
.
F
o
r
t
y
-
f
i
v
e
of the lots were sold. There are nine existing hous
e
s
.
T
h
e
b
a
l
a
n
c
e
o
f
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
has been graded. They want to provide housing in the
$
6
0
,
0
0
0
a
n
d
$
7
0
,
0
0
0
r
a
n
g
e
s
.
He stated that they had contemplated quadraminiums an
d
d
u
p
l
e
x
e
s
,
b
u
t
f
e
l
t
t
h
a
t
manor homes would be the best use. They divided the
s
i
n
g
l
e
f
a
m
i
l
y
l
o
t
s
i
n
t
o
two lots and reduced the house size to 900 sq. ft to
1
3
0
0
s
q
.
f
t
.
The
house would then fit onto the lot. He stated that th
e
y
h
e
l
d
t
h
r
e
e
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
s
with the homeowners of Ridgewood West and tried to wo
r
k
o
u
t
a
l
l
o
f
t
h
e
d
e
t
a
i
l
s
as possible. He reviewed the location and gave a slide
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
.
H
e
i
n
-
troduced Dick Krier.
Krier stated that this is a four phase project. The fi
r
s
t
p
h
a
s
e
s
i
n
g
l
e
f
a
m
i
l
y
is to be developed as originally planned. Phase two co
n
s
i
s
t
s
o
f
t
w
o
b
a
s
i
c
designs; the original single family lots and the small
h
o
m
e
s
n
o
w
b
e
i
n
g
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
.
The third phase will be the cluster housing. Phase fou
r
i
s
t
o
b
e
c
o
n
d
o
m
i
n
i
u
m
s
which will be located in the northeast quarter of the
s
i
t
e
.
P
h
a
s
e
o
n
e
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
s
of 16 single family homes (originally proposed) and 41
c
l
u
s
t
e
r
h
o
m
e
s
;
p
h
a
s
e
t
w
o
consists of 30 single family hones and 52 cluster home
s
;
p
h
a
s
e
t
h
r
e
e
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
s
o
f
17 single family homes and 12 cluster homes; phase fou
r
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
s
o
f
1
6
8
c
o
n
d
o
-
minium units. The total site area is 63.7 acres. Tota
l
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
i
s
5
.
3
9
u
n
i
t
s
/
acre. Phase one is at 3.37 units/acre. Street access is fro
m
M
i
t
c
h
e
l
l
R
o
a
d
.
Anderson Lakes Parkway will provide a primary access t
o
t
h
e
e
a
s
t
.
A
s
e
c
o
n
d
a
r
y
access will be off of Shiloh Court. The condominiums w
i
l
l
b
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
w
i
t
h
a
p
r
i
v
a
t
e
road system. The utilities go down Hawthorne and meet
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
r
c
e
p
t
o
r
s
y
s
t
e
m
.
Storm water will run to the lake and to Purgatory Cree
k
.
T
h
e
d
r
i
v
e
w
a
y
f
o
r
t
h
e
cluster homes will be 16 long and will be owned and m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
h
o
m
e
o
w
n
e
r
'
s
association. There will be double car parking and 20
'
s
t
a
c
k
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
.
T
h
e
r
e
i
s
adequate room for adding on to the single car garages
t
o
m
a
k
e
t
h
e
m
d
o
u
b
l
e
c
a
r
garages if desired. A private sidewalk would be put i
n
a
n
d
p
r
i
v
a
c
y
f
e
n
c
e
s
w
i
l
l
be put in before the homes are sold.
Eller showed site lines and examples of homes for th
e
s
i
t
e
.
T
h
e
c
o
n
d
o
m
i
n
i
u
m
buildings will be eight, twelve, and sixteen unit buil
d
i
n
g
s
.
The Planner reviewed the staff report dated 6/10/82.
Unapproved
Planning Commission Minutes -3- June 14, 1982
Gartner asked if there is any project existing in the City where there is the same
amount of snow removal needed in the Winter months, and asked if the homeowner's
association will clear the entire driveways. The Planner replied The Preserve.
Eller replied that driveway snow removal has not been decided yet and stated that
they will have to get together with an attorney.
Sutliff asked if there will be one homeowner's association foi - Uda iJhas. Eller
replied there will be one for the cluster homes and single family, one for
the condominiums, and one for a general umbrella association.
Torjesen asked where Cumberland Road ends. The Planner replied at Mitchell Road.
Torjesen asked the amount of development that could occur before Cumberland Road
would connect to Anderson Lakes Parkway. Eller replied that he sees no problems
with phases one through three, and expects Anderson Lakes Parkway to be needed
for phase four.
Torjesen expressed his concern that once the interest rate drops, the construction
will be done all at once, and Anderson Lakes Parkway will not be completed. He
felt it necessary to have Anderson Lakes Parkway constructed.
Retterath stated she felt that Anderson Lakes Parkway is needed.
Torjesen asked if the developer and the City can make a commitment for construction
of Anderson Lakes Parkway. The Planner replied that the developer has no control
over the Parkway, but stated that they are proceeding with a petition to get con-
struction underway.
Sutliff stated that he would like to see an overall location map to see all sur-
rounding uses.
Torjesen asked if this is manufactured housing. Eller replied no.
Torjesen asked the average size for the clustered lots. Krier replied 6,300 so. ft.
Torjesen stated he had concerns regarding the necessary variances.
Sutliff asked if the proponent is requesting rezoning. The Planner replied no,
they are asking for variances from the R1-13.5 District for first phase construction.
Arthur Weaks, 8789 Sycamore Court, stated he had talked with Mr. Eller and felt
that this plan is as close to the originally approved plan as the proponent can
get and stated he likes it. He submitted minutes of 4/29 and 4/15 and asked that
they be made part of the minutes.
Torjesen stated he felt it was a good plan, however, expressed concern regarding
access.
MOTION 1
lorjeseiT moved to close the public hearing. Sutliff seconded, motion carried 5-0.
I 3 ci
Unapproved •
Planning Commission Minutes -4- June 14, 1982
MOTION 2
Ycirjesii .n moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the Comprehensive
Guide Plan change from low to medium density residential for 63.5 acres as per
the plans dated May 1982 concurrent that Anderson Lakes Parkway be completed.
Sutliff seconded.
DISCUSSION
The Planner stated that he felt that conditioning approval of the project upon
completion of Anderson Lakes Parkway is too strict because the developer has no
control over Anderson Lakes Parkway. Torjesen stated he felt that the need for
completion of Anderson Lakes Parkway could be handled in a separate motion. It
is the City's responsibility to complete Anderson Lakes Parkway.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION 2
Torjesen moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the Comprehensive Guide
Plan change from low to medium density residential for 63.5 acres as per the plans
dated May 1982 contingent upon Anderson Lakes Parkway being built at this time.
Sutliff seconded.
DISCUSSION
-the—Hanner suggested the City plan to construct Anderson Lakes Parkway within the
next two (2) years.
Torjesen stated that the Guide Plan change can be approved but he felt that the
two year time limit should not be placed in the motion.
Sutliff stated he felt that this is the wrong place for placing Anderson Lakes
Parkway contingencies on the project. Torjesen agreed and withdrew his motion.
VOlE ON ORIGINAL MOTION 2
Motion carried 5-0.
MOTION 3
-Torj-C-s.j moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the Planned Unit Dev-
elopment for 168 detached cluster single family and 168 condominium units as per
the plans dated May 1982 and the staff report dated 6/10/82 and contingent upon
the City being able to assure that Anderson Lakes Parkway will be built within
two (2) years. Sutliff seconded.
DISCUSSION
ififlettked if Torjesen meant that if the City does not have Anderson Lakes
Parkway built in the next two years this project could end. Torjesen replied
no, then the City would have to delay the project.
The Planner stated that a strong recommendation made to the City Council
regarding construction of Anderson Lakes Parkway would be good. He asked if
the developer could develop one, two, three, or four phases without the City's
construction of Anderson Lakes Parkway. Hallett stated that he would like
phase one to be built without the restriction and stated he would like to urge
the City to construct Anderson Lakes Parkway.
Krier stated that the existing approval allows for construction of 131 single family
lots without Anderson Lakes Parkway.
c.)
Unapproved
Planning Commission Minutes -5- June 14, 1982
Eller stated that he felt that if th
e
u
r
g
e
n
c
y
i
s
n
o
t
a
p
p
a
r
e
n
t
,
A
n
d
e
r
s
o
n
L
a
k
e
s
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
will not be built.
Sutliff asked if phase one and phase
t
w
o
c
a
n
b
e
p
l
a
c
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
m
o
t
i
o
n
s
o
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
City does not have to go to spot zonin
g
.
Torjesen stated he liked Krier's sugg
e
s
t
i
o
n
.
The Planner stated that phase one and
p
h
a
s
e
t
w
o
a
d
d
e
d
t
o
g
e
t
h
e
r
c
o
m
e
t
o
a
t
o
t
a
l
o
f
1
3
9
.
AMENDMENT
TOTjesen moved to recommend to the City Counc
i
l
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
t
h
e
P
l
a
n
n
e
d
U
n
i
t
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
-
ment provided that only phase one and
p
h
a
s
e
t
w
o
w
i
l
l
b
e
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
p
r
i
o
r
t
o
A
n
d
e
r
s
o
n
Lakes Parkway being available or som
e
o
t
h
e
r
e
x
i
t
b
e
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
f
o
r
C
u
m
b
e
r
l
a
n
d
R
o
a
d
o
n
the east side as per the staff repor
t
d
a
t
e
d
6
/
1
0
/
8
2
a
n
d
t
h
e
p
l
a
n
s
d
a
t
e
d
M
a
y
1
9
8
2
.
Sutliff seconded, motion carried 5-0.
MOTION 4
Torjesen moved to recommend to the C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
p
l
a
t
d
a
t
e
d
May 26, 1982 for first phase developme
n
t
o
f
1
7
a
c
r
e
s
f
o
r
5
7
s
i
n
g
l
e
f
a
m
i
l
y
u
n
i
t
s
a
s
per the plans and the staff report da
t
e
d
6
/
1
0
/
8
2
.
S
u
t
l
i
f
f
s
e
c
o
n
d
e
d
,
m
o
t
i
o
n
c
a
r
r
i
e
d
5
-
0
.
MOTION _5 •
TOFfe-seri- moved to recommend to the City Counc
i
l
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
t
h
e
v
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
s
f
r
o
m
the R1-13.5 District as per the plans
d
a
t
e
d
M
a
y
2
6
,
1
9
8
2
a
n
d
t
h
e
s
t
a
f
f
r
e
p
o
r
t
dated 6/10/82. Sutliff seconded.
DISCUSSION
"Sutliff -Tated he felt that 5', 5', and 5' is too cl
o
s
e
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
t
w
o
l
i
v
i
n
g
spaces.
Motion carried 4-0-1. Sutliff voted
n
o
.
MOTION 6
Torjesen moved to recommend to the Cit
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
F
i
n
d
i
n
g
o
f
N
o
S
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
I
m
p
a
c
t
on the EAW. Sutliff seconded, motion
c
a
r
r
i
e
d
4
-
0
-
1
.
G
a
r
t
n
e
r
v
o
t
e
d
n
o
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
she did not have an EAW in her packet.
IIENIORANDOM
TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
DATE:
June 17, 1982
SUBJECT: Development Proposal Check List
PROJECT:
Ridgewood West Two
PROPONENT: Centex Homes Midwest, Inc.
REonsT:COm2rehans iy_e_Guide Plan change from low density residential to medium density
"FaVtlItage8 P 8Pfs nici d iEg s e.00migYRR t aAR P MI1mlUr Ph Mil 6 1 grq9 g linW 4mi 1
lots. F6Calon: east of1MT1601 RT., north of Research Rd. ephwest of Purgatory
EACKGROUND: Svc Planning Staff Eitlairt Dated:
PARK AND RUCRIATION PIANNINC CONCERNS
1. Type of development: Residential
2. Number of units in residential development;
S. Number of acres in the project :
Special recreation space requirements
S. Adjacent to any existing or proposed parls :This proposal is approximately one-quarter of a
mile east of Red Pick Neighborhood PaT1( arid —just noffh of Staring Lake Park.
a. affect on the pa: As this neighborhood develops, there will he increased
pressure for development —Of—nth—the- neicfliDornoodrIfnd community park.
6. Need for a mini prl,: Due to the small lot size & the large amount of multi-family unit'
a mini park should be developed at the central Portion of this development.
7. Cash park fee or land dedication?a c se Park tees wiii taquired at time 01 building permit
a. If Cash park fee dedication, amount based on existing ordinance will total: $115,125
b. If park land dedication, the number of acres to be dedicated is N/A
c. Existing or pending assessments or taxes on proposed park property total N/A
and will be paid prior to dedication.
8. Adjacent to existing or proposed trails: Cumberland Road will have sidewalks on both sides.
There will also bean internal sidewalk system that will have a sidewalk on one side
of Wellington Dr. and Knollwood Dr. & Hawthorne Dri-yehes-e—s-i-dtva-l-ks bt
1..awww.d.p.mertima4ma— outside of the ROW and will be homeowner association owned
maintained with an easement to the public.
Pedestrian, concrete, 5 feet
d. Party responsible for construction Developer
e. Landownership of trail location:(dedicated, purchased, ROW)
private property along other streets.
muuRAL Rrsouncr PKESERVAllON CONCERNS
ROW along Cumberland Road,
I. She grading plan considers natural amenities of the site? The site is basically an open rolling
site void of an significant vegetation.
393
64
n1117:( 7cur: park
2. Most significant grading on the site: II/A
3. Significant vegetation on the site includes:_
N/A
4. The site grading plan indicates preservation of:
S. Adjacent to public waters:_ N/A
a. Affect on waters:
YYFTRI -:FE_clifTS
1. Major Center Arca Study: 11 /A
2. Neighborhood Facilities Study ,Red Rock Neigborhood park will be the area serving
the neighborhood recreational needs of this development.
S. Purgatory Creek studyiAlis_pnapas.al it ili_compliancp J th the_Porgatory_frpek Study
4. Shorelaud lbulagement Ordinance: This proposal complies with the Shoreland Management
Ordinance
S. Floodp],lin Ord ace : N/A
G. uid e pl an :ThiS development proposal required a Guide Plan change from low density
residential to medium density residential.
7. Other :
NECOMMINOAllpns
I. Adjacent nrighbo'hood type, and any neighborhood opinion voiced in favor or opposed to the project:
s
2. Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission recommended approval of this
jjroposal_at their June 14 2_1982 meetinn.
S. Cormnwiity Services Staff Recommendations: The Community Services staff recommends approval
as per the Planning Staff Report of June 10, 1982.
returnino_ihP 2 acrs_.Urk PreviousTyjedicated
to the City with the original 176 lot approval. The City accepted that small
park because of the lack of available homeowners association. This development
will have a homeowners association that should be responsible for maintenance
of that 2 acre mini-park.
Connwity Services Staff would suggest that the developer reconsider develop-
ment of the small totlot in the south portion of the site. Staff feels that
developing a playstructure on an area limited to that size will draw a high
number of their young children that will be very distracting to the 3 adjacent
homes. Staff would recommend more of an investment in development of the 2 acre
nark north of Cumberland Road. rIllA
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
PROJECT:
PROJECT LOCATION:
Planning Commission
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
June 10, 1982
RIDGEWOOD WEST TWO
East of Mitchell Road, north of
Research Road, and west of
Purgatory Creek
APPLICANT &
FEE OWNER: Centex Homes Midwest, Inc.
REFER TO: May 1982 Development Brochure
REQUEST: Comprehensive Guide Plan change from
low density residential to medium
density residential for approximately
64 acres. Planned Unit Development
Concept approval for 168 small lot
single family detached units, and
168 condominium units. Preliminary
platting of 57 single family lots for
1st phase construction. Variances from
the R1-13.5 zone, including:
1. minimum lot size
2. minimum lot width and depth
3. maximum density from 2 units/acre
to 3.37 units/acre
4. front, side, and rear yard setbacks
5. lot frontage not on a public street
Approval of an Environmental Assessmen
t
Worksheet.
BACKGROUND AND GUIDE PLAN CHANGE
This project is part of the original 19
7
8
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
t
h
e
R
i
d
g
e
w
o
o
d
W
e
s
t
single family subdivision of 176 lots.
T
o
d
a
t
e
o
n
l
y
8
h
o
m
e
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
b
u
i
l
t
in this subdivision. Centex opted for
t
h
e
s
i
n
g
l
e
f
a
m
i
l
y
s
u
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
e
v
e
n
though it was a change from the Red Roc
k
S
e
c
t
o
r
P
l
a
n
w
h
i
c
h
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
t
h
i
s
area as five to ten units per acre. Sin
c
e
C
e
n
t
e
x
'
s
s
i
n
g
l
e
f
a
m
i
l
y
z
o
n
i
n
g
h
a
d
been approved prior to the City's Guide Plan Update adoption, the draft
Guide Plan was changed to reflect low
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
.
T
h
i
s
p
o
i
n
t
i
s
critical because it illustrates that i
t
w
a
s
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
'
s
p
l
a
n
t
o
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
• this area as medium density resident
i
a
l
.
A
m
e
d
i
u
m
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
designation still remains inurediately
t
o
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
o
f
t
h
i
s
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
,
w
h
i
l
e
low density will occur west and south of it
.
T
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
w
i
l
l
b
e
b
o
r
d
e
r
e
d
on the east by Anderson Lakes Parkway
a
n
d
P
u
r
g
a
t
o
r
y
C
r
e
e
k
.
laqq
Staff Report-Ridgewood West Two page 2
With all this in mind, it is clear that it is consistent with past City
plans for this area to be medium Gensity residential, but it must serve
as a transitional piece to properties to the west and south.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REOUEST
The transition to lower density land use to the west and south is accom-
plished as follows:
1. North of Cumberland Road, on the west side of the plat,
the single family lots are deep (150 minimum). In
addition, the majority of the border is made up of
ponding area and trees.
2. South Of Cumberland Road, on the west and south sides
of the plat, the single family lots (Lots 1-1, Block
16) are not changed from the original 1978 plat. The
lots around Pine Bluff Court (Lots 1-3, Block 3) are
ten feet lower than the existing home to the west. A
small berm should be added at the top of this slope to
strengthen the transition. The balance of the lots
around Pine Bluff Court (Lots 4-13) are very deep (260')
and incorporate a scenic easement, fo" protection of
the bluffs and vegetation; that runs to the City.
All of the lots on the south and west of the project are single family
detached. The center of the project is still single family lots, however,
the lots are smaller and most are done in clusters with common driveways.
The condominium area, in the northeast corner of the site, lies on approx-
imately 14 acres or roughly 20% of the entire site. It will be bordered on
the south by a park and Cumberland Drive, and on the east by Anderson
Lakes Parkway, but on the west by single family (small lot) and on the north
possibly by small lot single family (Ruscon Homes, Phase II). All plans
seem to indicate that the single family homes will be constructed prior
to the condominiums. This approach, of course, is building into a project,
your own future resistance.
Although it appears as if 168 condominium units would fit on this parcel,
in a manner similar to that shown in the development plan, care will have
to be taken to provide a buffer to the north and west. If that buffer
were to take the form of berming and planting, it would be wise to vanstruct
it at this point, to allow it to gain some maturity over the next 5- years.
PROJECT CONCEPT
This project will depend on many interrelated factors if it is to be a
success. Following, is a summary of these, each of which are important
to the project concept:
1. The transitional concept, of blending from existing large
lot single family, to smaller lot, to smaller lot cluster,
to condominiums.
Staff Report-Ridgewood West Two page 3
2. Buffering is a necessity between the condominiums and the
uses to the west and north.
3. Controlled architecture is one of the strong points of this
entire project. Although the single family homes are de-
tached, they are quite close together in the clusters and
tremendous differences in design are not possible as they
are on larger lots. Each lot is more part of a planned
whole. This goal will be accomplished through planned
ranges of color and the range of units offered in a colonial
style. There is, however, variety provided in the number
of different facades, styles, and floor plans.
The continuity of architectural style carries over into
the condominiums, which will help bring them into scale
with the rest of the development. The idea that any units
do not 'fit in in the future should be taken care of by
the fact that the entire development has been designed for
harmony.
The planned architectural approach will guarantee this
area to be unique throughout the City The success of this
project in terns of appearance depends upon adherence to the
planned architectural concept.
4. Strong Homeowner's Associations are an absolute necessity
in a project of clustered homes. Although the homes are
detached, the people will be living in very much a town-
house atmosphere.
The proximity of these units to each other calls for joint
maintenance responsibilities such as snow removal and drive-
way maintenance as well as rules regarding everything from
where garbage cans be put out to exclusion of outside storage
of recreational vehicles, to animal control. Although this
approach will offer people many of the amenities of single
family life-style, it will not work with uncontrolled and
indiscriminate use of a 6,000 square foot lot as if it were
a half acre.
The viability of the homeowner's association will determine
the quality of life for the people living there.
5. Initial plantings by the developer are intended to be large
in order to create an immediate pleasing atmosphere. The
developer has also provided an overall master landscaping plan
so that individual owners may add to the plantings on their
lot in an orderly fashion. Each clustered lot will be totally
sodded upon completion.
otity
Staff Report-Ridgewood West Two page 4
6. Privacy fencing is being provided by the developer in
strategic locations in the cluster lots in order to
provide overall planned continuity. Joint placement
of mailboxes and addresses will also be done by the
developer, which could be designed to help frame an
entry for each cluster.
7. Each single family unit is designed to be built with a
single or double car garage. If a single garage is
built initially, the second stall may be added later,
only according to the urchitectural plan for that unit.
In.either case, a double driveway will be provided.
PUD OMALL PLAN
The plan is in conformance with the Floodplain Ordinance, the Shoreland
Management Ordinance, and the Purgatory Creek Study. The land is largely
unvegetated and has been previously graded.
Access
Access is provided from the west via Cumberland Drive and Mitchell Road.
Completion of Anderson Lakes Parkway out to US 169, east of this project
would be helpful now, but will be important from a traffic standpoint in
the later phases of this project. Access to the north is provided via
Shiloh Court. Only a small part of Andersen Lakes Parkway touches the
very northeast corner of Centex's property. Since Centex has no control
over the ultimate construction of Anderson Lakes Parkway, the City should
undertake a feasibility study of the road for possible construction
beginning next Spring (1983).
Parking
The cluster homes will not have the equivalant parking of a traditional
single family home with a double garage and double driveway. These homes
will be short two exterior overflow spaces (typical home: .4 car driveway
parking - 2 car garage parking vs. cluster home: 2 car driveway parking -
1 or 2 car garage parking).
Therefore, although normal parking will be accommodated off street,
moderate to heavy overflow parking will have to be accommodated on the
street. To provide for this, Knollwood Drive and haiethorneDrive will both
be built 32 wide rather than 28' wide. This will allow two continuous
driving lanes and a parking lane along one side. Since the cluster concept
reduces individual curb cuts by one-half, more uninterrupted curb side
parking will be available.
Pedestrian Systems
Cumberland Road will have sidewalks on both sides. In addition, because
of the increase in density and contemplated on-street parking, there should
be a sidewalk along one side of Knollwood Drive, Wellington Drive, and
Hawthorn Drive. This sidewalk will be 5' wide 5" deep, concrete on
private property and be maintained by the H.O.A. with an easement to the
public.
Staff Report-Ridgewood West Two page 5
Cul-de-sacs
Because of the number of private courts requiring H.O.A. maintenance, and
because of the number of lots on public cul-de-sacs in this project,
making public snow removal difficult; we would recommend that the four
cul-de-sacs off of Knollwood Drive be vacated and maintained as part of
the private drive system.
Parks
The two acre park was previously dedicated to the City as part of the
original 176 lot approval. The City accepted this even though it was
considerably below the minimum s'ze standard for maintenance because of
the lack of available H.O.A. We would recommend that this park be
returned to the developer for conveyance to and maintenance by the H.O.A.
The development of this park and construction of the totlot should be
accomplished with the first phase of this development.
The southern private totlot is very small in area and should be fenced
and landscaped on the east and south lot lines to provide privacy for
adjacent lots. Fencing should be consistent in style with privacy fencing
to be provided throughout the development.
The cash park fee of $325/single family lot and $250/multiple family unit
would be applicable to this project.
RECOMMFNDATIONS
The Planning Staff recommends approval of:
1. Revision of the Comprehensive Guide Plan from low density
to medium density residential.
2. PUD Concept plan for 168 single family units and 168 condo-
minium units.
3. Preliminary plat and variances requested for Phase 1.
4. EAW finding of no Environmental Significance.
Subject to the following:
1. Plans submitted May 1982.
2. Items 1-7 under Concept section of this report.
3. Cash park fee applicable to this project.
4. Southern totlot to be fenced, south and east sides.
.5. Two acre park to be deeded by City back to developer to be owned
and maintained by H.O.A.
6. Cul-de-sacs off of Knollwood Drive to be deeded back to developer, to
be owned and maintained as private drives by H.O.A.
0,01
Staff Report-Ridgewood West Two page 6
7. Knollwood Drive and HawthorneDrive to be built to 32' width for
parking along one side.
8. Sidewalks to be provided on private property with public easement along
Knollwood Drive, HawthorneDrive, and Wellington Drive, to be maintained
by H.O.A. Sidewalks to be built with each adjacent cluster.
9. H.O.A. structure and documents to be reviewed by City prior to final plat.
10. Architecture, planting, and fencing to be as illustrated in development
submission May 1982.
11. Buffer to be provided in condominium area to single family to north
and west. '
12. Berming and planting be provided.
First Phase Platting and Site Development Plan
In addition to the concerns for the overall plan, recommendations regarding
the first phase are as follows:
1. Number andspacing of catch basins for store' sewer will have to be
revised according to City Engineering requirements. Detailed lot
drainage plans must be submitted to Engineering Department.
2. Knollwood Drive to Hawthorne Drive, Hawthorn Drive to Cumberland and
Cumberland Drive east to Hawthorne would all be constructed as a part
of the first phase.
.3. The park and totlot north of Cumberland would be constructed with
phase 1.
4. Zoning and platting for subsequent phases would be based in part,
upon the success and performance of phase one. Setbacks, lot size, and
other variances would be granted for phase one only at this time.
5. Concrete sidewalks could be constructed as each associated cluster
was finished.
6. Setback to Cumberland Drive to be no less than 30'.
CE:sh
MINUTES OF MEETING HELD THURSDAY APRIL 29_, 1982
Participants: Tim Eller, Tom Boyce of Centex Homes Midwest; Dick Krier of
Westwood Planning and Engineering; Residents of Ridgewood West.
1. Mr. Eller opened the discussion by stating that Centex would build models at
the West Parcel sometime in the spring of 1983 even if interest rates stayed
at their current level. Centex would develop the West Parcel with homes of
the same market value as originally planned. He indicated that a location
for models or number of models has not been determined.
2. No corrections or additions were offered by representatives of Centex or the
residents of Rigewood West to the minutes of the April 15 meeting.
3. Mr. Krier presented two schemes of the East Parcel rcplatted. Scheme I made
use of roads and utilities as orginally planned and showed a combination of
Twin Homes and Centex Manor Homes. Scheme II also made use of roads and
utilities as originally planned and showed a combination of Cluster Homes
and Centex Manor Homes.
4. Mr. Eller expressed preferance for the Cluster Home Scheme, although final
market costs have yet to be determined. Cluster Homes would have a base
price in the mid 60's to high 70's and would vary from single story struc-
tures to two story "Colonials." Homes would be constructed on slabs %,ith
basements as optional features. Single car garages would be standard with
an option available for a double garage. Site placement of Cluster Homes
having single care garages would allow future garage additions by individual
owners.
5. Mr. Eller stated that the base price of the Cluster Homes would include some
landscaping and sod around each unit.
6. Mr. Eller stated that each unit of Cluster Homes would be individually
platted.
7. Mr. Krier stated that the tree line at the eastern side of the intermittent
ponds at Block 1 would be extended southward across the area south of
Cumberland road. Details as to the extent of tree planting and types of
trees would be discussed at the next meeting.
8. The residents expressed a preference for Scheme II (Cluster Homes) and the
balance of the discussion focused on Scheme II.
9. Mr. Eller presented various floor plans and elevation schemes of proposed
Cluster Homes. He also presented elevations of eight-plex Manor Homes as
well as a fourteen plex Manor Homes as possible alternatives for use on the
East Parcel. Mr. Eller did not indicate which type of Manor Home would be
proposed before the planning commission for preliminary approval.
IdCO
After opening comments by Mr. Eller and Mr. Krier, the meeting was opened for
questions and discussion. The following points were made:
1. The Ridgewood West residents expressed their concern over the proximity of
the Manor Homes to existing homes on the West Parcel. The residents felt
that the Manor Homes as multi-family units were out of character to the
development as originally planned and should be placed further east to mini-
mize the sightlincs from the West Parcel.
2. Concern was expressed as to the storage capabilities of Cluster Homes
without two car garages or basements. It was felt that Cluster Home resi-
dents would have a tendancy to clutter properties unless measures could be
taken by a Homeowner Association to preclude this.
3. The questions was asked if the park could be moved to a different location
on the East Parcel. It was thought by the residents that grouping Manor
Homes around the park was inappropriate and that the Park was more suited
to be adjacent to Cluster Homes.
4. In addition it was felt that the open area of the Park with the grouping
of Manor Homes around the west, north and east sides would further increase
the visibility of Manor Homes to the Ridgewood West residents.
5. The transition from single family housing as originally planned on the West
Parcel to the Manor Homes as shown on Scheme II was accomplished in only
three lots. Concern was expressed by the Ridgewood West residents that with
the availability of eighty-eight acres more space could have been utilized
to accomplish the transition in a more gradual fashion.
I LO
Minutes of meeting held Thursday, April 15, 1982
Participants: Tim Eller of Centex Homes Midwest, Dick Krier of Westwood
Planning, residents of Ridgewood West
Comment: For the purpose of these minutes, the two areas of discussion will be
referred to as the east and west parcels of Ridgewood West. See
attached copy of original Ridgewood West plat to determine dividing
line as it was tentatively set at the meeting.
1. Mr. Eller opened the discussion by stating that Centex desires to apply to
the planning commission for replatting and rezoning of the east par-
cel. He indicated that he had called the meeting with the residents
of Ridgewood West: in order to ascertain our feelings about such a
move, and to inquire as to what things could be done to make it more
agreeable to the current residents. He indicated that Centex is
thinking in terms of two separate projects in the east parcel; one to
be either twin homes or cluster homes, and the other to be Manor Homes
as are being built by Centex in West Bloomington. He indicated that
Centex wishes to build homes in the range of the low 60's to high 70's
in the east parcel.
2. Mr. Eller said that Centex does not intend to replat or rezone the west par-
cel at this time; nor do they have any intention of doing so at any
time in the future. He also said that Centex does not intend to sell
any of the lots in the west parcel to other builders in the forseeable
future.
3. Mr. Eller expressed doubt as to Centex's ability or willingness to hold the
parcels if replatting and rezoning of the east parcel could not be
accomplished. He indicated that this feeling was based on the un-
favorable market conditions for single family homes in the price range
of $85,000 to $120,000 as originally planned.
4. Mr. Eller indicated that he feels that home building on the east parcel
would generate activity to increase the interest level on the west
parcel. He indicated that Centex would probably build models for the
single family homes in the west parcel, possibly as early as this
summer, probably not before next spring. However, he offered no firm
commitment to ever build models if market conditions continue to be
unfavorable. He indicated that Centex would develop the west parcel
with the same homes (i.e., floor plans, etc.) as originally planned.
5. Mr. Eller indicated that the units in the east parcel would have home owner
associations. Exactly how much maintainance would be handled by these
associations is not yet determined, but there would be some degree of
central control over exterior building maintainence and lawn care.
After Mr. Eller's opening comments, the meeting was opened for questions and
discussion. The following points were made:
1. The Ridgewood West residents expressed their concern over the prospect of
having the cast parcel changed from the original plan which was com-
municated to them at the time they bought their houses.
2. The residents expressed concern over the lack of marketing on the part of
Centex for the original plan (i.e., lack of signs, models, office,
landscaping at entrance). Mr. Eller indicated that Centex had placed
responsibility for the sales with a realty firm in the hopes of
broadening exposure, and had stopped advertising because they felt the
money spent was not worth the results gained. Mr. Eller indicated he
would consider putting up a sign so people driving through the areas
would be able to tell who the builder is and where their offices are
located.
3. Concern was expressed as to the access to the east parcel and increased
traffic due to higher density. Mr. Eller indicated that the initial
access would be via Cumberland with an outlot access to the north.
Additional access would be from Anderson Lakes Parkway after it is
completed. Cumberland is defined as a collector street by the city
and cannot be changed, according to Mr. Eller.
4. Desire was expressed for a buffer between the east and west parcels. lome
possibilities mentioned were a landscaped buffer and an additional row
of single family lots running just east of the line now dividing the
two parcels. Mr. Krier indicated that soil and slope conditions are
such in that area that it is not ideal for dense housing, which might
make a buffer an attractive alternative. He also indicated that there
are other areas in the east plat where such conditions will probably
lead to some relatively open areas.
5. The question was asked whether there was any possibility that units in the
east parcel would be rental units. Mr. Eller indicated that they
would be sold with the intention of owner occupancy although this can
never be guaranteed, and stated absolutely that they will not be built
as rental units.
6. The subject of marketing and sales offices for the entire area was brought
up. Mr. Eller indicated that ultimately there would be three separate
model sites and sales offices, but that prospective buyers would see a
map showing all three projects.
7. The question of the park was raised. Mr. Eller indicated that the land for
the park has already been deeded to the city. He indicated that the
location of the park is firm and cannot be changed.
8. Mr. Eller indicated that the Manor Homes would be developed after the twin
or cluster homes and would be located toward the southeastern corner
of the area.
r?)
9. The residents expressed great concern over the future development of the
west parcel; the main fears being that the land either will not be
developed, or at some future date will be sold to another builder for
development. Mr. Eller was asked to address himself to the question
of what specific commitments he can offer to reassure the residents.
One suggestion centered around the possiblity of protective convenants
being placed on the lots in the west parcel. Mr. Eller indicated that
he might be willing to do this.
It was agreed in closing that we will meet again in two weeks (Thursday,
April 29) to continue our discussion. At this time Mr. Krier will have a pre-
liminary drawing of the east parcel replatted as per our discussions. He and
Mr. Eller were asked to be ready to address themselves to the questions of the
buffer and a firm commitment to the development of the west parcel.
12 (-1
° • .:4:1
WESTWOOD PLANNING & ENGINEERING COMPANY
June 9, 1982
Mr. Chris Enger, Planning Director
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
RE: Ridgewood West II
Dear Chris:
In accord with bur conversation earlier this week, and at your
suggestion, I would make the following clarifications regarding
the plans and plan materials submitted to you for the June 14,
1982, Planning Commission meeting:
• Concept Plan Multi-family Area - In accord with ordinance,
policy and planning principles, we would use landscaping and
distance to create a transition between the multi-family area
and the single family area in the adjacent subdivision. I
would hope to resolve this issue between Planning Commission
action and City Council action.
• Concept Plan, Phasing - Although we would rather tie the
phasing to the individual zoning as the applications come in,
we understand your concern for wanting to tie the phasing to
Anderson Lakes Parkway. For this reason, I have provided
you with a detailed traffic report which was done for the
neighborhood. We feel, based on this traffic report, that
all of the single family and single family cluster develop-
ment could be accomplished before Anderson Lakes Parkway
is constructed.
• Concept Plan - In accord with your wishes and also with the
understanding that costs are increased per single family
duelling unit, we will provide a sidewalk on the east side
of Hawthorne Drive.
• Development Phase Plan - All driveways will be asphalt. Also,
to clarify the setbacks, we offer the following:
A - 25 ft.
B - 20 ft. '
C - 5/5 ft. - 10 ft.
D - 5/10 ft. - 15 ft.
E - minimum 16 ft., average 20 ft.
F - 20 ft.
(see attached illustration)
1116 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 66426 1612/ 5460161
Mr. Chris.Enger
June 9, 1982
Page 2
• North Tot Lot - Will be constructed as part of Phase I.
• Concept Plan/Development Phase Plan - We understand your
desire and the desire of the city engineer regarding cul-
de-sacs; the short cul-de-sacs can be made into private
streets if the Planning Commission so directs.
I believe this covers all of the issues which we discussed.
Should you have any additional issues or questions, please do
not hesitate to contact me.
Respectfully,
WESTWOOD PLANNING & ENGINEERING COMPANY
Richard C. krier, AICP
RCE/dg
cc: Tim Eller
Attachments
141OLL wOo 1> PIVO. rurir-zi ellp.GEK Ir7. ••••n•• 17/3 wamm Ivw link =Tr-4-a= CENTEX HOMES MIDWEST INC. TYPICAL CLUSTER PLAN I RIDGEWOOD WEST TWO (fl ...IOU 3 5 ul WY; / oleos s • a
Single Family 1 270 10- 15+ 20- 10
3 400- 10+ 25- 30- 15+
4 325 10 20 20+ 10+
5 565+ 15+ 35 40- 25-
— ---
Total 1560 45 95 140 110 60 170
Multi Family 2 630 10 60
50 25
6 225 5
25
20 10
--
Total 855 15 85
70 35
Up Shilo - 40%
A
Total - 60%
29A
16
6
4
East - 7C%
145
75
West - 30%
180
95
45
4
11
--
60
141
8
31
180
2SA -c- -.1:-. n .., -'11— /009 . . 7 a P . /0 • r5/ IS A 7iP IA GP )1 P .4-- I r; A zo P ?on 10p GA 7p NA 7/3 _Nr-i I — 3> •.• ;.1 (042 35-A 7/0 6-4 Cif P p 10A Of rP aP,4_ 2ep 24A loP rA reit/ 4
C-r,o 1
cif •nn•n••nn
e
12'1
3 Li 3
LI 3 5
5-
6
168 ‘.
tzi
_4-44 5 71-
Lnni ____Tr rj
/y
7--; 1-1-„,:is_
FC 15 0 /00 AC.,
_60
_ _ f4) 95 tv..) eo
Jt7 _ _17 0 los A7S
70 8 0
- - • - --(°•3 7) 6 0 _
REDGE1.11900D WEST
C-Intex Homes Midwest, Inc.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
May, 1982
:31 wFSTWOOD PLANNING & ENGINEERING COMPANY
MINNESOTA ENvIRO*ENTAL QUALITY WARD
ENVIROPIMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW)
AND NOTICE CF FINDINGS
DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE
E.R. 0
NOTE: The purpose of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAN) is to provide
information on • project so that one can assess rapidly whether or not the
project requires an Environmental Lopact Statement. Attach additional
pages, charts, maps, etc, as needed to answer thmee questions. Your
answers should be as specific as possible. Indicate which answers are
estimated.
X. SUMMARY
A. ,ACTIVITY FINDING BY RESPONSIBLE AGENCY (PERSON)
0 Negative Declaration (No'EIS) EIS Preparation Notice (EIS Required)
B. ACTIVITY IDENTIFICATION
1. Project name or title Centex Homes Midvest, Inc.
2. Project proposer(s) Centex Homes Midvost, Inc.
Address 8601 Darnell Road. Eden Prairie. MN 5534;
Telephone Number and Area Code 1 612) 941-L671
3. Responsible Agency or Person rify of Fdpn Prairie
Address 8950 Eden Prairie Road, Eden Prairie, MN 55343
Person in Responsible Agency (Person) to contact for further information
on this PAw: Westvood Planning & Telephone 546-ri155.
Engineering Company Richard Krier
4. This EAW and other supporting doctmentation are available for public in -
Spection and/or copying at: Location ftS n Prairie
Telephone ghl_77A7 Hours R:00 a.m.-4:30 p.m.
S. Reason for EAW Preparation
CD Mandatory Category -cite Petition (::)Other
MEQB Rule number(s) Chap. 12, 3.024, 4 -
C. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
1. Project location
CountyHennepinCity/Township name Eden Prairie
Township number 116 (Worth), Range Number 22 East or (circle one).
Section number(s) 22 Street address (if in city) or legal description:
-1-
2. Type and scope of proposed project:
Construction of 168 detached single family units and
168 attached units on 63 acres.
3. Estimated starting date (month/year) Scotemba_T 1982
4. Estimated completion date (month/year) Septemhnr 198 5
5. Estimated construction cost
6. 'List any federal funding involved and known permits or approvals needed
from each unit of government and status of each:
Unit of Government Name or Type of Permit/Approval Status (federal, state, or Federal Funding
regional, local)
local
regional
local
state
Plat, rezoning, comp. plan
amend, PUD
Comprehensive Plan amend.
Watershed district
Sewer & water system
pending
pending
pending
pending
7. If federal permits, funding or approvals are involved, will a federal EIS
be prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act? NO YES UNKNOWN
II. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
A. Include the following maps or drawings:
1. A map showing the regional location of the project.
2. An original 81/2 x 11 section of a U.S.C.S. 71/2 minute, 1:24,000 scale map
with the activity or project area boundaries and site layout delineated.
Indicate quadrangle sheet name. (Original U.S.G.S. sheet must be main-
tained by Responsible Agency; legible copies may be supplied to other
EAW distribution points.)
3. A sketch map of the site showing location of structures and including
significant natural features (water bodies, roads, etc).
4. Current photos of the site must be maintained by the Responsible Agency.
Photos need not be sent to other distribution points.
B. Present land use.
1. Briefly describe the present use of the site and lands adjacent to the site.
Streets, graded for development, previous EAW filed; surround-
ing land uses are single family, south, west and north;
agricultural, east.
2. Indicate the approximate acreages of the site that are:
a. Urban development NA ,acres f. Wetlands (Type III, IV, V) -0- acres
b. Urban vacant 63../a acres R. Shoreland
c. Rural developed -0- acres Floodplain
d. Rural vacant -0- acres I. Cropland/Pasture land
e. Designated Recre- acres J. Forested
ation/Open Space
-2-
12.3 . acres
NA acres
-0- acres
_ 3.4 acres
IV>
.3. List names and sites of lakes, rivers and streams on or Deer the site
particularly lakes within 1,000 feet and rivers and streams within
300 feet.
Staring Lake - 160t acres; McCoy Lake - 11 acres; Purgatory
Creek
C. Activity Description
1. Describe the proposed activity, including staging of development (if shy),
operational characteristics, and or types of equipment and/or pro-
cesses to be used. Include data that would indicate the magnitude of
the proposed activity (e.g. rate of production, number of customers, tans
of raw materials, etc).
Project will be built in 4 stages. Stages 1,2,3 will consist
of clusters of single family homes. The final phase will
consist of four 8-plexes, six 12-unit buildings and four 16-unit
buildings.
2. Fill in the following where applicable:
a. Total project area 6-5.47acres g. Size of marina and access NA sq. ft.
or channel (water area)
Length NA miles h. Vuhicular traffic trips
generated per day 2418 ADT
b. Number of hour in; or
recreational units 336
i. Number of employees
NA
C. Height of structures 25 ft. j.
d. Number of parking 2/du
spaces 1 outside; 1 garage k.
e. Amount of dredging NA cu. yd.
Water supply needed 72 ,424)ga1/da
Source , municipnt
Solid waste requiring
122 tons/yr disposal
1. Commercial, retail or
f. Liquid wastes requir-
industrial floor space
sq. ft.
ing treatment 57,975 gal/da
III. ASSESSMENT OF PUITNTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
A. SOILS AND TOPO'acAPHY
1. Will the project be built in an area with slopes currently
exceeding 12%? Southern/southeastern areas have steep slopes vhich X No Yes
will .be protected: no construction will occur on those slopes
2. Are there Other geologically unstable areas involved in the project,
such as fault tones, shrink-swell soils, peatlands, or sinkholes? X NO YES
3. If yes on 1 or 2, describe slope conditions or unstable area and any
measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impacts.
- 3 -
4. Indicate suitability of site soils for foundations, individual septic
systems, and ditching, if these are included in the project.
Majority of site has good bearing capacity and low volume
change characteristics. few pockets with less desirable
characteristics will be corrected before construction begins.
5. Estimate the total amount of grading and filling which will be done:
10 000cu. yd. grading -0- cu. yd. filling
What percent of the site will be so altered? minimal - NOTE: cite has
already_ been graded as per previous plan; new plan will require minimal changes on
6. What will be the maximum finished slopes 33 2a few lots
7. What steps uill be taken to minimize soil erosion during and
after construction?
'Erosion control plan will be reviewed and approved by Watershed District.
Exposed, graded soil will be kept to a minimum Straw mulch or seeding
will be used as needed.
B. VEGETATION '
I. Apprcximately what percent of the site is in each of the followint
vegetative types: Site has been graded per previous plan.
Woodland 51 Cropland/ -0-
Pasture
-0-2 Harsh Brush or shrubs -0-
Grass or herbaceous 95 2, Other -0-
(specify)
2. How many acres of forest or woodland will be cleared, if any? -0 - acres
3. Are there any rare or endangered plant species or areas of unique
botanical or biological significance on or near the site? (See DNR
publication The Uncommon Ones.) X NO YES
If yes, list the species or area and indicate any measures to be used
to reduce potential adverse impact.
C. FISH AND WILDLIFE
1. Are there any designated federal, state or local wildlife or fish manage-
ment areas or sanctuaries near or adjacent to the site? x NO YES
2. Are there any known rare or endangered species of fish and wildlife
on or near the site? (See DNR publication The _j .NO YES
Uncommon Ones.)
3. Will the project alter or eliminate wildlife or fish X NO YES
habitat? Area has been graded under previous approval and E.A.W.
4. If yes on any of questions 1-3, list the area, species or habitat, and
indicate any measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impact on
them.
D. HYDROLOGY
1. Will the project include any of the following?
If yes, describe type of work and mitigative measures to
reduce adverse impacts.
a. Drainage or alteration of any lake, pond,
sarsh, lowland or groundwater supply
b. Shore protection works, dams, or dikes
c. Dredging or filling operations
d. Channel modifications or diversions
e. Appropriation of ground and/or surface water
f. Other changes in the course, current or cross-
section of water bodies on or near the site X
2. What percent of the area will be converted to new impe-vious surface? 2B. el
3. What measures will be taken to reduce the volume of surface water
runoff and/or treat it to reduce pollutants (sediment, oil, gas, etc)?
Stray bale dikes and sedimentation pond will be used during
grading and construction. Majority of grading was completed
per previous plan and EAW.
4. Will there be encroachment into the regional (100 year) floodplain
by new fill or structures? y NO YES
If yes, does it conform to the local floodplain ordinance? NO X YES
5. What is the approximate minimum depth to groundwater on
the site? 51- feet
E. WATER QUALITY
1. Will there be a discharge of process or cooling water, sanitary sewage
or other waste waters to any water body or to groundwater? X NO YES
If yes, specify the volume, the concentration of pollutants and the
water body receiving the effluent.
2.. If discharge of waste water to the municipal treatment system is
planned, identify any toxic, corrosive or unusual pollutants
in the wastewater.
NA
. 3. Will any sludges be generated by the proposed project? X NO TES
If yes, specify the expected volume, chemical composition and method
of disposal.
I
3 -
4. What measures viii be used to minimize the volumes or impacts identi-
fied in questions 1-3?
NA
5. If the project is or includes a landfill, attach information on soil
profile, depth to water table, and proposed depth of disposal.
NA
F. AIR gUALITT AND NOISE
1. Will the activity cause the emission of any gases and/or particulates
into the atmosphere? NO X YES
If yes, specify the type and origin of these emissions, indicate any
emission control devices or measures to be used, and specify the
approximate amounts for each emission (at the source) both with and
without the emission control measures or devices.
Auto traffic will increase as residents occupy the area.
Pollution will result as normal in residential neighborhoods.
Development over 5+ years will allow for improvement to Mitchell Road
and its intersection at TN 5.
2. Win noise c: vibration be generated by construction and/or ope, ition
of the project? NO X YES
If yes, describe the noise source(s); specify decibel levels EdiTATJ,
and duration (hrs/da) for each and any mitigative measures to reduce
the noise/vibration.
Noise will consist of that normal to the construction of
residences and associated services.
3. If yes on I or 2, specify whether any areas sensitive to noise or
• reduced air quality-(hospitals, elderly housing, wilderness, wildlife
areas, residential developments, etc) are in the affected area and
give distance frou source.
Residences located immediately north& south of site; Purgatory Creel
to the east (about 100' at nearest point).
C. lAhM RESOURCE CONSERVATICC, ENERGY
1. Is any of the site suitable for agricultural or forestry production
or currently in such use? NO X TES
If yes, specify the acreage involved, type and volume of marketable
crop or wood produ:ed and the quality of the land for such use.
A portion of the site had been used to grow soybeans, prior
to first plan as interim use pending development. Has not
been cultivated since grading.
2. Are there any known mineral OT peat deposits on the site? x NO YES
If yes, specify the type of deposit and the acreage.
3. Will the project result in an increased energy demand?
NO
Com&lete the following as applicable:
a. Energy requirements (oil, electricity, gas, coal, solar, etc.)
Type
Estimated
Annual
necui rerrent
Peak Dezand
(Ho u rly or rally) I Anticipated
1Laili er
Pine Contract or
Interrt7titft le Basis E.: ..1:7"--.e r Wiliter
elcctricily 30 '000 KWH X N.S.P. Firm
gas 40,000 c.f
, r r .1kr1 Lt" Minnegasco Firm
b. Estinate the capacity of all proposed on-site fuel storage.
NA
e. Estimate annual energy distribution for:
space heating 71 e lighting 3
•
air conditioning
2 t processing NA •
ventilaticn
NA •
.d. Specify any major energy conservaticn systems and/or equipment
incorporated into this project .
NA
e. What secondary energy use effects ray result from this project
(e.g. more or longer car trips, induced housing or businesses, etc)?
NA
H. OPEN SPACE/RECREATION
1. Are there any designated federal, state, county or local recreation or
open space areas near the site (including wild and scenic rivers, trails,
lake accesses)? NO YES
If yes, list areas by nare and explain hem each may be affected by the
project. Indicate any measures to be used to reduce adverse Leg:acts.
Purgatory Creek Trail corridor is located to the cast; Storing
Lake is to the south. Erosion control measures as per watershed
district regulations.
I. TRANSrORTAHON
I. Will the project affect any existing or proposed transportation
• systems (highway, railroad, water, airport, etc)? NO X YES
If yes, specify which part (c) of the system(s) will be affected.
For these, specify existing use and capacities, average traffic
speed and percentage of truck traffic (if highway); and Indicate
how they will be affected by the project (e.g. congestion, per-
centage of truck traffic, safety, increased traffic (ADT), access
requirements).
Added trip ends Will result on Mitchell Road and future
Anderson Lakes Parkway.
Mitchell Road is a 30 mph street. The project will generate
approximately 3,000 ADT.
2. Is mass transit available to the site?
NO y YES
3. What measures, including transit and paratransit services, are
planned to reduce adverse impacts?
Site is one -half mile west of MTC express route.
J. PLANNING, LLND USE, CaDfUNITY SERVICES
1. Is the project consistent with local and/or regional comprehensive
plans? x NO YES
If not, explain:
. Changes pending
If a toning change or special use permit is necessary, indicate
existing zoning and change requested.
Existing zoning R1-13.5, new zoning as per PUD R1-13.5
KM 6.5
2 % Will the type or height of the project conflict with the character
of the existing neighborhood? X NO YES
If yes, explain and describe any measures to be used to reduce
conflicts.
- 8 -
3. Now many employees will move into the area td be near the project?
How much new housing will be needed?
4. Will the project induce development nearby--either support services
or similar developments? X NO YES
If yes, explain type of development and specify any other counties and
municipalities affected.
5. Is there sufficient capacity in the following public services to handle
the project and any associated growth?
Amount required
Pu63 c Service
for prolect
Sufficient Capacity?
—
water . 72,4in gal/da _., y pq
xfstiwater treattp.,nt ' _57.975 gal/da
needed feet
Yes
sewer - will be phased in ,..,3s Yes
schools 229 pupils Yes
solid waste dis.poral 43.5 ton/mo Yes
Streets l.45 14: miles Yes
other (police, fire. etc.) j Yes
If current major public facilities are not adequate, do existing local
plans call for expansion, or is expansion necessary strictly for this
one project and its associated impacts?
6. Is the project within a proposed or designated Critical Area OT part of
a Related Actions EIS or other environmentally sensitive plan or program
reviewed by the EQB?X NO YES
If yes, specify which area or plan.
7. Will the project involve the use, transportation, storage, release
or disposal of potentially hazardous or toxic liquids, solids or
gaseous substances such as pesticides, radioactive wastes, poisons,
etc.? y NO YES
If yes, please specify the substance and rate of usage and any measures
to be taken to minimize adverse environmental impacts from accidents.
•• 9 - 1 02-
IL • When the prcject has served its useful life, will retirement of the
facility re;uire special measures or plans? YES
If yes, specify'
K. BIS'DORIC RESOURCES
1. Are there any structures on the site older than 50 years or on federal
or state historical registers? _IL...NO YES
2. Rave any arrowheads, potter), or other evidence of prehistoric or early
settlement been found on the site? unknoun NO YES
Might any known archaeologic or paleontological sites be affected
by the activity? _ NO YES
Project will be reviewed by Historical Sortrty.
3. List any site or structure identified in 1 and 2 and explai any
impact on them.
NA
L. OTkiatENVIROMMENVn L CONCERNS
Describe any other major environmental effects which May not have been
identified in the previous sections.
None
(V. CYTal ?.13T3 CAME MEASURES
Briefly describe mitigative measures proposed to reduce or eliminate potent
i
a
l
adverse impacts that have not been described before.
None
a-0
V. FINDINGS
A. The project is a private ( ) government (X ) action. The Responsible
Agency (Person), after consideration of the information in this EAW, and
the factors in Minn. Reg. MEQB 25, makes the following findings.
1. The project is ( ) is not ( X ) a major action.
State reasons:
Type of action is residential development within the urban
service area; scope is limited to 64- acres with limited cost;
development is compatible to surrounding uses.
2. The project does ( ) does not (X ) have the potential for significant
environmental effects.
State reasons:
. With mitigating measures, erosion control, city infrastructure
end regional transportation system, no significant environmental
effects will occur; no other development will occur because of
this action; regulatory authority exists with city and watershed
district.
3. (For private actions only.) The project is ( ) is not ( ) of more
than local significance.
State reasons:
VI. CONCLUSIONS AND CERTIFICATION
NOTE: A Negative Declaration or EIS Preparation Notice is not officially filed
until the date of publication of the notice in the EQB Monitor section.
A. I. the undersigned, am either the authorized representative of the
Responsible Agency or the Responsible Person identified below. Based
on the above findings, the Responsible Agency (Person) makes the
following conclusions. (Complete either 1 or 2.)
1. WECATIVE DECLARATION NOTICE
No EIS is needed on this project, because the project is not
a major action and/or does not have the potential for significant
environmental effects and/or, for private actions only, the
project is not of more than local significance.
1)M
2. EIS PREPARATION NOCCE
An EIS will be prepared on this project because the project is a
major action and has the potential for significant environmental
effects. For private actions, the project is also of more than
local significance.
a. The MU Rules provide that physical construction or operation of
the project must stop when an EIS is required. In special circum-
stances, the MEQB can specifically authorize limited construction
to begin or continue. If you feel there are special circumstances
in this project, specify the extent of progress recommended and
the reasons.
b. Date Draft ELS will be submitted:
(month) (day) (year)
(1EQB Rules requIre that the Draft EIS be submitted within 120
davs of publicatfon of the EIS Preparation Notice in the Ea
Monitor, If special circumstances prevent compliance with this
time limit, a written request for extension explaining the
TeaSOTIS for the req.est must be submitted to the EQB Chairman.)
C. The Draft EIS wi.1 be prepared by (list Responsible Agency(s)
or Person(s)):
B. Attach an affidavit certifying the 'date that copies of this LAW were railed
TO all points on the official EQB distribution list, to the city and county
directly impacted, and to adjacent counties or municipalities likely to be
directly impacted by the proposed action (refer to question 111.3.6. on
page 9 of the LAW). The affidavit need be attached only to the copy of
the LAW which is sent to the EQB Administrator.
C. Billing procedures for EQB Monitor Publication.
State agency Attach to the EA W sent to the EQB Administrator a completed
ONIA: OSR 100 form (State Register General Order Form--available at
Center Stores). For instructions, please contact your Agency's
Liaison Officer to the State ReWter or the Office of the
State Register--(612) 296-6239.
1 hereby certify that the information contained in this document is true and
correct to the best of my know3edge.
SIGNATURE
TITLE
DATE
- 12 -
I a(l e3
RIDGEWOOD WEST 11
lOP
SCALE I 24 000
' 0 I.111
-1.=.1-,.--.=1 ==--= — - — — — — - - — — ----''' --"-C'---7.3
!OM 0 IMO 2" no 1011 •NIO SOY ((IV /on fill
.-.7L -... I . ...=---.. 1 -,.•-•:: - :, 1. _=_:1. 7747.7, •• S.:-='.:3
I S 0 I RII.OKUR
1 •
CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET
DATUM IS MEAN SEA LEVEL
EDEN PRAIRIE QUADRANG:
MINNESOTA
7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAT'
5M14 MINNEAPOLIS IV OLAE:RANCILE
J.n.C.1,7;/;;,7, \ te)
1_3
,r-zycz:rd
cJ
1
LL
•
/i I
Ridgewood West PUD Dev.
(Ridgewood West Two)
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 82-168
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDMENT OF PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT 82-26 OF RIDGEWOOD WEST
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of Ordinance 135
provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas
located within the City, and
WHEREAS, the Ridgewood West Two plan is considered a proper
amendment to the Ridgewood PUD and the Comprehensive Guide Plan, and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing
on Ridgewood West Two's PUD Development and considered Centex Homes
Midwest Inc. 's request for approval for development and variances, and
recommended approval of the requests to the City Council, and
WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on July 6, 1982.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The Rid9ewood West Two development of PUD 82-26, being
in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and legally described as
all of Blocks 3, 6, and 7, Lots 3-47, Block 5, Outlots
, A and B, Ridgewood West, Hennepin County.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD Development approv-
al as outlined in the application material dated May, 1982.
3. That the PO Development meet the recommendations of the
Planning Commission dated June 14, 1982.
ADOPfED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie this
day of
1982.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Irene, City Clerk SEAL
Ridgewood West Two PUG
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 82-165
A .RESOLUTION APPROVING THE RIDGEWOOD WEST
TWO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND AMENDING
.THE GUIDE PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of Ordi
n
a
n
c
e
1
3
5
provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUG) of cert
a
i
n
a
r
e
a
s
located within the City, and
WHEREAS, the Ridgewood West Two PUD is considered a pro
p
e
r
a
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
to the Comprehensive Guide Plan, and
WHEREAS,,the City Planning Commission did conduct a pub
l
i
c
h
e
a
r
i
n
g
on June 14, 1982 on Centex Homes Midwest, Inc. 's request for app
r
o
v
a
l
for attached and detached residential and recommended a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
t
h
e
PUG Concept to the City Council, and
WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on
J
u
l
y
6
,
1
9
8
2
.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of E
d
e
n
P
r
a
i
r
i
e
,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The Ridgewood West Two PUD, being in Hennepin County,
Minnesota, and legally described as Lots 28-62, Block
1; all of Blocks 3, 6 and 7, and Lots 3-47, Block 5;
Outlots A and B, Ridgewood West, Hennepin County.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD approval as out-
lined in the application material dated May, 1982.
3. That the PUG meet the recommendations of the Planning
Commission dated June 14, 1982.
ADOPTED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie this
day of
1982,
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Franc, City Clerk SEAL
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 82-166
•
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT
OF RIDGEWOOD WEST TWO
BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council
a
s
f
o
l
l
o
w
s
:
That the preliminary plat of Ridgewood West Two
dated
May 26, 1982 , a copy of which is on file at the City Hall
and amended as follows:
is found to be in conformance with the provisio
n
s
o
f
t
h
e
E
d
e
n
P
r
a
i
r
i
e
Zoning and Platting ordinances and amendments t
h
e
r
e
t
o
a
n
d
i
s
h
e
r
e
i
n
approved. .
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the day of
19 .
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
John D. Franc, City Clerk
SEAL
Ridgewood West Two EAW
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 82-167
A RESOLUTION FINDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
WORKSHEET FOR RIDGEWOOD WEST TWO A PRIVATE ACTION
DOES NOT REQUIRE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
WHEREAS', the City Council of Eden Prairie did hold a hearing on
July 6, 1982 to conSider the Ridgewood West Two proposal, and
WHEREAS, said development is located on approximately 64 acres of
land in central Eden Prairie, and
WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie Planhing Conodssion did hold a public
hearing on the Ridgewood West Two PUD request and did recommend approval
of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet finding of no significant
impact,
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Eden Prairie City Council
that an Environmental Impact Statement is not necessary for Ridgewood
West Two because the project is not a major action which does not have
significant environmental effects and is not more than of local signifi-
cance.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a Negative Declaration Notice shall
be officially filed with the Minnesota Environmental Quality Council.
ADOPTED, this day of , 1982.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Franc, City Clerk SEAL
Planning Commission Minutes -8- ' June-147
MEMBERS ABSENT: William Bearman and Dennis Marhula
C. BRYANT LAKE _CENTER 2ND ADDITION, by Ryan Development, In
c
.
Request to amend PUD 80-12 and replat Bryant Lake Center
from 14 building lots to 13 lots, vacation of easements,
variances from the Office District for setback and parking
ratio of 4 spaces per 1,000 GFA. Located west of Market
Place Drive. A public hearing.
The Planner stated that Bob Ryan was present to give the pres
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
.
H
e
stated the request is to consolidate 14 buildings to 13 buildi
n
g
s
w
i
t
h
l
e
s
s
parking; 4 spaces/1000 GFA.
Sutliff asked if the buildings would be owner-occupied under
a
c
o
v
e
n
a
n
t
.
R
y
a
n
replied yes, it is an office/townhouse type of building.
Hallett asked if there is adequate room for expansion of parki
n
g
i
f
n
e
e
d
e
d
.
The Planner replied yes.
Hallett asked who decides if more parking is needed. The Pla
n
n
e
r
r
e
p
l
i
e
d
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
.
MOTION 1
-Carfrier moved to close the public hearing. Sutliff seconded, motion
c
a
r
r
i
e
d
5
-
0
.
MOTION 2
Gartner moved to recommend to the City Council aftroval of th
e
B
r
y
a
n
t
L
a
k
e
C
e
n
t
e
r
replat as per the plans dated 5/20/82, letters dated 5/24/82
a
n
d
t
h
e
6
/
9
/
8
2
s
t
a
f
f
feport. Sutliff seconded, motion carried 5-0.
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
DATE:
PROJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
FEE OWNER:
REQUEST:
Planning Commission
Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
June 9, 1982
BRYANT LAKE CENTER 2ND ADDITION
(replat of first phase Bryant Lake Center PUD)
SW of Co. Rd. GO & Market Place Drive
Ryan Development, Inc.
Eden Prairie Land Company II
1. Replat Bryant Lake Center from 14
lots to 13 lots;
2. Parking variance to permit 4 .
spaces/1,000 G.F.A.
BACGC=
The 1Cryant Lake Center Addition plat and corresponding rezoning from C-Reg
to Office was approved in November, 1980. The project was approved with
a 4.7 parking ratio with the condition the developer must prove that the
project has adequate parking at time of Phase 2 submission or reduce the
size of Phase 2.
In April of 1981, Ryan Investment requested of the Council and received ap-
proval of a minor amendment to the site plan allowing a six space .carport to
be constructed on Lot 7 (this eliminated one parking space).
Todate 7 of the original 14 buildings have been constructed. An on-site
inspection on two different days showed ample parking for the buildings
and occupancy todate.
EXISTING SITE CNAPACTER
Market Place Drive and the required 5 concrete walk is installed.
Office Ridge Circle is not yet installed neither is the loop connection be-
tween the two streets.
The immediate yards around the seven constructed buidings has been sodded
and some are landscaped.
No change in grading is needed to accommodate the larger building.
Staff Report-Bryant Lake Center 2nd
page 2
ORDINANCE REQUIRIMUITS
Setbacks: 30 loot front, 20:50 sides, 20 rear
POD approval granted setback variances if a minimum of 20 feet was maintained
between buildings for fire safety.
Five parking spaces/1,000 G.F.A. (4.7 approved in PUD).
The change to 13 buildings from 14 buildings will cover less of the site.
Changes requested are:
1. New Lot 1 building setback from building on Lot 5 of 28' (not
26 as noted in letter).
. 5' sidevard setback for building on new Lot 1 (28'
between buildings).
3. Parking from 4.7 (variance previously granted) to 4 spaces/
1,000 G.F.A.
The request for 28 feet setback between Lot 1 and Lot 5 buildings is con-
sistent with the character of the approved POD and previous variances.
The 5 foot setback request from Lot 6 to building on new Lot 1 is 5 feet less
than the proyluu, v&riance Miich allowed a 10 foot mir,Imaa.
Since the developer is preserving green space for parking expansion in the
future if needed, and parking todate has not been a problem, the four
parking spaces per 1,000 G.F.A. may work on this 8 acre office site. Space
for up to 4.7 spaces per 1,000 must be provided in the site plan and con-
structed in the future if required by the City. This provision must be
filed with the property. An approval on this site should not be construed
to moan variances will be granted for the remaining 24 acres in the Bryant
Lake Center PhD.
TRANSPOR1ATION
As requested during the POD review, 27 additional feet of ROW was dedicated
to the County which is adequate for future improvements.
Construction on Valley View Road will begin this Summer which will improve
Site lines to allow connection of Office Ridge Circle.
CASH_PAR.K_FEF
Ac -reiitlinod in the developer's agreement effective on this property, a cash
park fee of S1400/acre is required at time of each building permit issuance.
RUMMLNPATIONS
The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the replat and variances
contingent upon the following:
1. A minimum of 20 feet is provided between buildings as required under
the POD.
2. 5' sideyard setback variance between the building on new Lot 1 and its
north lot line only.
I c
Staff Report-Bryant Lake Center 2nd page 3
3. Developer commit to providing additional parking when and where d
i
r
e
c
t
e
d
by the Planning Staff.
4. Cash park fee payment continue to be applicable.
5. Request be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering
Department prior to final platting.
JJ:sh
HENNEPIN
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
320 Washington Av. South ckV
Hopkins. Minnesota 55343
935-3381
June 3, 1982
Mr. Chris Enger
Director of Planning
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
Dear Mr. Enger:
RE Proposed Plat - "Bryant Lake Center PUD - Replat"
CSAH 39 (formerly CSAH 60) between TN 169/212 & FAI-494
Section 11, Township 116, Range 22
Hennepin County Plat No. 845R
Review and Recommendations
Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County revirm
of proposed plats abutting County roads. We reviewed the above plat and found
it acceptable with consideration of these conditions:
-The 17 feet additional right of may dedicated with the original platting, making
the right of way 60 feet from the center of CSAH 39 is enough for future improve-
ments to CSAH 39.
-The westerly proposed access onto CSAH 39 does not, under existing conditions,
meet the minimum sight distance requirements for the posted 40 mph. Until the
grades on CSAH 39 are changed to improve sight distance the developer must
construct the access directly opposite the westerly Super Valu drive and construct
a temporary frontage road to the proposed street. The frontage road must be out-
side the new right of way.
-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.
-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 to Les Weigelt.
'ncerely,
• //1. -(7
ames M. Hold, P.E.
Chief, Planning and Progranving
JMW/LDW:pj
HEN NEPIN COUNTY
onequaloppodunftiemployer
WAN ME Kff
May 24, 1982
City of Eden Prairie
Attention: Chris Enger
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Sir:
Attached is a request for replatting of a portion of our planned
unit development - Lake Ridge Office Park, Bryant Lake Center,
Eden Prairie, Minnesota. I have attached the following:
* A Land Development Application.
* Preliminary Plat (replat).
* Grading and Site Plan.
* Parking Survey.
Our request for amendment includes the following changes:
1. Replat from 14 building lots to 13 building lots. The
number of common area lots will remain the same. This
change is requested to react to a greater market demand
of office space in allotments of 4,500 square feet and
larger. Also, the smaller buildings (i.e. 3,800 square
foot building), because of the many fixed costs per
building, are quickly becoming economically infeasible
particularly in today's price-conscious market. No
major grading or site changes are necessary with this
change, and the change actually results in less
building coverage than our original proposal.
N). BOX 5411 • 1(17 • Mil SIKII 1 S.r. • C43.ANI) RAPIDS, MN 15744 • (21131 32.64Nt7
747() MARK! 1 PIACI DRIVI • !IAN PR:111:11. MN51344 • i612) 941.9415
Mr. Chris Enger -2- May 24, 1982
2. The replat also requests approval for an additional 500
square feet. Allow me to explain. The replatting from
14 to 13 buildings results in replacing 2 - 3,800 square
foot buildings with 1 - 5,500 square foot building. This
results in a loss of 2,100 square feet. To recapture
this loss, we are requesting approval to increase one of
our 6,700 square foot buildings to the next largest
building size (i.e. 9,300 square feet). That increase
is 2,600 square feet. The net difference between the
added 2,600 square feet and loss of 2,100 square feet
results in a net 500 square foot increase.
3. We are also requesting variance from setback requirements
with respect to the north lot line of Lot 1 of the replat
(the old Lot 11 of the current plat). This setback
variance is requested because of the change in building
size in the old Lot 11 as discussed in item #2 of this
letter. Although we are requesting the variance, it is
important to know that the distance between the buildings
to be constructed on the new Lot 1 and old Lot 5 will be
26 feet (the proposed building spacing will be as great
as the spacing between buildings 1 through 4). The 26
feet is slightly greater than the spacing of our buildings
which are approximately 24 feet apart. Thus, although
a setback is violated, the actual distance between
buildings is retained.
As we have discussed, the variance request for the five
foot side yard setback is based on our desire to avoid the
replatting of Lot 6, Block 1, Bryant Lake Center. Should
the City not grant our request for this variance, we
would have to replat a portion of the common area, Lot 6,
which would entail involving all of the present owners
of the seven buildings occupied at this time together with
their mortgage companies.
4. Lastly, we submit to the City for your consideration, a
request to reduce the number of parking spaces. I've
below summarized the original proposal, the new proposal,
and the existing parking situation.
* ORIGINAL PROPOSAL
77,700 sq. ft. 368 cars 4.74 cars/1,000 sq. ft.
1M
Mr. Chris Enger
* ACTUAL USE
28,500 sq. ft.
* PROPOSED
-Option #1
78,200 sq. ft.
-3- May 24, 1982
77 cars 2.70 cars/1,000 sq. ft.
372 cars 4.74 cars/1,000 sq. ft.
-Option #2
78,200 sq. ft. 313 cars 4.0 cars/1,000 sq. ft.
Our major concern as developers, and I'm sure the City's
major concern, is that adequate parking be constructed
for the project. 'With this in mind, our secondary concern
is to obtain as much open area and green space as possible.
This insures and enhances the residential appearance of the
project. Thus, we propose to construct parking to satisfy
Option #2 (which still allows for 50% growth in parking
needs for the existing space).
The area delineated on the site plan with the dotted line
would be landscaped; however, because of the location and
grading of these areas, they could be easily converted into
parking if the need arose. We would further propose that
as construction continues on the project, we take additional
parking surveys to insure that a ratio of parking to
square footage is adequate.
In summary, we feel the changes requested in this replat will in fact
further enhance Lake Ridge Office Park as a quality, low density
office park.
Respectfully submitted,
RYAN DEVELOPMENT, INC.
1
C Oe
Robert L. Ryan G
Vice President
RLR:pkj
enclosures
(612)941-4822
55344
May 24, 1982
Mr. Chris Enger
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
RE: Lakeridge Office Park
Dear Mr. Enger:
We have recently conducted a parking survey for the subject project
with the following results:
28,500 S.F. are finished and occupied thus far
78 cars = maximum count during our survey
This translates into 2.74 cars per 1,000 S.F.
If this ratio is applied to the eventual completed project, there
wouid be a need to provide parking for 214 cars for the completed
78,200 S.F.
Ryan Development is proposing to provide parking at a ratio of 4 cars
per 1,000 S.F. of building. Based on the current useage, this would
allow a 46% increase in efficiency. In addition to this, it is
possible to expand the on site parking to 372 cars or 4.74 cars per
thousand. This would allow a 74% increase in efficient use of the
buildings.
In conclusion, we feel that this is a very sound approach. By pro-
viding less parking, the hard surface area of the site is reduced,
while the green space is increased. Yet, the expansion capability
still allows the parking to be increased to meet possible future
demands. It is our opinion that these particular buildings, be-
cause they arc owner occupied, are being finished off with more
private offices and storage space than other typical offices. We
feel this accounts for the low parking ratios.
Very truly yours,
atuti
Daniel S. O'Brien, A.I.A
DOB:jid
7470 market place drive
16121941-4022
eden prairie, minnesola 55344
);#1,e,( f ) ( r ir 11 f
= waters, cluts & o'brien, memorandum C=11111=7
TO , Rot Ryan DATE: May 17, 1982
FROM Dan O'Brien
PROJECT. LakeRidge
COMM.NO. 8120
SUBJECT: Occupied Area Summary
Bldg.
Bldg. #1
Bldg. 42
Bldg. #3
Bldg. #4
Bldg. #5
Bldg. 46
Bldg. 47
Occupied Area
2650
4500
2700
2900
9300
1950
4500
28,500 Square Feet
12sua
77
100
95
90
85
80
75
66 66
72 71
i63
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
c.
t--1
a 0
0 4
TUESDAY
5/18/82
FRIDAY WEDNESDAY
5/19/82
MONDAY THURSDAY
5/13/82 5/14/82 5/17/82
Accum
[202]
Accum
[198)
Accum
[198)
Accum
[204]
Accum
[200]
LAKE RIDGE OFFICE PARK
Parking Lot Survey
May 19, 1982
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ,
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 82-164
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT
OF BRYANT LAKE CENTER 2ND ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
• That the preliminary plat of Bryant Lake Center 2nd Addition
dated
May 20, 1982 , 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
7oning 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 U. franc, City Clerk
SEAL
1'1( )1 IA I
July 6, 1982
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. R82-157
UTILITY EASEMENT ON
Lots 13 and 15, Block I
Bryant Lake Center
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has a certain utility easement
described as follows:
All utility and drainage easements on Lots 13 and 15, Block 1
Bryant Lake Center
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 6, 1982, after due notice
was published and posted as required by law;
, WHEREAS, the public utility companies, namely Northwestern Bell,
Minnegasco and Northern States Power have indicated no interest in said utility
easement; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that the said easement is not
necessary and has no interest to the public, therefore, should be vacated.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council
as follows:
1. Said utility easement as above described is hereby vacated.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare a notice of completion of the
proceedings in accordance with M.S.A. 412.851.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on July 6, 1982.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
A1TLST:
SEAL
-John D. Franc, Clerk
July 6, 1982
MEMO
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager
FROM: Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works
DATE: June 24, 1982
RE: Bryant Lake Center 2nd Addition
This project is a condominium office development which platted a small area
for each building unit and left the rest of the plat in an easement. Due to
some proposed changes in building locations, it is necessary to vacate the
"blanket" easement and replat them with the new lot locations.
Vacation of these easements have no adverse impact on utilities and it is there-
fore recommended the vacation be approved. I will be present to discuss this
information in more detail at the hearing.
EAD:sg
I t.'I t
' July 6, 1982
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. R82-158
VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT ADJACENT
TO ANDERSON LAKES PARKWAY
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has certain right-of-way easement
described as follows:
Located in the east 1/2 of Section 23 and the west 1/2 of
Section 24, 'I 116, R 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Said proposed vacation of Easement Document 11989259 as
recorded in the office of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin
County.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 6, 1982, after due notice
was published and posted as required by law; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that good area planning requires
that said right-of-way easement be vacated and that it would be in the public
interest to do so.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council
as follows:
1. Said right-of-way easement as above described is hereby vacated.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare a notice of completion of the
proceedings in accordance with M.S.A. Section 412.851.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on April 20, 1982.
Wolfgang H. Penzec -Kayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
1 211
July 6, 1982
MEMO
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager
FROM:
Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works
DATE:
June 28, 1982
RE:
Vacation of Easement adjacent to Anderson Lakes Parkway
During the initial phases of platting the properties adjacent to Anderson
Lake Parkway, specific easements were obtained for the roadway. However, now
that some adjacent properties are ready to be final platted, it is found
that the easements overlap the actual right-of-way necessary for the roadway.
The purpose of the vacation is to make the easements coincide with the platted
right-of-way.
This vacation does not adversely impact the utility and right-of-way needs
for Anderson Lakes Parkway. It is therefore recommended that the vacation
be approved. I will be available to provide more information at the hearing.
EAD:sg
July 6, 1982
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. R82-169
NOTICE OF HEARING ON VACATION OF
MEDIA LANE IN GOLDEN STRIP &
26' UTILITY EASEMENT IN
LOT 3, BLOCK 1 GOLDEN STRIP
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has a certain right-of-way and
utility easement described as follows:
Media Lane in Golden Strip and a utility easement in Lot 3,
Block 1 Golden Strip, situated in the Southeast corner of
Section 11, Southwest corner of Section 12, Northwest corner
of Section 13, and the Northeast corner of Section 14, T 116,
R 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 6, 1982, after due
notice was published and posted as required by law;
WHEREAS, it has been determined that good area planning requires
that said right-of-way be vacated and that said easement is not necessary
and has no interest to the public, therefore, should be vacated.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council
as follows:
1. Said Media Lane as above described is hereby vacated.
2. Said utility easement as above described is hereby vacated.
3. The City Clerk shall prepare a notice of completion of the
proceedings in accordance with M.S.A. 412.851.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on July 6, 1982.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
To: Mayor and Council
From: John Frane
Date: July 1, 1982
Re: Public Hearing Edenvale Apartments T.I.F. Project
The developer has requested a continuance of this item to Ju
l
y
2
0
,
1
9
8
2
.
The continuance will give the City an opportunity to receive
a
n
d
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
e
further information requested of the developer. The develop
e
r
i
s
requesting, however, that due to commitment dates regarding
H
U
D
i
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
,
loan commitments for First National Bank of Minneapolis, and
t
h
e
l
a
n
d
purchase option, that the Council authorize distribution of
t
h
e
T
.
I
.
F
.
plan to the other taxing districts as required by State Sta
t
u
t
e
s
.
T
h
e
proposed T.I.F. plan will be included in your FYI packets.
I
h
a
v
e
h
a
d
an opportunity to review the T.I.F. plan in a general way an
d
i
t
a
p
p
e
a
r
s
O.K., however I have requested more detailed information for
o
u
r
r
e
v
i
e
w
prior to any action by the Council.
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: .John D. Frane, Finance Director
DATE: July 1, 1982
RE: M.I.D.B.'s P & L Investment (Sheraton Inn) $9,170,000
The proponent, Mr. Paul Thomas, intends to construct a Sheraton
Hotel west of the Eden Prairie Center. Because of the un-
certainties in the financing market it has not been determined
if the financing will be a public offering or a private placement.
It is estimated that 150 new jobs will be available at the project;
the property is zoned correctly for its intended use. Resolution
No. 82-371 is included for your consideration.
JDF:bw
7/1/82
r0t
crry OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA
Application for
Industrial Development Bond Project Financing
1. APPLICANT: P&L Investment Co., a Minnesota general partnership
a. Business Name: P&L Investment Co.
b. Business Address: 4820 Highway 55
Golden Valley, Minnesota 55343
Attention: Mr. Paul Thomas
c. Business Form (corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, etc.):
General Partnership
d. State of Incorporation or Organization: Minnesota
e. Authorized Representative: Mr. Paul Thomas
f. Phone: (612) 588-0511
2. NAME(S) ANTI ADDRESS OF GENERAL PARTNERS:
a. Mr. Paul Thomas, 5022 Lowry Terrace, Minneapolis, MN
b. Mr. Lauren B. Pederson, 7029 Comanche Court, Minneapolis, MN
3. GIVE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF NATURE OF BUSINESS, PRINCIPAL
PRODUCTS, ETC.:
This partnership was formed for the purpose of developing and owning the
Sheraton Inn Southwest hotel facility.
4. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
a. Location and intended use: The 5-acre site is located 1/2 mile
south of the intersection of Highway 169 and Interstate 494 in Eden
Prairie.
b. Present ownership of project site: The site is presently owned
by Jesco, Inc. and is under option to the applicant.
c. Names and addresses of architect, engineer, and general contractor:
Architect: Korsunsky, Krank, Erickson Architects, Inc.
(Mr. Ronald Krank)
^1
Contractor: Kraus-Anderson (Mr. William Yaeger)
Construction Management: The Tuminelly Company
d. The project, the Sheraton Inn Southwest, will be managed by Thomas
Management Company which will be guided in its operation by
materials supplied by the Sheraton Corporation which materials will
include operations manuals for Pre-opening; Operations; Food and
Beverage; Advertising; Sales; Budget and Forecasting; Housekeeping;
From Office; and Security.
5. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST FOR:
Land
Construction Contracts
Equipment Acquisition and Installation*
Architectural, Engineering Construction Management
Legal
Interest During Construction
Bond Reserve
Contingencies
Loan Fees
Other (Interior Design Consultant)
Total
$ 750,000.00
5,420,000.00
1,293,000.00
252,000.00
75,000.00
630,000.00
None
250,000.00
400,000.00
100,000.00
$ 9,170,000.00
*Heating and air conditioning should be included as building costs. Indicate the
kind of equipment to be acquired here.
• 3, tr4-4
0.1 7"" /
6. BOND ISSUE:
a. Amount of proposed bond issue: $9,170,000
b. Proposed date of sale of bond: August, 1982
c. Length of bond issue and proposed maturities: Thirty years
d. Proposed original purchaser of bonds: Not yet identified.
e. Name and address of suggested trustee: Not applicable.
f. Copy of any agreement between Applicant and original purchaser:
Not applicable.
g. Describe any interim financing sought or available: Numerous
mortgage bankers have been unable to locate conventional financing.
h. Describe nature and amount of any permanent financing in addition
to bond financing: None
opalti4 riAls•
-2-
7. BUSINESS PROFILE OF APPLICANT:
a. Are you located in the City of Eden Prairie? No.
b. Number of employees in Eden Prairie?
i. Before this project:
ii. After this project:
c. Approximate annual sales:
-0-
150
$4,352,000 (1984 projected gross)
d. Length of time in business: As noted, this partnership was
formed for the purpose of developing and owning this particular
project. One of the principals of this partnership, Mr. Paul Thomas,
is the owner and operator of the Golden Valley House located in
Golden Valley, Minnesota. Mr. Thomas has owned and operated that
hotel for approximately 4 yours.
e. Do you have plants in other locations? If so, where? As noted, Mr.
Paul Thomas, one of the partners of this partnership, is the owner of
the Golden Valley House Motel in Golden Valley, Minnesota. P&L
Investment Co. has no other existing operations.
f. Are you engaged in international trade? No.
8. OTHER INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT(S):
a. List the name(s) and location(s) of other industrial development
project(s) in which the Applicant is the owner or a "substantial user"
of the facilities or a "related person" within the meaning of Section
103(b)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code. None.
b. List all cities in which the Applicant has requested industrial revenue
development financing. None.
c. Detail the status of any request the Applicant has before any other
city for industrial development revenue financing. Not applicable.
d. List any city in which the Applicant has been refused industrial
development revenue financing. None.
e. List any city (and the project name) where the Applicant has acquired
preliminary approval to proceed but in which final approval author-
izing the financing has been denied. None.
f. If Applicant has been denied industrial development revenue
financing in any other city as identified in (d) or (e), specify the
reason(s) for the denial and the name(s) of appropriate city officials
who have knowledge of the transaction. Not applicable.
-3-
9. NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF:
a. Underwriter Of public offering) If the issue is sold at a public
offering, the underwriter will be the firm of Dougherty, Dawkins,
Strand & Ekstrom, Inc., 425 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, MN
b. Private Placement Purchaser Of private placement) Not yet iden-
tified.
I. If lender will not commit until City has passed its preliminary
resolution approving the project, submit a letter from pro-
posed lender that it has an interest in the offering subject to
appropriate City approval and approval of the Commissioner
of Securities. Not applicable.
b. Bond Counsel: O'Connor & Hannan, IDS Center, Minneapolis,
MN
c. Corporate Counsel: Estes Parsinen & Levy, 700 Pillsbury Center,
Minneapolis, MN
c. Accountant: Laventhol & Horwath
WHAT IS YOUR TARGET DATE FOR:
a. Construction start: August 15, 1982
b. Construction completion: August 15, 1983
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The undersigned Applicant understands that the approval or disapproval by the City
of Eden Prairie for Industrial Development Bond financing does not expressly or
impliedly constitute any approval, variance, or waiver of any provision or require-
ment relating to any zoning, building, or other rule or ordinance of the City of
Eden Prairie, or any other law applicable to the property included in this project.
P&L INVESTMENT CO.
Applicant
„. •
By
Its Partner,/
Date: May 21, 1982
11
•••
EXHIBIT A
7 I RESOLUTION NO. . •
RESOLUTION GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO A
PROJECT UNDER THE MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVEL-
OPMENT ACT, :1EFERPING THE PROPOSAL TO THE
COMMISSIONER OF ENERGY, PLANNING AND DEVELOP-
MENT FOR APPROVAL AND AUTHORIZING PREPARATION
OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of
the City of Eden Prairie, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the
"City"), as follows:
1. It is hereby found, determined and declared as
follows:
1.1. The welfare of the State of Minnesota (the
"State") requires active promotion, attraction, en-
couragement and development of economically sound in-
dustry and commerce through governmental acts to pre-
vent, so far as possible, emergence of blighted lands
and areas of chronic unemployment, and it is the policy
of the State to facilitate and encourage action by local
government units to prevent the economic deterioration
of such areas to the point where the process can be
reversed only by total redevelopment through the use of
local, state and federal funds derived from taxation,
with the attendant necessity of relocating displaced
persons and of duplicating public services in other
areas.
1.2. Technological change has caused a shift to a
significant degree in the area of opportunity for edu-
cated youth to processing, transporting, marketing,
service and other industries, and unless existing and
related industries are retained and new industries are
developed to use the available resources of the City ., a
large part of the existing investment of the community
and of the State as a whole in educational and public
service facilities will be lost, and the movement of
talented, educated personnel of mature age to areas
where their services may be effectively used and com-
pensated . and the lessening attraction of persons and
businesses from other areas for purposes of industry,
commerce and tourism will deprive the City and the State
of the economic and human resources needed as a base for
providing governmental services and facilities for the
remaining population.
1.3. The increase in the amount and cost of govern-
mental services requires the need for more intensive
development and use of land to provide an adequate tax
base to finance these costs.
1.4. P & L Investment Co., a Minnesota general
partnership (the "Company"), has advised this City Coun-
cil that it desires to acquire land, acauire and con-
struct a building thereon and acquire and install equip-
ment therefor (the "Project") to be utilized as a first
class hotel and related facilities..
1.5. The existence of the Project in the City will
contribute to more intensive development and use of land
to increase the tax base of the City and overlapping
taxing authorities and maintain and provide for an in-
crease in opportunities for employment for residents of
the City.
1.6. The City has been advised that conventional,
commercial financing to pay the capital cost of the
Project is available at such costs of borrowing that the
economic feasibility of operating the Project would be
significantly reduced, but that with the aid of munici-
pal financing and its resulting low borrowing cost the
Project is economically more feasible.
1.7. This Council has been advised by a representa-
tive of Dougherty, Dawkins, Strand & Yost, Inc., in
Minneapolis, Minnesota, investment bankers and dealers
in municipal bonds, that on the basis of information
submitted to them and their discussions with representa-
tives of the Company and potential buyers of tax-exempt
bonds, industrial development revenue bonds, notes or
other obligations of the City could be issued and sold
upon favorable rates and terms to finance the Project.
1.8. The City is authorized, effective August 1,
1982, by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474, to issue its
revenue bonds, notes or other obligations to finance the
cost, in whole or in part, of the acquisition, con-
struction, reconstruction, improvement, betterment or
extension of capital projects consisting of properties
used and useful in connection with a revenue producing
enterprise, such as that of the Company; the issuance of
such bonds, notes or other obligations by the City would
be a substantial inducement to the Company to construct
its facility in the City.
2. On the basis of information given the City to date,
it appears that it would he in the best interest of the City
to issue its commercial development revenue bonds, notes or
- 2 -
other obligations under the provisions of Minnesota Stat-
utes, Chapter 474, to finance the Project of the Company at
a cost presently estimated not to exceed $9,170,000.
3. The Project is hereby given preliminary approval by
the City and the issuance of bonds, notes or other obliga-
tions for such purpose and in such amount is hereby ap-
proved, subject to approval of the Project by the Commis-
sioner of Energy, Planning and Development and to the mutual
agreement of this body, the Company and the initial pur-
chasers of the bonds, notes or other obligations as to the
details of the bond issue and provisions for their payment.
In all events, it is understood, however, that the bonds,
notes or other obligation:, of the City shall not constitute
a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any
property of the City except its interest in the Project, and
each bond, note or other obligation when, as and if issued
shall recite in substance that the bond, note or other obli-
gation, including interest thereon, is payable solely from
the revenues received from the Project and property pledged
to the payment thereof and shall not constitute a debt of
the City.
4. In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section
474.01, Subdivision 7a,. the Mayor is hereby authorized and
directed to submit the proposal for the Project to the Com-
missioner of Energy, Planning and Development for approval
of the Project. The Mayor, the Finance Director-Clerk, the
City Attorney and other officers, employees and agents of
the City are hereby authorized to provide the Commissioner
of Energy, Planning and Development with any preliminary
information needed for this purpose, and the City Attorney
is authorized to initiate and assist in the preparation of
such documents as may be appropriate to the Project, if it
is approved by the Commissioner of Energy, Planning and
Development.
5. The Company has agreed to pay directly or through
the City any and all costs incurred by the City in connec-
tion with the Project, whether or not the Project is ap-
proved by the Commissioner of Energy, Planning and Develop-
ment, whether or not the Project is carried to completion
and whether or not the bonds, notes or other obligations or
the operative documents relating thereto are executed.
6. The adoption of this resolution by the Council does
not constitute a guarantee or a firm commitment that the
City will issue the bonds, notes or other obligations as
requested by the Company. The City retains the right in its
sole discretion to withdraw from participation and accord- ..
ingly not issue the bonds, notes or other obligations should
the City at any time prior to the issuance thereof determine
911
Mb.
- 3 -
that it is in the best interest of the City not to issue the
bonds, notes or other obligations or should the parties to
the transaction be unable to reach agreement as to the terms
and conditions of any of the documents required for the
transaction.
7. All commitments of the City expressed herein are
subject to the condition that within twelve (12) months of
the date of adoption of this resolution, the City and the
Company shall have agreed to mutually acceptable terms and
conditions of the revenue agreement, the bonds, notes or
other obligations and of the other instruments and proceed-
ings relating thereto and to the issuance and sale of the
bonds, notes or other obligations. If the events set forth
herein do not take place within the time set forth above, or
any extension thereof, and the bonds, notes or other obliga-
tions are not sold within such time, this resolution shall
expire and be of no further effect.
Mayor
Attest:
Finance Director-Clerk
- 4 -
•1N
I
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 0 -11
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 135 RELATING TO ZONING,
INCLUDING PROVISIONS RELATING TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT,
SLOPES, SHORELAND, AND OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO ZONING
DISTRICTS AND CONDITIONS AND STANDARDS APPLICABLE THERETO
AND COMBINING AND MAKING A PART THEREOF THE FOLLOWING
ORDINANCES TOGETHER WITH ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO: 142 REG-
ULATING LAND ALTERATIONS, EXCAVATIONS, PITS AND REMOVAL OF
EARTHLY DEPOSITS, 152 RELATING TO ADVERTISING SIGNS, 261
RELATING TO SIGNS, 276 DESIGNATING FLOOD PLAINS AND REG-
ULATING THEIR USE AND DEVELOPMENT, 289 REGULATING FAMILY
CARE HOMES; AND AMENDING SAID ORDINANCES 142, 152, 261, 276
AND 288.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Ordinance 135, as amended, is hereby amended and there
are incorporated therein and hereby amended Ordinances 142, 152, 26
1
,
276 and 289, all of which said ordinances shall hereafter be design
a
t
e
d
and known as and be a part of Ordinance 135 which shall read as fol
l
o
w
s
:
(Text to be inserted.)
Section 2. It is the intention of the City Council that the
foregoing amendment of Ordinances 135, 142, 152, 261, 276 and 289 an
d
the combining with and designation thereof as Ordinance 135 will be
known as Chapter Jl of the Code of the City of Eden Prairie proposed
to be adopted in the codification of the ordinances of the City.
First read at a regular meeting of the City Council of Eden Prairie
this day of
, 1982, and finally read and
adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of said City Council
on the day of
, 1982.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. krane, City Clerk
Published in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
1982.
July 6, 1982
STATE OF MINNESOTA
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
"Y OF HENNEPIN
The following accounts were audited and allowed as follows:
1967 VOID OUT CHECK
2430 DUNDEE LAWN & GARDEN
2431 CHICAGO & N.H. TRANSPORTATION CO.
2432 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
2433 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF P/S
2434 OLD PEORIA COMPANY, INC.
2435 TWIN CITY WINE CO.
2436 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO., INC.
2437 JOHNSON BORTHERS WHOLESALE LIQUOR
2438 MIDWEST WINE CO.
2439 ED. PHILLIPS & SONS CO.
2440 INTERCONTINENTAL PACKAGING CO.
2441 MINNESOTA DISTILLERS, INC.
2442 GOPHER MOTOR REBUILDING
2443 U.S. POSTMASTER
2444 PETTY CASH
2445 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK
2446 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE
2447 AETNA LIFE INSURANCE
2448 MINNESOTA STATE RETIWIENT
24 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE
2 UNITED HAY OF MINNrapnlis
2 bl INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING
2452 PERA
2453 PRESERVE OF EDEN PRAIRIE INC.
2454 PETTY CASH
2455 PETTY CASH-CHANGE FUND
2456 KRIS KRYSTOFIAK
2457 RICHARD WARD
2458 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO., INC.
2459 ED. PHILLIPS & SONS CO.
2460 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE
2461 OLD PEORIA COMPANY, INC.
2462 TWIN CITY WINE CO.
2463 PAUL'S LANDING
2464 ROADWAY, INC.
2465 INSTY-PRINTS
2466 CINEMALAND
2467 MINNESOTA ZOO
2468 MINNESOTA ZOO
2469 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE
2470 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE
2471 MCDONALD'S
2472 U.S. POSTMASTER
2473 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT
" RALPH KRATOCHVIL
INTERCONTINENTAL PACKAGING CO.
2416 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE
2477 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO., INC.
2478 ED. PHILLIPS & SONS CO.
2479 A & H WELDING & MFG. CO .
Flowers-Connunity Center landscaping
Fee-Westwood Ind. Park
Fee-Westwood Ind. Park
Motor vehicle registration
Liquor
Wine
Liquor
Liquor
Wine
Liquor
Wine
Liquor
Equipment parts
Postage-Public Safety
Postage
Payroll
Payroll
Payroll
Payroll
Payroll
Payroll
Dues
Payroll
Earnest money
Expenses
Summer Program change
Change fund-Playgrounds
Refund-Solicitors license
Liquor
Wine
Liquor
Wine
Wine
Canoe rentals-Rec Dept.
Tables-Community Center
Printing-Senior Center
Expenses-Teen Volunteers
Expenses-Munchkins
Expenses-Munchkins
May Sales Tax
h June Estimates Sales Tax
Expenses-Summer Fun
Postage-Senior Citizens Newsletters
Expenses-Community Center
Instructor-Fitness classes
Wine
Liquor
Liquor
Liquor
Equipment repair
(1.25' •
134.30 •
75.00
15.00
5.7!)
417.37
836.59
2,978.97
1,249.30
1,382.2
1,315.02
717.9C ,
1,849.01
30.00
400.00
10.00
18,769.8
7,334.4 0.
40.00
2,250.00
73.50
392.0 1.1
13,036.29
100.00 ,
58.2?
20.00
60.00 .
5.0 n,
789.71
54.43
212.00
172.5C.
10.00
65.20
6,215.9
3,100.0;
8.5c :
80.0
170.0: '
129.5
238.
2,825.8
5,369.4;
40.(w 1
l'611
Page two
July 6, 1982
24(._ ROBERTA R. ALLEN
2481 STUART ALEXANDER
2482 ALLIED SIGN KORP.
2483 AMERICAN DATA PRODUCTS
2484 ELIZABETH ANDERSON
2485 ERIN ANDERSEN
2486 ANDERSON GARDEN CENTER
2487 AMOCO OIL COMPANY
2488 RON ANDERSON
2489 AQUA CITY IRRIGATION
2490 MICHAEL ARBISI
2491 ARMOR SECURITY INC.
2492 ERIN ASH
2493 ASPLUND COFFEE CO., INC.
2494 ASSOCIATED ASPHALT, INC
2495 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF P/S
2496 PRAIRIE VILLAGE MALL ASSOCIATES
2497 DANIEL ASZMANN
2498 AUTOTRAAC
2499 BACHMAN'S
2500 JULIE BAKER
2501 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK
2502 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE
250 1 DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
2( GRLA1 WEST LIFE ASSURANCE
25up AETNA LIFE INSURANCE
. 2506 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM
2507 UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS
2508 PERA
2509 BRW
2510 BRIAN BERGSTROM
2511 BEST & FLANAGAN
2512 DENIS BILLMEYER
2513 BLACK & VEATCH
2514 BLOOMINGTON LOCKSMITH COMPANY
2515 BLUMBERG PHOTO SOUND CO.
2516 BORCHERT INGERSOLL
2517 BOUSTEAD ELECTRIC & MFG. CO .
2518 MICHAEL BOTHUM
2519 J.E. BURKE COMPANY
2520 BUSINESS FURNITURE,, INC.
2521 BUTCH'S BAR SUPPLY
2522 BUTLER PAPER
2523 STEPHEN CALHOON
WENDY CARLSON
KA1HY CAUEMANN
2526 CHAPIN PUBLISHING COMPANY
2527 CLUTCH & U-JOINT BURNSVILLE, INC.
2528 JAMES CONNELLY •
2529 COPY EQUIPMENT INC.
Refund-Racquetball classes 24.00
Mileage 39.25
Signs-Park Dept. 240.00
Office supplies-Police Dept. 153.33
Refund-Swimming classes 27.50
Refund-Swimming classes 7.00
Trees 15.30
Fuel-Street Maintenance 9,597.20
Wire new squad cars 525.00
Sprinkler system-Round Lake Park 1,480.00
Expenses 13.65
Service-Park Dept. 67.90
Refund-Swimming classes 19.00
Concession stand supplies-Round Lake 28.00
Blacktop 974.50
Motor vehicle registration 7.50
July rent-Prairie Village Mall 2,125.84
Refund-Soccer 6.00
Speedometer test 95.00
Flowers 42.75
Refund-Swimming classes 9.00
Payroll 18,953.02
Payroll 7,404.S.
Payroll 20,146.10
Payroll 2,335.0l ,
Payroll 101.00
Payroll 40.00
Payroll 73.50
Payroll 12,565.61,
Service-Eden Road, Mitchell Road & W 53,009.7
78th Street, City West Streets & Utilities,
Shady Oak Feasibility, Valley View Road,
Schooner Blvd., Miller Park
Softball official 121.00
Legal service 180.00
Softball official 193.00
Service-Water Treatment Plant 6,221.70
Keys-Police Dept. 12.50
Equipment repair & rental-Police h Park 108.7,'
Planning
Equipment rental-Riley Lake Park 80.00
Motor, Equipment repair-Water Dept. 274.42
Refund-Swimming classes 9.00
Bike racks-Community Center 340.0
Legal file-Water Dept., Chair Frame-Police 302.1:
Supplies-Liquor Stores 655.2
Towels 109.1
Expenses 100.0Y ,
Refund-Skating 6.0
Refund-Dog Obedience 10.00
Legal ads 474.81 '
Equipment repair & parts • 104.1'
Refund-Fitness classes 40.0,
Supplies-Engineering & Park Planning 149.4;
1 :2
Page three
Jul. c, 1982
2530 CUTLER-MAGNER COMPANY
2531 WARD F. DAHLBERG
2532 DALCO
2533 DELL FABRICS
2534 DELTA DIGITRONICS, INCORPORATED
2535 EUGENE A. DIETZ
2536 DENISON MAILING SERVICE
2537 DETERMAN WELDING & TANK SERVICE
2538 ALBERT W. DAY
2539 DONOHUE ENGINEERS & ARCHITECTS
2540 DORHOLI PRINTING
2541 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU
2542 DUSTCOATING, INC.
2543 •DYNA SYSTEMS
2544 • EDEN PRAIRIE CLEANERS, INC.
2545 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOLS
2546 ERICA ESTROM
2547 CITY OF EDINA
2548 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
2549 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY, INC.
2550 EMERGENCY SERVICE SYSTEMS INC.
2551 EMPIRE-CROWN/AUTO, INC.
CHRIS ENGER
SUSAN ERICKSON
2554 RON ESS
2555 FEED-RITE CONTROLS INC.
2556 FIRE INSTRUCTORS ASSN. OF MINN.
2557 ELAINE FISK
2558 FLOYD SECURITY
2559 JAN FLYNN
2560 JOHN CRANE
2561 WHOLESALE LIGHTING, INC.-FREEMAN'S
2562 ADAM FREY
2563 KAY CRICK
2564 FRONTIER LUMBER & HARDWARE
2565 G.L. CONTRACTING, INC.
2566 GLW DISTRIBUTING
2567 DENIS GAGNON
2568 GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
2569 DANA GIBBS
2570 HARTFORD REAL ESTATE
2571 T. P. HECKER
2572 HENNEPIN COUNTY-SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
2573 HENNEPIN COUNTY .
2574 HENNEPIN COUNTY DIRECTOR OF PROPERTY
2575 HENNEPIN COUTNY TREASURER
2 7 6 HENNEPIN TLCHNICAL CENTER
SUE HILGERS
248 HONEYWELL
2579 HOPKINS DODGE SALES, INC.
2580 11001700 AGENCY, INC.
2581 MANC1A HUTSON
2582 INIERDESIGN INC.
Quicklime-Water Dept
Mileage
Cleaning supplies-Water Dept., Fire &
Round Lake Park
Supplies-Police Dept.
Equipment repairs
June expenses
Mailings-Assessing Dept.
Water tank-Gardens
Softball official
B F I Expenses
Office supplies
Dog food-Canine unit
Oil roads
Supplies-Street Maintenance
Service-Police
Community Education
Refund-Swimming classes
Tests
Service
Equipment-Community Center
Emergency lights/sirens
Equipment parts
June expenses
Refund-Skating
Hockey official
Sulfate-Water Dept.
Supplies-Fire Dept.
Refund-Skating classes
Service-Liquor Store/Prairie Village Mall
Expenses
July expenses
Light bulbs-Water Dept.
Refund-Karate
Refund
Lumber
Service
Supplies-Liquor Store/Preserve
Refund-Swimming classes
Equipment parts
Packet delivery
Garden Plat lease
Expenses
Supplies-Fire Dept.
Board of prisoners
Service-Forestry Dept.
License fee
Conference-Fire Dept.
Mileage
Service
Truck-Water Dept.
Insurance
Test
Service-P/S & P/W Building
5,532.66
80.00
642.50
4.80
60.00
150.00
75.00
459.80
132.00
417.6t',
927.47
9.85
5,981.a,
62.53
108.05
724.50
12.00
82.00
80,530.21
346.86
3,609.47
110.91
150.00
45.00
180.00 .
5,447.00
18.00
22.00
266.81
23.37 .
161.80
78.00
14.00
13.50
574.27
2,537.41
157.00
27.58
620.90
182.01!
1.00 :
3•3G
1,080.0n
37.bc! •
150.0
249.()r .:
6,825.9'
2,700.0
25.0!
5,048.9f
V OA
Page four
July 6, 1982
25ea INTERNATIONAL CITY MANAGEMENT ASSOC.
2584 JEAN JOHNSON
2585 JOE KASID
2586 PATTY KEOGH
2587 KEVIN M. KOHLS
2588 KOKESH ATHLETICA GOLF SUPPLY
2589 J. KRIS KRYSTOFIAK
2590 M.E. LANE, INC.
2591 LANG, PAULY & GREGERSON, LTD.
2592 LAS-SANA/ARGUS, LTD.
2593 SUSAN LATTERELL
2594 LEEF BROS. INC.
2595 AMY LENDT
2596 JIM LOCKHART CO., INC.
2597 LOGIS
2598 KENNETH LYNCH & SONS
2599 DAVID LUNDBERG
2600 JACK LYNCH
2601 ARTHUR MALENEANT
2602 MARINE ASSOCIATES
2603 ROBERT MARTZ
2604 MCGRAW HILL COOK COMPANY
2605 MEDICAL OXYGEN & EQUIPMENT
g" METRO LONE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
METRO PRINTING INC.
2608 METROPOLITAN AREA MANAGEMENT ASSOC.
2609 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL
2610 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL
2611 MID-WEST RESTRAURANT EQUIPMENT
2612 MIDLAND INSURANCE COMPANY
2613 MIDLAND PRODUCTS COMPANY
2614 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION
2615 MINNESOTA BAR SUPPLY, INC.
2616 MINNESOTA CASH REGISTER CO.
2617 MINNESOTA GAS COMPANY
2618 MRPA
2619 MRPA
2620 MINNESOTA TORO, INC.
2621 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP
2622 MINNESOTA WANNER COMPANY
2623 MODERN TIRE CO.
2624 MARY MOYLE
2625 mum, TREASURER
2626 MUNICIPAL ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
2627 NATIONAL RECREATION & PARK ASSOC
2628 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOC.
2629 NOR1HERN STATES POMP F) COMPANY
' NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY
2632 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO .
2633 ROBERT O'DONNELL•
2634 TERRY O'FALLON
2635 STEVEN OLSTAD
Dues
Mileage
Softball official
Refund-Tennis
Softball official
Bases-Park Dept.
Mileage
Insurance
B.F.I. Legal Service
Supplies-Canine Unit
Refund-Skating classes
Service
Refund-Swimming classes
Concession stand supplies-Round Lake
May Service, Computer terminal
Expenses
Refund-Karate
Refund-Swimming classes
Refund-Rec Dept.
Equipment repair
July expenses
Books-Park Planning
Oxygen-Fire Dept.
Service
Forms-Forestry Dept.
Expenses
May SAC Charges
Sewer Service
Equipment-Round Lake Park
Legal service
Equipment & concession stand supplies-
Round Lake Park
Blacktop
Supplies
Supplies-Liquor Store/Preserve
Service
Fees-Softball tournament
Fee-Softball
Equipment parts-Park Maintenance
Service
Fittings-Public Works Building
Equipment parts & repairs
Refund-Exercise classes
Dues
Radar repair-Police Dept.
Dues-Park Dept.
Dues-Eire Dept.
Service
Service
Service-Staring Lake Park
Service
Refund
Refund-Exercise classes
School reimbursement
25.00
12.9
165.00
22.00
280.5
163.8;
46.30
19,993.06
2,269.70
18.5?
27.00
124.80
17.00
227.7 0
10,569.5?
6.50
14.00
10.00
6.00 :
96.00
166.35
77.70 •
28.21
237.69
220.66 '
8.00
11,949.3 1 :
50,574.5.1
3,183.06
1,000.06
827.20
1,661.10
35.60
78.20 .•
3,354.61 •
975.00
225.00
5.80
36.50
7.50
677.N.
19.!w
15.0c
18.3:•
110.0H "
22,471 .I
3.2.1 1
3,317.0: 1
2,629.6 ;
3.7!.
25.m•
57.00)
1
Refund-Swimming classes
Equipment repair
Exterior lights-Water Dept.
Pop-Community Center
Softball official
Expenses
Service-Schooner Blvd.
Postage meter rental
Books-Forestry Dept.
Plaques
Supplies-Fire Dept.
Lawn mowers-Park Dept.
Supplies-Community Center
Office Supplies-Planning Dept.
Softball official
Hockey official
Softball official
Car wash powder
Service-Community Center
Refund-Rec Dept.
Sander-Street Maintenance
Hose-Street Maintenance
Supplies-Rec Dept.
Printing-Summer Brochures
Service-Community Center
Mileage
Refund-Tennis
Playground structures
Portable restrooms
Refund-Rec Dept.
Tests
Wrench, live traps, booster, shocks
Plastic pipe-Water Dept.
Softball official
Switch, Battery
Printing-Police Dept.
Refund-Tennis classes
Legal ads
Refund-Swimming classes
Supplies-Rec Dept & Forestry
Refund-Dog Obedience
Tests-Police Dept.
Mileage
Shotgun-Police Dept.
Equipment repair & parts
Expenses
Service-Research Road
Equipment-Public Works Building
Supplies-Liquor Store/Preserve
Maintenance agreement-Community Center
Supplies-Rec Dept.
Table-Round Lake Concession Stand
Tables-Community Center
Refund-Tennis classes
4.50
200.00
4,623.0d
49.00
176.00
16.10
5,280.00
55.50
50.00
33.40
11.0!)
469.15
2.30
50.00
132.00
180.00
44.00
188.00
66.50
10.00
39.95
41.44.
14,445.0 6
11.83
16.00
16,008.56
65.00
11.00
75.00 ,
319.19
,
110.00
71.50 ,
167.10
13.06
1,802.0
27.50
39.46
17.0
60.0c
1,038.0: .1
5.0
50.0L
160.e
1.?
156.(
108.ft
285.0,
Page five
July 6, 1982
26:iu DANIELLE OLTHOFF
2637 OSWALD FIRE HOSE
2638 MIKE PAUL ELECTRIC INC.
2639 PEPSI COLA BOTTLING CO.
2640 PATRICK PEREZ
2641 PETTY CASH-PUBLIC SAFETY
2642 TIM PIERCE & ASSOC., INC.
2643 PITNEY BOWES INC.
2644 PLANT DISEASE CLINIC
2645 POMMER MFG. CO ., INC.
2646 POWER BRAKE EQUIPMENT INC.
2647 PRAIRIE LAWN & GARDEN
2648 PRAIRIE OFFICE PRODUCTS INC.
2649 PRECISION BUSINESS SYSTEMS, INC.
2650 CHERI PROVO
2651 ' CHUCK PUFAHL
2652 JIM PUFAHL
2653 QUAL-CHEM INDUSTRIES, INC.
2654 R & R SPECIALTIES INC.
2655 KATIE RAJEK
2656 DAVID RAQUET
2657 ROAD MACHINERY & SUPPLIES
2658 ROBERTS DRUG
24c 1 ROBERTS LITHO, INC.
24, RAINBOW MECHANICAL INC.
201 KEVIN ROHE
2662 DONALD ROLOFF
2663 ST. CROIX RECREATION COMPANY
2664 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES INC.
2665 DEAN SCHMANDKE
2666 KATHY SCHUMACHER
2667 SEARS, ROEBUCK & CO.
2668 SEELYE PLASTICS, INC.
2669 BRIAN SIEVERTSON
2670 W. GORDON SMITH CO.
2671 SON OF A PRINTER, INC.
2672 MARY SONDEREGGER
2673 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING INC.
2674 JILL SPALDING
2675 SPORTS WORLD
2676 ROBERT STARR
2677 STATE OF MINNESOTA
2678 KRIS STETTER
2679 DON STREICHER GUNS, INC.
2680 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET CO.
2681 BRIAN SULLIVAN
2682 SULLIVANS SERVICES, INC.
2683 SUN CONTROL OF NORTHERN MINNESOTA
2 ' SUPPLEE ENTERPRISES, INC.
SWEDA INTERNATIONAL, INC.
26o6 TARGET STORES, INC.
2687 TAYLOR SALES, INC.
2688 TELESCOPE FOLDING FURNITURE CO., INC.
2689 BARBARA THENO
Service
Supplies-Rec Dept.
B.F.I. Expenses
Equipment
Dues-Fire Dept
Equipment rental-Forestry Dept.
Chlorine-Water Dept.
Equipment repair-Water Dept.
Ads-Liquor Stores
Chemicals-Community Center
Mileage
Refund-Swimming classes
Equipment repair & parts
Supplies-Community Center
Service-Community Center
Softball official
Mileage
Mileage
Service
Softball official
Refund-Water & Sewer bill
Mileage
Service
Equipment-Park Maintenance
Mileage
57.75
357.7
1,502.0
2,857.10
25.00
13.50
358.20
33.00
30.00
496.35
21.00
620.20
7,200.00
88.00
77.00
15.02
360.00
132.00 '
23.35
23.77
1,745.5?
164.00
6.7:;
1.31G
Page six
July 6, 1982
26. CARRIE TIETZ
2691 TRIARCO ARTS & CRAFTS
692 TWIN CITY TESTING
2693 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
2694 UNITED FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOC.
2695 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
2696 VAN WATER & ROGERS
2697 VESSCO, INC.
2698 VICTORIA GAZETTE
2699 VIKING LABORATORIES INCORPORATED
2700 BECKI WARNER
2701 JON WARNER
2702 WATER PRODUCTS COMPANY
2703 WATERITE, INC.
2704 WEAVER ELECTRIC CO., INC.
2705 PAUL WELIN
2706 SANDRA WERTS
2707 JON WESTERHAUS
2708 WESTONKA SEWER & WATER SERVICE
2709 JOSEPH A. WIETHOFF
2710 JOHN G. WITT
2711 PAT WYMAN
2712 XEROX CORPORATION
2713 ZIEBART OF MINNESOTA
2" FRED ZIEBOL
TOTAL $5 53,7 71.2
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:.
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor and City Council
Sandra F. Werts, Recreatig 1 pèrvisor
July 1, 1982
Indian Mounds Along Bluffs
The Historical and Cultural Commission has discussed the imminent
development of property near the Indian mounds along the Bluffs
at their last two meetings. At the May 6 meeting, the Commission
passed the following motion which was sent to you in your inform
a
t
i
o
n
packet on May 28, 1982:
MOTION: The Historical and Cultural Commission recommends that
t
h
e
City Council consider the feasibility of adopting an ordinance
protecting the Indian mounds along the Bluffs in Eden Prairie.
T
h
e
motion was made by Richter and seconded by Finholt and passed
unanimously.
Mona Finholt will be present to speak to the Cnunril on Tuesday
,
J
u
l
y
6, concerning the Commission's position on preserving the mounds
f
r
o
m
future development and the historic value of the mounds.
Attached is Chapter 457 from the State statutes relating to cem
e
t
e
r
i
e
s
and burial grounds to which Finholt will be referring.
SFW:md
437--S.F.No. 975 An art re'uons to cemeteries: provithlig for the preservation of burial group& etiminaiirg obsolete provisions, impultrig p,nuttles: uppropriumig money, toner:dins' ,if,eersota Statutes 1i•73, Section 307 08: repeating Minnesota Statutes 1978, Section149 07 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF TIIE STATE OF MINNESOTA: Sect.en I. Minnesota Statutes 1978, Section 307.08, is amended to read. 377.C3 DAMAGES; ILLEGAL MOLESTATION OF IIUN1AN REMAINS; BURIALS; CEMETERIES; PENALTY. Subdisnsion I. I! is a dectamtion and Kti_jr_ent 9: lett ,•t^' hetrnn ske.et, remains Sr : 'Cr tt'cIttt,eritOres-cc: tnt n!,vrttI ref.,:. e:te '3 tl!•' cric ns tir..! hack.t•Ouncls. or rCiiticsas aff.l-ations The p•osis•ri-s of th:s sectich &hail ±j311:1 10 ali nuniian btl!,.S sir skeletal re, a--s t7itmd on or in all dub.ic or private ...Inds or ,,IcrS in Minnesota. Suht_t 2 Every person who wt:fn or know, c'y destroy, mutilate. moure, or ,'CrrlOvt human ske'etal reirmns or 11,10,3, or remove any tomb- st,te. ,ror or structure paced ut any pub:if it pr‘vate Cemetery Or 0.41 wA,41ftevl ithitveri feta n henrI ground Cr• atty. Fence. railtng. Or other work erected 'for protection Or ornament, or any tree. or plan: Or Kra,c vood5 an,:t arlijaCts within the lords iftereof, and etc"): person who, without authority from Inc :curlers Of thrthet Cr Irt.J.an affairs trtertr.b.0 shall discharge any firearms upon or Os e: the grounds of any piablic or private cemetery or autr.enttcated and identified Indian burial ground, shall be Eutity of a rn.skenicanur. Sobd 2 3 , Every authentn:ated and identified Ind:an burial ground shall may be a: 12L.t• discretion of the stale arch:ice:cpsl and the Indian affatrs inter-thaibO,LI, posted for aolective purposes every 75 feet around its perimeter with signs listing the activities prohlbited by sultdivtslon 4 2 and the penalty for vadation of it . Subd 3 4. A ()earthed profession,' archaeo:ogist approved cue state arch:geologist and the Indian affairs intertribal board shall authenticate and iden• Itly Indian burta; grounds when requested by the putitica; subdivision in which hers .•ttte so the alleced Indian burial grounds arc„located. or ty a concerned scientific Or conterr"ara's Indian ethrs-c group . Sub.I 4 5 . The cost of authentication mwl .,•Identiftcatton and marktn, of uttat,ked or unidenttlied blir.al grounds or horlais shall be the responstbloty of the p...4tnykyki s•v4.4ykyww.kn pequ-esong sant ntkmtifisms.ce uthtt ut4K-14.raftufl slate . Skisd. $ 6 . The size, descripuon and information on the sign sins must be approseti by the Minnesota state biStOnc3: society :Hie polytm:-.4 ralvkltyiston wInkh Itch ithe kv the 444411,441 bur-44.1 rttharcti Must sttf.ffiy the ,tgOS and pfteswkle 104 then, Suhd 7 All untdennited Itut`tan retnains or hiirials !mine o,s.dtn cif recorded, or identified centeteries ant.I el,thni; pruir to 1886 AD shad he drib accordine to the provisions of ihif section If such burials do nnt c•iniatn manufactured trade goods Or. C.ol rscstaWished tu title iiOt 10 1700 LAWS of MINNESOTA for 1980 Ch. 457 A D. as derermtned 32g a quit-lied prCfessntl,: archleotettlist they shed be lath with tn accaLtr_ntnce with asv:sions estat2_,:lned tjty the 5•AIL 3rCLIc0:,,,11 If sueh butitits cme after :70d A D . kie•ittntine.st by a ni... pte'eys ±..., intertr.b,1 10 I i :( Can bit rt-le—u-d sad, retna sn. tif,t ‘'ate and India:: affairs it-lie:Mb,: 00 t1C La:a: C.v, CC, 1,1,1; ic..ntcrl fardreetactit Or itiltZrtntiaI boa taco rc9,J.r.f sir ItO stt.kIird by 3 tillaithfU profession,i; arctlaen:oit,t tefore be E: Ira! .e:It:Ces SUbd. 6 The Indian affairs board must apdrove any rentiest to relocate an authenticated and eit Indian burial ground. If jc Indian burial are invo:yed. by the state to pc,t.ise mcd protect them instead of rernovInt: [nem orol; en 3)d. it The departritent kIf natural resituries, d_ipartment nOrT3tuol, and all other sot,: aaeacLey o!"d nOc.•n ono, .,1,n- tnCS be affected. sha.; cottperele m.th Ittest.ite atcl,eolocs; and the Indian atfairs intertribal board to t=.1 :be ilrovi.:nrIS ut rtis Sand 10 Wlit:n ti- •n.th aft ,1,1•n,1 Iv/ eNist. toblif lands or wAters 02 a.tencv or Ccaaittnent 3nt.: of water, slia3 submit conytrUeitOrt and develap,teat p an.? i tile silt arch. ernogist ,ind tt!e mu.ab. alt:: is intertrthal board for Lev,ew prior :0 MC 11,7C ltct •irkl sulser!tsed The state archaeottteis: 3,1d the J: ..drs ititettr.aal aa.ad ntoinftly "es.tss 'r:ans and Mal, t fur the preserv3hon Of 5jirttefl activities Sec. 2. APPROPRIATION. The sums set forth in :Ms acchoil .ire annroort. 11424 front the general fund to Inc Intl,an affairs interirih..t board for carrvate, oat tIS duties reiatin 10 Ind.ati tiara. zroundl, to be avallibie for the fiscal )vt.tr endine June 39 In the sears indicated t"81 5 Sec 3 REPEALER. N.I.p.S,::11'iSljtules 1978. Section 1-49 07 Is repealed. Approved April 3. 19h0
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM:. John D. Frane, Finance Director
DATE: July 1, 1982
RE: Baypoint Manor Housing Revenue Bonds - $7,000,000
Mr. Gratz and Mr. Doelz propose to construct a 152 unit apartment
building with 33 units available for rent subsidies under the
Section 8 Housing Assistance Program. This process is somewhat
different than M.I.D.B.'s in that the public hearing required is
a "planning" type hearing.
The process:
1. City may approve Resolution 82-170 which grants
preliminary approval to the financing and grants
authority to proceed.
2. Hold a public hearing at a future dAte on a Housing
Plan (The City's Guide Plan) and a Housing Program
(which will be a statement as to how this project
fulfills the objectives of the Housing Plan i.e.
the Guide Plan.
3. Hearing is held.
4. Review and approval by the Met Council.
5. Review and approval by the Minnesota Housing and
Finance Agency.
6. Private placement of the project financing.
JDF:bw
7/1/82
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA
Application for
Industrial Development Bond Project Financing
1. APPLICANT:
a. Business Name -
G D Enterprises
b. Business Address -
5325 West 740 Street
Edina, MN 55435
c. Business Form (corporation, partnership, sole proprietor-
ship, etc.) -
. Partnership .
d. State of Incorporation or organization -
Minnesota
e. Authorized Representative -
Robert Coborn, Jr.
f. Phone -
612/251-4109
2. NAME(S) AND ADDRESSES OF MAJOR STOCKHOLDERS OR PRINCIPALS:
a, Walter E. Doelz
4928 Washburn Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55410
b. James E. Gratz
8383 Mitchel Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
C .
-1-
1.10.0
3. GIVE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF NATURE OF BUSINESS, PRINCIPAL
PRODUCTS, ETC:
Multi -family Rental liaising
4. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
4 story elevator apartment building containing a total of 152 units.
20 1-bedrooms and 132 2-bedrooms. (Total of 9 different interior
layouts) The building will also contain underground parking.
a. Location and intended use: •
The Preserve; Multi-family rental housing
b. Present ownership of project site:
Minnesota Gas Company
c. Names and address of architect, engineer, and general
contractor:
Architect: Jeffrey J. Pilling
3335 W. St. Germain
St. Cloud, MN 56301
5. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST FOR:
Land 0 $ 432,000 00
Construction ConLracts 5,462,000.
Equipment Acquisition and installation* fl
Architectural and Engineering 100,000.00
Legal 40 000.00
Interest during Construction 1,336.650.00
Bond Reserve S24.528.00
Contingencies 136,800
Loan Fees 330,000
Other 150,000
• Total $8,811,978.00
*Beating and air conditioning should be included as building costs.
Indicate the kind of equipment to be acquired here.
Contractor: Jim W. Miller Construction, Inc.
Box 1228
St. Cloud, MN 56302
-2- PO]
6. BOND ISSUE -
a. Amount of proposed bond issue
$7,000,000.00
b. Proposed date of sale of bond
October 1, 1982
c. Length of bond issue and proposed maturities -
11 years •
d. Proposed original purchaser of bonds -
private placement
e. Name and address of suggested trustee -
• First Trust, St. Paul, MN
f. Copy of any agreement between Applicant and original
purchaser -
g. Describe any interim financing sought or available -
Tax exempt
h. Describe nature and amount of any permanent financing
in addition to bond financing -
none
7. BUSINESS PROFILE -
N/A
a. Are you located in the City of Eden Prairie?
*b. Number of employees in Eden Prairie?
i. Before this project:
-3-
1:3)a
ii. After this project?
nia
c. Approximate annual sales -
n/a
d. Length of time in business nin
in Eden Prairie n/a
e. Do you have plants in other locations? If so, where?
n/a
f. Are you eogaged in international trade?
n/a
8. OTHER INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT(S):
a. List the name(s) and location(s) of other industrial
development project(s) in which the Applicant is the•
owner or a "substantial user" of the facilities or a
"releated person" within the meaning of Section 103(b)(6)
of the Internal Revenue Code.
none
-4-
b. List all cities in which the Applicant has
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
e
d
industrial revenue development financing.
none
c. Detail the status of any request the Appli
c
a
n
t
h
a
s
b
e
f
o
r
e
any other city for industrial development r
e
v
e
n
u
e
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
.
none
d. List any city in which the Applicant has b
e
e
n
r
e
f
u
s
e
d
industrial development revenue financing.
•
none
e. List any city (and the project name) wher
e
t
h
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
has acquired preliminary approval to proc
e
e
d
b
u
t
i
n
w
h
i
c
h
final approval authorizing the financing
h
a
s
b
e
e
n
d
e
n
i
e
d
.
none
9.7
-5-
r)(1
4. If Applicant has been denied industrial development
revenue financing in any other city as identified
in (d) or (e), specify the reason(s) for the denial
and the name(s) of appropriate city officials who
have knowledge of the transaction.
n/a
9. NAMES AND ADDRESS OF:
a. Underwriter (If public offering)
Newman and Associates
717 Seventeenth Street
Suite 2180
Denver, Colorado 80202
b. Private Placement Purchaser (If private placement)
i. If lender will not commit until City has
passed its preliminary resolution approving
the project, submit a letter from proposed
lender that it has an interest in the
offering subject to appropriate City
approval and approval of the Commissioner
of Securities.
b. Bond Counsel
DIUSeY Windhorst Hannaford, Whitney G Holladay
nneapo is, 4100 FIT Bank .qi62 fast
c. Corporate Counsel - Best & Flanagen
4010 IDS Center
Minneapolis, MN 55402
d. Accountant - Robert P. Pierce & Associates
3250 W. 66 Street
Edina, Minnesota
10. WHAT IS YOUR TARGET DATE FOR:
a. Construction start -
b. Construction completion -
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CO
N
T
A
C
T
:
The undersigned Applicant
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
s
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
r
disapproval by the City o
f
E
d
e
n
P
r
a
i
r
i
e
f
o
r
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Development bond financin
g
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
e
x
p
r
e
s
s
l
y
o
r
i
m
p
l
i
e
d
l
y
constitute any approval,
v
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
,
o
r
w
a
i
v
e
r
o
f
a
n
y
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
or requirement relating t
o
a
n
y
z
o
n
i
n
g
,
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
,
o
r
o
t
h
e
r
r
u
l
e
or ordinance of the City
o
f
E
d
e
n
P
r
a
i
r
i
e
,
o
r
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
l
a
w
applicable to the property
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
i
n
t
h
i
s
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
.
G & D Enterprises
After some discussion, Member introduced
the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE
BONDS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 462C, MINNESOTA
STATUTES, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING A
MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT; GIVING
PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE DEVELOPMENT,
AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF AND A PUBLIC
HEARING ON A HOUSING PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING
SUBMISSION OF THE HOUSING PROGRAM FOR REVIEW
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Eden Prairie, Minnesota (the City), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. By the provisions of Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 46C, as amended (the Act), the City is authorized
to plan, administer, issue and sell revenue bonds or
obligations to make or purchase loans to finanze one or
more multifamily housing developments within its
boundaries which revenue bonds or obligations shall be
payable solely from the revenues of the development.
1.02. The Act provides that, prior to issuing
revenue bonds or obligations to finace a multifamily
housing development, the City must develop a housing plan
and, after holding a public hearing thereon after notice
published at least thirty days prior thereto, submit the
' housing plan for review to the regional development
commission.
1.03. On February 2, 1982, after thirty days
published notice, this Council adopted the City of Eden
Prairie's Comprehensive Guide Plan and Housing Assistance
Plan (which is within the Housing Chapter of the
Comprehensive Guide Plan). The Comprehensive Guide Plan
was approved by Metropolitan Council pursuant to
Subdivision 1 of Section 402C.04 of the Act on March 11,
1982.
1.04. The Act further provides that the City may
plan, administer and make or purchase a loan or loans to
finance one or more developments of the kinds described in
Subdivisions 2,3,4 and 7 of Section 462C.05 of the Act
upon adoption of a program setting forth the information
—2—
required by Subdivision 6 of Section 462C.05 of the Act
after a public hearing thereon and upon approval by the
Minnesota Housing Finance Agency as provided by Section
462C.01 of the Act on the basis of the considerations
stated •in Section 462C.04 of the Act.
1.05. Messrs. Walter D. Doelz and James E. Gratz
(the Developers), who will be general partners in G & D
Enterprises, a Minnesota partnership (the Partnership),
have advised this Council of their desire to acquire
certain land located at 11111 Neil Lake Road in the City
and to construct and equip thereon a 152-unit rental
apartment building together with parking and related
facilities (the Project). Total development and financing
costs are presently estimated by the Developer to be
approximately $8,811,978.
1.06. The Developers have requested that the
City issue its revenue bonds in one or more series (the
Bonds) pursuant to the authority of the Act in such
aggregate principal amount as may be necessary to finance
all or a portion of the costs of the Project and make the
proceeds of the Bonds available to the Partnership for the
acquisition, construction and equipping of the Project,
subject to agreement by the Partnership to pay promptly
the principal of and interest on the Bonds.
1.07. The City has been advised by the Developer
that conventional commercial financing is available to pay
the capital costs of the Project only on a limited basis
and at such high costs of borrowing that the scope of the
Project and the economic feasibility of operating the
Project would be significantly affected, but with the aid
of municipal financing the Project can be constructed as
designed and its operation can be made more economically
feasible.
1.08. The Council has been advised by
representatives of Newman and Associates, of Denver,
Colorado, that on the basis of information available to
them and their discussions with the Developers and
potential purchasers of tax-exempt bonds, the Bonds could
be sold at favorable rates and terms to finance the
Project. '
1.09. The full faith and credit of the City will
not be pledged to or responsible for the payment of the
principal of and interest on the Bonds.
-3 -
Section 2. Approvals; Authorization and Hearing.
2.01. It is hereby found and determined that it
would be in the best interests of the City to issue the
Bonds under the provisions of the Act in an amount
currently estimated to be $7,000,000 to finance a portion
of the cost of the Project.
2.02. The Project is hereby given preliminary
approval by the City and the issuance of the Bonds for
such purpose approved, subject to conditions on such
approval as may be required as a result of the public
hearing called pursuant to Section 2.04 hereof. The Bonds
shall not be issued until the multifamily housing program
described below has been reviewed and approved as provided
by the Act and until the City, the Partnership and the
Underwriter have agreed upon the details of the Bonds and
the provisions for their payment. The principal of,
premium, if any, and interest on each Bond, when, as and
if issued, shall be payable solely from the revenues of
the Project and the property pledged to the payment
thereof and shall not constitute a debt of the City. The
City Attorney and other officers of the City are
authorized in cooperation with Dorsey & Whitney, as bond
counsel, to initiate preparation of such documents as may
be appropriate to the financing of the Project setting
forth the detailed terms of the Bonds, the security
therefor and provisions for payment of the principal,
premium, if any, and interest thereon in compliance with
state and federal statutes and regulations.
2.03. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a program
for a multifamily housing development prepared pursuant to
the requirements of Subdivision 5 of Section 462C.05 of
the Act (the Program). The City Clerk is hereby
authorized to cause notice of public hearing (in
substantially the form of Exhibit B hereto) to be
published in the Minneapolis Star/Tribune and in the Eden
Prairie News at least thirty (30) days before the date on
which a public hearing will be held by this Council. The
City Clerk and the City Manager are authorized to
establish the date of such public hearing. Subsequent to
the public hearing, the Mayor, City Manager, City Clerk
and other officers and employees of the City are hereby
authorized to prepare and execute the required
certifications and submit the Program to the Minnesota
Housing Finance Agency for review and approval in
accordance with Subdivision 5 of Section 462C.05 and
Subdivision 2 of Section 462.04 of the Act.
-4-
2.04. Pursuant to Subdivision 1 of Section
462C.07 of the Act, in the making of the loan to finance
acquisition, construction and equipment of the Project and
in the issuance of the Bonds or other obligations of the
City, the City may exercise, within its corporate limits,
any of the powers the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency may
exercise under Chapter 462A, Minnesota Statutes, without
limitation under the provisions of Chapter 475, Minnesota
Statutes.
2.05. The Developer has agreed to pay directly
or through the City any and all costs incurred by the City
in connection with the Project whether or not the Program
is approved by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency;
whether or not the Project is carried to completion; and
•whether or not the Bonds and all operative instruments are
executed.
2.06. The adoption of this resolution does not
constitute a guarantee or a firm commitment that the City
will issue the Bonds as requested by the Developer. The
City retains the right in its sole discretion to withdraw
from participation and accordingly not issue the Bonds
should the City at any time prior to the issuance thereof
determine that it is in the best interest of the City not
to issue the Bonds or should the City, the Developer and
any other parties to the transaction be unable to reach
agreement as to the terms and conditions of any of the
documents required for the transaction.
2.07. All commitments of the City expressed
herein are subject to the condition that within twelve
months of the date of adoption of this Resolution the City
and the Developer shall have agreed to mutually acceptable
terms and conditions of the Bonds, the operative documents
and of the other instruments and proceedings relating to
the Bonds and their issuance and sale. If the events set
forth herein do not take place within the time set forth
above, or any extension thereof, and the Bonds are not
sold within such time, this Resolution shall expire and be
of no further effect.
Passed and adopted by the City Council of the
City of Eden Prairie this day of , 1982.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
-5-
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing
resolution was duly seconded by Member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in
favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and
adopted and was signed by the Mayor and attested by the
City Clerk.
-6-
EXHIBIT A
PROGRAM FOR MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
UNDER CHAPTER 462C - BAYPOINT MANOR PROJECT
Messrs. Walter D. Doelz and James E. Gratz (the
Developer), who will be general partners in Baypoint
Manor, a Minnesota partnership (the Partnership), have
acquired and intend to exercise an option to purchase
certain land located at 11111 Neil Lake Road in the City
of Eden Prairie, Minnesota (the City), for the purpose of
constructing thereon a 152-unit rental apartment building
(the Project). Unit size composition of the Project will
be as follows: 20 one-bedroom units and 132 two-bedroom
units.
Consistent with the housing needs of the City
described in the Eden Prairie Comprehensive Guide Plan
(the Comprehensive Plan), a report prepared by the City
and Brauer & Associates, Inc., the Project will enable the
City to meet its two housing goals stated in the
Comprehensive Plan: encourage a variety of housing types
and prices through innovative architectural and land use
and encourage low income housing throughout the City. The
Plan Elements chapter of the housing section of the
Comprehensive Plan calls for continued cooperation between
the public sector and private industry to insure the
production of modest cost housing for middle income
households. The Project will be designed to be affordable
by persons and families with adjusted gross income not in
excess of the limits set forth in Section 462C.03,
Subdivision 2, Minnesota Statutes and by other persons and
families to the extent necessary to further a policy of
economic integration. At least 31 units in the Project
will be held for occupancy by families or individuals with
adjusted gross income not in excess of 80 percent of the
median family income estimated by the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the
Minneapolis-St. Paul standard metropolitan statistical
area and at least 84 units in the Project will be held for
occupancy by families or individuals whose adjusted gross
income does not exceed sixty-six times the gross rental
for the applicable dwelling unit, provided such gross
rental shall not exceed 120 percent of the Fair Market
Rents for the geographical area in which the Project is
located as determined and adjusted from time to time by
HUD. The remainder of the units in the Project will be
occupied by individuals and families without regard to
income limits. The authorization of revenue bonds to
finance the Project will make the Project feasible.
-7 -
1,0,1
It is anticipated that housing development
revenue bonds of the City will be issued and sold pursuant
to Section 462.07, Minnesota Statutes, for the purpose of
providing construction and long-term financing for the
Project, in the aggregate principal amount of
approximately $7,000,000, which is the amount presently
estimated to be necessary to pay a portion of total
development and financing costs.
—8—
Exhibit B
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN by the City Council of the
City of Eden Prairie (the City), that it will hold a
public •hearing at the City Hall in the City of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota, on the day of
1982, at .M. to consider a proposed program for a
multifamily development (the Program) to be financed by
the issuance of revenue bonds or notes of the City
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the
Minnesota Housing Bond Act).
The Program describes a development, to be known
as Baypoint Manor, which will consist generally of
approximately 152 rental units, parking and related
facilities. Revenues of the development will be pledged
to the payment of the bonds or obligations issued to
finance the development; such obligations will be payable
solely from the revenues of the development and shall not
constitute a debt of the City. The Program describes the
need for the development and the metaod of financing
proposed and states that the development is to be
constructed pursuant to Section 462C.05, Subdivision 2, of
the Municipal Housing Bond Act.
A copy of the Program are cn file and available
for inspection in the office of the City Manager at City
Hall.
Dated at Eden Prairie, Minnesota, this day
of , 1982. By order of the City Council.
John D. Frane
City Clerk
, 198 .
-9-
MEMORANDUM
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor and City Council
•Carl Jullie, City Manager
Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
July 1, 1982
Request from Residents in Hidden Ponds Regarding Chemically
Treating Pond
Attached is a letter from the homeowners in the Hidden Ponds area
that live adjacent to the City park pond located on the north side
of Hidden Ponds Park. Several homeowners have complained about the
"green" condition of that pond for the last few years. A number of
the residents have now decided to do something about it themselves.
The residents are requesting approval to hire a commercial sprayer
approved by the Department of Natural Resouces to spray that pond
to eliminate the duck weed. They would be using aquatic herbicides
approved by the DNR which are compatible with the maintenance of
wildlife populations and protection of human health.
City staff recommends approval of allowing the adjacent homeowners
to treat this pond at their own expense.
BL:md
June 30, 1982
Mr. Bob Lambert
Director of Community Services
City of Eden Prairie, MN
Dear Mr. Lambert:
We, the undersigned, request permission to limit the excessive growth of
aquatic nuisances (duckweed & algae) in the pond adjacent to our properties
located in the Hidden Ponds development. We request permission to either
hire a commercial sprayer approved by the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resurces or to control the growth by application of DNR-approved herbicides
by the homeowners.
Only these aquatic herbicides approved by the Minnesota DNR which are com-
patible with maintenance of wildlife populations and the protection of human
health will be used. The herbicides which have been recommended to us for
control of duckweed and algae respectively, are Diquat and Copper Sulfate.
If you have any questions in regard to the safety of the herbicides we re-
quest to use, please contact Mr. Howard Krosch, Coordinator, Monitoring and
Control Unit, Division of Fish & Wildlife, Ecological Services Section of
the DNR, (612) 296-0778.
It has been determined by the DNR that the pond in question is not considered
to be a "protected body of water" by the State of Minnesota and therefore a
permit is not required by the State to take such action.
In addition to enhancing the aesthetic value of the pond for the homeowners,
it will also benefit the public, as the pond is also adjacent to the new
Hidden Ponds Park. We also understand that the excessive growth of aquatic
nuisances may in fact be detrimental to other aquatic life in the pond.
We would appreciate your prompt consideration and attention to this matter as
the effectiveness of the herbicidal application is augmented by early treatment.
Sincerely,
Homeowners Adjacent to Pond
1:22fe.4re -A4.41 .a44:2,2r . 2y,4;dc, /
2./1/'), irr,ijiLv1"-12/4-2----.. 7 g id-. I,. ,01,4 ,
/7kt-4. 8.
4.11n! !IV), :Rtg 1WIL,./a. 9. 7;1_
5.72:5 10.
City Approved: Date:
cI a•e2..e- -,0 7= g.6/
da-rn -Au, '21e: tiox-It a yoz ,we
/'½e (ch .1/"AA'AL.4440 ./1 aid fa '1,4 o f 04114 c;p:e6../7 -
(. /
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF FISH & WILDLIFE, ECOLOGICAL SERVICES SECTION
Aquatic Herbicides Approved by the Department of Natural Resources
for use in Minnesota Public Waters
ANC Permit Required
Endothall Compounds:
Aquathol K (liquid)
Aquathol Granular
Hydrothol 47 (liquid)*
Hydrothol 47 Granular
Hydrothol 191 (liquid)*
Hydrothol 191 Granular
*A(Diquat Dibromide Compounds:
Aqua-Quat (2.36%)
Conkill (1.85%)
Crow 816 (4.35%)
Diquat (35.3%)
Team 38 (1.85%)
Veg-GO (1.85%)
Water/Land (1.85%)
Watrol (1.85%)
Weedtrine D (0.631)
(%) Active Ingredient
2,4 -D Compounds:
Aquacide
Aqua-K1een
Chipman Gran 20
Rhodia Gran 20
Weed Rhan
Weedtrine II
)( Copper Compounds:
Algimycin PLL-C
Copper Sulfate
Cuprose
Cutrine Plus (granular)
Cutrine Plus (liquid)
Kocide
K-Lox
Komeen
K-Tea
Other:
Aquashade (ponds only)4
Aquazine (ponds only)
Dowpon M (foliar application only)
*These formulations may only be applied by Minnesota Licensed Commercial
Applicators.
+Principle use appears to be to prevent plant and algae regrowth following
mechanical or chemical treatment.
State of Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources
Division of Fish & Wildlife
Ecological Services
COMPANIES SELLING APPROVED
AQUATIC HERBICIDES and
ALGAECIDES IN MINNESOTA
JULY, 1981
This list has been compiled as a guide for holders of Aquat
i
c
N
u
i
s
a
n
c
e
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
Permits, issued annually by the Minnesota Department of Nat
u
r
a
l
R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
.
We believe we have made a diligent effort to locate and inc
l
u
d
e
a
l
l
p
e
r
s
o
n
s
a
n
d
companies dealing in approved herbicides and algaecides; ho
w
e
v
e
r
,
i
n
c
l
u
s
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
e
list is not intended to be and should not be construed as e
n
d
o
r
s
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
a
n
y
p
e
r
s
o
n
,
company, or brand. Likewise, omission from the list is uni
n
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
n
d
s
h
o
u
l
d
n
o
t
be construed as criticism or lack of approval of any person
o
r
c
o
m
p
a
n
y
.
Any person or company who has been omitted from this list,
a
n
d
w
i
s
h
e
s
t
o
b
e
listed, should contact Ecological Services, Mn DNR, Box 25
,
6
5
8
C
e
d
a
r
S
t
.
,
S
t
.
P
a
u
l
,
Mn 55155. Tel. (612) 296-2835.
Product and Company(ies) Handling: (complete address, phone
n
u
m
b
e
r
,
e
t
c
.
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
.
)
Diquat,
Androc Products, Inc.
Barzen of Minneapolis, Inc.
Castle Chemical Co.
Cenex Coops (inquire at local coop)
Cole Chemical Supply
Howe Chemical
Landscane & Turf Sualz
Tre.Ft
Midland Coop (wholesale)
Don Penninns, Lake Mananement Inc
Rosen Ag Chemicals
Veg-go (diouat dibm;ide)
Scientific Int. Research, Inc.
Weedtrine D (diquat dihromide)
Aquacide
Landscape & Turf Supply
Aquathol Granular
Barien of Minneapolis, Inc.
Castle Chemical Co.
Contra Sota Co-op
R.L. Gould & Co. (wholesale only)
Van Waters & Rogers
Aquathol "K" (liquid)
Barzen of Minneapolis, Inc.
Don Pennings,'Lake Management, Inc.
Van Waters & Rogers
Hydrothol 191 Granular
Barzen of Minneapolis, Inc.
Castle Chemical Co.
Don Pennings, Lake Managemdnt, Inc.
Van Waters & Rogers
Hydrothol 191 (liquid) May only be applied by Minnesota Licensed Aquatic Commercial
Barzen of Minneapolis, Inc. Applicators
Hydrothol 47 Granular
Barzen of Minneapolis, Inc.
Hydrothol 47 (liquid) May only be applied by.Minnesota Licensed Aquatic Commercial
Barzen of Minneapolis, Inc. Applicators
Turf Supply Co.
Aquaccde,
Aquacide
Aqua-kleen
Androc Products, Inc.
Rhodia 2,4-D Gran 20
Midland Coop (wholesale)
Rosen Ag Chemicals
2,4-D Granular
Barzen of Minneapolis, Inc.
' Lyndc Chemical Co.
140trine II
5
4, •
R. L. Gould & Co. (wholesale only)
3711 Lexington Ave.
St. Paul 55112
484-8411
Hawkins Chemical Inc.
3100 Hennepin Ave. East
Minneapolis 55413
331-6910
Howe Chemical
4821 Xerxes Ave. No. (49th Ave. N. &
Minneapolis 55430 Brooklyn Blvd.)
535-1030
Landscape & Turf Supply
307 East 6th St.
Chaska 55318
448-3300
Lynde Chemical Co.
3040 Hennepin Ave. East
Minneapolis 55413
331-2840
Merit
1301 Cambridge
Hopkins 55343
927-0707
Midland Coop (wholesale)
P.O. Box 1395
800 53rd Ave. N.E.
Minneapolis 55421
571-2110
Nalco Chemical Co.
14100 Co. Rd. #6
Minneapolis 55441
559-3191
-[ -
Don Pennings
Lake Management, Inc.
10400 185th St. No.
Marine on St. Croix 55047
433-3283
Rosen Ag Chemicals
Fairmont, Minn. 56031
507-238-4201
Aquazine
Copper Sulphate
Aquathol Granular
Copper Sulphate
Diquat
Aquazine
Copper Sulphate
Dowpon
Algimycin PLL-C
Aquashade
Aquazine
4.Copper Sulphate
Cutrine Plus (granular)
lkDiquat
Weedtrine D
Weedtrine II
2,4-D (granular)
Diquat
Copper Sulphate
Dowpon M
Aquazine
Diquat
Rhodia 2,4-0.
Others available on request
Cuprose
Diquat
Cutrine Plus (liquid)
Aquathol "K" (liquid)
Hydrothol 191 Granular
Diquat
Aquazine
Rhodia 2,4-0 Gran 20
Dowpon
Science Explore Store
10th & Cedar
St. Paul 55101
221-4705
Scientific Int. Research Inc.
3725 Monitor
Minneapolis 55426
927-4949
Schuler Grain
Breckenridge, Mn. 56520
218-643-6130
scPr Industries, Inc.
RFD 1
Hastings, Mn. 55033
437-6758
Simplot Soilbuilders
East Grand Forks, Mn. 56721
218-773-2421
Thompson-Hayward Chemical Co.
584 Fairview Ave. No.
St. Paul 55104
647-0149
Turf Supply Co.
2970 Dodd Rd.
St. Paul 55121
454-3106
Van Waters & Rogers (Div. of Univnr.)
2313 Wycliff St.
St. Paul 55114
646-1351
Lake 7..,4orciti 0/1
"5-6° cg 8 4 Alterlue 1J0rt4
k"elec'Pli s , Min/let:at 1 CCi`fl
5751.- 1680
Copper Sulphate (fine crystal,
small quantities)
Veg -Go
Dowpon M
Dowpon M
Dowpon M
Copper Sulphate
Aquazine
Hydrothol 47 (liquid)
Hydrothol 191 Granular
Aquathol Granular
Aquathol "K" (liquid)
Copper Sulphate
ibbri-t Voith.s .171. ECKLU N D & SW E DLUN D CUSTOM HOME BUILDERS P. O. $OX IL EXCELSIOR. k PHONE 474-5821 307H AliNIVERSARY 19 • -ISIS • 4: 8 : •.'11'''N. • is fl r—c•—• CC- 1.5 01.17L07
Never Rake
Your Lake Again.
Enjoy your lake,
Enjoy your summer,
Enjoy your life.
LAKE RESTORATION, INC.
14550 21tth Avenue North
Minnearolls, Mtnnesota 55441
612.559.1680
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
THRU:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Carl Jullie, City Manager
Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
June 17, 1982
Dedication Plaque for Eden Prairie Community Center
Earlier this year there was some discussion regarding the dedication plague
for the Eden Prairie Community Center. The City Council did not want a
dedication plague listing all of the names of the people that were involved
in the construction of the Community Center. However, most people were
receptive to considering a dedication plague that was a simple statement
dedicating the Center to the citizens of the City.
Smiley Glotter and Associates, architects for the project, have offered to
donate a plaque with the statement "dedicated to the people of Eden Prairie
and their spirit of recreation". This plague would be 16x16" brushed alumimum
with black engraved letters as shown on the attached sheet. The only condition
for the donation of this plaque is that Smiley Glotter Associates name would
be on the 11:.:ttem of the plaque in letters approximately one-third of an inch
in height.
BL:md
rrri f° N1 0 2
C , .
1.
•.. „.
• f t - -el-
(17 - (.n 1-
t
"•• '"\ • f
I , ;
i1.41 \•• 1
i.:\ L ; ,-, r ,. 1„I..4/, • i % 1 i: • ' . ! ...;)
\:.i • ei -,.) v.,..---- .‘
pr)r -s. (-.-;--:(-7-1 ,I77.79 i
— ,:-. ' .-7 * - e l. I Li.,
U ,--, k,d,,,_;:-Dr.:,.,,,:ii „-....,...,,../(ii Lil 4;:i \O t';' ”
,,c7.2;;•1,ef.;:2.Nr\oi
" •
¶p -,t
g .44
e.qt,P (MI ('''R to4,1,,t"•n•ii-N 4•••n e t) v.:0ov ra,ve-&
tak.b e.r.101:4 c.ovin —n tn (,4V01n.• II •
1M .
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and City Council
Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
THRU:
Carl Jullie, City Manager
FROM:
Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services 10-
DATE:
June 17, 1982
SUBJECT: Fairview Southdale Hospital Proposed Donat'on
Attached to this memo is the May 28, 1982 letter from Margaret S.
B
i
e
t
e
r
,
Assistant Administrator of Fairview Southdale Hospital. Ms. Biete
r
,
a
resident of Eden Prairie, has suggested that the City of Eden Pra
i
r
i
e
and Fairview Southdale Hospital co-venture the establishment of a
n
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
course on the Round Lake trail system.
Staff from the Eden Prairie High School had previously contacted
C
i
t
y
s
t
a
f
f
regarding the possibility of establishing an exercise course arou
n
d
R
o
u
n
d
Lake that could be used for the physical education program at the
H
i
g
h
S
c
h
o
o
l
.
Upon receiving the proposal from Fairview Hospital, Community Ser
v
i
c
e
s
s
t
a
f
f
forwarded the information on the Vita Course to Steve Schultz, Co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
o
r
o
f
Student Activities for the High School. The physical education a
n
d
a
t
h
l
e
t
i
c
staff put together a plan showing the preferred layout around th
e
w
e
s
t
s
i
d
e
of Round Lake.
Community Services staff recommends that the City approve accept
i
n
g
t
h
i
s
donation from Fairview Southdale Hospital. The only cost to th
e
C
i
t
y
w
o
u
l
d
be the manpower for installing this course. Staff feels that thi
s
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
accomplished in late summer or early fall.
BL:md
Fairview•Southdale Hospital
G401 Fiance Ave So., Minneapolis, Knnesola 55435
Telephone (GI?) 924.5104
Miugaret S. Water — Assistant Administrator
• May 28, 1982
• Mr. Robert Lambert '
Director of Community Scrvics
City of Eden Prairie
g950 Eden Prairie Road
.Eden Prairie, MN 5S344
Dear Mr. Lambert:
As per our telephone conversation on Thursday, May 27, I
am writing to suggest that the City of Eden Prairie and
Fairview-Southdelc Hospital co-venture the establishment
.
of an exercise station course on the Round Lakes site in
Eden Prairie. You shared with me that the City of Eden
Prairie has considered this project., but was uuable to
proceed for lack of funding. Fairview-Southdale, as a
health care organization, certainly has a commitment to
physical fitness and quality of life, and perceives this
kind of project very appropriate for the community we serv
e
.
Perhaps if Fairview-Southdale can fund the purchase of the
equipment required, the City of Eden Prairie can supply th
e
resources to install the equipment. The two of us togeth
e
r
cah thereby provide a successful result for enjoyment by
residents of Eden Prairie. •
I have enclosed a brochure from one vendor supplying this
type of product, as well as a possible logo design to
include Fairview-Southdale's involvement. I will expect
to hear from you in the near future.
truly, .
)-1
Margar ,t Dieter
As niC.Administrator
M s r./;lb
A Fait vtw Comnnty loOtal
vuly U, elut
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. R82-140
RESOLUTION REJECTING BID
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the following
improvements:
Mitchell takes Estates 2nd Addition Improvements
I.C. 52-030
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 rejection of the bids at the
request of the property owner due to higher than anticipated costs.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council
as follows:
All bids are hereby rejected and City Staff is authorized to prepare
a revised set of plans and specifications which would eliminate the egress onto
T.H. 5.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on July 6, 1982.
' Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
SEAL
John D. Frane, City Clerk
Vo
July 6, 1982
MEMO
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager
FROM: Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works
DATE: June 28, 1982
RE: Mitchell Lake Estates 2nd Addition
Rejection of Bids
Bids for the referenced project were opened at 1:00 P.M. on June 11, 1982.
The attached sunnary of bids indicate that the bids were well grouped and
competitive. However, the very preliminary estimates supplied to the owner
by his engineer were for approximately $75,000. The low bid is approximately
$30,000 more than the owner had originally anticipated for the project.
In discussions with the owner's representative and the attached letter, I
hereby recommend that the bids be rejected and that Staff be authorized to
prepare plans and specifications for the project that reduces the scope.
The primary area of cost reduction will be to provide a right-in access off
of Highway 5 only. It is the owners opinion that by eliminating the right-out,
the project will still function much the same al. intended and that the project
costs can be reduced substantially. I concur with these opinions.
The changes will not involve significant modifications to the plans and we
would therefore expect to present the plans for approval at the-July 20
Council meeting.
EAD:sg
r11
F)1)AL
BID OPENING
FOR
I.C.52-030
UTILITIES FOR MITCHELL LAKE
ESTATES 2ND ADDITION
DATE: JUNE 11, 1982
FIRM NAME
i1 DMER BROS.
F.F JEDLICKI,INC.
HAROLD RODE
NODLAND ASSOCIATES
S.M.HENTGES & SON
0 & P CONTRACTING
5% BID BOND TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT
117, 1 412..5o
10 -7,986,.6,5- 0
)13:73700
106-,Baq.zo ED
HARDR1VES, INC.
.C.S.McCROSSAN .
M.G.ASTLEFORD,INC.
E G 1 E Eg'S ESTMATE. 91, -soo
June 24, 1982
Mr. Gene Dietz, P.E.
City Engineer
City of Eden Prairie
Dear Mr. Dietz:
Based on my review the design and bids for improvements in the Mitche
l
l
L
a
k
e
Estates 2nd Addition, I am requesting that the City Council reject al
l
b
i
d
s
and that a re-design of the Highway 5 access be initiated. This requ
e
s
t
i
s
based on the following:
1 - The $54,320 bid price for the Highway 5 entrance far exceeds
our original estimate.
2 - The planned upgrading of Highway 5 to 4 lanes within the next
few years would require the destruction of this improvement.
3 - The scope of the Highway 5 entrance design far exceeds what
reasonably should be expected for the abutting property's use.
Accordingly I am requesting that the "right-out" portion of the des
i
g
n
b
e
t
e
m
-
porarily deferred until either the eventual property users petition
f
o
r
i
t
s
installation or until Highway 5 is upgraded to 4 lanes. I propose t
h
a
t
t
h
e
"right-in" design maintain the current deceleration lane geometry b
u
t
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
turn radii into the property be reduced, the design thickness be co
n
s
i
s
t
a
n
t
Frith Terry Pine Court, and that a rural section be used with gravel
s
h
o
u
l
d
e
r
s
and grass ditches (this may require some super elevation on the rad
i
u
s
)
.
It is my understanding that this could be accomplished in time for
J
u
l
y
2
0
Council bid authorization and August 3 bid award.
Please keep me informed and let me know if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
1 -
Karl F. Peterson
10500 Lake Fall Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
KFP:mep
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
July 6, 1982
CONTRACTORS (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.)
Arteka Incorporated
Power Consultant Corp.
R. H. Romens Construction
Rutledge Construction
W. J. White Co.
Zachman Homes, Inc.
CONTRACTORS ( I 1 2 FAMILY )
David W. Durst & James Gans
Gorco Construction
Gary Nelson Construction, Inc.
Mark Peterson Contracting
Solar Envelope Home Builders
PLUMBING
1 & C Plumbing, Inc.
Ray Peterson
Southwest Plumbing
Sunrise Plumbing, Inc.
SOLICITORS LICENSE
Minnesota Cablesystems
VENDING MACHINES
ARA Services
Coca Cola Bottling
Royal Crown Beverage
PRIVATE KENNEL LICENSE
Joan Emswiler
Roger Farber
These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for
the licensed activity.
()
Pa t Solie, Licensing
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
BOARD OF REVIEW
BOARD OF REVIEW STAFF:
7:00 PM, CITY HALL
President of the Board Wolfgang H. Penzel, George
Bentley, Dean Edstrom, Paul Redpath and George
Tangen
City Manager Carl J. Jullie, City Assessor Bob
Martz, Deputy Assessor Steve Sinell, and Record-
ing Secretary Karen Michael
TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 1982
BOARD OF REVIEW MEMBERS:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Board of Review Member Dean Edstrom was absent.
I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by President of the Board Wolfgang H.
P
e
n
z
e
l
.
II. RECONVENE BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING
President Penzel noted the Board had met on June 8, 1982, at which ti
m
e
i
t
v
o
t
e
d
to reconvene the meeting at this time.
III. APPROVAL OF BOARD OF REVIEW MINUTES FROM MEETING HELD TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 1982
Page 2, para. 1, line 7: change "1982" to "1981.
Page 10, last para., change to 11:21 p.m." to at 11:21 p,m,"
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Minutes
o
f
t
h
e
Board of Review Meeting held Tuesday, June 8, 1982, as amended and p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
.
Motion carried unanimously.
IV. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 82-145, ACCEPTING THE 1982 ASSESSMENT
Board President Penzel called attention to Martz's memorandum of June
1
4
,
1
9
8
2
,
in which he outlined the progress and recommendations for action base
d
o
n
r
e
v
i
e
w
by the Assessing Department since June 8th.
The following taxpayers appeared before the Board:
John Davti - 9303 Talus Circle:
Deputy Assessor Sinell said after physically reviewing the property,
h
e
recommended reducing the valuation from $145,000 to $140,900. Davis
s
a
i
d
he would like the reduction to be more because his home should be in
t
h
e
"average to above average" rather than the "above average" category.
Board of Review Minutes -2- June 15, 1982
Sinell noted the rationale for rating is based on the professional judgment
and experience of the appraiser.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to accept the recommendation
of the Staff and reduce Davis's assessment to $140,900. Motion carried
unanimously.
Lance Finberg - 15801 South Shore Lane:
Finberg said he felt his lot was worth $25,000 rather than the $30,000 at
which it was assessed. City Assessor Martz stated Appraiser O'Brien had
recommended a reduction of $5600 from $102,600 to $97,000.
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to accept the Staff recommendation
to reduce the finberg assessment to $97,000. Motion carried unanimously.
Mrs. Bryn - The Cove:
Mrs. Bren inquired as to what decision had been made regarding the question
of equalization. It was noted that the issues raised by Mrs. Bren were in
regard to last year's valuations and did not have a bearing on this year's
valuations per se.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to sustain the valuation on
the Bren property. Motion carried unanimously.
Steven Hoyt - 10601 Niblick:
Hoyt stated he felt the proposed assessment to be extraordinary. He would
like to have his valuation reduced from $303,000 to less than $200,000.
City Assessor Martz stated the house was valued at $278,000 last year and
was increased to $303,000 this year (9%); Hoyt purchased the home in March
of 1981 for $330,000. Deputy Assessor Sinell said all of the homes on the
golf course were increased by 9%.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to sustain the valuation on the
Hoyt property. Motion carried unanimously.
Curtis Turner - 12551 Beach Circle:
Turner said he had received a 61% increase last year; his main reason for
appearing before the Board was to inquire as to why the residences in the
Willow Creek area had received a reduction last year.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to sustain the valuation on the
Turner property with the suggestion that these properties be looked at next
year. Motion carried unanimously.
Don Sorenson - 7121 Willow Creek Road:
Sorenson noted he had met with City Assessor Martz and Deputy Assessor Sinell
about his assessment. He felt he had four areas in which they did not agree:
1) basement finishing, 2) bathrooms, 3) deck, and 4) patio. He said he had
inquired from his insurance company what the guaranteed construction costs
would be in the event total loss and was told $112,000, He would be willing
to accept a reduction from $167,200 to $152,000.
Board of Review Minutes -3- June 15, 1982
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to sustain the valuation on the
Sorenson property. Motion carried unanimously.
Sorenson offered copies of the "Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and
Order for Judgment" in a recent court case involving the Gamble Development
Company, Mesabi Mall, Hibbing. President of the Board Penzel said the
case will be referred to the City Attorney for review.
Barbara Morris - 6921 Edenvale Boulevard:
Morris stated she felt $79,000 would be a reasonable assessment. The property
is presently valued at $84,900.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to sustain the assessment on the
Morris property due to the abatement of last year's taxes. Motion carried
unanimously.
Betty Anderson - 9340 Garrison Way:
Anderson noted she had not been able to meet with Deputy Assessor Sinell due
to a heavy work schedule; she asked to have the matter continued. City Assessor
Martz stated Anderson can abate through the County and noted that taxes cannot
increase under this procedure.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to sustain the valuation on the
Anderson property. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No. 82-145,
accepting the 1932 assessnent. A copy of the Gamble case findings is to be
included in the materials sent to the County, as well as an inquiry as to how
equitable Eden Prairie's valuations are relative to other taxing districts within
Hennepin County. Motion carried unanimously.
• CLOSE MEETING
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adjourn the meeting at 8:12 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
1.0