Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 11/02/1982 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA i:SDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1982 8:00 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, George Bentley, Dean Edstrom, Paul Redpath and George Tangen CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie; City Attorney • Roger Pauly; Finance Director John Frane; Planning Director Chris Enger; Director of Community Services Bob Lambert; Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, . and Recording Secretary Karen Michael INVOCATION: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL 1. PRESENTATION OF GOLD MEDAL AWARD FOR EXCELLENCE IN PARK AND RECREATION PROGRAMS II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS III. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FROM MEETING HELD TUESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1982 Page 2116 IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List Page 2117 B. Final Plat approval, MTS Technology Campus (Resolution No. 82-255) Page 2118 C. Receive I007' petition and authorize preparation of plans and Page 2121 pecifications for Creekridqe Estates road and storm sewer im rove- ments, I.C. 52-040 (north of Riverview Road and west of CSAH 18 Resolution No. 82-256 D. Change Order Number 2, Contract #3, I.C. 51-354, Well Collector Line Page 2123 E. Change Order Number 3, I.C. 52-025, City West Parkway Page 2124 F. Change Order Number 3, I.C. 52-027, City Services Project Page 2126 G. Restoration of the Cummins/Grill House Roof (Resolution No. 82-249, Page 2127 transferring CDBG Funds V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. WOODf..AWN HEIGHTS by Ruscun Homes. Request for rezoning of approximately Page 2D70 59.68 acres frog Rural to R1-9.5 for construction of 139 single family detached housing units and preliminary plat approval of 139 lots and 2 outlets. Located in the southwest corner of Duck Lake Trail and Town- line Road (Ordinance No. 9-82 - rezoning; Resolution No. 82-244 - prelirninary plat) Continued from October 19, 1982 City Council Ayenda - z - iues.,r;ovemoer z, 196G B. EDEN PRAIRIE PUBLIC LIBRARY by Hennepin County. Request to rezone 2.51 Page 2129 acres—From Ttiira1 to PUbTic arid priTiiiinary—Tlat 2.51 acres into 1 lot to construct a 10,000 sq. ft. library. Located In the southwest corner of Prairie Center Drive and Preserve Blvd. (Ordinance No. 7-82 - rezoning; Resolution No. 82-250 - preliminary plat) C. BASSWODDS FIFTH TOWNHDUSE ADDITION by Mr. & Mrs. Dahlquist. Request Page 2142 for PUD amendment for rear yard setback variance and preliminary plat for Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 3, Block 1, Basswoods Townhouse Second Addition. Located at 8851 Basswood Road. (Resolution No. 82-251 - PUD amendment; Resolution No. B2-252 - preliminary plat) D. SHADY OAK AMOCO by Amoco Dil Company. Request for rezoning .93 acres Page 2149 from Rural to Hwy-Com. and preliminary plat for construction of a gas station. Located in the southwest corner of Crosstown 62 and Shady Oak Road. (Ordinance No. 12-B2 - rezoning; Resolution No. 82-253 - preliminary plat) E. VALLEY PLACE OFFICES PLAT by G.S.J. Development. Request for preliminary Page 2160 platting of 4.1 acres, 4 lots zoned Office district with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals to allow Office condominium buildings. Located at 9971 - 9979 Valley View Road. (Resolution No. 82-254 - preliminary plat) F. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RENAMING KURTZ LANE SOUTH OF C.M.ST.P. AND P. Page 2188 RAILROAFTOrdinance No. 13-82) G. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RENAMING FLYING CLOUD DRIVE BETWEEN VALLEY Page 2189 VIEW RDAD AND SHADY OAK ROAD (Ordinance No. 15-82) H. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RENAMING VALLEY VIEW ROAD BETWEEN BAKER ROAD Page 2190 AND I-494 (Drdinance No. 14-82) VI. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 4405 - 4567 Page 2191 VII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & CDMMISSIOWS VIII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. Request from Thompson Academy of Gymnastics for a gymnastics use in Page 2195 an industrial area IX. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS A. Resolution No. 62-257, relating to the Burger King rezoning request Page 2198 B. Resolution No. 82-245, approving the preliminary plat of 1 lot into 2 Page 2204 lots for approximately 1.6 acres for lreanor Addition by Guy Treanor X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIDNS A. Reports of Council Members B. Report of City Manager 1. Appointment of Auditors to conduct the 1982 Audit Page 2207 2. Set date and time to meet as Canvassing Board XI. NEW BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT. UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1982 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel, George Bentley, Dean Edstrom, Paul Redpath and George Tangen COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Planning Director Chris Enger, Director of Community Ser- vices Bob Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION: Councilman George Bentley ROLL CALL: Councilman Dean Edstrom was absent I. COMMENDATIONS TO SUPERVISORS OF PUBLIC SAFETY RESERVE UNIT, SGT. BOB PTJOLSNESS AND SGT RON FUNK Mayor Penzel reviewed the work of the Public Safety Reserve Unit and read the letters of commendation which were then presented to Sgt. Bob Mjolsness and Sgt. Ron Funk. (Copies of which are attached.) II. DONATION OF PLAQUE FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER FROM SMILEY GLOTTER ASSOCIATES, INC. Gary Nyberg, representing Smiley Glotter Associates, Inc., presented a plaque for the Community Center with the following message "Dedicated to the Citizens of Eden Prairie and Their Spirit of Recreation." Mayor Penzel accepted the plaque on behalf of the residents of Eden Prairie. III. APPROVAL DF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS The following item was added to the Agenda: XI. New Business: A. Request to Authorize Repairs to City Hall Roof. The following items were moved from the Regular Agenda to the Consent Calendar: IX. A. Resolution No. 82-232, setting fees for the City of Eden Prairie becomes V. G., and X. D. 1. Receive 100 Ltitionfor prelimirpll grading of Sin9letree_ Lane and authorize preparation of plans and s.pecifications, I.C. 52-038 (Reso- lution No. 82-242) becomes V. H. 1/6 City Council Minutes -2- October 5, 1982 MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve the Agenda and Other Items of Business as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously. IV. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 1982 The following sentence was added to paragraph 7: "Hill noted that the Walden townhomes subdivision in Burnsville which he was involved with was done in this manner and there were no problems in marketing either the single-family or the townhomes." MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, September 7, 1982, as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously. V. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. Change Order Number 3, Water Supply Wells, I.C. 51-354, Contract #1 C. Change Order Number 1, Elevated Storage Reservoir, I.C. 51-354, Contract #2 D. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 8-82, rezoning Edenvale 15th Addition from Rural to RM 6.5 for townhouses and approval of Developer's Agreement. (Located at the end of Edenvale Boulevard) - (first read as Ordinance No. 82-19) E. Final Plat approval for City West (Resolution No. 82-238) F. Set Public HearinLDate for November 16, I982 on modification of the development. program for Development District No. 1 and establishment of proposed Tax In- crement District No. 3 and the adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan re- Tting thereto G. Resolution No. 82-232, setting fees for the City of Eden Prairie (formerly IX. A.) H. Receive lON petition for preliminary grading of Singletree Lane and authorize reparation of plans and specifications, I.C. 52-038 (Resolution No. 82-242) (formerly X. D. 1.) City Attorney Pauly called attention to the new format for Ordinances and also to the new number which was given to item "D" because of the new City Code. Bentley questioned the terminology "expires June 30th" which is referenced in the new Fees Resolution. City Attorney Pauly suggested that be deleted where ever it is mentioned. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve items A - H on the Con- sent Calendar with the additions and corrections as noted. Motion carried unani- mously. 2-1/6 6• City Council Minutes -3- October 5, 1982 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 1982 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS PUBLIC HEARING, (Resolution No. 82-230) - Continued from September 21, 1982 City Manager Jullie explained the procedure to be used. Director of Public Works Dietz reviewed individual project parcels which had been continued. I.C. 51-409 (#5.) Director of Public Works Dietz addressed his discussions with the Bearmans. (See attached letter.) Dietz recommended removal of the proposed assessment for trunk sewer and water because it had been previously assessed; the amount assessed for sanitary sewer shall be removed because it had been previously assessed; and reductions as noted. MOTION: 'tedpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to accept the revised recommen- dation. Motion carried unanimously. I.C. 52-001 (#6.) Director of Public Works Dietz noted that Sutton had requested a deferment until rezoning or development; his objection to the assessment would then be withdrawn. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt the revised recommen- dation. Motion carried unanimously. I.C. 52-038 (#14.) MOTION: Bentley moved,seconded by Tanoen to table action on this item to allow City Attorney Pauly time to review it. Motion carried unanimously. (See last page of Minutes.) SUPPLCMENTALS Director of Public Works Dietz recommended that the assessments to the Conner property for trunk santiary sewer and water and lateral sewer and water be dropped due to the unusual circumstances. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to delete the assessments on the Conner property at 12800 Valley View Road from the assessment rolls. Motion carried unanimously. City Manager Jullie stated there had been indications that a formal appeal would be filed by the Vikings II, Inc. and the Minneapolis Retail Meat Cutters & Food Handlers Pension Fund. Because of this, formalized testimony was taken. Assistant City Attorney Rick Rosow was present to oversee the pro- ceedings. Also present was William Belkengren, a court reporter, who made a transcript of the proceedings. z (1C 4.- • Page three Nu,' 5er 2, 1982 • 4502 LOGIS September service 4,873.37 4503 ROBERT HARTZ Expenses 166.55 4504 MEDICAL OXYGEN & EQUIPMENT Oxygen-Fire Dept. 39.00 4505 MERIT PRINTING Envelopes 357.3P 4506 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL September & November Sewer Service 101,149.0C 4507 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL September SAC Charges 22,671.0i; 4503 MN ACADEMY OF PROSECUTION Registration fee-Police Dept. 175.00 4509 MINNESOTA CASH REGISTER CO. Service-Liquor Store 330.20 4510 MINNESOTA GAS COMPANY Service. 3,979.45 4511 MINNESOTA HUMANE SOCIETY Fee-Animal control 25.00 4512 MIt;NESOTA RECREATION & PARKS Conference-Rec Dept. 35.00 4513 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER Overpayment-Miller Park Grant 3,125.00 4514 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC Service 35.25 4515 MINNESOTA WANNER COMPANY Hose-Public Works 56.81 4515 MATT NOHRENWEISER Refund-Swimming 7.00 4517 EARL MORE Expenses-Senior Citizens 4.8? 4518 MOTOROLA INC. Radio equipment 12,805.94 4519 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION Books-Fire Dept. 450.50 4520 NORTH STAR CHAPTER OF I.C.B.O. Dues-Building Dept. 25.00 4521 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. Service 3.09 4522 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. Service 16,765.57 4523 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO. Service 1,999.27 4}" THOMAS O'BRIEN Mileage 22.00 4:N.., OCLiS CRICK & TILE CO. Cement-Park Maintenance 28.75 4526 MICHAEL D. PAULUK Refund-Building Dept. 74.60 4527 PETTY CASH/PUBLIC SAFETY Expenses 13.28 4528 PONNiER MFG. CO., INC. Trophies-Rec Dept. 328.69 4529 PRAIRIE OFFICE PRODUCTS, INC. Office supplies 19.95 4530 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING, INC. Forms-Park Dept. 60.00 4531 PROCESS DYNAMICS Service 1,475.0.3 4532 RICK RARENORT Expenses 18.9C 4533 RADISSON ARROWWOOD INN Expenses 6.60 4534 RAINBOW SIGNS, INC. Card signs-Police Dept. 54.90 4535 RIDGE DOOR SALES CO. OF MINN Equipment repair 53.95 4536 TOM RIPPE Refund-Swimming 12.00 4537 ROBERTS DRUG Supplies 11.5S 4533 KEEL. ROSS Refund-Swimming 12.O0 4539 ROBERT ROUSSEAU Refund-Racquetball 21.00 4540 ST. CLOUD STATE UNIVERSITY Fee-Police Dept. 135.00 • 4541 RUSSELL SMITH ASSOCIATES, INC. Service 1,000.00 4542 SON OF A PRINTER, INC. Printing-Police Dept. 75.14 4543 SOUTH HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICE Service-Senior Citizens 2,650.00 4544 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING Ads I,602.0: 4545 STAR A TRIBUNE NEWSPAPERS Service-City Hall 14.95 4546 STATE TREASURER 3rd Quarter Building Permit Surcharge 7,297.55 4517 SULLIUANS SERVICES, INC. Service 50.00 51'1 SU1I'Hi N CO'H i'NNATIOU Equipment-Fire Dept. 357.0: - 1WIN CITY !'RI(:IME 5 LABEL Labels-Liquor Store/Preserve 87.0" 4...A TYPE HOJSE.+i'ORAGRAPH Printing-Planning Dept. 3.7 4551 VALiFY INDUSTRIAL. PROPANE, INC. Gas Cylinders-Coiauinity Center 99.50 4552 VAiPA Equipment repair 75.7P 4553 KLITH WAIL Expenses 5.2E 4554. WARNLR INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY, INC. Paint-Park Maintenance 295.00 •,4i`I 0 • Page four Noy tuber 2, 1982 4555 WATER ENGINEERING & MGMT. Subscription-Water Dept. 38.0� 4556 SANDRA RENTS Mileage 39.24 4557 WESTU'URNE SUPPLY INC. Equipment 104.9 4558 J. YEAGER Volleyball official 32.00 4559 XEROX CORPORATION Service 1,315.84 4560 L'HOTEL SOEITEL Fee-Senior Citizens 13.50 4561 INSTY-PRINTS Printing-Senior Citizens 92.01 4562 MABEL FAUSCH Service-Calligraphy 10.50 4563 KATHY HERRANN Mileage 13.50 4564 CRAIG HILL New roof-Grill House 5,569.0U 4565 STEPHEN CALHOON Mileage 26.20 4566 TIM PIERCE & ASSOCIATES INC. Service 562.5G 4567 CHRIS LNGER Expenses 150.00 TOTAL $518,649.97 • • MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Planning THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager DATE: October 21, 1982 REGARDING: Special Use Requests. • The City has received at least three different requests within the last two weeks for locating of gymnastics clubs in existing industrial buildings. The problem is that a gymnastics club, like a judo club, dance studio, etc., is a commercial service. It is not a related or supportive use to an industrial park. Yet, from information we have received, we find that in the suburban areas, most gymnastics clubs do locate in industrial areas. Rezoning is not appropriate because it is part of a building and the • proponent would be a leasce only. • We have discussed this at staff level and with the City Attorney. There is no remedy through the Board of Appeals because they only have authority to grant variances with regard to performance standards, not land use. So then, the request corms to the City Council. Some other communities, such as Bloomington, handle this type of request as a conditional use. That clearly is the vehicle that is needed, but once used, does open up a sort of Pandorra's box. In addition, the main concerns the Council might bear in mind are: 1. Parking; a particular club in a particular building, with current operations, may not be a problem, but what about expansion of class • size, hours, and curriculum (what about adult gymnastics or jazzer- cize?). 2. Precedent; there are many uses like this that are a commercial • service but do not wish to pay r.ocnrercial prices. A conditional use permit opens the door for a myriad of other requests. 3. Are we using up industrial space with ciume rcial areas, and in fact comrpet.ing for space in Indic,trial areas, and competing in price with areas we are now preparing for commercial? 2ITS Memo-Special Use Requests page 2 Planning Staff has contacted Plymouth, Burnsville, Eagan, and Edina regarding their treatment of this type of use. Private gyms, athletic clubs, tennis and racquetball clubs, are generally allowed as they can be classified as a supportive commercial service to an industrial area. A gymnastics club for children is completely independant of an industrial function. Upon review of the current request, theCoincil may choose to simply allow the current ordinance to stand which would limit this type of use to com- mercial areas, or Council may wish to explore the feasibility (and advis= ibility) of conditional use permits. • CE:sh • • • • • 21()(e k t • t THOMPSON ACADEMY OF GYMNASTICS F CLIME ND ,iURN`.,Vi[LL.MINNI 5S337 6Ii/NHD DFPO \91 JUL IA THOMPSON ANETZ•DIRECTOR OC. 2 City Council 8950 Eden Prairie Rd. Eden Prairie, !- Gentlemen: Thompson Academy of Gymnastics (TAGS) is a private gymnastic corporation located a 1207 East Cliff Road in Burnsville. In September of 1977, we opened and are presently leasing 8500 square feet from R.L. Johnson in the Tnrnsville Industrial Park. Our current enrollment has reached 400 students between the ages of two and eighteen. To better meet the needs of our program, we are moving to a new location with 10,000 square feet. It has been a successful and rewarding business for us over the years and we are anxious to expand and grow into the Eden Prairie commu- nity. We are merging with the 'Eden Prairie Gymnastic Club and have found a facility to lease at 14785-14791 Martin Drive. ITue to current zoning regulations, our plans have come to a halt. We would like the Eden Prairie City Council to consider our facility needs and allow us to operate at this location. Eden Prairie Gymnastics Club is a community based organization currently operating out of the school administration building with approximately 200 students enrolled. With the growing interest in gymnastics, the equil-meat, coaches and facilities of recognized clubs have been improved tremendously to safely accommodate the needs of its participants. The parents of the :;;den Prairie Club have given the merge much consideration and feel the Partin ')rive facility is essential in providing a quality program. This facility, with its required 18 foot clear ceiling height, would allow our business to operate in a professional and safe manner. TAG3 would like the city council to approve use of this location on Martin Drive for a gymnastics school to provide instruction for the youth in the community. The owner of this facility is acquainted with the logistics of running a gymnastics school and is eager to see us get started as soon as possible. Your prompt attention to this matter would be greatly appreciated. Sinccrel , �/— Thompson Academy of Gymnnstil Greg Aretz q,('d i o(.a r4, October 28, 1982 Mayor Penzel ED N PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL Eden Prairie City Ball Eden Prairie, MN 55344 RE: Relocation of Eden Prairie Gymnastics Club De:u- Mayor Penzel: We are submitting this letter in support of the proposal to relocate the Eden Prairie Gymnastics Club. i' As parents of a child who is enrolled in this club, we feel that it would be rmst beneficial to her and all of the children enrolled if our Club were to be located in their own space. If we were to have our own space, our children would be able to attend classes at a decent hour and still be able to have time for other activites and hcme life. We also feel that if the Eden Prairie Gymnastics Club wore to have their own space, we could better benefit the City of Eden Prairie by providing better space and a better program with which to futlher its gymnastics program. We thank you for your consideration of this proposal. Yours truly, Dave and Jan Sauer RESOLUTION NO. 82-257 WHEREAS, A. The owners of that part of Lot 1, Block 1, Eden Glen, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying south of a line drawn per- pendicular to the West line of said Lot 1 from a point of said West line distant 152.0 feet North along said West line from the Southwest corner of said Lot 1 (the "land") have applied for rezoning of the land by removing it from the Rural District and placing it in the Commercial Regional Service District ("C-Rog-Ser") by adoption of Ordinance No. 6-82 amending the legal description of land in each District referred to in the City Code Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B; B. The application for rezoning was considered by the Planning Commission of the City at a meeting on September 13, 1982; C. Notice of a public hearing on the application before the Council of the City of Eden Prairie was duly given and a hearing thereon was held on October 5, 1982; BE IT RESOLVED, that the application for rezoning of the land from the Rural District to the C-Rog-Ser District be and in all things is denied, and proposed Ordinance No. 6-82 shall not be and is not adopted on the basis of the following findings and for the following reasons: • 1. The land is proposed to be improved for construction thereon and use as a Burger King fast food restaurant, in accordance with a Dovelopmont. Proposal prepared by Howard Dahlgren Associates, Inc. , dated August 12, 1982. 2. The land is bordered by Glen Lane to the East, Single- tree Lane to the South and Eden Road to the West. 3. The land, together with other lands, consisting in the aggregate of approximately 15.2 acres is a part of the Eden Glen Planned Unit Development No. 80-41 ("Eden Glen PUD") concept approval of which was given by the Council of the City of Eden Prairie on February 17, 1981. 4. The Eden Glen PUD is located West of the Eden Prairie Center and is bordered on the East by Minnesota Trunk High- way 169/212, on the South by Singletrec Lane and on the North and West by Eden Road. 5. Eden Glen PUD as approved provides for a mix of uses consisting of two fast food restaurants, one Class 1 restaurant, one retail and three office sites. Use of the land in accordance with the Eden Glen PUD is for an office site. 6. The owner of the lands encompassed in Eden Glen PUD, including the land, entered into a Developer's Agreement with the City as of June 9, 1981, whereby the owner covenanted to plat and develop the lands for the uses described in 5 above (including use of the land for an office site) as set forth in Exhibit B to the Developer's Agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and further, to not develop, construct upon or maintain the lands in any other respect or manner. By its terms, the Developer's Agreement is binding upon and enforceable against the owner, its successors and assigns of the lands within the Eden Glen PUD. 7. A fast food restaurant has been constructed and operating for in excess of one year on one of the fast food sites (Lot 1, Exhibit A) pursuant to approved rezoning by the City, and rezoning and use of the other fast food site (Lot 2, Exhibit A) for a fast food restaurant within the Eden Glen PUD has been approved. B. One site located in the northwesterly corner of Eden Glen PUD designated for office use in the Eden Glen PUD, together with approximately one additional acre of land has been rezoned for construction thereon and use as a full- service hotel including 152 guest rooms as well as banquet, restaurant and meeting facilities. 9. Uses or approved uses of property surrounding and in the vicinity of the land, in addition to the hotel and the fast food restaurants, include single family homes to the north and west of the Eden Glen PUD, a condominium office complex approved but not built to the north of the Eden Glen PUD, and an automobile service station and an office building bordering on and south of Singletree Lane and south of Eden Glen PUD. 10. Eden Road bordering the westerly line of the land adjacent to which to n private residences are situated is an unimproved gravel road. 11. Existing or approved uses of the lands within the Eden Glen PUD, together with the proposed use of the land as a fast food restaurant is estimated to generate 10 percent more trips than those estimated with respect to the Eden Glen PUD as originally approved February 17, 1981. 12. Peak traffic per hour is estimated to he 150 vehicles for a fast food restaurant use of the land, compared to about 25 vehicles for office use. 13. Parking congestion, .including large trucks from Highways )69/212, generated by the operations of the fast food restaurant located within the Eden Glen PUD is presently being experienced and is being reflected by parking of cars and large trucks along adjacent streets. 14. Hours of operation of the proposed Burger King restaurant may range from an 11:00 p.m. to a 4:00 a.m. closing time. ]5. The Burger, King parking lot, building and certain signs will be illuminated. 16. Late night traffic and operations and noise, vehicle lights and lighting on the premises as well as dust from Eden Road generated from a fast food restaurant would create a disturbance to occupants of residences immediately across Eden Road from the land and in the vicinity and would adversely affect the use of such residences and the welfare of the occupants. 17. Use of the land for a fast food restaurant is contrary to the express provisions of the Eden Glen PUD as well as the written agreements and covenants of the owners with respect to the use of the land. 18. Use of the land for a fast food restaurant may have an ad- verse impact upon the values of other lands in the Eder Glen PUD because of the generation of increased traffic and parking and the concentration of fast food restaurant use of the lands within the Eden Glen PUD. 19. Traffic during ?cal: hours and at other times will be increased excessively as a result of use of the land for a fast food restaurant resulting in less safe traffic movement and conditions. 20. Use of the land for a fast food restaurant will aggravate existing parking congestion including the parking of large trucks on adjacent public streets resulting in less safe traffic movement and conditions. 21. Maximum (peak) traffic movements generated by fast food restaurants occur during times of day different from maximum traffic movements generated by office and retail uses. A mix of uses within the Eden Glen PUD will reduce or limit maximum traffic movements at any one time compared to the maximum traffic movements which would occur were all uses to be similar. 22. Increasing the number of fast food restaurant uses within the Eden Glen PUD will increase the total maximum (peak) traffic movements on streets within and surrounding the Eden Glen PUD resulting in greater congestion of traffic, blocking of streets and intersections, increased parking congestion and less safe traffic movements and conditions. 23. Increased traffic and automobile and truck parking congestion will create potential traffic and safety hazards impairing the ability of the City's public safety, fire and other emergency services to operate within the area. 24. The maximum number of square feet of signs authorized by the City Code in a C-Reg-Ser District for the proposed use of the land is significantly greater than the number of square feet of signs which could be displayed for an office building use of the land authorized by the City Code in an Office District, thus resulting in an excessive proliferation of signs within Eden Glen PUD and would be aesthetically undesireable. 7 , • • 25. Use of the land for a fast food restaurant would result in three fast food restaurants in the Eden Glen PUD and would be contrary to the objectives of the Eden Glen PUD to obtain mixed integrated uses of the lands encompassed within the Eden Glen PUD complementing and supporting each other and the surrounding land uses. ;?03 TO: Edon Prairie City Council FROM: Guy K. Treanor SUBJ: Past Council Meeting and Upcoming Meeting DATE: October 26, 1982 I withdraw my request to rezone my property on Valley View Road. I am now going to compromise with you, the City staff and my neighbors. My new plat is what you've all asked for. It splits my large vacant lot into two lots (Lot A and Lot B), Lot A being 30,784 square feet and Lot B being 39,520 square feet - well above the 1/2 acre required size. I wish to split the land so that I can build a new home on Lot B. The divid- ing lot line on this new plat is strategically placed so that I can build my new house exactly where I want it. The house will he set hack from the noisy Valley View Road and situated for maximum concealment and privacy (the X marks that spot). Please also note that I have agreed to giving up 40 feet of frontage (over 1/3 acre) right-of-way, something none of my opposing neighbors have had to do. Here are four reasons why I feel my new plat should not be rejected by the council : 1. I've already spent over $1,000 and have been denied my first plat, I don't want to pay to have more surveys done. 2. With the dividing lot line where it is I would own the tree line and would not have to worry about the neighbors trimming or damaging them. This is so because this dividing line is just outside of the farthest overhanging limbs - yet still on my property. 3. I have the right to build a house on my property wherever I want to as long as I stay within the proper setbacks. I don't believe the Council or my neighbors should tell me where to divide my land. After all , I didn't tell them where to build their porch, swimming pool , and their additions! 4. Also, project some of the future problems when Valley View Road will undoubtedly have to be upgraded. My opposing side neighhors will be screaming bloody murder when they are assessed for their huge frontages along Valley View - I wouldn't be if I a M allowed to divide mine into two lots. I am asking for a simple lot division. Please remember I have been misinformed by the City staff, sent through the Board of Appeals mistakenly, dropped from City Council agenda just days before my scheduled appearance and basically passed around City Hall and City Council like a puppet since July. Please give me a break, Guy K. Treanor a:L, / CI- (..) o U "`, t o 2 a3 a J.: 11,i L� ~ • LL I-o : o LL ��Lyj/ Z Q W 9 ,.�t3L'_l h w c' )^)s A r.... LO H N Q n •n in V'i _iO ^Y 0 �� z L) O T(•1 H W 0�? N. -I1- !i V O r 6 '. Z w — a R ccO l+)°' a as W 0 0 _7 > 8oz U. Ws. �Y ccronm 1. 0. ¢ l e � 4 y =I Vv: 0 i N + f ro °SI 9 ° r v F- �I ,il Z `,! fr^ J Is UJ .• P —— 04.4 Cr I 0 N ml N 1 N N totQ d: / t0 CJ M WI ,Al . , m tu d t '2 ! \ W iI 4 CI 7 i rI V ~ I. I'I I4J I. tl S $; n ;i -eel 1 1 i rl • CITY OF fHi_N PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COU TY, P":1NNLSOTA RESOLUTION NO. 82-245 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF TREANOR ADDITION • BE IT RESOIVED by the Ednn Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Treanor Addition dated 9/16/82 , 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 7oniny and Platting ordinances and amendments thereto and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the day of _____ 19 Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor John 0. Frane, City Clerk SEAL ._.'1.) • jQG�• FOX, McCUE & MURPHY 0-1 CI 1,01 COUNIAN/5 7901 rl TINS CLoun OHNE , EDEN PRAIRIL.MINNESOTA 55344 TELEPHONE L poxCPA 16121944-6166 WILLIAM M11 NIL CLI L' L.PA JAMES 5 MURPHY C P A October 11, 1982 Mr. Carl Julie City Manager City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Mr. Julie: We have met with Mr. John Frane to discuss the 1982 audit of the City's finan— cial statements. He suggested we prepare a brief audit proposal and forward it to you for your review. We appreciate the opportunity to submit our proposal to serve as the independent auditors for the City of Eden Prairie for the 1982 fiscal year audit. As you know, we have served as the independent auditors for the City since 1978. We are familiar with the engagement and feel this knowledge of the City's financial system is mutually beneficial since it enhances our understanding of the City's operations and thus permits greater efficiency in performing your audit. In addition we are readily accessible for any questions or accounting matters that might arise during the year. Such accessibility and continuity is important in providing quality service. The estimated fee for the audit engagement would be $9,800 plus any out of pocket expenses. Preliminary audit work would be completed prior to December 31, 1982, while the year—end work would be coordinated with Mr. Frane and his financial closing schedule for 1982 financial information. We would expect to deliver the completed financial statements to you by June 10, 1983. This might occur earlier depending upon Mr. Frane's closing schedule. As part of the audit engagement we would be available for any meetings that you, Mr. Frane, or the City Council might desire. We would also expect to meet with the City Council at the completion of the audit to review the audited financial statements and our letter of management or financial comments. -2- We have appreciated the opportunity to serve as your independent accountants for the last four years and look forward to serving as your 1982 independent accoun- tants. We again thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal. If you have any questions or desire further information, please don't hesitate to con- tact us. We would be happy to discuss further the nature of the engagement and the degree of our qualifications. Very truly yours,/ f 27Lc-— - CC: W. John Franc City Council Minutes -4- October 5, 1982 Assistant City Attorney Rosow reviewed what had transpired to this time. He noted who would be called to testify and what the rebuttal procedure would be. David Anderson, attorney with Peterson, Bell &Converse,stated he was present to represent the Minneapolis Retail Meat Cutters & Food Handlers Pension Fund. There was no one present to represent the Vikings II, Inc. The following were sworn in by the court reporter: Bob Martz, City Assessor; Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works; Russell Smith, private appraiser; and Chris Enger, Planning Director. Dietz addressed his memorandum of October 5, 1982, directed to the Mayor and Members of the City Council. City Assessor Martz spoke to his memorandum of October 4, 1982, to the City Council. Director of Planning Enger addressed his memo of October 4, 1982, regarding road improvements in the Major Center Area. Russell Smith spoke to the report he had compiled. (All of the referenced memoranda are attached as are the "Findings of Fact" for both parcels as compiled by Assistant City Attorney Rosow.) David Anderson, representing the Meat Cutters, stated its property already had access and did not feel the benefit to the property was commensurate with the assessment. Daniel Enblom, 10600 Valley View Road, asked about his grandmother's (Mrs. Myrtle Peterson) written objection. Director of Public Works Dietz said her assessment will be deferred until the property is rezoned and/or devel- oped (as is all homesteaded property in the district); this parcel had not been continued. Penzel noted that the Meat Cutters had agreed to appropriate upgrading of Valley View Road when they were in with the concept plans for their parcel. Penzel asked Planning Director Enger about the ingress and egress plans for the area. Enger noted the improvements at the 494/18 intersection which were recently completed have made ingress and egress to the Viking's parcel differ- ent than before and will be improved with the improvements now underway in the Major Center Area. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt the area-wide assessments as per Staff recommendations and to adopt the "Findings of Fact" as submitted by Assistant City Attorney Rosow for the Vikings II, Inc. and Meat Cutters parcels; and the include the various memoranda referred to this evening. Tangen stated since he did not have the opportunity to second the motion, he wished to indicate he supported the motion based on what he had heard this evening. VOTE ON MOTION: Motion carried unanimously. riG City Council Minutes -5- October 5, 1962 B. CHERNE CONTRACTING CORPORATION by Cherne Contractinct Corporation. Request to rezone 17.43 acres from Industrial to Office for an 33,000 square feet corporate headquarters and approval of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Located south of West 78th Street (I-494) frontage road and between Gelco and Cabriole Center. (Ordinance No. 4-82 - rezoning, Resolution No. 82-224 - preliminary plat, and Resolution No. 82-223 - EAW) Continued from Septem- ber 21, 1982. City Manager Jullie noted the Public Hearing notice had been published and the proposal will have to referred to the Board of Appeals for variances. Dave Johnson, Vice President of Cherne Contracting Corporation, introduced Bill Cherne, Assistant to the President, and Tom Stahl, architect. Johnson then addressed the proposal. Director of Planning Enger stated the Planning Commission had reviewed this proposal at its August 23, 1982, meeting at which time it recommended approval of the rezoning reiiuest subject to the recommendations included in the August 19, 1982, Staff Report. The Commission also recommended approval of the finding of no significant impact for the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The Planning Commission felt some items in the Staff Report should be deleted and left to the discretion of the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commis- sion. Director of Community Services Lambert said the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission had reviewed this proposal at its meeting held Septem- ber 20, 1982 and had recommended approval as per the recommendations of the Staff Report and included a scenic easement dedication along a line proposed by Cherne Contracting and payment of the cash park fee. The Commission also felt a fence or vegetative barrier should be required and planted during site construction. On October 4, 1982, the Commission reviewed the Lambert memo of September 29, 1982, to the Mayor and City Council. This referred to the dedication of land in lieu of cash park fees. The Commission unanimously recommended accepting this proposal. Redpath said he appreciated Cherne's hiring a naturalist. Tangen asked if parking was allowed on West 78th Street. Director of Public Works Dietz said parking is allowed only in some areas. Bentley said he thought it would be easy enough to extend those no parking areas to include the whole Street. Tangen thought it would be a good idea to post the street since there would be less than the usual number of parking places in the Cherne proposal. Redpath asked how the westerly delivery access drive would be shielded from the lake side. Johnson said it would be below ground level and would not be visible from the lake. Director of Community Services Lambert said the high oak hill on the lake side would also shield the delivery access point. Penzel asked what the intended use of the peninsula would be. Johnson said a walking path would be the only thing proposed. City Council Minutes -6- October 5, 1982 Bentley asked about the variance which would be necessary relative to the height of the building. Eiger said the Board of Appeals would have to review that request however the height would be consistent with what is already along the north side of the lake. Bentley said he would encourage employers in this area to participate in the Chamber of Commerce's Rideshare Program which would help to reduce the number of parking spaces necessary. Johnson noted Cherne has implemented its own rideshare program within its own corporation already. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to close the Public Hearing and to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 4-82 (100' south of the sewer easement.) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to adopt Resolution No. 82-224, approving the preliminary plat of Cherne Contracting Corporation. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 82-223, finding the Envinronmental Assessment Worksheet for Cherne Contracting Cor- poration a private action which does not require an Environmental Impact Statement. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to direct Staff to draft the Oeveloper's Agreement, taking into consideration the recommendations included in the Staff Report, those of the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission and the Planning Commission, the various dedications, and fencing as needed to preserve the environment. Motion carried unanimously. Tangen requested Staff to look into fencing and/or boundaries of properties along Anderson Lakes so there will be some uniformity if barriers are necessary. Penzel concurred; Staff is advised to undertake that review. C. REQUEST FOR HOUSING REVENUE BONDS BY G & D ENTERPRISES (BAVPOINT MANOR APART- MENTS] 1N THE AMOUNT OF $7,000,000.00 (Resolution No. 82-239) City Manager Jullie stated official notice of the Public Hearing had been pub- lished and gave some background on the request. Dick Smith, representing Jim Miller Construction, and Art Piehl, Knutson Com- pany, were present to answer questions. City Attorney Pauly said he had reviewed the Resolution and as the result of his commients,the bond counsel had supplied the City with a new Resolution. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Redpath said he felt there is a need for housing in Eden Prairie and this proposal would provide that. I IL', is_. City Council Minutes -7- October 5, 1982 MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to adopt Resolution No. 82-239, relating to the issuance of revenue bonds pursuant to Chapter 462c, Minnesota Statutes. Bentley stated he still does not have a good feeling about the use of housing revenue bonds. lie said he has objected to the project from the beginning. He understands the need for rental housing in the City but felt it should be accomplished through private financing. Penzel said he appreciated Bentley's concerns but he did not feel there was much difference between industrial revenue bonds and housing revenue bonds. He said if one is legitimate then the other must be also. He said it is a legislative device. He supported the application recognizing the need for housing in Eden Prairie. VOTE ON MOTION: Motion carried with Bentley voting "no." D. BURGER KING by Burger King_Corp. Request for rezoning of .8 acre from Rural to C-Reg-Serv., and preliminary plat approval to construct a Burger King restaurant. Located in the northwest corner of Glen Lane and Singletree Lane. (Ordinance No. 6-82 - rezoning, and Resolution No. 82-234 - preliminary plat.) City Manager Jullie noted official notice of this Public Hearing had been published and property owners had been notified. John Shardlow, planner with Howard Dahlgren and Associates, introduced Chet Sazenski, president of Jesco; Paul Sutherland, regional vice president of Burger King; Dennis Trissler, site development engineer; Bill LaPanta, project realtor; Jim Benshoof, traffic engineer; and Geoff Martin, landscape architect. Shardlow then addressed the proposal. Sutherland then introduced his operations team including Jay VanDelson, area manager; Mark Roedal, district manager; and Dave Pauly, district manager. He said Burger King would hope to employ 50 - 70 full and parttime employees; they believe in community involvement - last year they sponsored a midget hockey team and this year they are planning to sponsor a bantam traveling team and a pewee house team. He reviewed their menu. Sutherland said they would love to be a part of Eden Prairie. Director of Planning Enger stated the request was considered by the Planning Commission at its September 13, 1982, meeting at which time the Commission voted to recommend approval of the rezoning request and the preliminary plat. Enger noted the September 3, 1982, Staff Report had looked at both the pros and cons which were then laid out in a comparative manner. Director of Community Services Lambert said the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission had not reviewed the proposal because the only issue was cash park fees and those would be automatically included. 2 § City Council Minutes -8- October 5, 1982 Bentley questioned some of the figures in the occupancy rates in tables presented in material in the Council packet. LaPanta later noted this was put in as a "rule of thumb" guide. Redpath stated the Council had recently allocated approximately $18 million in a ring route. He would like to see Burger King on the outer perimeter. He would not like to see the Major Center Area developed in a helter skelter fashion due to the heavy assessments which have been placed upon the property owners. Bentley said he would concur with Redpath's comments. He stated at the time of PUD approval he expressed a concern that this area was going to become a fast food strip. He noted there were conditions imposed at that time that there would be no more than two fast food restaurants on that site. Shardlow reviewed the Eden Glen Planning Unit Development document which had been submitted along with the Design Framework Manual. He said they are not advocating a fast food row but rather a a building which is of high quality and is consistent with the overall planned unit development. He noted the proposal had been reviewed by the developers of the Sheraton Hotel and they had found it to be acceptable; and, they would, in fact, support a standard restaurant between them and the Burger King proposal. He said he felt Jesco had made a major contribution to the City in that they had spent about $400,000 in earth work to make their property developable. Helen Martin, 8482 Eden Road, said they are opposed to the restaurant because they' get up at 4:30 a.m. -- their home is due west across Eden Road from the proposed Burger King. She expressed concern about the additional traffic which would be generated by the restaurant. Enger asked for direction as to where the Council would like to have fast food restaurants located. Penzel said he, too, agreed with Redpath's concerns. He asked what the hours of operation would be. Sutherland said last summer some Burger Kings tried late night drive-throughs-- some stayed open until 4 a.m., others until 2 a.m. He said it all depended on what was warranted. During the school year, he pointed out, it is harder to find employees who are able to stay past midnight. He could not say definitely what the hours would be. Redpath noted the situation in the Southdale area off of Xerxes Avenue where there are a couple of fast food restaurants and the traffic situations which are created there during the noon hour. He reiterated his desire to see this proposal on the periphery. LaPanta said there have been numerous offers to buy this property -- all of which have been turned down because neither he nor Sasenski felt they were appropriate. He said he does not consider the Kentucky Fried Chicken a fast food restaurant because the home owner usually does not eat on the premises. He said he has been at Hardee's at 11:25 a.m. and you can hardly get in -- it is his opinion that there are people in the City to be served by a restaurant such as Burger King. 'G.1 I". 6 City Council Minutes -9- October 5, 1982 Penzel said he felt there was universal recognition that there would be bene- fits froms having a Burger King type restaurant in the Major Center Area; the question revolves around the issue of whether this site is the appropri ate location or not. He noted the Council is wrestling with whether or not the concepts of use that were provided for by Jesco in the original PUD are still there and the desire to provide for a well-structured Major Center Area with a well rounded mix of commercial development. Tangen felt the key to the development is whether or not the Sheraton will be built. He indicated that if the Sheraton does come in, then, in a sense, the concept does change completely and Burger King might fall into a support service. At this time, however, he would find it difficult to support with- out the assurances that the other proposal will perform. He said he does not like the idea of a fast food strip. He is not anti Burger King; he appreciated the aesthetics of what they are trying to do and the quality of their operation. Sasenski said he felt the PUD indicated their intentions but also allowed a certain latitude where they might vary. He said they have turned down buyers after reviewing their plans. It is their feeling that Burger King fits into the quality of development they hope to complete. He felt the streets in the area have been built to handle the traffic which will be generated. He said he felt the Martin property would eventually be zoned commercial so theirs is a temporary complaint, if legitimate. Redpath indicated there are three restaurants west of here on TH5 which people go to. Traffic studies show the same traffic goes past the VoTech School a mile down THI69/212 as goes past Singletree Lane. Sazenski noted that Shardlow had shown what other municipalities such as Rose- ville have allowed. Penzel said it has never been the case -- and never will be -- that the guidelines for the City of Eden Prairie are based on what is done in another city. tie said there was a straight conflict situation here which might be approached thusly: a vote could be taken and if it fails things are closed as far as this proposal on this site goes for a year, or the matter could he continued for further review, or the proposal could be withdrawn. He urged the proponents to make that consideration. He said if they wished to consult among themselves, he would be glad to entertain that request and ask the Council to table consideration at this time until after discussion on the Edenvale gth proposal. He indicated he did not think the issue would be resolved due to the polarization shown. Shardlow said he appreciated the Mayor's candor and asked to hear from other members of the Council -- he felt Tangen had indicated his position and what sort of change would justify consideration of the proposal and wished to find out what the feelings were of the other members of the Council. Bentley said he would be happy to see Burger King in Eden Prairie but he would not vote in favor of another fast food site on this site because of his basic premise upon which his original vote for PUD approval was based and that was the original concept for this project. He did not like the clustering effects of fast food restaurants. lie would entertain another type of restaurant -- something like a Perkins, but nothing which would be classified as a fast food restaurant. City Council Minutes -10- October 5, 1982 Penzel said he had some sympathy with Tangen's position. He said he believes there would he a reassurance in the knowledge of what is going to happen with the Sheraton as this will have a major impact on this whole section of the City and not only the Eden Glen PUD. Redpath said he thought Hardee's had been assured there would be no other fast food restaurants there. Sazenski said they had an agreement with Har- dee's that there would be four fast food restaurants which would be excluded from building along Highway 169 only and not on the other side of Glen Lane. Penzel said the merits of what Hardee's agreed to was their business and should not be the concern of the Council. Shardlow asked if the Mayor's offer of deferring considerdation might be taken given the amount of time and effort and money which had been put into the proposal. Penzel said the matter could be tabled. Trissler, indicated he was speaking for the corporation, requested the Councils vote. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to close the Public Hearing and to deny 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 6-82. Motion carried unanimously. Penzel indicated a motion on the preliminary plat would be moot. He asked if the Council members wished to restate their findings. Redpath said his vote was based on the impact on Prairie Center Drive and the ring route and he felt it would be wrong to change the PUG at this time. Penzel said that was basically his judgement. The City has consistently encouraged a variety of mixed uses. From a traffic circulation standpoint he felt this would only create problems. Tangen noted he stood by his earlier statement. Bentley said he had indicated his objections earlier. He said he had based his original vote on the fact that there would be no more than two fast food restaurants on that side. He also felt traffic problems would be created on Eden Road. Penzel said the City Attorney had suggested the Council might wish to recon- sider its action and defer the matter to Staff based on the Council's input as had now been provided so that a resolution of denial including the findings of fact might be prepared. This resolution would be considered at the next Council meeting. Tangen said since the proponent had requested a vote, would the Council not be complying with his wishes if it were rescinded? City Attor- ney Pauly said that was correct, but in order to make the record clear formal findings should be prepared. Pauly noted that while the request of the pro- ponent would not have been fulfilled tonight, it would be at the next meeting. I,. 7 I lit, City Council Minutes -11- October 5, 1982 Tangen indicated he would not he at the next meeting and therefore would not be able to have the opportunity to vote -- and he wished to do so based on his comments this evening. Pauly said the matter could he continued for presentation at another meeting at which Tangen would be present. Bentley said he felt it was a sad day in the state of governmental affairs in this country when the Council could not vote no on a project strictly on some pretty strong feelings. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to reconsider the motion of denial and to return the matter for preparation of a resolution of findings of fact to the Staff. Motion carried unanimously. E. EDENVALE 9th ADDITION (REVISED) By Equitable Life Assurance Society. Request for development of Edenvale POD 70-04, Planned Unit Development Concept approval for office and industrial uses on 100 acres, preliminary plat approval, and possible variances. Located north of TH5 and west of proposed Prairie Center Drive. (Resolution No. 82-235 - PUD and Resolution No. 82-236 - preliminary plat) City Manager Jul lie noted official notice of the Public Hearing had been published and notices sent to adjacent property owners. Richard Krier, Westwood Planning & Engineering, addressed the proposal. Dennis Marhula, representing the same firm, spoke to the grading plans. Director of Planning Enger stated the Planning Commission had reviewed this proposal at its September 13, 1982, meeting and recommended approval of the PUD concept and the initial preliminary plat subject to the recommen- dations included in the September 10, 1982, Staff Report. Director of Community Services Lambert said the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission had reviewed the proposal at its September 20, 1982, meeting as per the Planning Staff Report. The Commission had taken a second look at the proposal at its October 4, 1982, meeting -- Lambert's memorandum to the Mayor and Council dated September 29, 1982 -- regarding tree removal. The recommendation was to have the boulevard trees planted in conjunction with the building of the loop road. This would lessen the impact of the trees which would have to be removed for construction. Krier spoke to the recommendation and said they would agree to do the planting. Bentley asked what the highest point of the hill is? Krier said 940'. A discussion ensued on the slope visavis location of buildings. Bentley asked what the total square footage of the project would be? Krier said 651,000 square feet. Tangen asked that the top of the hill be softened when the final grading is accomplished. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to continue the meeting beyond the 11:30 p.m. deadline. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes -12- October 5, 1982 Penzel asked Walter Klus, representative of Northwestern Banksouth, if he would be willing to accept a 3:1 slope. Klus said he had not had time to look at the proposal before this evening. There were no other comments from the audience. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 82-235, approving the development of Planned Unit Development of Edenvale. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 82-236, approving the preliminary plat of Edenvale 9th Addition. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to direct Staff to draft the Developer's Agreement taking into consideration the recommendations included in the Staff Reports, those of the Planning and Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commissions, phased grading starting in the west with the eastern portion to be included in phase two, and the elevation to be at 921' or higher. Motion carried unanimously. F. VOLUNTFFRS OF AMERICA recLuest to amend 10-12 PUD (Bryant Lake Center PUD) to construct an enclosed walkway between buildings 5 and 6 with a zero lot line setback. 7460 Market Place Drive. (Resolution No. 82-237) MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 82-237, approving the development of Planned Unit Development for Bryant Lake Center. Motion carried unanimously. G. VACATION DF EASEMENTS IN RIOGEWOOD WEST (Resolution No. 82-214) Director of Public Works Dietz addressed the vacation of easements. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 82-241, vacating the utility and drainage ease- ments in Block 7 Ridgewood West. Motion carried unanimously. VII. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 3977 - 4176 MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Payment of Claims Nos. 3977 - 4176. Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath, Tangen and Penzel voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously. VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS There were no reports. IX. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS A. Resolution No. 82-232, setting fees for the City of Eden Prairie This item was moved to the Consent Calendar as V. G. City Council Minutes -13- October 5, 1982 B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 5-82, rezonigg 2.5 acres from Rural to C-Reg-SSer for Northwr,tern National Banksouth by Banco Properties, Inc. and Developer's Agreement —------ Walter Klus, representing Northwestern Banksouth, said he did not think they would agree to a 3:1 slope if they had to grade Equitable's property at Banco's expense. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to give 2nd Reading to Ordinance 5-82. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to direct Staff to draft a Developer's Agreement taking into consideration all the recommendations previously considered and contingent on a 3:1 slope being accomplished to the top of the hill. Bentley said he found it amazing and interesting that Klus had not looked at the cost of the grading before now. Klus said he had not known what Equitable wanted until tonight. Tangen said a 3:1 slope extended to the top of the hill was what had been proposed by the City Council at the last meeting. Penzel said publication of the Ordinance might be withheld until the Developer's Agreement is signed. City Attorney Pauly said that is not a good lever and is really a housekeeping matter. Redpath said he thought the two parties should work it out -- the Council could not settle it for them. Bentley asked the City Attorney if the City Council could make it mandatory to have certain requirements go beyond the perimeters of a site. Pauly said he would be very hesitant to say it would. VOTE ON MOTION: Motion carried unanimously. X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS Councilman Tangen had to leave the meeting at 11:50 p.m. Prior to his departure the following items, requiring four votes, were acted upon: X. B. 1. 1983 City Budget; X1. A. City Hall Roof Repairs. Tangen noted he had no objection to the remaining items on the Agenda. Penzel said perhaps the time has come to cul-de-sac the eastern portion of Blossom Road now that Bennett Place is done due to the hazardous intersection of Blossom and County Road 1. Director of Public Works Dietz said he would look into this. Bentley spoke to Resolution No. 82-243, requesting the Metropolitan Council to modify the draft Transportation Development Policy Plan for 2000. He said he had had a call toddy from Don DeVeau in Chanhassen pointing out the lack of concern for Highway 5. The Plan will be discussed by Charles Weaver, Metro Council, at 7:30 a.m., Tuesday, October 12, 1982. There will he a public hearing by the Metropolitan Council that same evening in St. Paul. The City has been asked to adopt a Resolution which can be presented at that meeting. Penzel said the City should not give the Highway Department justification for not doing anything to Highway 212 by requesting improvements to Highway 5. Eager said the report does not acknowlege the fact that Highway 5 is a part of the metropolitan road system. S, City Council Minutes -14- October 5, 1982 Redpath said it is criminal to play their game when it must be done. The road has needed improvements for a number of years. Game playing will only result in further delays. Penzel said he did not feel the City should support improvements on Highway 5 when it has been supporting Highway 212 for 20 years. Penzel said he was sure the upgrading of Highway 5 would happen in the very near future anyway. City Manager Jullie said the City could ask for safety improvements which are called for. Bentley said he could support Highway 212 as a major transportation route through the City but the City should note that TH5 and TH169 are deficient at this time. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 82-243. Motion carried unanimously. Bentley noted that Don Brauer will head up a task force for the Chamber of Com- merce which will look into drafting a Master Plan for the Major Center Area. B. Report of City Manager 1. Resolution No. 82-240, approving the 1983 City Budget City Manager Jullie spoke to his memorandum which showed the changes which the Council had requested. Director of Finance Frane said the County will have the information back to the City as soon as possible so the mill rate can be determined. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the 1983 Budget as amended - Resolution No. 82-240. Motion carried unanimously. C. Report of City Attorney There was no report. D. Report of Director of Public Works 1. Receive 100"; petition for preliminary grading of Singletree Lane and authorize preparation of plans and specifications, I.C. 52-038 (Resolution No. 82-242-) This item was moved to the Consent Calendar as item V, H. City Council Minutes -15- October 5, 1982 XI. NEW BUSINESS • A. Request to Authorize Repairs to City Hall Roof City Manager Jullie spoke to the memorandum of October 5, 1982, from John Frane to the Mayor and City Council regarding the City Hall roof. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to authorize roof repairs for City Hall with the cost to he approximately $20,000. Roll call vote: Bentley, Redpath, Tangen and Penzel voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously. I.C. 52-308 This item was removed from the table -- continued from page 3 of these Minutes. City Attorney Pauly said that a problem arose because no notice has been given to the property owners telling them of the assessment. The petition for a public improvement does not preclude an assent to the assessment and amount of benefit to the property. He suggested the assessment be delayed and the assessment notice and hearing can be held at a later date with the assessment not appearing on the rolls until 1984 -- this would be in accordance with the Statutory scheme of things; the alternative would be to approve the assessment this evening with qualifications -- pending hearing from the property owners that they would waive the public hearing -- this would raise problems should someone question the approach. Bentley asked if the request to put in the road could still proceed since the equipment is in the area. Pauly said since the improvements have been ordered in, work can proceed. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Penzel, to levy the assessment this evening and to procure written consent from the owners (draw a document which specifies the properties and owners or mortgagees and which indicates this is acceptable to them.) Motion carried unanimously. Elderly Housing - Director of Planning Enger said Representative Frenzel's office had notified the City that a Section 202 project for 61 units of elderly housing had been approved for the area west of Prairie Village Mall. XII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adjourn the meeting at 12:24 a.m. Motion carried unanimously. ��l(� - �� The following items listed as attachments to the October 5, 1982, Minutes of the City Council are on file in the Office of the City Clerk: 1. Letter of commendation to Sgt. Bob Mjolsness. 2. Letter of commendation to Sgt. Ron Funk. 3. Bearman letter dated September 30, 1982. 4. Conner letter dated October 5, 1982. 5. Jullie memo dated October 5, 1982 -- with attachements. 6. Russell Smith publication. 7. Findings of Fact - Meat Cutters and Vikings II. 8. Exhibit A - Resolution No. 82-230 2i;(.0 • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST November 2, 1982 CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) W. L. Hall Company Larry Opfer Construction, Inc. U. S. Masonry & Concrete, Inc. CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY) Brancale Construction, Inc. Christy Construction Co. Warren A. Feece Plymouth Plumbing, Inc. Rudy Trones Construction, Inc. PLUMBING Star Plumbing VENDING MACHINES Gold Medal Beverage Company These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. s.1 2,.ttt_.(.a_ Pat Solie, Licensing • ;z 11'1 • November 2, 1982 CITY OF EO!N PkAIRIE HENNE_PIN COUNTY, MI IM SUTA RESOLUTION NO. R82-255 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF TECHNOLOGY CAMPUS • WHEREAS, the plat of Technology Campus has been sub- mitted in the manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have'been duly had thereunder, and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and 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 Technology Campus is approved upon compliance with the reconcnendation of the City Engineer's •• - Report on this plat dated October 27, 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 November 2, 1982. Wolfgang H. Penzei, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane,Clerk 2I / • November 2, 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: October 27, 1982 SUBJECT: TECHNOLOGY CAMPUS • PROPOSAL: The developer, MTS Systems Corporation, has requested City Council approval of the final plat of Technology Campus. This is a 158 acre Planned Unit Development located south of T.H. 5 and east of Mitchell Road in the North of Section 15. The developer has requested final plat approval at this time to facilitate the dedi- cation of roadway right-of-way and enable the sale of lots. HISTORY: PUD approval of the site was approved by the City Council on April 7, 1981, per Resolution 81-35. • Zoning of approximately 25 acres of Lot 1, Block 1 was approved through Ordinance 135. Remaining areas will be rezoned as development proceeds. Rezoning will be necessary prior to the issuance of any additional building permits on Lot 1, Block 1. The Preliminary Plat was approved by the City Council on July 20, 1982, per Resolution 82-178. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed on July 20, 1982. VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. • UTILITIES AND STREETS: Municipal utilities and roadway to serve the plat are being installed within Technology Dirve. The roadway and utilities on Campus Boulevard will be constructed at a later date in conformance with City standards. Utility easements to cover ponding areas, ditches or storm sewer to be publicly maintained and not located within platted right-of-way �- will be shown and dedicated on the plat prior to release. PARK DEOICATION: The requirements for park dedication are covered in the Developer's Agreement and Planning Staff Report dated July 8, 1982. Pg. 2 - Final Plat Technology Campus Nov. 2, 1982 • BONDING: The requirements for bonding are covered in the Developer's Agreement and shall apply to future construction on Campus Boulevard. RECOMMLNDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Technology Campus subject to the requiremtns of this report, the Developer's Agreement and the following: 1. Conformance with the Planning Staff report dated July 8, 1982. 2. Receipt of cash deposit for street lighting in the amount of $5,967.00. 3. Satisfaction of Bonding Requirements. 4. Dedication of additional utility easements. DLO;sg • 212() • November 2, 1982 CITY OF EVEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. R82-256 RESOLUTION RECEIVING 100% PETITION, ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS 8 PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR CREE:RIDGE ES1ATES ROAP AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS, I.C. 52-040 BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council: • 1. The owners of 100% of the real property abutting upon and to be benefitted from the proposed Creekridge Estates Road and storm sewer improvements have petitioned the City Council to construct said improvements and to assess the entire cost against their property. 2. Pursuant to M.S.A. 429.031, Subd. 3, and upon recommendation of the City Engineer, said improvements are hereby ordered and the City Engineer shall prepare plans and specifications for said improvements in accordance with City standards and advertise for bids thereon. 3. Pursuant to M.S.A. 429.031, Subd. 3, the City Clerk is hereby directed to publish a copy of this resolution once in the official newspaper, and further a contract for construction of said improvements shall not be approved by the City Council prior to 30 days following publication of this resolution in the City's official newspaper. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on November 2, 1982. Wolfgang H.Penzel, Mayor • • ATTEST: SEAL • John D. Frane, Clerk } r 11 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MIN1:i.SOTA , 1• 100% PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS • TO THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: • The undersigned are all the fee owners of the real property described below and herein petition for the Eden Prairie City Council to proceed with making the following described improvements: (General Location) • Sanitary Sewer • Watermain • XXX -Storm Sower CREEK RIDGE ESTATES LOTS 1, 2, & 3. XXX Street Paving - -Other - - - - - - Pursuant to M.S.A. 429.03], Suhd. 3, the undersigned hereby waive any public hearing to be held on said improvements, and further state and agree that the total cost of said improvements shall be speci a]ly as- • ser.e.ed against the property described below in accordance with the City's special assec;sment policies. We further understand that the prel ir.inary, est imatr-d total cost for the said improvements is $75,000.00. Street Address or other Legal Names and addret.ses of Petitioners ( Descr ir't ion of Pi pperty_to be Served jtust be owners of record) -- • 10720 COUNTY ROAD 16 EDEN PRAIRIE, 1114. 55344 BRIAIJ W. CCIJSIIER 10720---CO. RD_t16 EDLN• _PRAIR11,1T. - - GL0RCI>\NNE G(.N SHE R 10 2O CO. RD. I S FDI N_PRA_IRIE ta!;. Q S 5 3 4 •-- JANLS C. BUBLIIZ 10720 ZINRANnCIRCLE 14110011INCTON, -- - - --_ 71 1JIJL C. DU BLITZ 10720 ZINRAN CIRCLE BLOOIITNCTOl1,i - - -- 554< 14 -- (For City Use) 7195' I RONTIER 1RA]I. C)tANHASSLN,Ie' 5531 Date Received Project No. --. -- --- -- --- ?.I 1. Council Consideration_-_ • • ' EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA WATER WORKS IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT NO. 51-354 CONTRACT NO. 3 • WELL COLLECTOR LINE . CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 • I. SCOPE This Change Order No. 1 includes adjustments in contract price related to unused lengths of 12-inch pipe. II. ORDER The cost of unused 12-inch cast iron pipe with restrained joints which cannot be returned to the supplier shall be added to the contract price. The pipe lengths were not installed because Well Houses No. 4 and No. 5 were relocated several feet to accomodate easement acquisition and com- patibility with future development plans for the surrounding area. The pipe lengths cannot be returned to their supplier because they have restrained joint rings welded on the spigot ends and are nonstandard lengths. III. CHANGE IN CONTRACT AMOUNT The increase to the contract price resulting from this Change Order No. 2 shall be $1,331.41. The change to the contract amount is summarized as follows: Current Contract Price $379,431.76 Change Order No. 2 1,331.41 New Contract Price $380,763.17 IV. ACCEPTANCE The changes and conditions set forth in this Change Order No. 2 are hereby accepted. MINN-KOTA EXCAVATING, INC. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA Contractor Owner By By Mayor Date Date By City Manager Date • (EDEN PRAIRIE, MINN ) (WELL COLLECTOR LINE) 2{.-3 CO2-1 • CONTRACT AM[NDML:NT NO. 3 TO CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR I.C. #52-025 CITY WEST PARKWAY CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA • October, 1982 Bennett-RIngrose-Wolsfeld-Jarvis-Gardner, Inc. 2829 University Avenue Southeast • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55414 The City has agreed to add the following work to the contract for this project: ESTIMATED UNIT UNIT QUANTITY PRICE AMOUNT 1. Equipment Rental Hrs. 10.00 $90.00 $ 900 966 Loader 2. Equipment Rental Hrs. 15.00 $70.00 $1,050 950 Loader 3. Equipment Rental Hrs. 25.00 $65.00 $1,625 690 Backhoe 4. Common Borrow Placed C.Y. 2,000 b 2.50 S5,000 Total Additions $8,575 Original Contract Amount $ 979,893.09 Total Previous Contract Amendments $ 59,157.47 Contract Amendment No. 3 S 8,575.00 Contract Amendment to Date $1,047,625.56 Page 1 of 2 ;112 • • Necessity for Amendments Items 1-3: Equipment rental items are required for miscellaneous excava- tions and removals that were not completed during the develo- pers grading operation. Item 4: Common borrow is necessary to f1II areas of the roadway subgrade which had not been constructed to the correct elevation by the developer. CONTRACTOR: BarbarosSa and Sons, Inc. DATE: ENGINEER: Bennett-Ringrose-Woisfeid-Jarvis-Gardner, Inc. L Q DATE: /0- T-BZ- CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CITY ENGINEER: DATE: Page 2 of 2 LANCE R �X' + ARCI II I I CT s • ORDER CO\1 RAC IOR • MID A/A H ('uMr,NP C701 0TI11R PROJI(TT: EDEN PRAIRIE CITY SERVICES CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: 3 (Wanly,address) City of Fdrn Prairie City I{all,I'I",ti Eden Prairie Road 10 (Cunitaciurr` C 1en Prairie,MN 55344 1 -ARKAY CONS1 RUCTION COMPANY ] ARCHIIICI'S I'ROJICT NO: 475.1 620 North County Road 18,Suite 189 CONTRACT I OR: $2,345,300.00 Minneapolis,Minnesota 56427 CONTRACT DATE: June 29, 1982 • You au•directed to maker the following chanpcs in this Ceniract: 1. Add: Eight(8)steel bollards at Public Safety Garage. + S1,401.00 2. Subcut and compact soil southwest corner of Maintenance Building. + 3,245.00 3. Omit: Drain Tile around Public Safety basernent, — 1,200.00 4. Lower grade to permit water to drain away horn the conduit under the south service road. + 594.00 5. Additional joist for hoist support--Maintenance Building. + 347.00 6. ADD: Sprinklers to Roorns No.76 and 27. + 290.00 y3 7. Insulate efrigerant piping and change draft inducer. � � 8. EXTLND completion date 14 days for outside work only. Zf',)9' TOTAL ADD: + ,_.�S5,30r16.{30 -� 'G C 5,/7Z« REFERENCES: Sec attached sheet. • The n,n cal C unaact Sure was $ 2,345,300.00 Net cI,.Wye by p:e„nus DI.a l e Orders $ 7,147.00 2,352,447.00 The(untrut Sum liner to this Change Order says $ the Contract Sum ccdl be pnsicased) !dr<•,•.K•d, (xrxl,:,rnyrr4i try this CI•.an e Order. . . $+ ty (.O0 ejl7?— The rise Conlr,,tt Sinn rntludhnl;this Change Order will be The Corrlral Time still he (uoth.mged)by (see Item 8 above). 7,5TGl7- l Dave. •The Date of Completion cc of the date of This Change Older therefore is unchanged. 7 J l T` INURDI SIGN INC. ARKAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY CITY OF EDEN,PRAIRIE-- 7 C 11 ._.._ (ONT RA(it)S -- OWN1 R - — rl t ICT G,� ',i�,:,,�Surer G7(1 No,County Rd.18.Suite 189. 8950 Eden Prairie Road Adri,r,s - --- - Anises Address I air,ra;,,,'n.I.04(5433 Minnralwlis,MN 55427 Fdcn Ptairie,MN 55344--_ RV. --- F C. ht,I,rrt 1 I 'tt l'i ut3;an Rase,V-Prerldrnt. • ()Alf rrlti•t 4.1rB2 UAlI Ocludxr .S' 1982 PATE October _ 1982. Clc � __.... -- - - —`---- _ 21'.,„ MA Iva ct 6;01 • ( st•,r _n e,<.nr.l,.,• t lr lro' G ice • lilt OM fact MIlMIUtA^ipltl ' TO: Mayor and City Council • 1111ZU: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services FROM: Stuart A. Fox G � DA'fi: October 22, 1982 SUBJECT: Restoration of Cunmd ns-Grill House Roof On April 22, 1982, the City Council authorized the transfer of $10,000 in OBE funds to restore the roof of the Cuunins-Grill House. Quotations were sought and the preliminary indicators were that the roof could be replaced for under $10,000. '!hc restoration work has now been completed; however, the final cost is $14,654.33. This cost is a result of the following: Roof Materials Increase of $773.67 over original quote. Tie roofing contractor was unable to salvage the fascia boards as originally planned by Miller-Dunwiddie Architects. The replacement of these boards, additional paint, nails, shingles and ridge board accounted for this material increase. Roof Labor Increase of $1,046 over original quote. Additional labor was needed to tear off fascia, put on new fascia, prime, install 2 extra squares of shingles, and flashing around new chimneys. Chimney Restoration Addition of $2,850.35 to roofing estimate. When the roofing contractor went to apply flashing to the three chimneys on the house, he found them to be crumbling away withscveral loose bricks. After consultation with the architect it was determined that the throe chimneys should be rebuilt. The cost included complete plans detailing the profile of the chimneys cira 1900, purchase of additional brick to replace broken or eroded bricks and labor to rebuild chimneys from the roof line up. RECON'JP.M1ATI ON While it may appear that the increase of $4,654.33 over the original estimates is high, staff r:wtld like to point out that 60% of the overrun was for a project not considered with the roof work; nmely, the chimney restoration. In addition, all work was necessary tier the completion of the roof restoration project. Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the transfer of $4,660 from Project °36 (:ITC funds to Year \'Ill Cummins-Grill Restoration Site Improvement. A resolution for transfer of funds is attached. SE:rad � in CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 82-249 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING HENNEPIN COUNTY TO 'TRANSFER CDEG FUNDS FIIOM PROJECT #36 TO YEAR VIII CIIM?TINS-GRILI. RESTORATION SITE IMPROVEMENT WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has executed a joint powers agreement with Hennepin County thereby agreeing to participate in a Grant Application under the Urban County designation provided for in the (lousing and Community Development Act of 1974, and WHEREAS, a grant application has been prepared requesting funds to undertake a community development program, including appropriate - citizen participation, goal estbalishment and implementation plans and procedures, and WHEREAS, the amount allocated by Hennepin County for use in 1981 for Assisted Housing Site Acquisition has not yet been expended, and WHEREAS, additional construction at the Cummins-Grill House has been accomplished and costs incurred. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie does hereby request Hennepin County (as Administrator of Community Development Block Grants) to transfer $4,660 allocated in Project #36 for Assisted Housing Site Acquisition to the Cummins- Grill Restoration Site Improvement in Year VIII. ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota this day of , 1982. Wolfgang II. Penzcl, Mayor ATTEST: John U. Franc, Clerk SEAL Minutes - Parks, Recreation & unapproved . Natural Resources Commission -2- October 18, 1982 ALL MEMBLRS PRESENT a. Eden Prairie Public Library Lambert said there are no major issues concerning this Commission and the proposed library so no representatives of the developer were invited to this meeting. Lambert said he feels the cash park fees should be paid by the developer in order to develop the required pedestrian accesses in the form of trails and sidewalks. Jessen said he feels the City should not require cash park fees from the public library system, but insist they construct the proper sidewalks on their property. He added he would rather see the 512,500 (+) put into the library itself (instead of cash park fees). Anderson said he is in agreement with Jessen. He said the library system is a public agency and is also in the public recreation business. MOTION: Jessen moved to recommend to the Council approval of preliminary platting and rezoning for the Eden Prairie Public Library subject to Staff recommendations and conditions and that the library be exempt from cash park fees only on the acres used for library purposes, and any other property sold would have to pay cash park fees. The idea of waiving the cash park fees is that the library system in also in the public recreation business. Friederichs seconded the motion and it carried, Kingrey opposed. tLi A • approved . Planning Co.Lmission Minutes -7- • October 12, 1982 MEMPSPS rifl`.;ENT: Liz Retterath A William Dearman C�1i.PEN MINE PPPS.IC IIRF:f,RY, by Hennepin County. Request ..... to rezone 7.5 acres from Rural to Public and preliminary plat. approval of approximately 10 acres, to construct a Hennepin County Library facility. Located in the southwest corner of Schooner Blvd. and Preserve Blvd. A public hearing. The Planner introduced Earl Johnson of Hennepin County who was present to give the presentation. • Johnson stated that Mr. Smith, Hennepin County Library Staff was also present. • He stated that the site is 2.5 acres, utilities are available, the library will • be constructed in 1984. Phase one consists of 6,000 square feet with off-street parking for 50 autos; Phase two is anticipated to be constructed in 1087 which consists of 4,000 square feet for a grand total of 10,000 square feet of library space. The Planner stated that the site plan is general at this time and that, Hennepin County will have to return to the Planning Commission in the future for site plan review. He stated that he expects the site to he developed at an elevation range of 885 to 838. He reviewed the staff report dated 10/8/82. Sutliff asked the amount of impervious surface coverage. The Planner replied 75%. Gartner asked the square footage of the existing library. Mr. Smith replied 1700 square feet. Gartner asked why concrete for the sidewalk is reconanended versus black-top. The Planner replied that when Prairie Center Drive is completed a concrete sidewalk will be on both sides of the road. Hallett asked why Hennepin County was suggested not to pay the cash park fee. The Planner replied that because it is a governmental body providing a public a public community service. Gartner asked if any similar libraries are constructed. Smith replied the W'estonka library in Mound. He stated that at total construction, the library will he very similar to the Hopkins library. Dale Iknkus, 8706 Leeward Circle, asked when Preserve Blvd. will be upgraded. The Planner replied there are no current plans for upgrading Preserve Blvd. Sutliff asked if the existing library will be used after the new one is constructed. Smith replied no, they will offer it to the City for purchase. • Hallett stated he felt that the proponent should pay the cash park fee. Gartner stated she felt that the location for the library is a good one. MOTION 1 G,irtncr moved to close the public hearing on Eden Prairie Public Library. Marhula seconded, motion carried 5-0. approved Planning Corrn:ission Minutes -8- October 12, 1982 MOTION 2 tartner moved to recoeunend to the City Council approval of the rezoning of 2.5 • acres from Rural to Public as per the plans dated 8/25/82 and the staff report dated 10/8/8?. Marhula seconded, motion carried 5-0. MOTION 3 Gartner moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the preliminary plat • dated 8/25/82 for construction of a Hennepin County Library facility as per the staff report dated 10/8/82. Marhula seconded. DISCUSSION Gartner stated that she felt that this project is a Hennepin County facility not an Eden Prairie facility. Therefore, cash park fee should be paid by Hennepin County. The Planner stated that the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission would make a recommendation on this. Hallett stated that he felt that the system should be further defined who would pay cash park fees and who would not. AMENDMENT TO MOTION 3 Hallett moved to amend Motion 3 deleting item 4 from the staff report recommenda • - tions. Marhula seconded, amendment carried 3-2. Torjesen and Gartner voted no. VOTE ON MOTION 3 WIlH AMENDMENT • • Motion carried 5-0. • C0:1';I9 1'fY SLL1'1CL5 DLI'AR ]LENT ' Dlf1'1:LO1']lI.!:T 11;G1'O'1AL (•IILCK LIST (ATlACIIED TO PLANNING STAFF REPORT) DATE: October 14, 1982 PUOJLCT: Eden Prairie Libr•ry . 1. Adjacent to any existing or proposed parks: No a. Affect on the park: N/A • • 2. Cash park fee or 1ar,d dedication: n_n lots arc being platted totalling 8.9 acres. The cash park fee is applicable on that 8.9 acres. a. If cash park fee, amount based on existing ordinance will total: $12,572 b. If part: dedication, the number of acres to he dedicated:—N/A c. Existing or pending assessments or taxes on the proposed park property will be paid prior to dedication: N/A 3. Adjacent to existing or proposed trails:—Mere eontreic lsler,^,Jk on the south side of Schooner Blvd. and a sidewalk proposed on the west side of Preserve Blvd. between Schooner Blvd. and Franlo Road. a. Party responsible for trail construction: The developer is responsible for constriction of trails serving their property. b. Land ownership of trail location: (dedicated, purchased, ROW) ROW 4. Grading plan con•mcnts•_. A er.,Ldi1>,g plan hits notJiten aubumitte0 to date 5. Significant vegetation on the site: N/A G. Adjacent to protected waters: N/A • • REVMSCF. 1.. MCA: The M for Center Area depicts this area 55regional/commercial. _— 2. Neighborhood Facilities Study: N/A • 3. Purgatory Creek: N/A---- --- _ 4. Shoreland Management Ordinance: '.5. Ploodpla.in Ordinance: vA----_ 6. Guide P12n:-1he_fsi,(e Plande.picts this area as regional/commercial. 7. Other: • RP(O?i'.1PNfAl l OUS 1. Adjacent neighborhood type, and any neighborhood opinion voiced in favor or opposed to the project: Existing neighborhood is regional/commercial.with the Fden Prairie.� in_ ) _,eoppc� Center north of_Schooner Blvd_ Properties on either side of this site i are undeveloped, but are planned for regional/coalcrcial. 2. Planning Commission Pecomendation: The Planning Commission recommended approval as per the Planning Staff Report with the exception of waiving the cash park fee. • 3. Coscaunity Services Department Recommendation: the Community Services Department recommends approval as per the Planning Staff ' •Report with the following change: Although, the Community Services understands the recommendation to waive the cash 15ark fee clue to the public service nature of this proposal, the Community Services Staff suggests: that the cash park fees will he necessary to assist with the construction of the transportation pedestrian system to serve this site. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: October 8, 1982 PROJECT: EDEN PRAIRIE LIBRARY • APPLICANT: County of Hennepin LOCATION: In the Major Center Area, south of Prairie Center Drive (Schooner Blvd.), bounded on the west by Franlo Road, and on the east by Preserve Blvd. REQUEST: Rezoning from Rural to Public District for 2.51 acres and preliminary platting of approximately 10 acres into two lots and road right-of-way for Franlo Road and Preserve Blvd., for use as a library site. BACKGROUND The property is currently zoned Rural, but is designated as Regional Commercial. The City had previously approved zoning for a library site directly north across Prairie Center Drive. Hennepin County abandoned that site because of a break down in terms of purchase. LAND USE The-library is a regional use and would be appropriate in this area. As shown by the applicants information, commercial development is expected to the west, north, and east of the project. Northmark 3rd Addition (Hans Hagen Carriage Homes) are almost complete to the southeast, and Franlo Road Condominiums have been approved immediately to the south of this project. ORDINANCE PEQUIRf_MENTS Because the library is not to be built until 1984, only a preliminary sketch site plan has been submitted at this time. Hennepin County is requesting approval subject to site plan review of more detailed plans in the future. However, a 50' minimum frontyard setback is required, which is met, both from Prairie Center Drive and from Preserve Blvd. All parking must be screened from public roadways and differing adjacent land use. • 4 • Staff Report-Eden Prairie Library page 2 • The condominium building planned to the south would be three stories high, creating a top floor sight line of about 883. Although a grading plan has not been done for this site, it appears that the highest point at the parking lot would be 383 in the southwest corner. The County should bear this relationship in mind and should consider flipping the Parking arrangement so that one east/west access lane could be eliminated, thereby adding another 25 or 30' to the open area along the southern property line that could be used for berming to screen the parking area. An alternative would be to change the site plan so that the building is in the southeast corner, with the majority of the parking to the north. SIDEWALKS • There is currently an asphalt walkway along the east side of Preserve Blvd. However, a concrete sidewalk should be constructed along the east side of Preserve Blvd., when the road is upgraded. There is no sidewalk along Prairie Center Drive. The library should construct a 5' wide concrete sidewalk along Prairie Center Drive which ties into their internal site walkway system, when the building is constructed. ACCESS Access to the site will be by a right-in/right-out from Prairie Center Drive. This access is approximately 300' west of the intersection with Preserve • Blvd. and 225' east of the next right-in/right-out. RIGHT-OF-WAY Right-of-way for the improvement of Preserve Blvd. is being dedicated with the plat. UTILITIES All public utilities are available to the site. RECOMMENDATIONS Recommend approval of the request for rezoning from Rural to PUB of 2.5 acres for a library and preliminary plat approval of approximately 10 acres into 2 lots and road right-of-way for Preserve Blvd. and Franlo Road subject to the following: 1. Zoning is subject to site plan review by the Planning Commission prior to building, which would include proper screening of parking. 2. Construction of a 5' wide concrete sidewalk with building construction. 3. Dedication of right-of-way for Preserve Blvd. and Franlo Road. 4. Waiver of cash park fee. CE:sh rt • PROPERTY MANAGEMENT ')= A-2208 Government Center _ Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 `� •° HENNEPIN SEPTEMBER 10, 1982 MR. WILLIAM BLAW4N CHAIRMAN, CITY [TANNING COMMISSION EDEN PRAIRIE CITY HAL1. 8950 EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 SUBJECT: LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION OF THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CON- CERNING THE REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT KNOWN AS HOLMES ANDERSON ADDITION AND THE RE7ONING OF LOT 2, HOLMES ANDERSON ADDITION FROM RURAL DISTRICT TO PUBLIC DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSE OF ERECTING A COUNTY LIBRARY THEREON. DEAR SIR: TRANSMITTED HEREWITH IS THE LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION, SUPPORT MATERIALS AND HENNEPIN COUNTY'S FILING FEE IN THE AMOUNT OF FOUR HUNDRED ($400.00) DOLLARS AS IT CONCERNS THE SUBJECT. THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A COMMUNITY PUBLIC LIBRARY ON THE SUBJECT SITE IN 1934. IT IS PROPOSED TO CONSTRUCT THE LIBRARY AS A TWO (2) PHASE PRO:RAM. THE. FIRST PHASE OF THE CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM WOULD BE TO ERECT' A SIX THOUSAND (b,000) SQUARE FOOT LIBRARY FACILITY IN 1984 WITH ACCESSORY OFF STREET PARKING FOP FIFTY CARS. THE SECOND PHASE CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM WOULD BE TO CONSTRUCT A FOUR THOUSAND (4,000) SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE EXISTING FACILITY SOMETIME AFTER 1937 RESULTING ULTIMATELY AS A TEN THOUSAND (10,000) SQUARE FOOT CO?NMUNITY LIBRARY FACILITY. THE EXISTING EDEN PRAIRIE LIBRARY FACILITY, CURRENTLY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD (COUNTY ROAD NO. 4) AND VALLEY VI)N ROAD, WOULD BE CLOSED AT SUCH TIME iFIAT THE NEW LIBRARY OPENED FOR BUSINESS. THE CITY OF EVEN PRAIRIE WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY OF PURCHASING THE EXISTING FACILITY AT THAT TIME., OTHERWISE IT WOULD BE RELOCATED IN MINNETONKA (HIGHWAY NO. 3 AND 101). THE CURRENT FEE CINDERS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS IDENTIFIED ON THE LAND DEVLLOI'MlNT AP'r`L)IAlION ADUIEFL IN THE SUBJECT APPLICATION AS EVIDENCED BY THEIR ENCLOSED I ET FER 01 ACQOI SENCE. HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer THE FOLLOWING EXHIBITS ARE FILED AS PART AND PARCEL OF THIS APPLICATIONJ: NO. DESCRIPTION 1. PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HOLMES ANDERSON ADDITION SHOWING EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AND PUBLIC UTILITIES. 2. SCHEMATIC SITE PLAN (SCALE 1" = 40 FEET) 3. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE GUIDE PLAN OF SUBJECT AREA 4. LOCATION MAP OF THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA 5. ZONING MAP OF THE SUBJECT SITE AND ADJOINING AREA 6. EXISTING AND PROPOSED LAND USE IT IS RESPECTFULLY REQUESTED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND FAVORABLY IN THE COUNTY'S REQUEST AND THAT YOUR RECOMMENDATION BE FORWARDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE DATE. SHOULD THERE BE A NEED FOR ADDITIONAL MATERIALS OR CLARIFICATION, EARL JOHNSON OF OUR STAFF WOULD BE PLEASED TO ASSIST YOU. HE CAN BE REACHED BY CALLING 348-3150. YOURS TRULY, • N LIAM F. RYAN DIRECTOR OF PROPE MANAGEMENT ENC. CC: ROBERT ROHLF KATHRYN FRIEDMANN LYLE LANDSTROM PAUL THONE EARL TIGHE EARL JOI-INSON PROJECT FILE /I d' , s, 0 0. ... () --' , ' 1 ! Z .• ..-- I e 's •,a^ ,.a.• - - "- I,'t "/, • 1, , ••, -.\, c---•..,7, — 77-,:)",; : .. —7--7—...,--_—r: .• '4 iirrn-7.;. ,,, ' ,-.'' ;: I' ' 11- . , ' ;1•1:.:R ' ' ' ; '' 1::; ' -k.: !4 : : .•:i p,' i .1 '. • ", • ,• ,,','/ ' %') ''',,' ' *, ') - .? '''', - i -=::- ''' : kE 4 • , 1Z•Lii , ,,, , „___ ,: ... „ -:;?,,...fr.,.:;.,, ,, , . ,..-......----h....,,, i ,;•,. ir,... ; , , ....-, i . , ._,,,,..,:_.--_ 1 , _ 1 , ,..,i „.,/,,/ ,) , • ,........:\ ..„) , : ., ....._.... 1, .., --\._ --..--7 : 4 ,/ -....."7",-7.‘,....../. ' (14.1 Z .. ' ' 1,I,: •• .t.C‹.,..710, 2 '.....:::"".-^-,: / , • ":•:',';'."..4 s‘..... Li o_r--',,,1.:i , , ..-...-_,_„.i.:.,.-„:„.7.,...._,.,_:. ..,,::::::::.: ..--,. .,,.. ,..,,,1 1 f.t•. ,,\.,--es4 -7 iii -`•=..4„.._4 4"11.1-.k...,. .‹, ..:' . ..1 ,,'; ' 1 ''0 i i''1111 1 , r\i ,,, (f i j . ' --- (-I; (4--)L. • , ;.;;I: - . 1 - -....\% .0"Ciz,,,.,,,, • , , .:.. v.) O.:I, ,r,_...„...,, # 1 ... '' ;\, ta. V"'f• '',t,:..., .1 r •''' '.' i -'. 1 i 1 N. 3, :i / . , ,/, .i. :,,,,, ,,,,,, • ,.. . . 0 Al - 1- ,/:.., ' .,•_,4\ _ \ '' , 0 , ,• ..:•;rc.... . ..-... e... k • • \_,e, " , •..-- - . .d. u. 0 • r'••• ; ,--‘4 ••-•c:E7g -..., ' , b.. 0_ _. 7. ' ._ ::. i• .,=1',V t a "7 --...--4, Q _ lb . '' i -r,--s.. - ...- -"...•= ,'. IL . lu -,-,'r-,I 1 a.. — ,,---,;-- A ---:-?:"'::-',' : 0 • ''s, -- 0,•:•• .::.•' ,,,,--7,:-•-•-•.; 't1;, ;',,•,% :,•••' cc .%",, . t. ...-- D r• 1 '' .- -.7;:`,.-i- ' ,F '‘ '',',. '',',.0 , ,,,,,,,,,,,,, - ,- .i.• — I- ......,...f,...,,,.....7. ',;, :,',' .. -ILE CC •,.\\ ,',./' 0 • i ""el (t. ) ' ' .... 0 '. '.,i,t ' , ' 1 :•;:i.•:•'•:•;. I d_j lb 2, i ' I, l. ,i . ,•:.t .• 5 I - 1 :' •.:. -, t,, ,,•:. ,, 7, ....- - 4 .". ........ : 1 ).';414,..171• r."-:,1' ....... ...._ I , ! - ' . . , f f I /03 .• : ..f ..`-.% - M co mint,,,,,, In 1)•. •• • - ...:'.•....•.:..• •%t ''k• P. 4 -'''..,t. , .... • ....... -....t ,,t, d a 1 „,••, 1.. --,,,,,. ,..- I.:, -A '- -•• , •••• 40 ••.• f ' .1.\' ?•s CO a.1- . •,. ' /-.,,,'•,,,,o :___,.,_,.el'. 7 •— • \ " . - so' , 1 , 11 — a. ._ .: . ; •; .., .,,,„ i , -,.:..k-s„.•„ , ,_..--f. ..z...3 \\ • s.,- , :-, . , . . ,,..\ ,_, : • ,‘ . (L,,..„..;„, ,•,......,,,, c...._;,,-„err:t ...... ,. ‘,, ss• '. .„?.. -' I . 1 — t`' . LIJ 1....::,.,,, /(_., 7 •./ //',/t1",t,r;,.: ‘-__ _..... „/,',,,0 f•'...7' '' C 1 .---,..„ ' ' L---- •i c,,,,,,.ifi r \\.,..,, ,ttilialt,' ,T.,....,... :,...-...-.-1 „-..._..- 7/.4,„:"- .".....:r... Li ;.-----2-- --' "' ' / 1 • - C7-77—r---'' ' I' ' Ca ) 1 V.I-1-1 A 1 1.:. -_ )�/ ;/ ' 1 CO 1 1 : ' ! - --•• Cam--- j ,--. 2 2 r 1 i 'c ' 4i -, I 1 V.1 1 \..... t:':\IF Y- t ,-. -.,- '- /- 1, P--ij - •,--•-,si A - •-:-/%,7-, 1 / i w_i //•‘ 4 7,„ ..,.. _ : ,. ;', . :\„. \ : ' ...;L.,' ';,\L t\t ..,.,„ '!dj.._,_ .1.7,1_.:,_:__::,..:..,.,,,-,. ... a ;F � 1 /------1--1 �(` Q I; � �. • 1./ 'kJ —. s . . ': ,, a _ - .h . i_ -I. -- ►,JI ,i I ID J -��;� l 'y J - 1 = ; o-- _ V - - o � •,l— i . , . ----- o 0 V 3 _,r I. Q 2 j r,„..- i:? ! i`- r 1 i f i1 a Z 2 �• .1J of � Q ' ° rO � ' ii • TM �'• .1 yL,{; >s'i 1 ; a ' 7 .,, ",:,:*'.., - ‘,...,:,.....c..,..,.,;,,,..,,:.......,,,.„,,„/„,?. . ..:,,,,,.\,•:',L......; kydid,/ .. •ir -� i 1.H :; j v,.. / y b, e , 11 .j;`,A; ,. . I , . . '1,..:,1. .. .ee '30"Q' .„, sI ftI _,�:�'1 °'°r --•0A-1B. -3A8353Nd;.,; I µ55471, , It j�j, ,• ' fd on�A„� = O J V. y" IF F v b J ••. . e � m0 �` `1�I IL) • LL J 1 f` L I \ I 4 7 0 14'C+Z4 7 di •s �r it Z n7 r 0 2 !,•1 (' lit I • "L N W p 0 ti bJ 0 1 "� �. d0J n. .J' O. ei s Z 0 :1 t` •L1 IG •ON c ,I•, a \^I v 1• l...:,r,., :i �•77• m O� I,� h Li 4 • Mi: i;to. / ;t_;AH f1S avv-1 G 1Il.isIJJU 2/K . --_.rtr_ rI �.__r_J,�-_l_ by.;;Ott 51"k • • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 82-250 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF EDEN PRAIRIE PUBLIC LIBRARY BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Eden Prairie Public Library_ _____ _ dated 8/25/82 _, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall and amended as follows: is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances and amendments thereto and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the • day of — 19 Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor John D. Franc, City Clerk SEAL • 21cl� approved Planning Commission Minutes -9- October 12, 1982 MEI1BLS AlUNT: Liz Retterath & 41i 11 iara Bearman E. BASSWOODS f THU T0'..:NHOOSE. REM AT, by Dahiquist. Request for PUO /0-03 (ihe Pres,.rve) amondment for rearyard setback variance and preliminary platting of Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 3, Block 1, Basswoods Townhouse Second Addition. Located at 8851 Basswood Road. A public hearing. The Planner stated that the Planning Commission is looking at this request instead of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments because the Planning Commission should deal with changes to a POD. He stated that Mr. Dahlquist would like to add on to his tovmhouse. He has to replat to do it. He has received approval from the homeowner's assocation. MOTION 1 Gartner moved to close the public hearing on Basswoods Fifth Townhouse Repl a t Marhula seconded, motion carried 5-0. • MOTION ? -Gartner moved to recommend to the City Council approval of POD 70-03 amendment for rearyard setback variance as per the plans dated 9/24/82 and the staff report dated 10/7/82. Sutliff seconded. DISCUSSION Sutli ff asked if this project will go before the Board of Appeals. The Planner replied no, this was the reason for the POD amendment. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION 3 Gartner moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the preliminary plat dated 9/24/82 of Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 3, Block 1, Basswoods Townhouse Second Addition as per the staff.report dated 10/7/82. Marhula seconded, motion carried 5-0. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner 1IIR000il: Chris Eiger, Director of Planning DATE: October 7, 1982 PROJECT: BASSWOODS FIFTH TOWNHOUSE ADDITION APPLICANT: Mr. & Mrs. Dahlquist REQUEST: Replat Lots 1 and 3, Block 1, Basswoods Third Townhouse Addition to allow expansion of a townhouse unit and construction of a deck BACKGROUND The Basswood Townhouses are part of The Preserve POD 70-03. The Third Addition Townhouses were started in 1977. The property is zoned F'•1 6.5. Eight townhouses have been constructed upon Lot 1, Block 1. Lot 1 is the common ground surrounding the townhouses. Each townhouse occupies a lot (Lots 2-5, 7-10) within Block 1. Dahlquists, the owners of the townhouse on tot 3, have received approval from the townhouse association to acquire 208 sq. ft. (8 x 26) of Lot 1 to combine with their Lot 3. See figure 1. With the land addition, Lot 3 will he 10+ feet from rear lot line of Lot 1 (common ground). The common ground between Lots 2-5 and the rear lot line is a grass area of about 20 feet of depth, followed by brush and a low area of cattails. Across from this low area is the Schneider Construction Condominiums. Dahlquists have plans to construct a I0 foot wide room addition and a 12 foot wide 3 season porch above ground, for a total extension of 22 feet from the existing building. The 10 foot addition will be flush with the unit to the east and the deck of the unit to the west. The 12 foot porch will extend beyond these building lines. Without platting of the 2 properties, no porch could have been permitted because it would have extended over the townhouse lot (Lot 3) onto the common ground. The City Building Department has reviewed and approved the building plans with the porch construction being contingent upon the platting. With the additional 8 foot depth to the lot, the porch will be within Lot 3. Lot 3 will be 10+ feet from the common lot line. Other lots within this addition have setbacks as low as 4 feet, with en average of 25 feet. 2 )'1'1? • Staff Report-Basswoods Fifth Townhouse Addition page 2 SUMMARY With the homeowner's association approval and The Preserve's review committee's approval, the platting is reasonable and consistent with the townhouse development. RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Staff recommends approval of the replat of Lots 1 and 3, Block 1, contingent upon the following: 1. Plat meet with requirements of the Engineering Department. 2.' All construction be according to the City Building Code. 3. The PUD amendment would provide the variance from building to common lot line from 20' to 10' and 0 lot line to the townhouse lot itself. JJ:sh iatl . • • • ' ,..' 8 ,,. ... r ,,''', 1/3:".."--5 - -/Itc-- 3,(": so tr, L• .....,: 's., ,'I,.- ,,N 0 ........,,,, .,..y -_.. . .`.;,- --' ,1)•-,I" . , .,J<5 c. ,i - I 5- s;,...50.f'. .5,_ :. .44-,1,1 ,8 :-1:113.1./.;•' 5 . . ,5 ,f, '.-1, '',Vo 1,4! " Z,' t2 .;"• -.1 z 3 .: 4 s .:. . t(V.1`).;,.t..• ' s• .6 ••(' •` "" " •'• I .". .t; • .N•. I,'•:- Q' 1/6' -- ;-:,,"s tP,A.::j-" . `,Z''Y.*''•;"",'''' C•7 5. I.s, .1\ f, (Z I 5 ' 7 ) • A 42 s 1 l'• fs14;,.'" .3.... • .'•;;.."°,;%-\' :•• ...,-, '.:4-C-'''.''''''' '-':' . • A , 5. 4:', '13 '' •.? 04 el' .;-, --6T±7,-,., :' "•1.1 .... '' — s N'. ,.$ ---.-- • ' 1::4. :-.' 1" ..1."‘. 4 ,• '' rip ,.• ,..„0....,t , ..,"--.. 4 (20)' • ,,2.,•,, ; f• ,*.",;.•,,2' '' .'''<cp• .. cv.....„.„, ....../.....„.„-- 0,7 *. t) ,v -k`3 •• ,s',/,' I ,,, I N ;2,,... % .. .._...:-.)---" . .." ., I •,,,. . 31?) • .". -; ''' \ s5-.: '''' .'-':•:."' `r •.:' .•"'`-.'.5' . ' " •\ T., i;'-',.''';',..,..,\ 3".• \..!-4' • •• ,,..! .,, .,..e . ,, ,, ‘r .04.1' ••• • :I '-i. - 11-0404.))- -- 0._5.„,- ., •.-' •' •,'..,,,, Schneider Constructiu (4).... .,..., , .... , Ironwood,-.-Corldos ,., • . , .., J '..... ..-:,, :.'...4 ' ‘ 19 .. , , , ,...,,,....• -...,:, .. %.• ... 20 , . . . \,....."- 2 .. ,• • 2, ,,,,, ,, ,.(35) .... !,•), ,(in,,,,,sn## 4111.14 ) - ,1'.,..., 3‘1) .4 ' S , '..1 0'1 ..1. .,'„‘, ..,.‘ . 1_,.:).'77:1 .`-',,,•\-..,,, .'," /....1,..•,'75,., ,...,._,71'_., --/ --;-:1,..'"" rs. .}, ;7-\it '' 5%, ••• 6" 5 ' --(..t. . ''• !.• "-••"' '...1 •:., ' •- • I r I -,r; '3 ..'=--i1.4'-- ).,‘.- 2 ' --sv , ., ',O.. 6.., , •„•,- ::,.-; s.),'• .,1,..,,,,..„. ' . ^.:,' ..,, :',' '*......°;:,..... • .: , LI `..±,', -'22-'' ":•,', .. - '!' • ' - . .--'':.''' .''• •,;'''''L"',-,•1)-`-' o 'e '-i 1.'• I,'s? .., I. c."',..‘) -',., .., •• • z, -..-.... 4 '' . :,I 4.4 23 d'jr.-,, ':. •' co'' : \''-'1:.:a '''.<',..,•',,-''. ''';'7..," S., '' . '^ --0 `"' .,',. ,. ,:f3,‘ ---.1:: .', 4,, \;/ ' ...• C../V '.:. ,' -4 . r7t.-: :.N _ , ... ,:b. ,,,,,.7....::.,-,,-.., •,4 -!.......,,,,oc-, , • -, • „,••• \ _,:.• •—'t--;,,. :.-,` •ti-.4..,-,•,,'• , — ;" - . \...\. .,. •,'. -:. .`- ia:„...,---",, i . 11 ''' -...,' ••• 7:-„- .- •-•;.,(.;,q C • ,,,t,- -,-q, ,-.. ,.. .:, , ,„ .,-• •• . , ,, •;. * . —; -ci, 1 , 8 s•- .i.1 ', :...,,.."' ,-, :•':.' E. ‘,. ,,, .- --i L..),., . . ,3 -, ,....- ,. ''. 6 ,../..•°.; •••••,, •:-. .., '' - -".,H •-. '...' ' E .' , •1.'.•N-51'; °N •5•''''.4.......',' • ..‘ .•• -.1"\ '''' . 7 .. n% ckC) ,.\,. ........\ 50 ,-•t• ... 1,',, & , ,,,„ '2i0 ;l475,, •••`: 1.1,•• 1':...'S t (ILL) 7-,,,',j,.,,,,, ,,,, .., ot,, . ,,.,„ „„; ..t, • •.: • .. •• •-•., .. .. .,,,\::.••• ,',. ,--,. s- -, .:si.,,,, -....: :.., , ..-• „c; - • . ,. -- • . '7.,,. ' _, ,. , ,-' ri.-''...''.-'b :A.'. ".' '•,••••m,, .„;-...,,c,_,•:).__IJI.6_j____ • . \-',".','' r ,. , ' .' ... •. • •- .. ' -: ,. .,,2 '''‘,..., "-'. Z,t.'7 1'-;2N IN) ...• '''' "51-•'-) .`1.,'''. ". :•.''''•.‘ .' (0.- '' ' ' "•.. :'.':. '•• ' ''''"-- 1,'••l• '..`" .s," ".2••••..• ,r'-• ., c ' t53, \'fb :•,,,, , 'I,: N. • • .:.."4..1•:2.. .1..71' ''. q• . c '; ,c1,,.14,, •..,.4, •V,,, ,CO .11)" . :\ 42. \ '(-•• S. '. "' . . 7' /ail'-' .: •'," - .•... .. '''. ..° .d:.,.'. . 3'0 0,1 . 5;17 \-', j<15-\ ,t. si.-.6 ''..' ilq-• , 4 • , " '' `)`) ,,,,'\'',.' ,' 741/ . , • , •':.•.(4/4 ' ''' ,s ':' f - \''s ..:: .. .C'it 1 ... '" .'s. :.. ' "s .;.:: I..... 4 ...: 4) ' V,,:,' 5 ,,,„r•t.,.S. ., *5.' SO c). ' r ... 00 •:.:,,,, . ..- :•,... ' :.-. :,•...xc,,..,),....,..,•:'..;,:,..:. 4.,4.. ''''.',3-.:::::?.,,,:.;.1,:. 4.1..k.),,;..1‘ \•,,,,,\k94.,V s.::%•:I. .:'',.::. •'.• .,..`.•','; ?:,' 8 ,, 1 lel' ‘1•5 •• . 1... ;•'..-•''' . ....CO'.. , --•." •••• ,1.11, ''' ,/,•' i I' 7 .•\ 51 . 'C's •":5 4 .:,• . ' . •A S).f.) it I) ,`1., ''. • S5 •" , -N 41:10 ' •,,, ' -'':‘ •"\\ 7`.'r:-. , 0 , 7.* ...', •(., I: • N• . ' , •• . ',; . 't '• .4 5-A.,, —..\•., ' l• ./ ':."'..'.;;+" •:... ‘. ... ,••••'.•./.,.1 '''' Y',. ....''' c....''.::.: ..: +: C''',. '..7r;Ps.t.'e...2.----" , N.: . t• • , ,� �'., \ /., '`,i, 'e•` ,, / /• i ow O�°6 /9 ^ it 61,0V..c, G\o • r q. �1,, 1, �•' ,. 'y; \ems- 2 co • Zc�2 N oI It'.. 442 'sue 'c.3<i• r /�6+°S' 5 LP i Sr 0�v c c`22 L�Lg 2\oOc`S o[ '/ ' d'�vU1 ' ..s' • S r •o 2� ''� ti' ,. ��� v.6`a nO ',, W '." �o`o'" D o v. TM�{ A N;,,. 1 ° m�44t S 1926' l''' `'0 r0: 'C / �+ -n 0 r N(n , -59' o JSSr��/ /•/1 ° F �Jd F' •. " a �� da\° 00 ;r :z mc�v • 4yOo 29.26 or GS 2 NQ07p.E •w ss 'M9 o s 'Z / w A So r� 0° S. ?V A ..• c. .- / o� tLot s °r• °:cfloc `' 0 O. y ; y� 1 CO O z m Zs st 7 r al a /^+` I r W ' v ro o z o N7°!G'50'E/ • ��� u o N7 IG'50°E 0 v a i I in Ix, a ^ o _w,Iv 2G,00 V1 r : _. N 01 W N i.'2.33 VI \ / Of O O N co ' _.r!". .z PI-c gym' v o 00 siv F fQJi° .. e I833 �° mc o� 2G.00 Ow m<o 2 27.00 Oo. o �1., y �p Ino �m U " UO^ WNo W (Ojy N m w 4 4.00 z o w 22.00 O�F a wo n F _ u y 'Zf.O0:,, ° O m a°W w m 4.00" c� "`� o u o W o (0 cn ro O 0 o ., 4. CO g�= N F S b �+•oa i M o u., 33A0 S• a0 36.00 0 u\�� S7°IG'S0IY� ' 2GA0• ....... �^ a S7°IG50'yy ��38.> S 20 Op N2To�5 4.00 52.00 a9 ip�• :i 0 0: S7°I6' F • w 50"W !, • 22 vzoc)2`' :i CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 1E UNLPIN COUNTY, MINNE:SOTA RESOLUTION ND. R2.252 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF BASSWOODS FIFTH TOWNHOUSE ADDITION • BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Basswoods Fifth Townhouse Addition dated 9/2.4f82 + 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 Fden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances and amendments thereto and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the _ day of + 19 Wolfgang H. Penzel , Mayor John D. frane, City Clerk SEAL CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 82-251 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT THE PRESERVE WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas located within the City, and WHEREAS, the Basswoods Fifth Townhouse Addition is considered a proper amendment to the 70-03 PUD and the Comprehensive Guide Plan, and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did review the request on ' Dct. 12, 1982 for PUD Development and considered Mr. & Mrs. John Dahlquist's request for approval for development and variances, and WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on November 2, 1982. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The Basswoods Fifth Townhouse Addition development of PUD 70-03 being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and descrihed as Block 1, Lot 1 and Block 1, Lot 3, Bass- woods Second Townhouse Addition. 2. That the City Council does grant PUD Development approval as outlined in the application material dated Sept. 24, 1982. ADOPTED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie this day of 1982. Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: .lohn 1). Frane, City Clerk SEAL approved Planning Commission Minutes -3- October 12, 1982 MEMUII',S AI]Si.N1: Liz Rett.ernth R William Dearman `‘iSilADY 0,^K Aiapc0, by Amoco Oil Company. Request for rezoning torus t rim Rural to Ii y-Cem and preliminary plat for construction of a gas station. Located in the southwest corner of Shady Oak !Thad (Co. Rd. 61) and future Crosstown 62. A continued public hearing. • The Planner stated that Ray Marian and Harlan McGregor of Amoco Oil were present. He stated that this proposal has been continued to wort: out the access to West 62nd Street. He staled a revised site plan has been submitted along with a grading pIan. • Duggan reviewed the location, access, and stated that after many changes, they have come up with the plan which is submitted showing one access to West 62nd Street rather than two, moving the access further from the intersection with Shady Oak Road. • The Plar;ner reviewed the staff report dated 8/5/82. 'He stated that the proponent will rericw the 10' dedication to the County with the County. Sutliff asked what will happen to Old Shady Oak Road. The Planner replied that it terminates into a dead-end. Sutliff asked if there will be enough room for semi's on the site. Duggan repl ied that there is some allowance, but did riot expect semi's coming to this station. Marhula asked if Old Shady Oak Road will be vacated or dedicated. The Planner stated that it is vacated now north of West 62nd Street. Marhula asked where the landscaping plan was that was requested in the staff report. Duggan replied that it has not been completed because of the many changes needed to the pl an. He stated that all ordinance requirements will be met. Torjesen asked if the entire site is to be graded. Duggan replied yes. Mr. 8eersdorf, attorney representing Mr. & Mrs. Uherka of 6301 Shday Oak Road, questioned what the land use impact upon the llherka property would he. The Planner stated that hest 62nd Street could act as a transition to multiple residential to the south. • Torjesen stated that he saw no problems with the zoning requested and had heard • no comments from the noighhorhood. Hallett asked if all the recommendations as listed in the 8/5/82 staff report apply at present. the Planner replied yes, all but 13, which is the request for • change in access. Sutliff stated that he would 1 i ke to see a 'lap showing the affects that a proposal has on surrounding land in the future. MOTION 1 Hal l i.t nnved to close the public hearing on Shady Oak Pitoco. Marhula seconded, roil on carried 5-0. approved . Planning Coe:aission Minutes -4- October 12, 1992 MOTION 2 Hallett moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the rezoning from Rural to C-llwy subject to the plans dated October 5, 1982 and the staff report dated 8/5/82 eliminating item 3 of the recommendations. Marhula seconded, motion carried 5-0. MOTION_ 3 Hallett moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the preliminary plat of .93 acres as per the plans dated 10/5/82 and the staff report dated 8/5/82, elim- inating item 3 of the recommendations. Marhula seconded, motion carried 5-0. • ') >i) approved Planning Commission Minutes Aug. 9, 1982 ALL MEMBERS PRESENT. D.).SHADY OAK AMOCO, By Amoco 0i1 Company. Request for rezoning .93 acres ru,n Rural to Hwy-Com and preliminary plat for construction of a gas station. Located in the southwest corner of Crosstown 62 and Shady Oak Road. A public Hearing. Mr. Cneer stated that the proponent had requested continuance in order to nudity the site plan according to staff recouidations. MOTION Rettcrath moved to recap:.=.end this item be continued to the August 23, 1982 meeting. Gartner seconded the motion and it carried 7-0. approved Planning Commission Minutes Aug. 23, 1982 MEMBERS ABSENT: Liz Retterath, Hakon Torjesen, Grant Sutliff A. SHADY OAK AMOCO, by Amoco Oil Company. Request for rezoning 9. acres from Rural to Hwy-Corn and preliminary plat for construction of e gas station. Located in the southwest corner of Crosstown 62 and Shady Oak Road. A continued public hearing. Beaman stated that the proponent has requested continuance to alter their site plan by redesigning the entrance points. MOTION Gartner moved to continue Amoco's public hearing to the September 13, 1982 meeting. Marhula seconded, motion carried 4-0. approved Planning Commission Minutes Sept. 13, 1982 • MEMBERS ABSENT: Hakon Torjesen AA) SHADY OAK ACO, by Irloco Oil Company. Request for rezoning • .93 acres frnm,iiural to Hay-Com and preliminary plat for construction of a gas station. Located in the southwest corner of Crosstown 62 and Shady Oak Road. A continued public hearing. • MOTION hartner: roved to continua Shady Oak Amoco to the October 12, 1982 • meeting with renotitin tion to the neighbors. Retterath seconded, notion carried G-0. '1I1) ( TO: Planning Commission • FROM: Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner DATE: August 5, 1982 PROJECT: Shady Oak Amoco LOCATION: Southwest corner of Shady Oak Road(Co.Rd.61) • and future Crosstown. 62 • APPLICANT: Amoco Oil Company • FEE OWNER: A & E Properties, Inc. • • REQUEST: 1. Rezone .93 acres from Rural to Highway Commercial • • 2. Preliminary plat approval to combine 2 parcels into 1 parcel. • • BACKGROUND The property is zoned Rural and is a small undesignated area on the Comprebensiae Guide Plan. A residential structure exists on the site and Amoco intends to remove the house prior to station construction. 'The site is situated between old and new Shady Oak Roads, West 62nd Street and future Crosstown 62. All these roads are considerably lower than this site. To the north of the site is County right-of-way • for Crosstown 62 ramp construction. To the south of this site, • across W. 62nd Street, is land designated on the Guide Plan as medium density residential, although because of surrounding uses, office and commercial uses may also be possible for a small portion of the northern area of the land. Further south are low areas and additional land designated for medium density residential. ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS C-Hwy District. Amoco Proposal min.lot size 20,000 sq.ft. • 39,000 sq.ft. min.lot width/depth 100/130 feet 200/240 feet setbacks: front 35 feet 35 feet sides 20:40 feet 80+ feet rear 10 feet 80+ feet max. F.A.R. 1 story 30% 7 % ( including expansion ) max. height 40 feet approx. 1s feet parking: 10'spaces were cars 4 spaces provided are serviced i•) • Staff Report - Shady Oak Amoco page 2 The Amoco building depicted on the plans is a small office with restrooms and snack shop. No space is depicted as service area on this plan. If service bays are added, additional parking spaces will be required. Hardsurfacing of the area over the buried gas tanks occurs approximately 19 feet from the Shady Oak Road right-of-way requested by Hennepin County. This is consistent with ordinance which allows parking in • ' of one of the 35 foot front yards. • SITE PLAN When the site is cut down 20+ feet its grade will be similar to the surrounding roads. • • [terms along the site's east and south sides are recommended to be incorporated into the landscape plan which will he submitted for review and approval prior to any permit issuance. These berms should be a minimum of 4'z feet tbove. the parking lot elevation. To the west of the site, across old Shady Oak Road are dense wooded hills with large lot single family residences. The tree cover on these hills will buffer the use from the residences ( See figure 1). According to the recent Shady Oak Road improvement study, the intersection of Co. Rd. 61 and the service road(W. 62nd St) will have signals. Two access drives to the service road are depicted. The easterly most drive occurs only 50 feet from new Shady Oak Road. This is an insufficient setback for safety and stacking. Staff recommends the easterly most drive be eliminated. If the owner wishes to investigate an alternate access onto old Shady Oak Road, it should be submitted to the City for review and approval. The Hennepin County Highway Department is requesting an additional 10 feet of right-of-way along Co.Rd. 61. This should be reflected on the final plat. As requested in other proposals, staff recommends all lighting standards be no hiylier than 20 feet and be equipped with cut-off luriinars. All signage must be consistent with the City's Sign Ordinance. Platting is being requested to combine the two existing parcels into 1 parcel so that a building can be constructed across the two. (1 1g•1 ) • Staff Report-Shady Oak Amoco • page 3 UTILITIES Utility service will have to he jacked-under Co.Rd. 61 from the City West site and then brought north to serve this site. This extension is still being studied by the City Engineering Department. • Prior to the issuance of a building permit, sewer and water must be brought to the site. • Storm water plans will be subject to the review and approval of the City and Watershed District. • CASH PARK FEE Payment of the cash park fee, $1400/acre, will be required at time of building permit issuance. • • RECOMlEWDATIONS The Planning S'aIf would recommend approval of the Shady Oak Amoco rezoning and platting contingent upon the following: 1. If the building is enlarged, parking as required by ordinance must be added. • 2. A landscape plan including but not limited to 41 foot high berms be submitted,for review and approval prior to permit issuance. • 3. The eastern access drive be eliminated. A. All light standards be no higher than 20 feet and equipped with cut-off luminars. 5. All signage be consistent with the City's Sign Ordinance. 6. Utility plans be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval and installed prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. Storm water plans meet the rules and regulations of the Watershed District. 8. Payment of cash park fee be made at time of permit issuance. • 9. That the City and Watershed District be notified 48 hours in advance of any grading. JJ:jj 31 - . • _ nr"--- --------_____ '''."---=---------— Existing d visLipn , 111e.I.V1 W. 162 ND STII ..,. • .i.41.417. :...;..1.,,, ,c,_'..:•% .,.:.,-1..:... ,i,....,..-:::::-:;•,1,, . “,.., ••• \:,. : •,.. .......,,, .. : • ..„ .•;• . . ,, „, ... . 1; ..- ' •,....c .li. '•—• :'',•"•, '•.' . ',..';';').1'4•-----' •, ' .4 • ''''Cr"- \J ,i— , , ,,.! x ,t4.4, ,• ; •:.;.',..,:. cr. •;•:";;'::;:; .•,...1 (zIr . .:.• Y...,,;.• Q- :-_,Z-2,:.------- • . •,--.........--. tegl.' .' ' ":2.,::::''':=;":"•,' _..............:....; ,,, • . •:::•. - 0 •:•:•:•.•:• •:•:•:•:•: >- ' -.\--1----- • ...„. :::•:::::: .... Pomp . :•::::::, .••••••• — :•:•.. --- ,... ...._......___.. '%46 .1- o• a' , • AMOC 0 Si ._ •.:-..Z:Lowland --- 1, -- 17:NtiC. --1',\-,.:' •, . CAnfir)(_:O) Amoco Oil Company lwin Cdvs DIM ON - 4540 W 2/th Street.Sudo 328 Minne.frohs,141mne:..ota 6543b 812 831:osi J F Omrby Derr rc.r M.uonpa July 20, 1982 City of Eden Prairie Zoning Request Re: AMOCO STATION SANDY OAK ROAD AND CROSSTOWN Dear Sirs: The existing land use is rural, undesignated, and presently has a house on it. We would propose to have the site zoned highway commercial. We would anticipate construction next year, or when sewer and water are available. The improvements would be owned by Amoco Oil Company, and per our normal procedures, leased to an operator. Find attached building and canopy elevations. As the city locations of the sewer and water are undetermined, we would run a 1" water line and a 4" sewer to these utiI tieslfrom the building/when they are located. Sincerely R. A. Dugg1 , J Senior Pr 'J ,ct ngineer RAD/pg !' -/,:: I• >, I ,I-... .....,.... 0 1•, .. - i I ----- - -- • - - -- ----- •-- - - o e) ' ... .171 ,-- 1 $ cis: 4 l'$$$$-Ii5..C. "...-. moon r• 1 . •-‘ -,i ..... t ... 0 0 0 , ! !-- ! I '.'r•-'7,1--") i.' ! i i .3... ' 1 • • 7 : ,1, 1.,.,. ... .-:. ' ,..--.-- 0 11, Sr . -•- ,..._ 1. V .:' ', :• 1 (.•/, t. .."-' ' . P '.'•1 . • I . '01 ,, • ,t i $ , $ .: • .:'., ,11 .$ • s „ t$Z1-1 ›- ' ' l'i I . I - : 1 I . : , (:.:.•..1 "...1',i. I .1 ' • . I': .Z--..t, ..e` I 0 Iit' • • : • ' :i I• , • . ,. . • 1 4., $i 1 illi• I! , 1 is I i cls _4, s 1.0 $ ; - $ .tl 1$$$-1 .:s 1$ $ III \ s ' $. -1! 11- $ 1 i ' $1. 1 ... I ,. ---_, . ! ' s ' •$ • $ ----,,i I1,11 i$ I „ $$ $. 1 •• 1 $$ t —7 ,1_'..::.• - I I 0 ___.)1 1- - -• - ----- - --- ---- 1 ir''.!',, I •''.1 • ..1 ., ., k-- ... NA..) 1 i • :,1!; ,,. . T,,• ; . ,,7 ,"r' it,' ,:t .,.1 •, •-•!4.1 --.., ; • ,.;.:iLL,L,- !,ii :. : • .--------„-_—_,_ _ i . . I \— I. .' '-'1' NIN , T . LL----47 _._._______ . t•_,/i - r 1 _ .., .. N - f , \i% .• ' ›C' ... [-- , ..-'-----' .._ ..' ' I - $ $ .? 71. • t. '"i.$ ...e.'_ . s .:1.:. .....) .11 si, 0 sls 0 •1 • i -r: • 17 c')1 •-• ;''''' ..... -4: •I ; • ‘ . ,•).\ ',' •i v ..., —1 i. ,i ..A . , . ;- 1: -,,''1 N ., :x ,-.0.,f $ I iti! ;,......1 1.-. ,11St, 4 ..‘1 « .4.4 • r • .... 1 • •/ • f t-•-• ,.. , ,,,., .... if :; '!C ! ),r 1. e,:4 • ...,- • , '.....2.:1', — --4 .....,E, , I • .-Ci 1, u a a. ;?... - • ti t t%i .-4- ,01!..F wt.!) :-i I • .r.3,. ''. ' 1-1— !1 t . 1 .; .i ; ...I . ', 1 ! :77.'Ll':?..-7 _ v-..1 1..T , 11 1 • ;-. I I 3 ...,,,•,, . . . -. '.,4<I(k tle . '. 2 ri t," . . . . . . . d'9 r;tj'' •% 41" '.), ...., ..,. ', s, ) •T., —. ,s.).,...c.,-„,.....,, , ,...,t••, • 1... •,,c • . 1 .. ,P .. . r: 1.1, --::::1 >.• e ...--,..4- 'a Ci. C • ...., I E c.. II — : Li . A I I 0 C'' a.- (f?) -:-7----; .., -1 'A i'i' 1 I • -I—. .11.-= • L , — C, • —1- A 1 t7,7-a '------ - ;I:-• -- --I ----1 .—. 4.... 0 <f; kJ. I I' ' V i 7 .ft.. 0 '4- ow* ; E ... n.....1 4 ;( v, C5 *• 1::: ' I--- il ,., ›....... , ,r, W 7 4 .NI si •,t 1 d.Z tij >LI 1 O Pri il LI 1' o s -Jt \ . • .') ., 4't 6_E4' - .• o 0 cp .,•,'" 4 1 Id." „b.: I 0 J I 2. . - g ..1t5?)C r--.'t .... c.1 ,r\ \ LIJ CI J -I[ VI VI U 1 (9 - fZi \\@'2) ` • d. 1 \S , , 1 1 ,i '-4 ' r 11 1 t ..„1-- --I 1 ,-' ' - 1 ' I 0 ___i '22 — 1' I $ —7 -- -' 1 '--1 .,, ,., I q4)/ -cl _ I . — : 1.- j 1 __ .I • lc7-.I m.l, ....o .-; 14, Eli, ..i r, ,.s. _.. r o 1- I z III r-... , L I . I 1.••••-,-----) (I. rilV Lr'' .el, -9 ' „ •,i ..,.., • October 28, 1982 { Fden Prairie City Council 8950 Fden Prairie ?;ad Fden Prairie, I n. 55344 Members of the City Council, We have a problem with access. We reside at 6200 Old Shady Oak Road, property TD numbers 02-116-22-11-0001 and.0003. Amoco Oil is proposing to build a gas station directly across from us. The plan shows Amoco Oil owning the easterly half of Old County Road 61, north of 62nd St. Yet, it is a public street used and maintained by the City of Eden Prairie. Amoco's plan does not provide for a turnaround on the north end of Old County Road 61. This is the only access to our property. School busses turn around at the end of our driveway along with snow plows, garbage trucks, emergency vehicles, and others. A turnaround is necessary to get in and out on snov,y days. The driveway was constructed in 1950, the cut was made to negotiate from the north, Hennepin County chopped Old County Road 61 on the north edge of our property: making it a difficult turn from the south; without a turn- around an impossibility. Our driveway is very steep. We wish the matter of ownership and access of Old County Road 61 to be resolved and that a legal turnaround be placed at the north edge of Old County Road 61. Sincerely, 2)(-{G-L'-"ed6--ej C)"(11 CITY OF IDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNISOTA RESOLUTION NO, 132-253 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF SHADY OAK AMOCO • BE 11 RESOLVIIO by the Edon Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Shady Oak Amoco — • dated ____10/5/82 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 Toning and Platting ordinances and amendments thereto and is herein approved. ADOPTEO by the Eden Prairie City Council on the _ day of , 19 Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL • Unapproved P1arming Cem ission Minutes -2- October r;, 1982 MEMBERS ABSENT: William Beaman III. MEMBERS REPORTS None IV. DEVE LOPMI NT PROPOSAL S A. VAILEY PI ACE OFFICES PLAT, by G.S.J. Development. Request • for prel•iminary platting of 4.1`acres, 4 lots coned Office District, with variances to he reviewed by the Board of Appeals to allow office condominium buildings. Located at 9171-9179 Valley View Road. A public hearing. Sullivan reviewed parts of the staff report dated ID/22/82 and stated that Mr. Bill Jacobson was present to give the presentation. Jacobson stated that Donald Scheff and Charles Garity (both also of G.S.J. Develop- ment) were present and Brad Fuller. He stated that the project has been built according to the approved plan. Two buildings are completed to-date. He stated that the preliminary platting request is based on the current economic situation. He introduced Brad I ul ler. Fuller stated that the financing for the plan has been approved through industrial revenue bonds. The house in the center was not. He stated that they have prepared an easenent and covenant agreement for the site. Garity passed pictures of the two completed buildings to the Conmission Members. Sullivan reviewed the reconmendations of the staff report. Garity pointed out that the percent coverage on the staff report is incorrect and should he as follows: 10%, 30%, 16%:, 17%, for a total of 14',i (from top to bottom). Marhula asked if the reason for doing this is to convey title to Lot 2 outside the condxiniu•n plat. Garity replied that they want convey a portion of it now instead of waiting possibly three years before the Bond Countal can give them the go-ahead on selling portions of the property as condominium units. Marhula asked if Lot 1 will be maintained as a rental office. Fuller replied yes, until they are allowed to convert. Marhula asked if Lots 3 and 4 will be built as condominiums. Fuller replied that they hope to do that. Torjesen asked if they have a buyer for the house. Fuller repl ied yes. Torjesen asked when this was approved a year or so ago, was it a single plat. Sullivan replied that it was only zoned as one parcel. Marhula asked if this is the same plan as previously approved, only with a ditfrrence inn title conveyance. Fuller replied yes. Torjesen stated he had concerns with Lot 2. Unapproved Planning Cc,s.Hssion 1•1inutes -3- October 25, 1982 Sutliff asked if Building C on Lot 2 is the existing house. Fuller replied yes. Retterath asked if the house is used as an office. Mr. Obrien, who presently rents the house, replied yes, and hours are from 10 am to 12 noon to 6 or 7 in the evening. • Herleiv Helle, 613g Arctic Way, asked if the parking lot will be used as a public street. Sullivan replied that the drive will he the drive access for all the buildings. Retterath asked how the covenant and easement agreements will be enforced and who will enforce these. Fuller replied that the agreements will he enforced the same as a hon,vowner's agreement, and Valley Place Offices will enforce them. Sutliff asked if splitting building A from B is needed, if they will return to the Commission. Fuller replied yes. • • Marhula stated that if the proponent wants to make a condominium out of building B, they can du it administratively. • Torjcsen asked if there is any advantage for the City in having Lots 3 and 4 platted now. Fuller stated that if they want to build buildings on Lots 3 and 4 at some time in the future, they cannot do it without returning. MOTION 1 Cartier roved to close the public hearing. Sutliff seconded, motion carried 6-0. MOTION..2 Gartner moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the preliminary platting of 4.1 acres, 4 lots zoned Office District, with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals to allow office buildings as per the plans dated 10/13/82 and the staff report dated 10/22/82. Marhula seconded. DI SC1",S1 ON Marhula slated he had concerns regarding the handicap parking spaces provided. He stated he felt the grade might be too high. Jacobson replied that there are two sppac.es per building provided and stated he felt that the grade would be alright. Marhula stated he felt the actual grade should be looked at when grading the parking lot. • Motion carried 6-0. • • 2161 • • STAFF ILPOiIT TO: Planning Commission FROlI: Stephen Sullivan, Assistant Planner THROUGH: Chris Egger, Director of Planning DATE: October 22, 1982 PROJECT: VALLEY PLACE OFFICES PLAT • • APPLICANT: Valley Place Offices • LOCATION: Site is in the central/eastern portion • of the community approximately 1500 feet 'west of Washington Avenue and south of Valley View Road REQUEST: Preliminary plat approval for the existing 4.1 acre parcel to 4 separate parcels BACLOROIND This area was previously reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council. The site was rezoned from Rural to Office, and was originally in- tended as a condominium ownership. The project is presently structured as a general partnership and is financed through Indus. •ial revenue bonds. Tax-exempt financing is creating financial difficui`.ies to the proponent for developing the site to a condominium type office park use. The proponent wishes to sell portions of the project (building and lot) subject to overall site restrictions, easements, and conditional agreements. The lot areas and coverage are as follows: Building Percent Area Coverage Coverage • Lot 1 101,776 s.f. 10,000 s.f. 50 Lot 2 12,395 4,000 20% Lot 3 31,636 5,050 25% Lot 4 30,209 5,050 25• % Total 176,016 24,200 14% Lots one and two presently have buildings constructed on them. Lots three and four ill have building.; constructed similar to the two now buildings on L(I one when tenants are secured for there. Lots three and four are covered in the easement and maintenance agreement as well as architectural and use restrictions. ��Iu. Staff Pepurt-Valley Place Offices Plat page 2 Lot two does not. meet Office District, minimum lot size, width and sideyard setback requirements. A variance will be required. • Each individual parcel with the exception of Lot two (building E) has adequate parking. Valley Place will designate 20 parking spaces for Lot two. A non-exclusive easement over the driveway for the purpose of pedestrian and vehicular access and puking is proposed. Valley Place agrees to maintain and repair all driveways. A non-exclusive easement over, in, on, under, and across areas designated as utility areas for the purpose of maintenance, inspection, repair, replacement and alteration is proposed. Maintenance of such utilities that serve other portions of the property may be undertaken with written consent of Valley Place. A non-exclusive easement for access and use of portions of property designated as "green area" is proposed. Valley Place agrees to maintain the "green areas" and all landscape areas in a neat and attractive condition. Each lot owner is responsible to maintain and keep the building or buildings in good condition and in compliance with all suppliable laws, codes, statutes, rules, and regulations. Individual lot owners are required to adhere to architectural and use restriction as set by Valley Place Offices. • Maintenance assessments shall be equal to the product of the total cost of driveway maintenance and green area maintenance multiplied by the percentage derived by dividing the total number of gross square feet of the floor area contained in all buildings located in a particular lot by the total number of gross square beet of floor area in all buildings within the entire property. Valley Place, prior to each calendar year will submit to each owner an estimated annual budget for the cost of drive and green space maintenance. Subsequent owners of parcels presently not told and without buildings shall: (a) lie granted and acquire an easement for use of the driveway. (b) Be granted and acquire easements over the property such as may be reasonably necessary for location of utilities. (c) Be granted and acquire an easement over the green areas. (d) Ile granted and acquire the right to use a proportionate share of parking spaces on the driveway. (e) Be subject to maintenance provisions, archtectural restric- tions, and the use. restrictions. • • Staff Report-Val ley Place Offices Plat page 3 Enforcement of these covenants and restrictions may be by any proceeding at law or in equity against any person violatioq or attempting to violate any covenant or restriction, either to restrain violation, to compel compliance, or to recover damages; and failure by any pa rty to enforce any covenant or restriction herein contained shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. Attorneys fees and costs of any such actions to restrain violation or to recover damages as determined by the court shall be assessable against and payable by any persons violating the terms contuibed herein. SUM- MARY The proponent requests the platting of Lots 2, 3, and 4 as separate parcels. Within these lots exists building E and proposed buildings C and D. These lots have no frontage to public streets and require easements for access, parking and utilities from adjacent parcels. Maintenance assessment costs will be proportional to each parcel. Archi tectural and use restrictions have been proposed for the entire site. RC Co'1'TI_D!1T IOIIS Recommend approval subject to one of the following alternatives: A. Approval subject to the following: 1. Review and approval by the Board of Appeals of variances for: a. Sideyard setback. b. Three lots with no frontage on a public street. c. Building D and C will need variances for providing parking on lots separate from the lot on which building sits. 2. Review of easement documents and covenant by City Attorney prior to final plat. • 3. Utility easements running to the City for all common storm sewer, water, and sanitary sewer systems. B. Denial. 1. Variances are required. 2. Condominium method as a proven alternative. SS:sh 21G1/ • 4 October 1982 Mr. Chris Enger, City Planner Eden Prairie City Hall Eden Prairie, Minnesota Re: Valley Place Offices Dear Mr. Enger, As previously discussed with you we are filing an application for prelicinary plat approval for this project. Copies of the easement and maintenance agreement are included with the required drawings as part of this application. It is our understanding that this appli- cation will be on the agenda for a public hearing on October 25. The project is presently structured as a general partnership and is financed through industrial revenue bonds. Although the tax-exempt financing prevents subjecting the property to a condominium regime at this time, the ecsccert ngt'C'enxnt is structured to allow eventual • sale of portions of the project; provided 'that all such parcels sold will be subject to and benefitted by the restrictions, easements and conditions in the agreements. The eeser,nt and maintenance agreements are structured to provide for maintenance of landscaping, driveways, utilities and parking throughout the property. There is adequate parking throughout the project for each building; it is contemplated that specific spaces will be assigned to specific offices. The casement agreement specifies exterior maintenance and appearance to assure a harmonius appearance throughout the site. • • Please notice that Lots 3 and 4 are included in the plat and are covered in the easement. and maintenance agreements. These lots have been separately disignated at that time to facilitate their inclusion as additional property in a condominium structure in the event construc- tion on such lots is not complete at a time that it appears appropriate to subject the balance of the property to a condominium structure. • The present and proposed buildings comply with present zoning require- • nents for lot coverage and for setbacks from property lines and public streets. The proposed lot lines for Building "E", the existing house, • may require a variance; this is being requested from the Board of Appeals. , rl • 4 October 1982 Mr. Chris Enger page 2 The lot areas and coverage are as follows: Building Percent Area Coverage Coverage Lot 1 101,776 s.f. 10,100 s.f. 10% Lot 2 12,395 4,000 32% Lot 3 31,636 5,050 16% • Lot 4 30,209 5,050 17% Total 176,016 24,200 14% Lots one and two presently have buildings constructed on them. Lots three and four will have buildings constructed similar to the two new buildings on Lot one when tenants are secured for them. This proposal seems to best fit current financial conditions and provide a solid base for the continued success of the project. Please call our attorney, Brad Fuller, 339-7666, or myself, 941-7052, if you have further questions. Sincerely, William Jacobson 9975 Valley View Road Eden Prairie, MN, 55344 cc: Brad Fuller Charles Garrity • • 1 October 1982 Mr. Chris Enger, City Planner City Hall Eden Prairie, Minnesota Re: Valley Place Offices Dear Mr. Enger, As previously discussed with you we are filing an application for preliminary plat for Valley Place Offices. Copies of the easement agreerr,ent are included with the required drawings as part of this application. It is our understanding that this application will be on the agenda for a public hearing on October 25. Please notice that Outlots 3 and 4 are shown and are covered in the oasawwwent enrccment. It was done this way for ease in future condo- minium dieciopelent: for sale to individual owner-occupants. The project is presently structured as a general partnership and is financed through industrial revenue bonds. the easement agreement is structured to allow sale of the buildings to individual tenant owners at the end of three years, at which tine a condominium assocaiation could be set up. The e::sec,ent anrca: ents are structured to provide for common main- tenance of landscaping, driveways, utilities and parking. Parking is structured to allow spaces to be reserved for each occupant com rnient to his office space. Because there appears to be more parking than required for actual needs this reservation of spaces does not sewn necessary at this time. The easement agreement also calls for exterior maintenance and appearance to be controlled by the association in order to maintain a hurn..onius appearance throughout. The present proposals seem to hest fit current financial conditions and provide a solid base for the continued success of the project. Please call our attorney, Brad Fuller, 339-1666, or myself, 941-1052, if you have any questions. Sincerely, William Jacobson • 99./5 Valley View Road Edon Prairie, 1ul, 0h 44 I AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATION OF EASEMENTS FOR VALLEY PLACE OFFICES THIS AGREEMENT, made this day of , 1982, between Valley Place Office Associates, a Minnesota general partnership ("Valley Place") and Gerald V. O'Brien, an individual ("O'Brien"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Valley Place is the owner of certain real property located in the • City of Eden Prairie, Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto (the "Property"); and • • WHEREAS, Valley Place and O'Brien have entered into that certain Commercial-Industrial Purchase Agreement dated September 3, 1982 (the "Pur- chase Agreement"), whereby Valley Place has agreed to sell and O'Brien has agreed to purchase a portion of the Property (such portion of the Property being legally described in Exhibit "B" and referred to hereinafter as the "O'Brien Parcel") upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Purchase Agreement; and WHEREAS, Valley Place and O'Brien desire to create and maintain upon the Property, including the O'Brien Parcel, an integrated project of office build- ings, together with a private driveway and parking area (said project being referred to hereinafter as "Valley Place Offices"); and WHEREAS, Valley Place and O'Brien desire to provide for the preservation of the values and amenities in Valley Place Offices and for the maintenance thereof, and to this end desire to subject the Property to the running cove- nants, restrictions, easements, charges and liens hereinafter set forth, each and all of which is and are for the benefit of the Property and all owners thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived thereby, Valley Place and O'Brien hereby agree and declare that the Property and such improvements thereon as may exist or hereafter be made pursuant to the terms hereof, are, and shall be held, transferred, sold, conveyed and occupied, subject to the covenants, restrictions, easements, charges and liens hereinafter set forth, and to any amendments hereto or thereto. ARTICLE I EASEMENTS • 1.1 Driveway. There is hereby granted and conveyed, for the benefit of the O'Brien Parcel, a non-exclusive easement over that portion of the Property described in Exhibit "C" hereto (the "Driveway") for purposes of pedestrian and vehicular access to and from the O'Brien Parcel, and for purposes of vehicular parking pursuant to the provisions of Article II below, such easement to be for the use and benefit of the owner of the O'Brien Parcel and such owner's employees, agents, contractors, tenants, licensees, guests and invitees (collectively here- inafter referred to as "Permittees"). At such time as construction of the area marked "Extended Driveway" on Exhibit "D" hereto is completed, the definition of Driveway for purposes hereof shall be expanded to include such area. -2- c 1.2 Utilities. There is hereby granted and conveyed, for the benefit of the O'Brien Parcel, and its owners and Permittees, non-exclusive easements over, in, on, under and across those portions of the Property designated as "Utility Areas" on the site plan attached hereto as Exhibit "D", for purposes of the operation, maintenance, inspection, repair, replacement and alteration thereon of all items serving the O'Brien Parcel commonly referred to as utilities, including water, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, electricity, gas, steam, security systems, tele- phone and other electronic. communication systems, and all wires, ducts, shafts, conduits, pipes, vents, cables, pumps, valves and similar equipment used ip connection with providing any of the foregoing utilities, provided that such easements shall not permit unreasonable interference with the use or enjoyment of the balance of the Property, and provided further that any repair or main- tenance of any such utility that serves any other portion of the Property may be undertaken only upon the written consent of Valley Place. 1.3 Green Areas. There is hereby granted and conveyed, for the benefit of the O'Brien Parcel and its owners and Permittees, a non-exclusive easement for access to and reasonable use of those portions of the Property designated as Green Areas on the site plan attached hereto as Exhibit "D" ("Green Areas"), such use to be subject to the provisions set forth herein, and to such rules and regulations as may be promulgated by Valley Place. At such time as improvements are completed on those portions of the Property designated as Lots 3 and 4 on Exhibit "D" hereto, the "Green Area" shall be redefined and expanded to in- clude that area shown as "Additional Green Area" on said Exhibit "D". -3- ARTICLE II PARKING 2.1 Use of Spaces. Valley Place shall maintain upon the Driveway twenty (20) vehicle parking spaces for the use of the owners of the improvements located on the O'Brien Parcel and such owner's Permittees. No one shall use these parking spaces for the parking or storage of vehicles and items of personal property which are not business related. Valley Place may specifically designate the location cf such vehicle parking spaces, which parking spaces shall be located as near and convenient to the O'Brien Parcel as reasonably possible and which location may be changed from time to time by Valley Place. 2.2 Additional Parking Spices. • In the event the owner of the O'Brien Parcel expands its improve- ments pursuant to the plans and specifications described in Exhibit "E" hereto, Valley Place shall upon completion of such improvements increase the number of parking spaces available pursuant to Section 2.1 to a total of twenty-eight (28). ARTICLE III COVENANTS FOR MAINTENANCE 3.1 Improvements on Property. The parties hereto covenant and agree to maintain and keep the buildings and other improvements located on any and all portions of the Pro- perty respectively owned by each in good condition and state of repair, and in compliance with all applicable laws, codes, statutes, rules, regulations, orders -4- .'11)1 and ordinances of governmental bodies and agencies and the provisions of this Agreement, but this provision shall not require reconstruction of any building or improvement which is demolished, voluntarily or involuntarily. If any build- ing or improvement located on any portion of the Property is damaged or de- stroyed and the person owning such portion of the Property does not intend to repair or restore the same, then such building or improvement shall be demol- ished and removed, and the foundations filled in and the surface of such pro- perty restored to a safe condition, all without cost or At pen se to any other person owning any other portion of the Property. 3.2 Green Areas. Valley Place agrees to maintain, or cause to be maintained, the Green Areas and all lawn or landscaped area within the O'Brien Parcel, in a neat, clean and attractive condition, free of debris. Such maintenance shalt include lawn mowing and removal of leaves (all maintenance required by this Section 3.2 being referred to collectively as "Green Area Maintenance".) 3.3 Driveway. Valley Place agrees to keep and maintain the Driveway in a neat and it clean condition, free of debris and in a state of good repair. Such maintenance shall include snow removal, repair and replacement of appropriate markers and lines, and the operation and replacement of appropriate lighting facilities (all maintenance required by this Section 3.3 being referred to collectively as "Driveway Maintenance"). -5- 3.4 Assessment for Maintenance. O'Brien covenants and agrees to pay to Valley Place a portion of the cost of Driveway Maintenance and Green Area Maintenance ("O'Brien's Assess- ment"). O'Brien's Assessment shall be equal to the product of the total cost of Driveway Maintenance and Green Area Maintenance multiplied by the percentage derived by dividing the total number of gross square feet of floor area con- tained in all buildings located in O'Brien's Parcel by the total number of gross square feet of floor area in all buildings within the entire Property. Unless the parties hereto subsequently agree otherwise, O'Brien's Assessment shall be payable monthly within ten (10) days after billing therefor. Any amounts not paid within ten (10) days of notice of delinquency shall bear interest until paid at the maximum rate allowed by law. Valley Place shall, prior to each calendar year, submit to O'Brien for informational purposes only, an estimated annual budget for the cost or Driveway Maintenance. and Green Area Maintenance. O'Brien's Assessment shall be adjusted within thirty (30) days of any increase or decrease in the number of gross square feet of floor area within the Pro- perty for which there exists a certificate of occupancy duly issued by the appropriate governmental office. IV ARCHITECTURAL RESTRICTIONS No building, fence, wall or other structure shall be commenced, erected or maintained upon the O'Brien Parcel, nor shall any exterior addition, change or alteration be made to any such building, fence, wall or other struc- ture, except in conformance with the plans and specifications described in ( Exhibit "E" hereto, until reasonably satisfactory plans and specifications show- -6- ing the nature, kind, shape, height, materials, color and location of the same have been submitted to, and approved in writing as to harmony of external design and location in relation to surrounding structures and topography by Valley Place. No improvement or structure of any kind or any walls, windows, signs, or doors thereon shall be painted, decorated or colored in any way on the exterior without prior written approval of Valley Place, nor may any trees or shrubs be planted on the O'Brien Parcel, nor shall any sculptures or works of art or any ornamental lighting, signs or antennae be placed upon the outside of any improvements on the O'Brien Parcel or in the windows of any building located thereon without prior written approval of Valley Place. In the event Valley Place fails to approve or disapprove such design and location, or such painting, decorating or coloring, or such trees, sculptures, signs, works of art or lighting, within thirty (30) days after said plans and specifications, or information on such painting, decorating or coloring, or such trees, sculptures, • works of art or lighting, have been submitted to it, approval will not be re- quired, and this Article IV will be deemed to have been fully complied with. It is understood and agreed by the parties hereto that the consent provisions of this Article IV are intended solely to achieve architectural and aesthetic harmony within the Valley Place Offices project, and that Valley Place shall not unreasonably withhold its consent to any requested change or proposed con- struction which meets such criteria. Valley Place agrees to cooperate with O'Brien in obtaining any governmental approvals or permits required in con- nection with construction or alteration of any improvements on the O'Brien Parcel approved by Valley Place. -7- 2If1�j ARTICLE V USE. RESTRICTIONS 5.1 Use of Property. (a) Buildings on the Property shall be utilized only for general office purposes, and such other uses as all owners of all portions of the Property may hereafter agree. (b) No operation or use shall be permitted or maintained which causes or produces any of the following effects discernible outside any building on the Property or affecting any other portion of the Property: (I) Noise or sound that is objectionable because of its volume, duration, intermittent beai, frequency or shrillness; (ii) Smoke; • (iii) Noxious, toxic, or corrosive fumes of gasses; (iv) Obnoxious odors; (v) Dust, dirt or fly ash; (vi) Unusual fire or explosive hazards. (c) No portion of the Property shall be utilized for residential purposes. 5.2 Obstructions. There shall be no obstruction of the Driveway, nor shall anything be kept or stored on any part of the Driveway without prior written consent of Valley Place except, where reasonably necessary, construction materials and equipment during construction or repair of improvements on the Property. -8- I'l' 5.3 Prohibition of Damage and Certain Activities. Nothing shall be done or kept on any part of the Property which would be in violation of any statute, rule, ordinance, regulation, permit or other validly imposed requirement of any governmental body. No noxious, de- structive or offensive activity shall be allowed on any part of the Property nor shall anything be done thereon which may be or may become an annoyance or nuisance to any other owner or to any other persons at any time lawfully utiliz- ing a portion of the Property. 5.4 Animals. No animals, rabbits, livestock, fowl or poultry of any kind shall be raised, bred or kept in or on any part of the Property. 5.5 Utility and Drainage Easements. Easements for installation and maintenance of utilities and drainage facilities are reserved as shown on the recorded plat of Valley Place, unless vacated by action of the municipal authority. Within these easements, no struc- ture, planting or other material shall be placed or permitted to remain which may damage or interfere with the installation and maintenance of utilities, or which may change the direction or flow of drainage channels in the easements, or which may obstruct or retard the flow of water through drainage channels in the easements. 5.6 Trash Removal. No trash shall be stored outside of any structure located on any part of the Property other than in such area as may be designated therefor by Valley Place. Valley Place may allocate trash removal charges for the entire Property in the same manner as assessments set forth in Section 3.4 above. -9- 5.7 Subdivision of Parcels. • Except as set forth below, no portion of the Property may be further subdivided without the prior written approval of all owners of the Property and unless all applicable laws and ordinances have been complied with; provided, however, that this provision shall not be construed to limit the right of any owner of any portion of the Property to rent or lease any portion of any office building improvements thereon by means of a written lease or rental agreement that is subject to the restrictions contained in this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Valley Place may convey either or both portions of the Property designated as Lots 3 and 4 on Exhibit "D" hereto without the consent of O'Brien; provided any subsequent owner of such parcels shall by such transfer: (a) Be granted and acquire an easement for use of the Driveway pursuant to Section 1.1; (b) Be granted and acquire easements over the Property such as may be reasonably necessary for location of utilities; (c) Be granted and acquire an easement over the Green Areas pur- suant to Section 1.3; (d) Be granted and acquire the right to use a proportionate share of parking spaces on the Driveway; and (d) Be subject to maintenance provisions of Article III, the Architectural Restrictions of Article IV and the Use Restrictions of Article V. O'Brien agrees to cooperate with Valley Place in connection with obtaining any and all approvals or permits as may be necessary to accomplish the conveyance of said Lots 3 and 4. -10- ARTICLE VI ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT Valley Place may annex and subject to this Agreement all or any part of the real property ("Additional Property") located in the City of Eden Prairie, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota lying to the north of and adjacent to the Property by filing for record a Supplementary Agreement and Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and Reservation of Easements so sub- jecting such Additional Property hereto. Upon the annexation and subjecting hereto of any such Additional Property, each owner and subsequent owner of any portion of the Additional Property which contains or is planned to contain improvements thereon shall acquire thereby full rights, benefits of covenants, . conditions, restrictions and easements of the parties hereto, and shall become subject thereby to all of the obligations, covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements as provided herein. ARTICLE VII GENERAL PROVISIONS 7.1 Duration. The easements created hereby shall be permanent and the covenants and restrictions contained in this Agreement shall run with and bind the land for a term of twenty (20) years from the date of this Agreement, after which time the covenants and restrictions shall be automatically renewed for successive periods of ten (10) years. -11- 7.2 Running Covenants. The easements hereby granted and created, and the provisions here- of, shall run with the land and be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns, and all present and future owners, occupiers and encumbrances of each and every part of the Property. 7.3 Enforcement. Enforcement of these covenants and restrictions may be by any pro- ceeding at law or in equity against any person violating or attempting to violate any covenant or restriction, either to restrain violation, to compel compliance, or to recover damages; and failure by any party to enforce any covenant or restriction herein contained shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. Attorney's fees and costs of any such actions to restrain violation or to recover damages as determined by the court shall be assessable against and payable by any persons violating the terms contained herein. 7.4 Severability. Invalidation of any one of these covenants or restrictions by judgment or court order shall not affect any other provisions, which shall remain in full force and effect. 7.5 No Public Right or Dedication. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be deemed to be a gift or dedication cf all or any part of the Property to the public, or for any public use. -12- ;Ii`'ift 7.6 Suspension of Easements. The rights and easements granted O'Brien hereunder shall be subject to the right of Valley Place to suspend the enjoyment or use of such rights and easements for any period during which O'Brien is delinquent in the payment of any assessment due hereunder; provided nothing herein shall be deemed to deny O'Brien access to the O'Brien Parcel. 7.7 Additional Documentation. In the event the owners of the Property unanimously agree to subject the Property to a townhouse or condominium regime, the parties hereto agree to execute such documents as may be required to accomplish such structure. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. VALLEY PLACE OFFICES ASSOCIATES By Its Partner By Its Partner By Its Partner Gerald V. O'Brien -13- j. STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) S5. COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1982, by and , partners on behalf of Valley Place Offices Associates, a Minnesota general partnership. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1982 by Notary Public -14- i • • • EXHIBIT A e;. The real estate and interests in real estate located in the County of Hennepin and described as follows: That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 12, Township 116, Range 22,' Hennepin County, Minnesota, •described as follows: . Commencing at the northwest corner of the East 30 acres of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast 'Quarter of said Section 12; thence south along the west line of said East 30 acres, a distance of 749.84 feet; thence west at right angles to said west line, a distance of 350.00 feet to the point of beginning; thence east along the last described line, a -distance of'•350.00 feet to the west line of said East 30 acres; _, thence south along said west line, a distance of • 286.66 feet, more or less, to the north line of :• Norseman Industrial Park„ 4th Addition, thence west • along the north line of said Norseman Industrial Park, 4th Addition a distance of 522.00 feet; thence north parallel with said west lire to the centerline of County Road No. 39; thence northeasterly along said • centerline to the intersection with a line drawn north, parallel with the west line of said East 30 acres, from the point of beginning; thence southerly and parallel to the west line of said East 30 acres to • • the point of beginning. I,. . EXHIBIT "B" O'Brien Parcel [Legal Description to Follow] 5 EXHIBIT "C" Driveway [Legal Description to Follow] td: ice' i . a ... 1 1 ' - 6 I Loy' ; • ' t 1,..•!•' -2.,,,l..."5•• '1 - ' - "--1 . .1 . , ,F, --- "S. —11- ; I • ' i t . • . , ,:-.=•-•-,, —1-2_,..„!// I, 1 I 1 %:-; ,•I--p,'"'", "" "I'' 11 1 / ..,, ,, — ,-.---. :--,--- -----.[:—.........7,:-',. 4::1-i'‘..,:ie--:- ..,.. ' 1\ • - ' i --.• ---'( 1 ..:.•+ ... rn ., -... ,-..--,Z...... ___/ r—• 7 '.... .7j j.... •1 r • . ' I II• "-• •••••—•;•;: • , ; -; 7,•,;•-•--Ii , I ! c"/ I s LI ' L • 7.7;41-.-J I I Ie/ ! ••KZ .. !' .• 1 ‘ ; • ! C.! ••, • • I '! I i ri • .g.,•71r. 'X', -' I i -.... • I >4/ • 1 - I \T ' Li........ . •..... • i 0 sRiet%1 . ...,. \I. GI,'EEA1 -- ,•.-,• , • (AR •• i ' .ei-R ,..15;'• ____ ; 1:7., , 1-- 71.1_, • I -,..-•- .-- • • "•• • r.:7 —), ADD vr!c•KIAL- ' — --N.,..----=t ..., '7 . i•Sii ' ' %'s. .--- - -I , c•-•,:',zr.-7.z..-:•4 ! , •- .-#' ,. ' •• • `' • .ith // • ,,I , liqrtL1,17...i'itz6A .\\ I ,\ .. ,,,•••_.. ..- •- ,...- .4. .4-•--- ,. . i • 242.24 • ,— - I ,,/,• -y I n.,.•... ....: 1 ; ;1 1 I. _ . . —\-7:-,.. .p. ••1 / '' i.•''''''' '''. , ' ' \-...;:•.. ' • ••••''''' —C`N. I 01 .42 1 . _ N: I \ •\ ,,c• ,. i__ _ (..:, '-....4'i , 1 _.....-• .. -• , 1 ' ,./ • ' . ' , / •• ,.- •, / .,/••,... 1t, 1 • , , . ...-.. .....4 1 //'-./ .. ..,.. t-- _ .. , -• ‘,4,..‘s.... 1 1 • \•\ •' / ' /. ' i•-•—•.„.„. .:. ,. ,v `-''r,..„,N111111 ._ __ • ; >--°-;; ., \ • / ! / 1 i ' I- .--;•ao. •I !I ! • . I ' I I ‘, \ \ IILIIII •71 I ! II,I1II , IIIIII•LII. . • s, ;!II; II i .// , e7;7../I.1,...,7 i It NI \ '•\; .n.„,,' ';••'7,.I‘ •\?, ./' ,/ /, ), • ,„, / lt,I , • , 1 I ' .-\\ \ V s •I;;;\... "..I , ' ' •, i ; • '1; ; I !IJI ! I ' IIIII_ IiI --•••I, 11 ; IIIT , \ .,., . •s.„.......... ,...4_ . , 1.... 1 :.,.. • 1 , , ! , 1 , 1 1 , , ,!......H....',.......: ' \ \ •.,._ --:•••\\Ns"' . .---,,,,,,— ...\\. ' •'S' -•-•\•:— e _ ...„ 395.02 i s•,;.;,, '.,...•''.' • , \ s /r EXH I B I T "EV , /-: ... • \ . . • ' ",1 l'.' CITC reis,cmcirs./c• rli A.1 •••ei.., EXHIBIT "E" O'Brien Plans and Specifications (To Be Supplied] 1: l''(? • CITY OF EVEN PRAIRIE H[NNLPIN COUNTY, MIIINE.SOTA RfSOLU1ION NO. 82-254 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF _.VALLEY PLACE_0FFICES PLAT • BE IT R!SOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of __Valley_Place_Offices Plat , dated 10/13/82 , a copy of which is on file at the City Hall and amended as follows: is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances and amendments thereto and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the day of , 19 Wolfyeng H. Cerizel, Mayor John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL November 2, 1982 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, 'INNESOTA OROINANCE 13-£32 • ORDINANCE CHANGING STREET NAMES BE IT ORDAINEO by the Eden Prairie City Council that the following street shall be renamed: Kurtz Lane between C.M.ST.P and P. Railroad and Edenvale Boulevard Renamed to Hallmark Drive. First read at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on November 2, 1982, and finally read, adopted, and ordered published at a regular meeting of the Council of said City on the 16th day of November, 1982. Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Franc,Clerk .�. .q 177 • November 2, 1982 CITY OF FDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE 15-82 BE IT ORDAINED by the Eden Prairie City Council that the following street shall he renamed: Flying Cloud Drive between Valley View Road and Shady Oak Road Renamed to Kerwood Drive. First read at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on November 2, 1982, and finally read, adopted, and ordered published at a regular meeting of the Council of said City on the 16th day of November, 1982. Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk November 2, 1982 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE 14-82 ORDINANCE CHANGING THE STREET NAMES BE IT ORDAINED by the Eden Prairie City Council that the following street shall be renamed: Valley View Road between Baker Road and I-494 Renamed to Roberts Drive First read at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on November 2, 1982, and finally read, adopted, and ordered published at a regular meeting of the Council of said City on the 16th day of November, 1982. Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. frane, Clerk i N() November 2, 1982 • STA1E OF MINNESOTA CIT" OF EDEN fiAIRIE CO( ; OF HENNEPIN The following accounts were audited and allowed as follows: 4104 VOID OUT CHECK $ (11.51'` 4187 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC Fee ( 2.1'+(0 4405 PETTY GASH-PUBLIC SAFETY Postage-Police Dept. 9.76 4406 PETTY CASH Postage 9.5E 4407 ANDREA E'i;OSCII Instructor-Racquetball 132.00 4408 HENNEPP; LOUNTY SUPPORT Service 80.10 4409 RALPH HEAL OCHVIL Instructor-Fitness class 352.0e 4410 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Fee-Assessing Dept. 160.0D 4411 MINNESOTA DEPADF;'SNT OF P/S Fee-Motor Vehicle registration 20.00 4412 OLD PEORIA COMPANY, INC. Wine 1,228.51 4413 ED. PHILLIPS & SONS CO. Liquor 1,731.47 4414 GRICGS, COOPER & CO., INC. Liquor 2,654.10 4415 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE Liquor . 596.5i- 4416 PAUSTIS & SONS Wine 140.45 4417 TWIN CITY WINE CO. Wine 157.63 4418 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK Payroll 16,215.0t; 4419 COM'1ISSIONI R OF REVENUE Payroll 7,261.7 4420 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT Payroll 40.00 ; 4421 AETNA LIEF 1;SUGANCE Payroll 101.00 4422 GREAT WEST INSURANCE CO. Payroll 2,315.00 44. UNITED WAY OF 'INHEAPOLIS Payroll 72.50 4 . PFRA Payroll 12,746.7' 4425 MINNESOTA SOCIETY OF ARBORICULTURE Conference-Forestry Dept. 20.00 4426 JOHN FRRNE Expenses 158.50 4427 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE September sales tax 7,424.0', 4428 COM;IISSICNER OF REVENUE September fuel tax 303.4:: 4429 EUGENE UIETZ Expenses-Engineering Dept. 556.64 4430 GN U'S, COOPER & CO., INC. Liquor 3,843.75' 4431 JOHNSON BKOIHLRS WHOLESALE Liquor 3,357.87 4432 ED. PHILLIPS & SONS CO. Wine 2,596.5. 4433 IIITRIEST WINE CO. Wine 1,832.7D. 4434 TWIN CITY WINE CO. Wine 157.6:: 4435 NELSON ENTERPRISES Freight charges-Liquor Store/P V M 30.O0 4436 BELLDOY CORPORATION Liquor 1,483.1E 4437 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING Wine 172.50 4438 PETTY CASH Expenses 65.0' 4439 PETTY CASH Expenses 51.95 4440 WENDY BURNS CARLSON Instructor-Skating 94.50 4141 ACRO-MINNESOTA, INC. Office supplies, Council chair 446.5o 4442 STUART ALEXANDER Mileage 24.25 • 4443 ANiPICAN FREIGHT SYSTEM, INC. Freight charges-Water Dept. 34.5o 4444 LAP(. F. ANOER;iF.N & ASSOCIATES Sign posts 504.0: 4445 GREGO ANDERSON Hockey official 48.00 4446 AIU;0R SEC0YI1Y INC. Service-Community Services 38.101 4447 ASE,OEIA110 ASPHALT, INC. Blacktop 6,111.5; AI:UCIAILII (TELL DRILLERS, INC. Service 400.0. 44,, B R W Service-Mitchell Rd & Technology Drive, City 95,897.0; West Streets P. Utilities, Shady Oak Feasibility Anderson Likes Parkwav-TIT 169 to Mitchell Road, Valley Vice Road from TH 169 to 1494 : 1C)I • Par. to Nove.aer 2, 1982 4450 • BERNADINE A REI.F, ROBERT RELF Easement-Schooner Blvd. 6,460.00 4451 BRIAN BEiRCSTROM Sports official 110.00 4452 GRANT BERGS RO)1 Sports official 96.0[' 4453 DENIS BILLMYER Softball official 22.00 4454 DAVID BLOOD Refund-Dog Obedience 17.00 4455 BR00)DALE FORD, INC. Two dump trucks 63,092.0c 4456 BUTCH'S PAR SUPPLY Supplies-Liquor Stores 187.15 4457 CENTURY SALES COMPANY, INC. Equipment parts 58.34 4458 CHEMLAWN Service-Public Works 113.6'u 4459 NORENE CLARK Refund-Membership 18.O0 4460 COLLINS ELECTRIC CO. Service-Community Center 2,117.00 4461 COMMUNITY DANCE CENTER . Instructor-Exercise class 264.60 4462 COPY EQUIPMENT INC. • Supplies-Engineering Dept. 33.07 4463 CROWN RUBBER STAMP CO. Name plate signs 13.16 4464 CUSTOM DESIGNED AWARDS Plaques-Senior Citizens 69.75 • 4465 DALCO Cleaning supplies-Water Dept. 218.1' 4466 DAY-TIMERS, INC. Office supplies-Planning Dept. 12.00 4467 DON'S SOD SERVICE Service-Park Dept. 12,634.0., 4468 DORHOLT PRINTING Office supplies 39.01 4469 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMPER OF COMMERCE Dues-Liquor Store 180.0. 44 ^ EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE RELIEF Fire Dept. Pension 41,196.5U 41, EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT September Service 1,192.87 447a EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT Printing-Eden Prairie brochure 57.67 4473 ELECTRIC MOTOR REPAIR, INC. Equipment parts 49.97 4474 JON B. ELVY Hockey official 48.00 4475 RON ESS Hockey official 96.00 4476 JONATHAN EWALD Refund-Swimming 7.00 4477 FEED-RITE CONTROLS INC. Sulfate-Water Dept. 3,502.0C 4478 FINLEY BROS. ENTERPRISES Service-Staring Lake Park 1,455.0[ 4479 GHA LOCK JOINT INC. Gaskets-Water Dept. 5•-'o 443D G.L. CONTRACTING, INC. Repair Water leaks 1,116.0ii ' 4481 GENERAL CONPUJICATIONS, INC. Equipment repair & parts 301.C 4482 GENERAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT CORP. Equipment. parts-Fire Dept. 9.10 4483 R.L. GOULD & CO., INC. Equipment parts-Park Dept. 1,044.75 4484 GRAHAM PAPER Xerox paper 628.75 4435 MARTHA CROTE Refund-Exercise class 25 10 4486 JACK HACKING Expenses 231. 4487 HARi'ON GLASS Windshield-Street Maintenance 345.71 4488 HENNEPIN COCNTY CHIEFS OF POLICE Conference-Police Dept. 275.0R: 4489 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Board of Prisoners 2,130.00 4490 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT Service 80.0u :. 4491 HYDRA!'IIC JACK S EQUIPMENT Equipment repair-Fire Dept. 72.5 4492 INGRAM EXCAVATING INC. Service-County Road 1 Trail 11,035. 4493 GENE JACOBSON Expenses 120.1: 4494 IRICHARD .5:NSON Volleyball official 32.1 4' • CARL JUL[.IC Expenses 17.1. KIIVF ULA11NG S AIR CONDITIONING Service-Public Works 236. 4497 KEVIN 00. ;'.OHLS Sports official 154.ta :; 4498 RAM KRA1O DVIL Instructor-Exercise class 56.C.' ": 4499 M.C. ION): INC. Insurance 19.:r,' 4500 LANG, MADLY C GR{GLRSON, LTD. Legal services 2,660.1 4501 LATIIGOP PAINT SUi'I'I.Y CO. Paint-Park Signs 20.. 9 I1