Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 12/20/1983 CDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL !:':E.NDA tiY, CI Ci.,i;LR 2U, 1983 7:30 PM, CITY HAI L r Ma holf5='uy Pcnzei Richard Anderson, • COl-;CIL MEMIaRS.:_ Mayor' George Bentley, Paul Red,ath and George Tanyen t.ITY COUNCIL STAFF; lit City Manager Carl J. Jullie; City Attorney Royer Pauly; Fin,:Ince Din-clad Jchn Crane; (t744 /p ) Planning.Director Chris Fncer; Director `(1fl of Community Services Robert Lar1!ert; Director of Public lurks Fuyene A. Dietz, and R cording Secretary Naren Mich.ael I,l tr INVOCATION: Councilman George B ++kialYf l.,• 1` Sr,,,"c:i✓ PLEDGE OF Al I tGIANCE !) /�, t �;�h' � ,,��ti, d.# .1N ROLL CALL )--, lH� f 1. APOROVAL OF AGIND,A AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS II. MINUTES A. Minutes of the City Council meeting held. Tuesday, Noveher 15., 1983 Page 2553 B. Minutes of the City Council noeting_held Friday,_ Decer:ber9, 1983 Page 2562 II. CONSi NT CAI.i 2UAR A. Change Order No. 1, Shady Oak Road Utilities, 1_C_ 52-049 Page 2563 B. Change Order/Cont_ract An:nndment No. 1, Edenvale Boulevard, ]_.0 Page 2565 ' 51-356 C. Final Plat approval for Autukin Ridge (formerly Bluffs Ridge), Page 2567 (southeast quadrant of Franlo Road and Pioneer Trail (Resolution No. 83-301) D. rinal Plat. approval for Eden Prairie Center, 4th Addition (Tar•neti Page 2570 (Resolution No. °3-302) E. Opt Out -- Sup,rorting Ott Out Application to the i'inur•sota Page 25/2 UepartE nt of Transportation (Resolution No. 83-797) - F. CORG Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program - Pcsolution to Forego Page 2573 • doinistr.Ution of [dun Prairie's CHOG i,ousing !E,r,nb c.gran: by Herua•pin County (Resolution No. R3-296; Resolution No. -1'95 - Trans,frr of COIN Funds from Assisted Housing Construction to rehabilitation of Private Property) G. Final r: rl c.f runic i:;1 1! trial lr r.! in It.e v.nt Page 7'; c,f <<<,1 (i.;r,00 for Io1.e r'ro�•ct ( r ; uri Sit 1) (iiesoluticn ".a. f.3-3u3) R. Final :ro':al r.f .?ar,icipei !! ' stri l .'clo' nt E?-nds in th,. runt Page 25i: of �1 , G5fc,rF. A.. 5... :n Cr ( i.iu, i n a. F•3 b7) • City Council •.:cr.da - 2 - Tues.,Dece+r,;;er 20, 1963 1. Final approval of Municipal Industrial Cevelopment Fonds in the amount Page 25/. of 51,600,000.00 for Tri-Cor (Resolution No. 83-308) . a. Final approval of Municipal Industrial Development Fonds in the m aount Page 251; i of 51,100,000.00 for S & S Land (Resolution No. 83-309) IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS . A. HUSTAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION & EDEN PRAIRIE HOTEL COMPANY. Request Page 257'• • for Rezoning from C-Regional to C-Regional Service of approximately 1► 31 acres For a hotel, location: southeast quadrant of Highway !,. 5/U.S. 169 & 1-494. (Ordinance No. 57-83) • B. CRESCENT BY D.C.C. DEVELOPMENT_ Request for Comprehensive Page 2583 Guide Plan Ar..endment from Industrial to Medium Density.Residential; Planned Unit Development Concept for industrial, open space, and • . mixed residential uses on 152.4 acres; Planned Unit Ceveloprent District Review and Toning for 2D acres from Industrial General . and Rural to RM-6.5, with variances, and 26.6 acres from Rural and • R1-22 to R1-13.5; Preliminary Plat of 27.5 acres for large lot residential and ?D acres for multiple residential. Location: North of Highway 5 at the Western boundary of the City of Eden Prairie. (Resolution No. 83-304 - Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment; l Resolution No. 83-305 - PUD Concept Plan; Ordinance No. 58-83 - PUD District and Zoning; and Resolution No. 83-306 - Preliminary • Plat) C. PUB] IC PLANING FOR 1-:1.:•NOVAL DE DISEASED 1RFIS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY Page 26N (Resolution No. 83-298) 1 ik D. REQUEST FOR MUNiCIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVFLDP] ENT BONDS IN THE AMOUNT OF Page 2616 (n 5465,000.0D I OR IIINI1ER CARE I EARNING CENIFRS, INC_ (Resolution No. 83-299) V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 11054__-11298 Page 2631: VI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY C0:•1M]SSIONS Vi], EtPOR1S OF OfFICEPS, BOARDS & CO:: ]SSlONS A. Rejorts of Ceuneil Wz,;hers B. Rerport of City Attorney C. Rruort of City Manager D. Fo tart of Dir;•ctor of Puhl is Works • E. Repel t of Dir•_ctor of Cor :unity Services 1. Pest to draft Crvi•ol. Lai e Surfnt c i';.i a. ':nt 0'dir,,:nce Page 2o:'r. City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,Geccnhber 20, 19E3 2. Camp Indian Chief _Lease Page ?.6e,' 3. National--Wildlife Refuge/Recreation Area Corprehensive Page 265.- Plan F. Rc_port of Finance Director -- Page 267t; 1. Clerk's License List VIII. NEW BUSINESS IX. ADJOUFNMENT_ • • UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1983 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Paul Redpath and George Tangen CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Planning Director Chris Enger, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Safety Jack Hacking, Police Captain Keith Wall, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael INVOCATION: Councilman Paul Redpath PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: all members were present I. COMMENDATION FOR RICK RABENORT/BUCK AND JIM MATSON/HAWKEYE Mayor Penzel asked Director of Public Safety Hacking to explain what the dogs and their trainers have done. Hacking then introduced Officers Rick Rabenort and Jim Matson and their dogs Buck and Hawkeye as well as the wives of the officers. Penzel presented a letter of commendation to each of the officers and expressed appreciation on behalf of the citizens of Eden Prairie to the officers and their families for the hours of training in addition to their regular working hours which are spent in this endeavor. Janet Koch of Black River Falls, Wisconsin, was also introduced. Penzel presented her with a letter of appreciation for the hours which she has spent assisting our K-9 units with their training programs. Hacking introduced Tom Myers, President of the Crime Prevention Fund. The Crime Prevention Fund has paid for the equipment, travel expenses, and mis- cellaneous expenses which have been incurred by the K-9 program; these expenses have not come out of tax dollars. Buck demonstrated his ability to assist in locating a "foreign substance" by locating marijuana which had been placed in the Council Chamber. City Council Minutes -2- November 15, 1983 II. APPROVAL DF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS The following items were added to the Agenda: IX. A. Penzel - 1. Location • of Meetings in January, 2. Liquor License Terms and Method of Payment; and X. A. Lease Arrangement - Rosemount MIDB. The following item was removed from the Agenda and continued to December 6, 1983: VII. A. South Hennepin Human Services Council - Mary Hayden and Rose- mary Dysinger. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the Agenda and Other Items of Business as published and amended. Motion carried unanimously. III. MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 1, 1983, CITY COUNCIL MEETING • MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue action on the Minutes of the November 1, 1983, meeting of the City Council so additions and corrections could be made. Motion carried unanimously, IV. CONSENT CALENDAR • A. Clerk's License List 8. Change Order #1, Brookview Circle, I.C. 52-040 C. Designate Eden Prairie Road (between CSAH 1 and TH 169) as part of the Municipal State Aid SAtemrTResolution No. 83-281) • D. Final Plat approval for Massee Addition (Lot plat in Edenvale 15th Addition] (Resolution No. 83-282) E. Change Order #2, I.C. 51-308A-2 F. Change Order #1, I.C. 51-308C G. Change Order #5, I.C. 52-025 H. Set Public Hearing for easement vacations in Ridgewood West for December 6, 1983, at 7:30 p.m. I. Final approval of Municipal Industrial Development Bonds for BBS Partner- ship in the amount of $1,750,ODO.OD (Resolution No. 83-286) MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt items A - I on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously. • City Council Minutes -4- November 15, 1983 City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published and notices had been sent to property owners within the project vicinity. Ron Krueger, proponent, addressed the proposal. Director of Planning Enger noted this request had been reviewed by the Planning Commission at its October 24, 1983, meeting at which time it voted to recommend approval subject to the recommendations included in the Planning Staff report dated October 21, 1983. Enger indicated this request had been reviewed by the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission and it had suggested the area along the slope on the northeast side of the proposal be described and covered by a scenic easement within the conservancy area of Purgatory Creek. Enger said there has been additional concern regarding the location of the access to County Road 4; work has been done in an attempt to resolve these concerns. Enger reviewed the various alternatives and explained the pros and cons of each. He noted that the fewer intersections along County Road 4, the better; that was the a reason for looking into alternatives. He stated that the property owner to the south had been consulted as to his plans for that property and that is how the alternatives had been developed. Another question to be resolved is how to save the trees. Krueger reviewed the rationale for how the site plan was determined. Anderson asked which proposal would have the least impact on the land. Enger said that would be the proposal as presented by Krueger. Penzel asked which would have the least impact on traffic safety. Enger said the plan which would limit access to County Road 4 to one intersection. Anderson asked about the feasibility of a right-in, right-out turn only. Enger said that would not present the best situation, but it would not be an unduly hazardous situation either. Krueger said the County has said the right-lane turn at the Duck Lake intersection will have to remain. Enger said the possibility of having County Road 4 a four-lane road through this section of Eden Prairie will have to be looked into. • Bentley suggested the developer come back to the Council with a redrawn plan. Penzel said Krueger should work with the property owner to the south to make some adjustments to the plan; he noted he is in favor of the Hidden Ridge concept. Redpath asked when the realignment of Duck Lake Road would be done. Director of Public Works Dietz said that will be done this coming year. Tangen said he felt there were two issues which had to be examined: the environmental and safety -- and these two issues tend to conflict with each other. He said he felt a decision could not be made at this time because the details were not available; he said he would like this referred back to Staff so these details can be worked out. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue this Public Hearing to December 6, 1983, and refer this back to the developer and City Staff for further consideration. Motion carried unanimously. • _ .,( City Council Minutes -5- November 15, 1983 D. REQUEST FROM JOHN LIEPKE FOR COUNCIL REVIEW OF BOARD OF APPEALS & ADJUSTMENTS DECISION ON VARIANCE NO. 83-33 • City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been published. He reviewed the file on this request. John Liepke addressed the request noting this was a unique situation. The address of the home is 15208 Scenic Heights Road and was built in 1890. He said it was one of the oldest homes in Eden Prairie. He noted he would like to build a deck and reviewed the plans of what was proposed. Liepke said he understood there was a "grandfather" clause. City Attorney Pauly explained that the "grandfather" clause applies to non-conforming uses -- those properties which do not presently conform to proper set- backs, etc., and existed prior to the passage of a particular Ordinance; it is a non-conforming use as long as the use is not expanded or changed and therefore is allowed to continue in that form. Pauly explained that because Liepke is intending to expand, he is subject to the terms of the Ordinance. Redpath asked if Liepke has attempted to meet with his neighbors as per the request in the Minutes of the Board of Appeals & Adjustments. Liepke • said he had not; he said he did not feel he had gotten a "fair shake" from the Board of Appeals & Adjustments and therefore chose to come before the Council. Bill Gilk, 15212 Scenic Heights Road, said this has been a long, drawn out • project. He said he felt a 15' setback was quite adequate. He stated the design of the deck does not conform to the design of the old farm house. He noted that this has strained relationships in the neighborhood and has created a negative impact. He asked the Council to take into consideration the work of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. He said he felt the deck constituted more than just that -- it is an addition to the home. He said it would have a negative impact on the neighborhood. Raymond Rannow, 15210 Scenic Heights Road, asked Liepke if he intended to cantilever the deck over the footings and if the footings would be 15' from the property line. Liepke said it would be 15' back or 20' back from the easement and according to the plan which had been presented to the Board of Appeals & Adjustments. Rannow said he was not happy with the plan. Ethel Wokash, 15214 Scenic Heights Road, said her husband's main concern is about the run-off from the second story roof and its effect on the road which is private and must be maintained by the residents. Liepke said he would repair the road is there were problems. City Council Minutes -6- November 15, 1983 Tangen asked what the side-yard setbacks would be in an R1-22 District. Enger said 15'. Tangen said he felt this neighborhood had the characteristics of that type of neighborhood (R1-22) and while the neighbors might not feel the deck to be aesthetically acceptable that is a matter of personal opinion and he would be inclined to grant the variance. Bentley said he questioned the precedent setting aspect involved in this decision -- does the Council take action or not. He reviewed the findings of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. Redpath said no matter which direction Liepke were to add on to his home he would offend someone because there are neighbors on all sides. He suggested Liepke make a final attempt to work out something with the neighbors and come back before the Council in two weeks. Anderson said he had a similar problem with an addition to his home whereby he was unable to get a building permit due to restrictions on homes in his neighborhood. He said there should be uniform enforcement. Penzel said he felt the rules should be applied uniformly and there is time for compromise with the neighbors. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue this Public Hearing to December 6, 1983, to allow time for Liepke to work with his neighbors on a solution to his deck problem. Motion carried unanimously. VI. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 10522 - 10745 MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Penzel, to approve the Payment of Claims Nos. 10522 - 10745. Roll call vote: Anderson, Bentley, Redpath, Tangen and Penzel voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously. VII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS A. South Hennepin Human Services Council - Mary Hayden and Rosemary Dysinger This item was continued to the December 6, 1983, meeting. VIII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. Request from Alex Dorenkemper regarding denied shooting permits Penzel noted Dorenkemper's letter of November 10, 1983, (see attached) regarding the denied shooting permits. Alex Dorenkemper, 18925 Pioneer Trail, reviewed the points expressed in his letter. City Attorney Pauly said there were considerations of safety involved which he felt could be best expressed by Captain Keith Wall. Wall referred to his memorandum of November 14, 1983, in which the request was addressed (see attached.) • • • City Council Minutes -7- November 15, 1983 Redpath said he was willing to go along with the recommendation of { the Public Safety Department because it has the where with all to make these decisions. City Attorney Pauly said the City Council has the authority to take into consideration the public safety issue. • Anderson said he felt it was irresponsible to be in favor of hunting with rifle slugs in the City of Eden Prairie. Penzel said he had calls from people who were concerned that hunting was going on in the City. He said there is also a problem with controlling where hunters might be. He said this request might bring to a head the decision as to whether or not hunting of any kind is appropriate in Eden Prairie. Walter Bentz, 9802 Crestwood Terrace, relayed his experience with hunters in the area and expressed concern about the number of children who use the various outlots for play areas. He stated it is a dangerous situation to mix the recreational use of the outlets with hunting. Tom Jensen, 9806 Crestwood Terrace, said he did not feel the residents should have to be exposed to this type of danger. He said he cannot afford to outfit his children in blaze orange. Jerry Harris 9844 Crestwood Terrace, s<id he did not know how this got to this point because it is such a dangerous issue. Penzel explained that as the City has developed the City has restricted hunting more and more. Hunting zones were created to allow such in some areas of Eden Prairie. The City Council must now decide if this is still viable; more specifically, is this particular request appropriate. Jill Grier, 9848 Crestwood Terrace, expressed concern for her three children and dog. • Sonja Brown, 9869 Crestwood Terrace, said she is fearful of hunters in her backyard; this is where her children, as well as other neighborhood children, play. She said hunting is far too dangerous to be allowed here. Penzel asked Director of Public Safety what the experience has been this Fall relative to hunting in the City. Hacking said there have been a few complaints which Captain Wall has personally handled. The complaints, in general, have come from the area immediately south of City Hall. He said he thought the situation should be studied. City Council Minutes -8- November 15, 1983 Bentley asked if there was anything in the zoning ordinance which pre- cluded it. Pauly said that is inherent in the ordinance and the process of acquiring a permit that the activity for which the permit is sought not be potentially dangerous, and if it found that it is then the request for the permit can be denied. Redpath said he would have to believe that Captain Wall had good reason to deny the request. Bentley said he was only trying to draw an analogy between types of ordinances. There was discussion as to what types of ammunition were used in various weapons. Pauly said he would suggest the Council, if it should determine the request should be denied, give consideration to interpretation as well as the safety factor. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to deny the permit on the basis that the characteristics of the weapons used and other public safety factors deem such action necessary. Anderson said since the City has a permit system, it would appear that the City has a process under which permits could be revoked. Wall said the Public Safety Department may issue a permit, the ordinance does not say the Department shall issue a permit. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to establish a citizen's committee to review the situation. The matter will be referred to Staff. Wall suggested the original hunting committee be reconvened since most of the members of that committee still feel they are members of a standing committee. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously. IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members Penzel - 1. Expressed displeasure with the action taken at the November 1st Council Meeting regarding the location of Council meetings in 1984. He said he would like to see the Council leave its options open. Bentley said he would like to see the decision left to the City Manager. Tangen pointed out the discussion relative to the parking situation at the Community Center. Anderson said he would not like to see the public inconvenienced by the parking situation at the Community Center either. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to hold meetings of the City Council beginning with the January 3, I934, meeting at the School Admini- stration Building for a period of three months. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes -9- November 15, 1983 2. Liquor License Terms and Method of Payment - Penzel said he would like to explore the possiblity of splitting the liquor license fee so that / could be paid in January with the second half then due in June. He noted that this would make payment easier for some license holders who find the $7500 fee difficult to come up with in January. - Bentley said he would like to know what the requirements are accord- ing to State Statutes. He also suggested the City review what is done by other cities in the metro area. The matter was referred to City Attorney Pauly for his review. B. Report of City Attorney There was no report. C. Report of City Manager There was no report. X. NEW BUSINESS • A. Lease Arrangement - Rosemount MIDB Finance Director Frane reported this was a perfunctory matter and was necessary due to new requirements. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the waiver agreement. Motion carried unanimously. XI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to adjourn the meeting at 10:33 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. • UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING FRIDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1983 4:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel, Richard Anderson, George ' Bentley, Paul Redpath and George Tangen COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie and Finance Director John D. Frane ROLL CALL: Councilmen Bentley and Tangen were absent. Assistant City Attorney Richard Rosow reviewed the court decisions relative to Richard Miller Homes request that the City decertify the special assessments levied on the Timber Lakes project which are currently delinquent. Mayor Penzel questioned what precedent, if any, does a unilateral action on the part of the City Staff obligate the City and/or the City Council to a further commitment. Mr. Davidson, representing Miller Homes, indicated that the lawsuit brought was a "friendly" suit initiated so that the City might have the authority to resnread the assessments. This authority could come as a result of a court order or an opinion of the City Attorney that the original assessment is or may be invalid. Mr. Miller indicated that he does not wish to upset the fine relationship he has had with the City. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, that the City Staff should contact Miller Construction relative to their request. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 5:15 p.m. CONTRACT AME.NDtILNT/CH';NGE ORDER 01 1/2 I.C. 52-049 November 30, 19T..' SHADY OAK ROAD UTILITIES TO: F.F. Jedlicki, Inc. • The City agrees to make the following revisions to work performed by this contract: ADDITIONS A. Jack additional 27 ft of 24" casing 1. 27 ft. of 24" steel casing @ $94.93/ft. $ 2,563.11 2. Crew time - pull augers & jacking machine, re-dig part of pit and reset machine and augers. $ 750.00 6 hrs. @ $125.00/hr. 3. Boom truck 2 hrs. @ $75.00/hr. $ 150.00 B. Install additional hydrant - labor only • $ 325.00 C. Anticipated profit, overhead, testing, cleanup, etc. contributable to elimination of approximately 35". of { the Contract. S 1,000.00 TOTAL ADDITIONS TO CONTRACT = $ 4,788.11 DEDUCTIONS: A. Elimination of sanitary sewer (from Mil 3 to h;H 6) and adjacent t.atermain along with any contributable restoration costs from the Contract. TOTAL DEDUCTION TO CONTRACT = 532,017.60 SUNC4'.RY TOTAL ADDITIONS TO CONTRACT S 4,788.11 TOTAL DI DUCTIOII TO CONIR.4CT C32,017.60 TOTAL UECRLASE IN CONTRACT AMEN[;,ENT/CHANGE OkOLR =1 527,229.49 ), ). CONTRACT AMENDl1ENT/CHANGE ORDER i+1 2/2 I.C. 52-049 SHADY OAK ROAD UTILITIES { Necessityfor Arnendment/Change Order ill ADDITIONS: A. The 24' steel casing was jacked an additional 27 feet to the existing manhole to eliminate digging up City West Parkway. This method of of connecting to the existing sanitary sewer cost S4,550, eliminating the restoration of City West Parkway which would have cost $7,550, with a net savings of approximately $3,000. B. The City supplied the Contractor with a hydrant which was installed at a price of $325.00. C. A portion of the Contract was eliminated due to the County's need to obtain the Amoco site for the Crosstown Highway improvements. The $1,000 is reasonable compensation to the Contractor due to the elimination of a substantial segment of the project (Standard City specifications provide that reasonable compensation be given). DEDUCTIONS: ( A. See (C) above. Date: /v?' Contractor: F.F. JedTicki, Inc. _ Date: City of Eden Prairie �s4�u 1/2 November 30, 1983 CHANGE ORDER 01 I.C. 51-356 EDENVALE BOULEVARD TO: Kenko, Inc. The City agrees to make the following revisions for work performed by this contract: ADDITIONS 1. Drop Section - 8.5 L.F. @ $140.00/L.F. $1,190.00 Equipment, labor, overhead, and profit $1,551.07 Total - Item l = $2,741.07 2. Extra Depth Sanitary Sewer $2,479.20 Equipment, labor, overhead, and profit Total - Item 2 = $2,479.20 3. 12" Surge Basin $ 315.25 Materials 31 Equipment, labor, overhead, and profit $ 150.00 Total - Item 3 = $ 465.25 4. Hydrant Relocations Equipment, labor, overhead, and profit $1,184.27 Total - Item 4 = $1,184.27 5. Remove and Reset Catchhasin Equipment, labor, overhead, and profit $ 212.08 Total - Item 5 = $ 212.08 6. Valve Extensions - 2 Each @ 575.00/Each $ 150.00 Total - Item 6 = S 150.00 TOTAL ADDITIONS TO CONTF:ACT - CHANGE ORDER aI 57,231.67 ), ,', 2/2 November 30, 1983 CHANGE ORDER #1 1.C. 51-356 EDENVALE BOULEVARD Necessity for Change Order 01 Additions: 1. The existing stub near Woodhill Trail and Edenvale Boulevard was 8.5 feet lower than the as-built elevation. 2. The location and elevation of MH 7 was changed due to changes in the Edenvale 17th Addition plat. 3. The developer changed the grading plan of Edenvale Boulevard requiring storm sewer and a surge basin to be added to provide drainage in a low area. 4. Two hydrants needed to be relocated due to a surveying-error. 5. Catchbasin needed to be removed and relocated due to a surveying error. 6. Two valve extensions were needed to be provided for the existing 16" watermain. Dote: Contractor: I;enko, Inc. Date: City of Eden Prairie i)Cr� • • • • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 83- 301 RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF AUTUMN RIDGE • WHEREAS, the plat of Autumn Ridge 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 Ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. Plat approval request for Autumn Ridge is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated December 13, 1983. B. Variance is herein granted from City Code 12.20 Subd. 2.A. waiving the six month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat as described in said Engineer's report. • C. 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 Registrar of Titles for their use as required by MSA 462.358, Subd. 3. D. 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. E. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the • certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. • ADOPTED by the City Council on Oecember 2D, 1983. Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk ,� 'j'"] • 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 L. Olson, Engineering Technician c4 Cs2, DATE: December 13, 1983 SUBJECT: AUTUMN RIDGE (formerly Bluff Ridge) PROPOSAL: The developer, Urban Unit Corporation, has requested City Council approval of the final plat of Autumn Ridge. This plat was formerly known as Bluff Ridge and is located east of Franlo Road and south of County Road 1 in the South 'z of Section 25. Currently, sixteen single family detached lots are requested for platting as Phase I and conforms with the approved preliminary plat. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on October 18, 1983, per Resolution 83-252. Zoning to RM 6.5 and RI 9.5 was finally read and approved by the City Council on November 1, 1983, per Ordinance 51-83. • The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed on November 1, 1983. VARIANCES: All variance requests not covered within the Developer's Agreement must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: All utilities, streets, and walkways within the plat will be installed by the developer in conformance with City standards and will be publicly owned and maintained. • Outlot I will be dedicated to the public for road right-of-way as • future platting of Outlets E and F occur. The roadway to be located within Outlot G will be installed through a future phase of construction. This roadway is to be privately owned and maintained and any replatting for Outlets F and H must include an explanation of maintenance responsibilities in a format acceptable to the City Attorney. • The requirements for the installation of walkways within the plat are covered in the Developer's Agreement. PARK DEDICA1ION: The requirements for park dedication are covered in the Developer's Agreement. / Pg. 2, Final Mat report for Autumn Ridge Dec. 13, 1983 ` BONDING: The requirements for bonding are covered in the Developer's Agreement. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Autumn Ridge subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement, and the following: 1. Receipt of Engineering fee in the amount of $480.00. 2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $1,807.20. 3. Satisfaction of Bonding Requirements. DLO:sg • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ( HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 83- 302 RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF EDEN PRAIRIE CENTER 4TH ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Eden Prairie Center 4th Addition 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 Ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: L. A. Plat approval request for Eden Prairie Center 4th Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated December 14, 1983. B. Variance is herein granted from City Code 12.20 Subd. 2.A. waiving the six month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat as described in said Engineer's report. C. 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 Registrar of Titles for their use as required by MSA 462.358, Subd. 3. D. 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. E. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. ADOPTED by the City Council on December 20, 1983. Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST SEAL Jotiri 0. Frane, Clerk 2! %U 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 L. Olson, Engineering Technician Ooe4 CQ DATE: December 14, 1983 SUBJECT: EDEN PRAIRIE CENTER 4th ADDITION PROPOSAL: The developers, Homart Development Corporation and Target, have requested City Council approval of the final plat of Eden Prairie Center 4th Addition. The plat contains approximately 10.1 acres and is a replat of part of Lot 3, Block 1, Eden Prairie Center Addition. The site is intended for the construction of a retail store for Target (approximately 100,OD0 sq. ft.). HISTORY: Zoning of the site to C-Reg-Ser was approved by the City Council on June 23, 1973, per Ordinance 213. The site plan was approved by the City Council on July 19, 1983. The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on September 2D, 1983, per Resolution 83-224. VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: All utilities and streets necessary for this site will be installed, owned, and maintained by the developer. PARK DEDICATION: Park dedication requirements will be in conformance with City Codes. BONDING: All utility and roadway improvements will be privately owned and maintained, therefore, bonding will not be required. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Eden Prairie Center 4th Addition subject to the requirements of this report and the following: I. Receipt of Engineering fee in the amount of S200.00. DLO:sg ;)-.7 • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION d83-297 • A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE SUBMISSION OF AN "OPT OUT" APPLICATION TO THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. WHEREAS, in 1980, 1981, 1962, and 1983 respectively, residents of the City of Eden Prairie contributed $240,015, $418,176, $527,184, and $703,303 respectively, to the Metropolitan Transit Taxing District to support the Metropolitan Transit Commission, and WHEREAS, Eden Prairie residents receive limited transit service to and from Downtown Minneapolis from the Metropolitan Transit Commission during peak rush hours only in exchange for their tax dollars, and WHEREAS, 1981 the Minnesota Legislature adopted the "Metropolitan Transit Demonstration Project" legislation commonly known as the "Opt Out" Bill, and WHEREAS, the purpose of the legislation was to "provide financial assistance for projects designed to test the efficiency and effectiveness of alternative methods of providing public transit service for communities that are within the Metropolitan Transit Taxing District but are not adequately served by existing regular route transit," and (. WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie City Council recognizes that the full potential transit ( needs of Eden Prairie residents are not being met through existing service levels and will submit an opt out application to the Minnesota Department of Transportation specifying alternative transit services which the community will contract for, and WHEREAS, the only source of funding available at this time is through °Opt Out"; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, that it hereby does approve the submittal of an opt out application to the Minnesota Department of Transportation to provide the transit services that Eden Prairie residents require for a one year test period. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota this day of , 1983. Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: John D.Franc, City Clerk • MEMO TO: City Council FROM: Steve Durham, Assistant City Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: December 15, 1983 SUBJECT: HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM Eden Prairie since 1981 has made available, through CDBG Funds, Housing Rehabilitation Grants to City residents. This program has been instrumental in providing limited income households with emergency, health, and energy improvements, i.e., replacement of unsafe furnaces, connection to City Services when private systems fail, proper insulation , storm windows, doors, etc. The City administered the program until September of 1982, at which time it turned the program over to Hennepin County because of staff constraints. During the City's administration, approximately 15 applicants were received of which five were eligible and processed. Hennepin County has processed two applicants as of October 1, 1983, with three applicants waiting to be processed. Since the beginning of this program, the City has allocated $19,637 to the Housing Rehabilitation of which $12,525 has been expended and $7,112 committed to applicants being processed presently. In order for Hennepin County to process the three applicants waiting, additional funds are required. The Planning Department suggest transfer of funds from Assisted Housing Construction to Housing Rehabilitation in the amount of $20,018. The intended use of the $20,018 was for the Staring Lake • play structure which was not an eligible CDBG activity. Staff also recommends that • the City take back administration of the Rehabilitation program, thereby having more control over the program and making it more accessible to Eden Prairie residents. • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 1!83-295 • A RESOLUTION REQUESTING HENNEPIN COUNTY TO TRANSFER CDBG FUNDS FROM PROJECT NUMBER 010 YEAR VIII ASSISTED HOUSING CONSTRUCTION TO PROJECT NUMBER 562 YEAR VIII REHA- BILITATION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY 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 resignation provided for in the Housing 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 establishment and implementation plans and procedures; and, WHEREAS, the amount allocated by Hennepin County for project number 010 year VIII assisted housing construction has not yet been expended; and, WHEREAS, additional funds are required for Rehabilitation of Private Property Program in order for this program to provide services and remain in an active state for Eden Prairie residents through the remainder of 1983 and 1984 funding year; 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 $20,018 allocated in project number 010 for assisted housing construction to project number 562 year VIII Rehabilitation of Private Property. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota this day of , 1983. Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: ( — John D. Frane, City Clerk CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION #83-296 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING HENNEPIN COUNTY TO FOREGO ADMINISTRATION OF EDEN PRAIRIE'S CDBG HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT PROGRAM., BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota request that Hennepin County, as the responsible Urban Hennepin County CDBG recipient, forego administration of the Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program and, all entitlements within the City as approved through and funded by the Urban Hennepin County CDBG program; and, BE IT RESOLVED, that all applicants and applications currently being processed prior to January 2nd, 1984, be completed by Hennepin County's Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota authorizes the City Planning Department to administrate the Housing Rehabilitation Program for the purpose of providing Housing Rehabilitation Grants to City residents, ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota this day of , 1983. Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Cler TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: John D. Frane, Finance Director DATE: December 15, 1983 RE: Final Approval M.I.D.B.'s Luke Project (Montessori School) #481,600 - Resolution No. 83-303 The project is located at 7455 Market Place Drive and was given preliminary approval on October 4, 1983. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed and approved the final documents. Resolution ( No. 83-303 will be in the Mayor's signature file on Tuesday. JDF:bw 12/15/83 TO: Mayor and Council FROM: John Frane DATE: December 15, 1983 RE: Final approvals of MIDB'S E. A. Sween - $1,000,000 - Resolution 83-307 Tri-Cor - $1,600,000 - Resolution 83-308 S & S Land - $1,100,000 - Resolution 83-309 The Sween Corporate Headquarters was given preliminary approval on August 16, 1983. The Tri-Cor project, located on the N. E. corner of Prairie Center Drive and West 78th Street was given preliminary approval on July 19, 1983. The S & S Land project, located at 7575 Corporate Way was reheard and given an extension of one year on December 6, 1983. The City Attorney's office has reviewed and approved the final documents. The Resolutions will be in the Mayor's signature file Tuesday evening. i' STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Planning s DATE: December 9, 1983 PROJECT: Brock Residence Inn LOCATION: Southeast quadrant of T. H. 5/U. S. 169 and I-494 APPLICANT: Brock Residence Inn FEE OWNER: Hustad Development, Inc. REQUEST: Rezoning from C-Regional to C-Regional Service The City has received a request from Brock Residence Hotel for approval of a 122- room facility located at the northwest corner of I-494 and U. . 169/212, directlofy 3 west of Major Media. This hotel would be constructed on approximately a 7 acre site, owned by Hustad Development. The feasibility of this project depends j upon the use of Municipal Industrial Development Bonds for financing. There is a bill currently being discussed by Congress to eliminate, or severely limit the use of MIDB's. It is unclear exactly when Congress would take final action regarding 1 this bill or in what final form the bill may be. However, there is concern that the bill would be retroactive back to January 1, 1984. Even if the bill were not adopted, it is anticipated that bond counsels advising clients would not give an opinion on the legality of bond issues until Congress takes final action. The effect of this is that the use of MIDB's for financing will effectively be cut off i , after January 1, 1984, until Congress takes action, and depending upon that action, may be permanently curtailed. Brock Residence Inn has applied for MIDB's and the City Council has scheduled a special public hearing for December 27, 1983, in order to try and considerrpethem prior to January 1, 1984. In order for the City Council to give of favorable approval for this method of financing, it is necessary for the site to be I zoned correctly for the use. We have scheduled the rezoning request for the Planning Commission for Monday, December 12, 1983, and for a public hearing before the City Council for Tuesday, December 20, 1983, with agreement from the proponent 1 that information normally required for evaluation of a rezoning request would be submitted as soon as possible for a site plan review, which would be identical to R the rezoning process. Both the proponent and the fee owner of the property have agreed to enter into a development agreement between the first and second reading of 1 the zoning ordinance, which would obligate them to the site plan review process $ through Planning Commission and Council prior to building permit issuance. We recognize that this is a highly irregular way to treat a rezoning request, but we believe it at fords the City the Salle dffiree of control and plan review required in the rezoning process, and helps to accommodate what promises to be a very high quality use for the Major Center Area. We have had additional meetings with the proponent, and they will be working on detailed site and building plans over the weekend, and we will be meeting with them gain on Monday to review those plans. We will not be asking the Planning Commission to react to specifics on these plans Monday evening because we will have formal review process within the next several weeks. However, we do think it is important for the Planning Commission to see the general lay out of the plan and character of the buildings in order to assure that this is an appropriate use of the site. We have reviewed the Comprehensive Guide Plan and the rezoning request from C-Regional to C-Regional Service is in conformance. The legal description published for the Council public hearing and Planning Commission public meeting encompasses the overall Hustad site, and we would suggest that the Planning Commission limit any approval to that area proposed by Brock Residence Inn. We would be able to modify the size of the rezoning between first and second readings of the zoning ordinance. RECOMMENDATIONS Approval of the request for rezoning from C-Regional to C-Regional Service for approximately 3.5 acres for use as a 122-room hotel, subject to the developer and fee owner of the property entering into an agreement with the City which would require detailed site plan review by the Planning Commission and City Council prior to building permit issuance. KENNETH E. NELSON 310 WIST 06NTKAL NVI77S 209 WICHITA.KAN.MS 07202 310-004-7209 310-202.3021 December 15, 1983 Mr. Chris Enger Director of Planning City of Eden Prairie Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Dear Mr. Enger: The purpose of this letter is to describe the Brock Residence Inn which is proposed for the southeast quadrant of T.H. 5/US 169 and I-494, and to explain why Municipal Industrial Devel- opment Bonds (MIDB's) are necessary to finance the project. Brock Residence Inns are all-suite hotels; each suite contains a bedroom, a kitchen with full-size appliances, and a living room, most of which have a fireplace. The suites are in 21 story brick buildings containing eight suites each. The enclosed brochures show what the buildings in a southern cli- mate look like; the buildings here will have interior stairs and doorways and a brick exterior. The areas between the buildings will be planted with trees and shrubs. This hotel will contain 128 suites in sixteen buildings plus a Gatehouse, which contains the front desk and a lobby. The hotel does not have meeting rooms, a restaurant, or a bar, but it is expected that restaurants will be built near the hotel, possibly adjacent to it. This use of the site is con- sistent with the guide plan. a Mr. Chris Enger December 15, 1983 page two All-suite hotels are an attractive alternative to conventional hotels, especially for frequent travelers on extended stays and families that are relocating. Eden Prairie should pro- vide substantial numbers of both business people in to work on projects or training at the nearby office/industrial parks and people moving to the new homes in the city. Having this hotel in Eden Prairie should make the city a more attractive place to the businesses that are expected to locate in the nearby office and industrial parks by providing a convenient place to stay rather than driving several miles to the east to stay in Bloomington. Brock Residence Inns are new, franchises were first sold in June, 1982, but over 100 hotels are committed to be built. There are currently nine hotels open with six scheduled to open in the first quarter of 1984, and approximately 30 more in various stages of construction. Brock Hotel Corp., the parent of Brock Residence Inns, Inc., is the largest operator of Holiday Inns in the world. This project will be leased to Brock and operated by them. MIDB's are necessary for this project to be built because of the terms of the lease between Brock and Eden Prairie Hotel Company. The difference between the rental Brock will pay and the debt service on a conventional loan is too great for the project to be feasible, at least until there is a substan- tial decline in the interest rates on conventional loans. • While economists never agree on anything, most are not pre- dicting such a decline in the foreseeable future. The future of MIDB's is unclear after December 31, which is the reason Mr. Chris Enger December 15, 1983 page three that the resolution of all issues concerning this project must be completed this year. We do appreciate the coopera- tion and direction that you have given us to date. Sincerely, Kenneth E. Nelson, General Partner, Eden Prairie Hotel Company CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 83-304 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted the Comprehensive Municipal Plan ("Plan"); and, WHEREAS, the Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment; and, WHEREAS, the proposal of DCC Development for development of Crescent Ridge for mixed residential uses requires the amendment of the Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City •Council of Eden Prairie. Minnesota, hereby proposes the amendment of the Plan as follows: approximately 152.4 acres located north of Highway #5, at the western boundary of Eden Prairie, be modified from Industrial to Medium Density Residential. ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this day of , 1983. Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION #83-305 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF CRESCENT RIDGE FOR • DCC DEVELOPMENT • WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept of certain areas located within the City; and, WHEREAS, the DCC Development PUD Concept of Crescent Ridge is considered a proper amendment to the Comprehensive Guide Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the DCC Development PUD Development Concept for Crescent Ridge and considered their request for approval for development (and variances) and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and, WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on 198 ; NOW, THEREFORE, BY RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: ( 1. The DCC Development proposal for development of Crescent Ridge, Planned Unit Development Concept, being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept approval as outlined in the application material as revised and dated October 3, 5, and 8, 1983. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission dated November 14, 1983. ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this day of , 1982. Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Franc, City Clerk i CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION #83-306 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF CRESCENT RIDGE FOR DCC DEVELOPMENT BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Crescent Ridge for DCC Development, dated October 8, 1983, of 27.5 acres for large lot single family residential lots and 20 acres for multiple residential, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the day of , 1983. Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, November 14, 1983 City Hall, 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman William Bearman, Virginia Gartner, Robert Hallett, Stan Johannes (8:35 p.m.), Dennis Marhula, Hakon Torjesen MEMBERS ABSENT: Ed Schuck IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. CRESCENT RIDGE, by DCC Development. Request for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning for 26.6 acres from Rural and R1-22 to R1-13.5 and 20 acres from Industrial General and Rural to RM-6.5, with variances; Preliminary Plat of 27.5 acres for large lot residential and 20 acres for multiple residential; and Environmental Assessment Worksheet Review. Location: North of Highway #5 at the western boundary of the City of Eden Prairie. A continued public hearing. Mr. John Bossardt, Bossardt-Christenson, representing the proponent, explained the changes in the plan, pointing out the additional walkways, totlot, and tennis courts to be part of the plan. Mr. Bob Davis, architect for the proponent, reviewed the amended elevations for the multiple units. Planner Enger added that, per the amended plans, free-standing garage units were provided for at least half of the required parking spaces. He stated that there had not yet been resolution to the situation involving access to the project via the subdivision to the north along Lorence Way. This would be required prior to occupany of any of the units. Planner Enger stated that care should be taken in the location of the totlot, as required by the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission, to be certain that as few trees as necessary would be removed for development of the totlot. Hallett questioned whether it would be necessary to eliminate so many trees with the revised plans. Staff responded that they had been working with the proponent to determine whether alternatives such as retaining walls in strategic locations could be used in order to preserve as many trees as possible. Torjesen asked if there was a limit as to how much of the development could be completed before the access road from the subdivision to the north would be necessary. Staff responded that access was available to the site from Evener Way, also, but there were no other routes available. It was suggested that a temporary access road from Highway #5 could be used for construction traffic and interim traffic until Lorence Way was built through the subdivision to the north. nl. Planning Commission Minutes 2 November 14, 1983 Gartner stated that this alternative would not provide for a secondary access for any of the people living in the townhouses within Crescent Ridge. Planner Enger stated that the City was of the opinion that Lorence Way would be built within a short period of time, although it may not be ready for use by the time the Crescent Ridge development needed it. Torjesen asked if a restriction could be placed on occupancy within the Crescent Ridge development until such time as the Lorence Way access was available. Staff stated that neither the City, nor the developer of Crescent Ridge would have control over such a restriction, which would make it difficult to handle as a requirement of the development. Staff added that it was understood from the developer of the subdivision to the north that the road would be completed in the early Spring, 1984. Torjesen asked if it would be necessary to remove any trees between the proposed single family units and the multiple units for the project. Mr. 8ossardt stated that some trees could be saved if a few of the detached garages were eliminated. Torjesen asked Staff if there would be a difficulty with reducing the number of detached garages. Staff responded that the parking requirements were met on ' the site already, and that the detached garages in this area could be removed without affecting the parking requirements. Gartner asked if the proponent was still suggesting variance from the required front yard setbacks. Staff responded that the site plan had been corrected to bring the front yard setbacks into compliance with the Code. Hallett asked if there were plans for the 50-acre ponding area for recreation purposes beyond the trails shown around it. Staff responded that the ponding area would basically remain as it is now visually. Upon dedication of the area to the City, there would be several alternatives available, including duck ponds, etc. Staff • added that it would be possible to dredge out a portion of the ponding area, as was done with Neill Lake, also. This would be left to the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission. Chairman Bearman asked Staff to check into the rights of the public on private roads, as were proposed in this development. Staff responded that the City Attorney had been contacted about this and was preparing a response. • Chairman Bearman asked if this project would provide privacy fencing 0.T; and landscaping between the units as had been done with several projects within the community. Mr. Davis responded that this would be shown in the landscaping plan to be submitted to the City at a later date. He added that it was their intention to screen between each unit. Chairman Bearman stated that he concurred with Hallett regarding the `. r/1 Planning Comnission Minutes 3 November 14, 1983 ;P\ • location of the totlot. Significant trees should not be removed in order to locate a totlot as shown on the plans. Mr. 8ossardt stated that they would review this, adding that he believed that the majority of trees in that vicinity were diseased elms, which would r .. require removal. Torjesen pointed out that the length of the road within the multiple portion of the development was approximately 900 feet, which was substantially greater than allowed by Code for a dead-ended street. He stated that safety matters should be considered in this area and potentially an alternative routing provided to eliminate a 900 foot cul-de-sac. Torjesen asked when Dell Road was scheduled. Staff responded that it would be at least three years. Planner Enger suggested that a looped road system connecting to the private roads could be accomplished for a temporary period of time, or at least until Dell Road was completed. Chairman Bearman asked for comments and questions from the audience. There were none. MOTION 1: Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Marhula, to close the public hearing. Motion carried--5-0-0 MOTION 2: ':f Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Marhula, to recommend to the City Council approval of the Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning for 26.6 acres from Rural and R1-22 to R1-13.5 and 20 acres from Industrial General and Rural to RM-6.5, with variances, for the Crescent Ridge development by DCC Development, based on revised plans dated November 11, 1983, and written materials dated October 3, 1983, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated October 21, 1983, with the addition of the following: 1) No construction shall be allowed west of the bend in Lorence Way until Lorence Way is constructed; 2) No side-by-side units for the townhouses shall be identical, nor any units directly, or diagonally, across from each other shall be identical; 3) A landscape plan shall be submitted, taking into consideration methods for elimination of as few trees as possible, including, but not limited to, elimination of some free-standing garages, relocation of the totlot and the use of retaining walls for the townhouse units closest to the proposed single family residential units within the project; and, 4) A temporary private looped road be constructed between the two private roads until the completion of Dell Road along the west property line. Marhula questioned the need for requiring the units in close proximity to each other to be differing types. Planner Enger • responded that it would likely be possible due to the variety of 1 i./1(it Planning Commission Minutes 4 November 14, 1983 elevations provided by the developer. Mr. Bossardt stated that he agreed and felt the condition could be met. Torjesen asked if it was the intention of the motion that no units be constructed west of Evener Way. Gartner stated that it was and that she felt no units should be built west of the woods until Lorence Way was connected. Planner Enger stated that the problem was with construction traffic, not residential traffic. Motion carried--5-0-0 MOTION 3: Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Marhula, to recommend to the City Council approval of the Preliminary Plat of 27.5 acres for multiple residential for Crescent Ridge development by DCC Development, based on revised plans dated November 11, 1983, and written materials dated October 3, 1983, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated October 21, 1983, with the addition of the following: 1) No construction shall be allowed west of the bend in Lorence Way until Lorence Way is completed; 2) No side-by-side units for the townhouses shall be identical nor any units directly, or diagonally across from each other shall be identical; 3) A landscape plan shall be submitted taking into consideration methods for elimination of as few trees as possible, including, but not limited to, elimination of several free-standing garages, relocation of the totlot and the use of retaining walls for the townhouse units closest to the proposed single family residential units within the project; and, 4) A temporary private looped road be constructed between the two private roads until the completion of Dell Road along the west property line. Motion carried--5-0-0 MOTION 4: • Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Marhula, to recommend to the City Council a negative declaration for the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for Crescent Ridge development by DCC Development, based on revised plans dated November 11, 1983, and written materials dated October 3, 1983. • Motion carried--5-0-0 ,.' • • MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COhtliSSIDN • Monday, October 24, 1983 • 7:30 p.m., City Hall • MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman Hakon Torjesen, Virginia Gartner, Robert Hallett, Stan Johannes, Dennis Marhula, Ed Schuck MEMBER ABSENT: Chairman William Bearman STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director of Planning • Kate Karnas, Planning Secretary . Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA • Motion was made by Hallett, seconded by Schuck, to accept the agenda , . • as printed noting the withdrawal of item III. B, Village Greens, by • the proponents of the project. Motion carried--6-D-D II. MEMBERS REPORTS • None. III. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS • A. CRESCENT RIDGE, by D. C. C. Development. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan change from Industrial to Medium Density Residential; Planned Unit Development Concept for industrial, open space, and mixed residential uses on 152.4 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning for 26.6 acres from Rural and Rl-22 to R1-13.5 and 20 acres from Industrial General and Rural to RM-6.5, with variances; Preliminary Plat of 27.5 acres for large lot residential and 20 acres for multiple residential; and Environmental • Assessment Worksheet Review. Location: North of Highway #5 at the western boundary, of the City of Eden Prairie. A • public hearing. Based on the review of this project by the Planning Commission at their August 29, 1983, meeting, proponent had revised the plans to • reflect the recommendations of the Commission at that time. Mr. John Bossardt, Bossardt Christenson Corporation, representing • the proponent, reviewed the revised requests with the Commission. Mr. Bossardt discussed the concerns of the surrounding, existing Planning Commission Minutes 2 October 24, 1983 residents as presented at a neighborhood meeting held by proponent. Mr. Bossardt stated that the price of the individual units in the multiple area would range from $65,000 to $90,000. Staff reviewed the major concerns of the Staff Report for the project including, concern for the architectural variety, emergency vehicle access, availability of parking, and landscaping/screening for the property. Hallett asked if the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources held jurisdiction over the wetland areas in the northeast quadrant of the :' proposal. Mr. Bossardt responded that they were concerned with any area two acres or greater in size. Neither of these were that • large. • Marhula asked how density transfer was being used for this proposal. Staff responded that, previously, proponent had requested a density transfer due to the "down-zoning" requested of a large portion of • industrial property to a residential use. This proposal did not make the same density transfer request and was only suggesting a transfer of density from the flood plain area, which wa:, in accordance with City policy. Marhula asked about the alignment of Dell Road. Staff stated that plans were under discussion to align the remainder of Dell Road from its termination north of the site, south to Highway #5 along the Eden Prairie/Chanhassen border which would be of the most benefit to the parties concerned. The cost of the road, which would be used by both communities, would, therefore, be split between the two communities. Marhula asked what the final outcome would be of the two wetland areas shown in Phase 1. Mr. Bossardt stated that these two areas would be filled. • Hallett asked if there were any plans for pedestrian movement along Highway ii5 in the future. Staff .responded that there were not, but that a bituminous path currently existed from Prairie Village Mall, westerly to Heritage Road. The Commission discussed the possibility of installation of a bituminous path along the east side of the north-south single family road within Crescent Ridge, then easterly • along the north side of Highway F5 to Heritage Road to complete a pedestrian path to Prairie Village Mall. Johannes asked if there would be a need for a sidewalk system within the development. Planner Enger responded that there would be a sidewalk along Lorence Way and through the project along the flood ' plain area. Johannes asked if it would be appropriate to require that the • townhouse units be dealt with in a manner similar to the R1-9.5 lots whereby no house could be the same as that directly or diagonally • Planning Comnission Minutes 3 October 24, 1983 across from, nor adjacent to itself. • Gartner asked of additional right-of-way was necessary for the eventual upgrading of Highway #5 from this project. Staff stated '-, , that the Minnesota Department of Transportation was yet to respond to that question. • Terry Rhoades, 7660 Heritage Road, representing the Heritage . neighborhood, had several questions on behalf of the neighborhood: 1) Was the density transfer justified; 2) Was adequate water available from the public system to service this project; 3) Was adequate storm water drainage available to avoid pollution of the lake; 4) Would the trees on the site be preserved; 5) Was a variance r necessary for the size of the buildings; 6) How would construction • traffic be controlled so as not to impact upon the existing ' neighborhood; and, 7) Would recreational amenities be provided within the project for the new residents. Gene Peterson expressed concern about the storm sewer plans, asking f if the water would be directed toward the•Round Lake basin. He • stated that the capacity of Round Lake was already at its peak. Staff responded that the plans indicated no water would be directed toward Round Lake. Don Uhden, 7530 Atherton, stated that he was concerned that the small pond into which run-off would be directed would not be allowed to overflow and flood the existing 'single family lots. Staff stated that this was not the case according to the proposed design. Gene Wolper, 18735 Partridge Circle, stated that he was concerned ? about the alignment of Dell Road. He asked if it would cross the tracks. Staff responded that it would. Acting Chairman Torjesen asked Staff to respond to the questions of the audience. . Regarding the density transfer, Staff explained that, in the past, the City had allowed transfer of density from a flood plain area, but not from open water. Regarding an adequate amount of public water, Staff responded that there were adequate public utilities available to the site. As to water, it was pointed out that it would be better to have a looped system in this area, particularly during summer months of high water usage. This would be part of the overall plan for this area as it developed. Regarding preservation of the trees, Staff stated that the City required the preservation or replacement of all significant trees. The developer would be required to protect the trees during construction, as well. Regarding a construction traffic temporary roadway, Staff responded that there would be no difficulty with such a roadway, and that .:' .. • Planning Commission Minutes 4 October 24, 1983 perhaps it could access the site from Highway #5. Regarding run-off, or storm drainage, overflowing onto the existing • single family lots, Staff responded that the developer was actually improving this situation by the proposed installation of another overflow valve at a lower elevation. Regarding Dell Road alignment and construction timing, Staff stated that the most cost-effective location for the road would be on the Chanhassen/Eden Prairie border, which would allow for sharing of the • costs between both cities, and allow both cities to benefit from its location. Alignment of Dell Road through the Crescent Ridge project alone would prevent the cost sharing to take place and would potentially locate the road in an area of bad soils along the flood • plain.area. Acting Chairman Torjesen asked if any more specific information was known about Dell Road at this time. Staff responded that the road • would extend across the railroad tracks and be directed northerly to an intersection with Highway 101. • . Marhula questioned the fact that the underlying zoning for a portion • of the property was Industrial. He asked if it would not be wise • • for the City to rezone this property back to Rural at this time to • prevent the possibility of someone coming in and requesting an industrial use in an area now planned for residential. As long as the Industrial zoning was in place, it would be possible for someone to make a proposal for industrial purposes. Marhula expressed concern for the lack of architectural information for the property. Staff stated that Commission would be able to review the matter in more detail at a future meeting. MOTION 1: Motion was made by Schuck, seconded by Gartner, to close the public hearing on the Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Industrial to • Medium Density Residential and the Planned Unit Development Concept for Crescent Ridge development by D. C. C. Development. Motion carried--6-0-0 • MOTION 2: Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Gartner, to recomnend to the City Council approval of the request for Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment from Industrial to Medium Density Residential and Planned Unit Development Concept for industrial, open space, and mixed residential uses on 152.4 acres for the Crescent Ridge development by D. C. C. Development, based on plans dated October 3, 5, and 6, 1983, and written materials dated October 3, 1983, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated October 21, 1933. • x7 : Motion carried--6-0-0 Planning Commission Minutes 5 October 24, 1983 MOTION 3: Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Gartner,to continue the • public hearings regarding Planned Unit Development District Review, Zoning District Change, Preliminary Plat, and Environmental Assessment Worksheet, to the November 14, 1983, Planning Commission meeting, and with the following recommendations to the Staff and the developer: 1) The property with underlying zoning of I-General currently proposed for residential use by the Crescent Ridge proposal, be rezoned to Rural; and, 2) Pedestrian access be provided along the north side of Highway #5 for this project. • Motion carried--6-0-0 Jk ),' • APPROVED MINUIIiS EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION MO`TAN', NOVT MER 7, 1983 7:30 P.M., CITY ILL 1 COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Marty Jcssen, chairperson (late, 8:15); Pat Breitenstein, Marge Friederichs, Gary Gonyea, 1 Jerry Kingrey, Jesse Schwartz C0nMISSION MEMBER ABSENT: Raiford Baker COMMISSION STAFF: Bob Lambert, Director of Coanmmity Services • I. ROLL CALL • The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by vice chairperson, Pat Breitenstein. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Schwartz moved to approve the Agenda as published. Kingrey seconded the t'ion and it carried unanimously. III. MINUTES OF OCTOBER 17, 1983 $ OCTOBER 31, 1983 • MOTION: Gonyea moved to approve the Minutes of October 17, 1983 as published. Schwartz seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. MOTION: Kingrey moved to approve the Minutes of October 31, 1983 as published. Schwartz seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. IV. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COI.MUNICATIONS - None V. RECOMIENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. Reports of Commissioners - None B. Report of Staff • 1. Development Proposals • a. Crescent Ridge • Lambert introduced Ken Bossart, present on behalf of the proponent. Bossart reviewed the 152.4 acre project and explained that I it will be developed in phases, with phase 1 being 12 single family lots and 118 multiple units on the eastern portion of the site. He reviewed the site plan noting that the 50 acre • marsh in the center of the site will be preserved in its natural state and given to the City as a gift. • Minutes - Parks, Recreation f, approved Natural Resources Cotanission -2- November 7, 1983 Lambert noted that the City feels the developer has done a very good job with the project and has been very cooperative in working with the City in retaining the amenities of the site. MOTION: Kingrey moved to recommend approval of Crescent Ridge Development in accordance with Staff recommendations in the Memo of October 27, 1983, including the tot lot location at Evener and Lorence Way. Schwartz seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. i., • MEMORANDUBI TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Service DATE: October 27, 1983 SUBJECT: Supplementary Staff Report to the October 21, 1983 Planning Staff ,/ Report on Crescent Ridge BACKGROUND This request is for a Comprehensive Guide Plan change from industrial to medium density residential for approximately 20 acres, PUD Concept approval on 152.4 acres; PUD district review and zoning for 26.6 acres from Rural and R1-22 to R1-13.5; rezoning 20 acres from Industrial General and Rural to R1-6.5; and preliminary platting of 27.5 acres for large lot residential and 20 acres for 118 units for multiple residential. . Of the 152.4 acres approximately 60 acres, in the center of the site, is proposed to be dedicated to the City for open space. The majority of this 60 acres is a marsh area. NATURAL RESOURCES :;" The most significant natural resources on this 152 acres include the marsh and the wooded area located in the northeast portion of this site. The marsh is proposed to be dedicated to the City for open space. Much of the wooded area will remain as a natural barrier between the multi-family housing portion of the site and the single family development. Several multi-family buildings will be developed in the center of the wooded area. A tree inventory has been provided. The woods contain mostly oak and elm, and nine oak trees 12" in diameter or greater will be lost within the four unit building area. Construction limits for the townhouse area within the woods must be fenced during the construction in order to protect the balance of the woods from grading. TRAILS , Existing proposal depicts a sidewalk along the south side of Lorence Way and an 8' bituminous path around the marsh connecting to the path along Dell Road to the west and within a 25' wide pathway area that will connect this open space area with Round Lake Park to the east. The Community Services Staff recommend a connection from the sidewalk adjacent to Lorence Way via a 5' concrete sidewalk to the 8' bituminous path around the marsh and a 5' concrete sidewalk along the north side of Evener Way from Lorence Way to the eastern property line. . The City did not require a sidewalk on the portion of Evener Way west of Dames Way; however, staff recommends that section of sidewalk he constructed at the same time to complete the connection to (lames Way. This will provide the most direct pedestrian path to the existing sidewalk on (lames Way and to the high school. 21)`)i•) • Community Services Staff also recommend an 8' bituminous path on the north side of highway 5 from Dell Road to the eastern boundary of this site. The pathway along the southern portion of the marsh can serve as an appropriate 600' link in • the Highway 5 trail (the City presently has an 8' asphalt trail along the north • side of Highway 5 from County Road 4 west to Heritage Road. The connection from Heritage (toad to the eastern boundary of this site should be made at the same time the trail around the marsh is completed.) PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES The neighborhood park that serves this area is Hidden Ponds Park located approxi- mately one-third of a mile to the northwest. The west edge of Round Lake Community • Park is located approximately 1300' from the cast edge of this development and also assists in serving recreational needs for this development proposal. (The active area of Round Lake Park is approximately 3/4 of a mile from this development.) City ordinances also provide for the requirement of mini parks to serve concentrated • populations that are not in close proximity to a neighborhood park. Mini parks are generally provided to serve the elderly and the young in their immediate neighbor- hoods when a neighborhood park is not within approximately a quarter of a mile, or if • heavily travelled roads must be crossed to reach those neighborhood facilities. In the case of Crescent Ridge, there will be a total of 322 residential units on this 152.4 acre site, of which 272 units arc multiple. The developer has provided tennis courts on the west side of the marsh adjacent to the trail system to provide some recreational amenities within this development; however, there is no provision for amenities for young children, and facilities located at Round Lake Park and Hidden Ponds are located an excessive distance for young children. Community Services Staff would recommend that the developer construct a totlot facility in the northeast portion of the site. Staff would recommend the structure be located between lots 29 and 34 on the PUD Concept Plan map, and preferably in the open space area that is surrounded on three sides by woods. The structure should then be con- nected to Evener Way through the woods via a 5' concrete sidewalk. This structure should be constructed with phase I multiple, and should be owned and maintained by the multiple family project homeowners association. The location of this structure provides safe access from all of the multiple units via either the 8' asphalt bikeway or the sidewalk proposed along Lorence Way and Evener Way. This location would also provide visual screening from the adjacent residential units and would be located far enough from any residential units to minimize possible problems with noise. RECOMMENDATION The Community Services Staff recommends approval of Crescent Ridge as per the October 21 Planning Staff Report subject to the following additional conditions: 12. The 5' concrete sidewalk be extended from Lorence Way to the 8' asphalt sidewalk within the first phase multiple area. 13. A 5' concrete sidewalk be constructed along the north side of Evener Way from Lorence Way to the eastern property line. 14. An 8' asphalt hikeway/bikeway he constructed along the north side of Highway 5 within each phase. The approximate 600' stretch of 8' bitumi- nous pathway around the southern portion of the marsh may be used as the • section of trail adjacent to Highway 5 in this area. T -3- 74. A totlot structure that meets City standards be developed in the north- east portion of the site, generally between lots 29 and 34, as depicted on the PUD Concept Plan dated October 3, 1983. Access to this totlot structure from Evener Way will be made via a 5' concrete sidewalk from the location of the structure to Evener Way. This totlot to be owned and maintained by the phase I multiple homeowners association. BL:md • • • • • • is • • STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: October 21, 1983 PROJECT: Crescent Ridge • • LOCATION: North of Highway #5, along the Chanhassen/Eden Prairie Border APPLICANT: D. C. C. Development FEE OWNER: Estate of Francis and Marion Burdick and Frank Griswold REQUESTS: • Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial to Medium Density Residential for approximately 20 acres; Planned Unit Development Concept Approval for Industrial, Open Space, and Mixed Residential Land Uses on 152.4 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning for 26.6 acres from Rural and R1-22 to R1-13.5 and Rezoning of 20 acres from Industrial General and Rural to RM-6.5 (with variances); Preliminary Plat of 27.5 acres for large lot residential and 20 acres for 118 units for multiple residential; and Environmental Assessment Worksheet Review Gui!1/2 Plan Chanr.e • The developer is requesting a Comprehensive Guide Plan change in the northwest corner of the property from Industrial to Medium Density Residential. This request is a reduction from the original request for Guide Plan change on the majority of the property, for which the Planning Commission recommended denial. The request has been revised from 396 units total on the site to 322 units total on the site. The area adjacent to the single family lots on the east portion of the parcel has been revised from a multiple area to an area of 50 large single family lots. The area in the northern center of the parcel has been altered from 10-14 unit buildings to a range of buildings 4-8 units in size. The western portion of the site will contain the highest density and largest buildings adjacent to Dell Road. Therefore, the overall plan has changed to include a gradual 'tran9ition from the Low Density Residential area on the east to a mixture of Medium Density Residential small multiple buildings in the center to approximately 6.5 units per acre and larger buildings on the western portion of the site. Industrial is proposed for the 30 acres along the Highway 5 frontage, but is separate from the single family area to the east by a large flood plain area and a distance of approximately 600 feet. These general changes in the plan are in conformance with suggestions made by the Staff and Planning Commission during the review of the first proposal. Planned Unit Development Concept The overall concept of the development is a mixture of residential uses, open space, and industrial. Approximately 60 acres in the center of the site are retained as 1 •F 1, Crescent Ridge Staff Report 2 October 21, 1983 oi,en space. The industrial along Highway #5 would be requested for rezoning when a specific use is available. This area is intended as light industrial and would be an ideal location for a corporate industrial or high tech user. 4 The transition between the single family area and the multiple area is made at the woods, which occurs in the northern center of the parcel. This woods is a mixture of oak and elm. The developer has revised his request to utilize six four-unit buildings within the woods, retaining much of the woods as a buffer between units. Transition to the multiple is also made in the road network by providing "T" connections between Evener Way and Lorence Way, thereby diverting much traffic to the southwest to future Dell Road and to the northeast via Lorence Way. The overall PUD provides for a jogging trail around the periphery of the marsh area to be constructed with each phase. Two tennis courts are illustrated in the Phase :I.::' II multiple area toward Dell Road. No recreational amenities are provided for Phase I multiple. " Phasing and transportation access for the entire Planned Unit Development must go hand in hand in order to assure the smallest possible impact on existing residential neighborhoods. Phase I, multiple area, could take access from the north through the proposed Apple Groves subdivision, which will extend Lorence Way to its southern property line, if the road is available in time for construction of this property. The City, D. C. C. Development, and Northwest Properties (Apple Groves) should work together to coordinate the construction of Lorence Way in order to provide access or this project in a timely fashion. If access can be provided initially via Lorence Way, Evener Way may be constructed with a knock-down barrier at the boundary between the proposed single family and proposed multiple in this project to be removed at the time of the connection of Lorence Way on westerly to future Dell Road. Dell Road would have to be in place down to Highway #5 before the knock-down • barrier in Evener Way would be removed. This would assure that construction traffic would not come through the Heritage Way neighborhood and that a road system would be •`• ?`' in place for the majority of the multiple traffic to access down Highway #5 without coming through the existing neighborhoods. In the event Lorence Way were not ready in time for construction of this project, Evener Way could be utilized until access from Lorence Way was available. Zoning The developer is requesting zoning from Rural and R1-22 to R1-13.5 for 26.6 acres lying along the project's eastern boundary, which would be the large lot single 4;' family area. The proponent intends to develop 12 lots of single family residential • around the Evener Way extension with the first phase of the project. The balance of the single family lots would be developed at a future time. The proponent is requesting rezoning from Rural and I-General to RM-6.5 for 20 acres to accommodate 118 multiple units in the center northern portion of the property. ( The developer is utilizing a density transfer from the open space area in order to . be in conformance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan for this area. ;urroundinn Land Use The land uses surrounding the proposed multiple area would be single family lots to the east, cluster homes and the railroad tracks to the north, proposed higher density multiple to the west, and industrial and open space to the south. (:.()l • Crescent Ridge Staff Report 3 October 21, 1983 Existing Site • 'The multiple family site is a south-facing sloped site, which is part of a larger bawl-shaped area surrounding the 60-acre lowland area on the parcel. The topography rises from approximately 880 feet to 926..feet at a high point. A wooded area dominates the eastern third of the multiple parcel and helps provide a natural transition to the proposed single family to the east. The woods consists of oak and elm, and the developer has provided a tree inventory of all trees over 12 inches in diameter on the site. The development will require the removal of approximately 9 oak trees over 12 inches in diameter within the four-unit building area. • Construction limits for the townhouse area within the woods must be fenced during construction in order to proctect the balance of the woods from indiscriminate grading and construction. • Access The developer has provided a traffic analysis for the entire development. The first phase, containing 118 units, would generate approximately 840 Average Daily Trips with a peak hour of 84 trips. If Evener Way were constructed with a knock-down barrier, the number of trips exiting through the Heritage Hills area would be minimal. The eastern grouping of townhouse units occuring on the eastern half of the multiple site takes its access from Lorence Way from a single private drive. Because of the very tight site plan, an additional way out should be provided for this area. The potential exists for this secondary access to be approximately an 80 foot long connection from the northeastern most townhouse unit to the east-west section of Evener Way. The area of townhouses occurring on the west half of the multiple site, which is {s' made up of'four-, six-, and eight-unit buildings must be planned so that it can loop to the Phase II multiple area so as not to leave a permanent private dead-end. Lorence Way through this multiple area will be the primary road serving the multiple i"' units and is planned within a 60 foot wide right-of-way with a 32 foot wide street which includes a five-foot wide sidewalk along its southern side. This sidewalk will connect up through the Apple Groves cluster homes area over along Lorence Way to Names Way, which will connect over to the high school and Round Lake Park area. Drainage and Utilities • Storm water drainage for the entire site will flow to the south into the marsh area. No drainage will flow off the site to the north, east, or west. The small pond, which is elevated some 30 feet from the flood plain area. and which occurs in the northeast corner of the property, currently has a natural overflow elevation of 904. The lowest basement floor elevation of the properties to the east is 905.5. The developer is providing an additional overflow outlet within the storm sewer system at 902. This will provide an additional cushion of safety from any upland urban flooding which may have possibly occurred prior to this development. Sewer and water for the project will come from the east along Evener Way. The entire first phase of the project will be able to be served by gravity. The development further toward the west will either have to wait for trunk sewer extension up from the southeast or pump sewage through a lift station to the east on a temporary basis. There is adequate water in the area to serve the site. However, Crescent Ridge Staff Report 4 October 21, 1983 for long term completion of the City water system in this area, it will be necessary to loop an additional water main up through this project to the water tower -occurring to the northwest. This looping helps equalize water pressure for the entire neighborhood and makes it easier for the City to fill the water tower in the summer time during peak water usage. Without the water looping, it is necessary to manage the water distribution in this area during peak summer flows differently. The extension of this water main would occur through the industrial area, and could occur as rapidly as the developer is ready for industrial development. • Architecture The developer has provided one building elevation of each of the unit types (four, six, and eight). The developer has indicated that he will be providing two • different building elevations for each unit type, but has not submitted them. The drawings that the developer has submitted do not correspond in floor plan footprint with the footprints depicted on the enlarged site plan for the multiple units. The enlarged site plan indicates that the units are jogged quite substantially, and the floor plan illustrates very little building relief across the backs of the six- and eight-unit buildings. The six- and eight-unit buildings have a rather massive appearance and should be studied further in order to accommodate the same type of footprint as illustrated on the site plan. In addition, the developer should submit two building elevations on each building type. Brick should be incorporated along each of the building elevations to help provide variety and durability • and add to the appearance of the buildings. Parks • The first phase does not include any provision for private recreational space. The project is. served by an existing Hidden Ponds neighborhood park, which occurs approximately one-third mile to the northwest of the project, and Prairie View elementary school park, which occurs three-quarters of a mile to the north, and Round Lake Community park, which occurs approximately three-quarters of a mile to the east. However, the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission should evaluate the necessity for additional recreational amenities on the overall site and on the initial first phase multiple site. The internal looped trail system would be constructed in pieces as each phase is developed. The area below the low side of the trail edge would be dedicated to the public as open space. RECOM-:ENDATIONS , The Planning Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Guide Plan change and Planned Unit Development Concept. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning from Rural and R1-22 to R1-13.5 and Zoning from I-General and Rural to RM-6.5 with side yard setback variances, and Preliminary Plat approval subject to the following: 1. The site plan for the townhouse area in Phase I should be revised to loop the private road on north to Evener Way and provide a knock-down barrier at the boundary between the multiple area and the single family area on Evener Way. The developer should also revise the multiple site plan to assure that • the free-standing parking spaces all have free access and are all at least 20 feet in depth. The developer is providing only single car garages for Crescent Ridge Staff Report 5 October 21, 1983 • each unit and one additional free-standing space per unit is required. The developer must also provide for the looping of the western area of the first phase to the future multiple area in Phase II. . ;` " 2. Prior to the City Council review, the developer must submit additional elevations of each unit type so that the City may review no less than two different building elevations for each of the four-, six-, and eight-unit buildings. The developer should include the use of a significant portion of each building elevation as brick to add to the detail and enhance the appearance of the buildings. 3. Prior to building permit issuance in the multiple area, the developer must submit a specific landscaping plan which provides buffering of the free- standing parking areas from the approach access roads. ' 4. The developer must fence all construction limits within the wooded area in . order to protect trees. Trees removed outside of the construction area must be replaced by the developer caliper inch per caliper inch. 5, Prior to Council review, the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission will review the necessity for additional recreational amenities within this development. 6. The City, the developer, and the developer to the north for Apple Groves, • must work to coordinate the construction of Lorence Way to provide access to this site prior.to the construction of Dell Road. Development of any phase further west of Phase I other than the Industrial area must be done in conjunction with the construction of Dell Road down to Highway #5 and the "" • extension of Lorence Way to serve the additional phases of the project. 7. Specific 'review of the multiple Phase II of this project is necessary. Detailed plans must be submitted for the architecture and site plan for this area as a part of any rezoning request. The Planning Commission and City Council will evaluate Phase II based upon its own merits. The architecture of the project buildings will be of primary concern. 8. Developer shall submit detailed information regarding sewer, water, storm '_ . sewer, and streets to the Engineering Department for review prior to Council review. 9. The Cash Park Fee is applicable to the zoned portions of this property. 10. The proponent must receive approval from the Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed District. 11. The Department of Natural Resources may require a permit for work within the ,' ' marsh area. titNNESo,. ,o %•>r"<1. Minnesota 'r / i' a Dcpottmcnt of 'Transportation y / 1, go 20 District 5 m -1(, J �055 No. Lilac Drive OF TB ' Golden Valley, Minnesota. 55422. September 15, 1983 • (612)sas 37ci • Mr. Chris' Enger • Director of Planning Eden Prairie City Hall • 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 S.P. 2701 TH 5 Plat review of Crescent Ridge located north of TH 5 between the West City limits and 0.5 mile east in part of Section 7, Township 116, Range 22 • in the City of Eden Prairie, Hennepin County Dear Mr. Enger: We are in receipt of the above referenced plat for our review in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03 Plats and Surveys. We find the plat • acceptable for further development with consideration of the following comments: — At the present time there are no plans to upgrade TH 5 in this area. However, as development continues it is clear that improvements to the existing highway will be needed to handle the increased traffic that is generated. Improve— ments to the trunk highway may have to be included as a part of this develop— ment to preserve the safe and efficient operation of the highway. The development should be designed to allow as much flexibility as possible to • accommodate future needs. — Present noise levels exceed State daytime standards for residential use. The '_ City and the developer should be aware that Mn/DOT will not provide any type of noise abatement for new development adjacent to the existing highway. We suggest every effort be made in design of the development to lessen the • impact this might have on the proposed development. — Our District Land Surveyor, Mr. Keith Slater, is presently in the process of platting the inplace highway right of way through this area. The surveyor for this development should contact him so that common boundaries can be established. — When developing parcels directly adjacent to TH 5, care must be taken so that additional right of way can he provided when needed. If you have any questions in regard to this review, please contact Evan Green at • 545-3761 ext. 119. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sin •rClj, � 72, ''/ . W. Cra ford, P. District Engineer, cc: Gerald Isaacs, Metropolitan Council Plikc, Reiter,Ltcr, Hennepin Coun't'y4/0f0ppnnuniry Employer hTNC:hu ,= i �J I • —if' _71-1- _- 1_ Riley- Purgatory Creek Watershed District t 'l. e 950 COUNTY ROAD +a "' toe .. EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA 55343 September 14, 1983 Mr. Chris Enger City Planner City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 ' Re: Crescent Ridge Development Dear Mr. Enger: The engineering advisors to the Board of Managers of the Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed District has reviewed the preliminary plans as submitted to the District for the Crescent Ridge Development. The following policies and criteria of the Watershed District are applicable for this project: 1. In accordance with Section E(2) of the District's Revised Rules and Regulations, a grading and land alteration permit will be required from the District for this project. Accompanying the permit application, an erosion control plan outlining how sediment is to be controlled both during and after construction must be submitted to the District for review and approval. 2. A grading plan showing both existing and proposed contours must be submitted to the District for review and approval. 3. Because of the size of the proposed development, the District will require that grading operations be phased on the site. All grading operations on initial stages of grading must be restored prior to proceeding to latter phases of the development. 4. A detailed storm sewer plan must be submitted to the District for review and approval. The wetland area located on the site has been designated as public waters by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The District will require that stornrxater runoff from the ultimately developed site by discharged into sedimentation basins prior to reaching the public waters area. jn, V. • Mr. Chris Enger Page 2 September 14, 1983 • 5. If grading operations are proposed below the Natural Ordinary Highwater Elevation, as determined by the MDNR, of the wetland area, an MDNR Chapter 105 Work in Public Waters Permit will be • required for these grading operations. 6. Because Mitchell Lake is a land-lock basin and the wetland area on the site is connected to Mitchell Lake (water levels in • both fluctuate together), the District will require that for all structures, the basement floor elevations or point where water could enter the structure must be set at a minimum of 2 feet above the surface overflow elevation for Mitchell Lake, until an outlet is provided. The surface overflow elevation for Mitchell Lake is 877.0. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this development at an early date. If you have any questions regarding the District's comments, please call us at 920-0655. Sincerel , air Ro er C. Obermeyer B R ENGINEERING CO. RCO/gbs E gineers for the District • c: Mr. Fred Richards Mr. Fritz Rahr I • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council • THRU: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services FROM: Stuart A. Pox, City Forester 'F DATE: December 15, 1983 SUBJECT: Public Hearing for the Removal of Diseased Trees on Private Property by Contract . The staff has made several attempts to have the affected property owners remove their Dutch elm diseased (DED) trees. To date the procedures have been: 1. Original notification - summer of 1983. Card lists the number of trees marked, diameters and date trees are to be removed by - 20 days after notification, 2. Second notification letter sent to property owners October 13, 1983. (copy attached) 3. Date set for public hearing November 1, 1983 Council meeting. 4. Public notification of property owners published in Eden Prairie News December 7, 1983. Letter also sent to property owners informing them of the December 20, 1983 public hearing. A complete list of the affected property owners is attached and includes estimated removal costs. These costs are based on $7 per diameter inch of tree which was the • average bid price for the summer of 1983. Some of the property owners on the list have contacted the staff regarding a target date for the removal of their trees and the staff will continue to work with these property owners. However, many have not complied with City Code Section 9.62. In past years every attempt to permit homeowners time, up to April 1, for removing their trees has been exercised, however, this caused several problems. As outlined in an earlier memo, time requirements, snow and yard conditions combined with • road restrictions has delayed the removal of trees by bid until late May. The staff recommends the Council require abatement of the trees on the attached list by Resolution 83-298 with removal to begin after January 15, 1984. SF:md • CITY OF EDE•N PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 83-298 RESOLUTION ORDERING A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT FOR THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED ELM TREES hl1PREAS, the City Council fixed the 20th day of December 1983 for a Public Hearing on the proposed improvement to remove diseased elm trees from private lands and, WHEREAS, all property owners whose property is liable to be assessed for the making of this improvement have been notified and notice has been published by law; • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that 1.. Such improvement is hereby ordered. 2. The City Forester is authorized to advertise for bids for the removal of said trees. (See attached list of properties) • ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 20th day of \ December 1983. • Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor • ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL M co co 00 co H I— 0 0 d) 1. 0) 1. • r • '01 4, .0O 0 O U, IM 0 0 7 0 4-4 7 )) E. I O•.. O•.v U ••.4 .n nv 0 0 n y e O V• ) o o 0 o o 0 o voi Ian 0 IOi) 0 o en • 0 0 0 .r a Co I/O n µ •� N n 1-. In co H .... N 4-4 o O in en re, M . M en1 M co co M M M M M n H H 00 O N N H H N N P. O. N N N N \ \ Co \ I N• \ Co 1 n n n n Co co Co co N n 1 n .O c0 • ram• •'• O H N N N in N ...I -ti .le co PI) UI) E. 0 N co K "I .. H N O .O'O N O W 0 4)N 0 0 0 0 O O O O O M 0 4+ 0 0 NI.N•..x O m M O .n 1 0 •n n O O O O I 1 O vfN 1 N U O Y O", . 0.Y. 1 1 1 O ^..41 1 •r1 CO O I 0 N 0 U N 0 U N O U... .M-I O •Ct M �I N N^,�Y 1 Y. f J •+,_ O : O I : "I1 V 1 I 1 H O 1 E. N ...CO N N N.: O I I I I N N W 1 00 N N .1 N N N 0C N 4 N.:.:.-I N U 'S.-4 N 1)tl N 0�" N E.tl N N N N 1 � I U N .d tl 1 Id 1 1 1 1 O .. U.0 et, -4 In.0.0 Ot.O .O .O .O -O •'+ I. -C.O�N H ...� , O1 C 1.1 .. 1.1 .. 1-) .--1 V .•I H H '4 H I .M 4 ti X H i. 'ld O I .0 0 I 0 0.-1 0 0 r. H H H 1 CO I Id 4 U 0 1 N 1.4..] N U..]In U Ln U..d V) In co 01 I 1 7'0) l/) {. ^ I O .. • In H a N 6.W o..-i .. O N ' O 44 en • 0 0N . IC M 7 CO U O M a° . m rn CO 4+ !) n 0) C 01 In Ch 00•.•I 4)In 0)•M 0 U C 0).a U U C CO ....A.` 41 H In ld U U 7... rtl N 0. .-I <r. A F..ti !d Ci : .� 0) VS 1. _ _ d) td N • U•.Ci X .0 0' 40i C).. 1) O 00 1. 7 'L yC a W 4-1 U e. 4-1• ]....I Occi C CO 14 .0' C O N 0 01 0 In 7. N•ti sD O o O C 0 • 7 •1 0 aJ M 0 U �. 04 1. X . 0 U - - _ 0) U N '0 N O. U1.4 114 4-1 co Al..l co I. 0) 0) 1-4 .1 144 . .. 3. O 0 0 •"I 41 d 44 GO CC 1 I A. 0 W ), y . I-. N 1.. O U In 'O v.+ w 'C v.. O N co C O u , u N — .1 ti O O co co o Ln O N 0 0- .D in6! E- coIn N '0 n N V N CO .-9 N El I-O C )0n "I n V U W U H U A tn M N C) f co UM M M O oO oO oO M oO oO pO 00 M 00 W W \ \ \ \ \ co \ - \ \ co \ 0 F.X ..1 0) vs 1/) N \ N 0 0 M \ 00 • 00 ¢C .-I .••I .-1 .-1 N N w1 M N N Of - l6 O S \ \ \ \ \ n co '0 n '0 COCO U, ,a co n n n 10 w {N O, co O to r1 4-4 r1 N N .4 en t{^ • • • • g. ca g V) N VD V' e-I U) 'C1 r+. a+ C),y ,- ,-I N U) O O O co N M 41 n 0 0 VI e-114 0 0 NJ NC C ON C•.I •D 1V 11. 0 X O:.G C O .M-I 0 H 1-•1 O o OO 0 M 01.4 0 0 0MO 0I U OOI O? . I . 0 N O V O•.+N I U j • y. ...)o I -0 I U) Y O N M . Z N I- N t+ U M � O c!•< U N E U O `7 U U•1 U C I M .-1 O I 1 . N H • I 41 K.N N • I 14. I N."...I-) I C I Cl f) ~E" N•-n..N.-)C-IN N N in CO N N N N N C] N'O,-•N•41 r1 a N I)N N I) I IN N 0 • 1 N V N I U el F C N W'W, • U I O I O K. 'I 1 )•I o VO '0 I VD 1 �O•rl N I t5 I C O �O..i N W•'4 M �O U.-1.-I �O .-I C.r1 \O OC 'J•.4 a .y U • H .-I O 1., H 1, .+ N N.+ S. 41 I I '_ 10 O I r) Q N V) I •t-I O M K. ~� 1 v.+ O 1 0 0 1 0 0 • M U..:M U...r•1 144 CO T..7.-I .41 V C ,0 N 0.-1 C S J O G.-) t'� N U H I') va O M .•4 V) 'O U . � M of N k In C 0 0 0 U M d E' C? •14 a 'O`n C ) V o n Z4- U) •to . A G C O ' CU ' .-1 A.M l{ « O N 040 d S n. S. • 0 .o O C Q 0 _ .C - N C M U N•O N .-I v .+ of m j N• VI N r1 T •U) F 0 0 ;Z.M X E N I 2O IN 41) O N O 0 O G as 0 U - O•.+ 01 N 0 M O VI n In nU N ^,.1 rla K'0 01 01 CO CO .1>4 • . U 0 VI u O d . a) r I. C. b x > 0V .c) haU 0Clt. '.I O _ • - 0 M U O 8 W to 0 U. Il.1 U a+ 0 > E z .+ tti . V1 7 .t U 4.N �. O R1 t0O O d o V) U C VI • d ..1 S e~-1 n e •u, v o a + v • C .0) U V'� ►l .f U U, ww • O U • In O IA O N VI (..V) .O.1 VI N .N•1 in O O h M VI 0 0 O 0)N NI .-• NN 4i)U H . I� 1 1 U O M M M M M M r,) I M M M M r,)I w GU m m co m m m co M m au co co m 4 CO CC CO N mom. VD VI M \ '� V OBI .�•1 N Cr M \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I oC1 T o�D o�D C'. - 0 CO h (J... h .O h .O r. • a w . (Al .•. O h 0 N Ip .-1 .. N N .. M N OI •-. ... M • In (Al aw • F 41 .. 01 m'0 m VI O c- 0 N C) N) .••I .. O O O O tl• C) O N Op . 0 O CO C) O C U. O O O O O .- O $ O O O 0 O 0 0 ..• C o x�7 O/`. O Irn I 0 U I hM. I ri 1 .1 0 C P. 7 ' N n. 0 �t .0. .'•1 C) f/N U M.+X V1. I N !C O N l`1 hi0 CL I. .••U .. I1 I I M VI C 11•I O 1 ..1 U 1 t1• 1 I. .-. N I-. I 0 1 O I N N {.. I (y..N= C N N N N F. N N N '. F. N C) N 0 Cl N N U C N 0 cc.,N .-.0 N N N I h N N U N M m N U N I I N.-] I U cc I . O I N 1 I .D .O 30 P 1 C .O .:J sO sO .CO 0 0 .. a .p N N .o w r1 .. .. O o — ar a — .. .. •l .. .-1 •, ....4 .1 .. .•1 H .-I .•. E> .. .I V) .. 1. .•1 $. r. 0 .•. I I .~•I 1. .. a•4•' I -4JJ0 1 tl'rl I I C I U 0 1 V 1 K .•.•.-I C I al C .1' - h m. C M I.. . 0: NO•: Vf p .Ca M N .. h N • M . O O N PO I N .•. 0 CC ; .•I .•1 M •••I o MN VI CC 0 . ) 0 U CC (Al VI u I.M>. I-• 0• F e.1 aF a di N c u U) zco�Mui rV •.-I5 •O In C6 • .. .n N U i ..)C N MV N . � x ' }N (Al C ^O Il r1 c OO •� ] NmCC 0 >. c H cC 0 .. ` O • 1. S • : oa yups w x � c Ad u c v.z F 0 N > 0 . L F G. 0 1N.'" .0 0 "0 s ¢ O W N la 00 In In 0 w O 0 1. '` `` .. O In .p..0 .. C: N O t: VI m in N .O 0 0 r N N N N 0 M C: .. C(J•.I r. 01 m O O•.1 O•n .o v v vu[ o•.. cv v ;-' m va r..LL1 1 h .. .o .o e~ m I X • 0 - 0)., • in 0 0 > NCn N . " • g 1-4 .-1 0 ^0 iO I. O. ;? VI 0 ' + U I N -0 O 0 el U C: VI .. :.c W .� ..I a. 2 U •M y. C = 0 H O.0 VI .. B 44 b.) 0 bU co 0) IC 00 I. G • C O •. V I-. in U. 3 I O nu E E� a, Q ?� • • • • h , cu 1.1 us C c e; C 7 O ow • U o: In a • • M Co I-.to O O N N p O O U) In p • 10 W U to N N N a Nal IN IA ti N a N tR N "9 al C 0, t..) ..} M IA in IA 10 D U. w CO r IN 00 CO CO \ a N \ \ n U O \ \ N .. ti 7 a .. CO CO N cu w et cy D ,. a N I VI a N N .D '. M M N N td a at r • i N 0 N N N .D..•/ 0a at M O O. 0., .-1 a 0 U) J.1 O C• a Uw a o o '"a+ o 0 0 O. o 0 0 l a N O O a H 0 7 V a a O1 0 T1.N O VI 1 1 I 1 .0 1 'D N O • N 4,�,G I N1 0 1 .-1 .-I N<....aN 0.X .•. M N 1/1•Ci f I N N U,�L '0. VI .-I p U •"1.0 U 1 I M ea C •' N U .-1 1 I I to G 1 N N , a[•+ IN N N N 1 N 0 1 N CJ N co N IN . N„ICCO v N H CO N IN 0N N N N O CON E CO 1 1 U I D I V^ N O CO N 1 1 I O I ;a 9 0O 1� �� I H I .�.. sr) .:a.". CJ .D.0 N C O C 0 U a aI 'C atl a M al H .-1 a .. .-I .-1 al .-. .'. It H I 1 .0 N .-1 N I, a 1 al al H a I 1 1 .4 N I .0 0 0 .D (I C>4 0, N a Ol Z 0 N .-1 N N: .-7 of U.-. N aCK ,. N.O. 1). N . N 0 •>-I 0 0 N U)N 13 1). .1.J C C 'C • I 3 • C In In m K'c In U 'b 3 O > C �+ C> C F• I. 0 U C I- Itl •U td.N ¢... U U O •./ CO ..7 O..`" CO 'C .O V) . a ' > i 0w oo U r U '0 v CC CI • o 1 C >. 1 qC CI r0•". 3 Inc S U o; a (. II o 0 I 6 H +n M C W C o ,y ... E.-Di (I O C/ >C r O •>. CJ CO ate) Cl m i ..�.1 13 .0 0. I. "f.' .0 I. CO I. . N U U m • C O. O to C. O w 1 O•� .i_ U C Of D M G a . G co 0•-• IN Q O1 N In O a G UD C•. Gl CC C.on - N C In n 0 f_ M O to In .M.. a.. v:i cl 0. w ai u? a IO al OI q y y In • In H U U alJ.I oO C :t 1 G 0 0 C G. N C I. U - H C C C 0 N •' U 0 U O .2 It D Cl 0. U .ya x 0. a U O U y0 �: D 0 • U y 1n I. C rd 3 IC U a, U C C O >. .0 l •.4 Cl A •I ,] 'U a 1.... U 0. N ti r U H U C • IA IJJ ci i - --- M 0 1.1 •1.- , 0 In In to 0 O O 0 0 f IA 0 0 I In Co Ih to to N In O to0 N IA 0 CO to I N 40 CO 0 N co 44 W U el 1 -I , e. .1 C) 01 , CIHIVItotoonNIM M U W l'J CO "I VI to to Co Co Co M co co to U <CG S`. CO - CO N ..' N C CO 0 N CO 0 Q S -1- N \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ to Co N Co N. CO co Co Co I. CO Co CO• N N 14 OO H N M 144 VI el „I .•1 . .•1 Cn C-I N 0 O to a. a 1 _ 44 U O 44 • IA CO µ4J N CA CO 'l7 '0 'l7 Co pal 0r1 N C O 0.0 Co N co I'I C N 1O • N O M O O N O 0 4-1 M M O N Co O O 0.•OJ O O k• 1 O 1 O •D CX C.`G 0X O 4 C40 4JN CO O C O ,'- O •'I 1 in I N 1 ..co U N O U N O U N I VI I Vl 0 0 C ry 1 ry •C N .. J•I I U I U ICJ M,e-1 X M.-.X 1 I '0 .-. M '� I N C I M VI X Co F.X I.X.; F.X N U N U.•+ vt 0 I •-1 0 N I O.''I N I N U C I.) Co4t U I.C(.) C1 1 VI C I VI O N M 0 N I I'•1 I• CI C=G:I N N (.-'. 0 I 0 1 C 1 O N.r...N..... I 1 N N F' 1 N I N .'V e-•1-1 (N.•.I C•1.-1.-.N..4 I,L N.1 DC C'J N I N . U Co I C Co 1 CO CO N C 0:1 N CO C.N C G: 1 . 1 ..a CO N U 0 I U .D U.� .ti 0 4-1 1 C 1 1 -, .-.-.`N V)CC M 1 I CO .y ..-. O ..I 'O I •'1 '4 N Co•..01 .- •-1 CI Co•-1 V) „-•1 .-.Co . 0 I. .y .4 I .•I'n 4.4 I .-. ..•0 ...D .--J .... - .. C .. .. ) r., 1 .H cy 1 CI J.I.. F. 0 .. l.. C.•. I. 41 I U N I 0 41... -. C I 1 -. n M... N In F. O I D O 1 co O 1 0 ..•0 O•-1'O 0 1 1 N NIA 1 N 0..-M()— MC,._M.U�N L..JNI(:J,,44 V F NN oo enCO C) •U M Co44 It JU.I VI ICI II) CC CO co 0) C)In • V 'd V' C CC co O N co C 0) > ••>1 rn 0 1• °n VV)•, 0 C u QI 0 ',M CO F+ C in •C CC..I CO CO '0 In U In • In •.CJ iI.. •(). 0 ••^I <'d In •N`_ -0 II) C V) c In s. O C) 0<• >In 3 .I .I 0 1O • a U '- > •',...1 0 . tC tC to,-1 C) • ..J C CC .-I Q . C CO • 1.. 0 N I- CJ C C 0qC CCO C et 3 V)0 CO O C 0 C CO CO CO •• C--I -I a .ti I, I, (C u,-) Cl-.-.' 0.O -J 'O 1i 0 i p 74 F. O 0 ON C (. CCFto III 0. Ii U U U U .. IA - -1 JJ.)..I U h C W< • Cr C CO C .< 4-1 U 1Il O Co 0 0 CC c I.C C Co 0 0� O N 00 4-1 C I,.1 N 0 CO Co M 'C C V) -• p,G 01 CO C CO T N T N In Cl 0•.. 0--'0 M In • U 14) Iy In CO CO CO N e•1 01 J' s. co N CC .•J .-I 0.U C N$ IC . 0 C9 .-1 ..I N U U 0 • P. VI ' 41 IC .0 7 U .1-1 CO 4-1 .t II-. 0 'C ... C 'O In F. u In C o 0 C CO C C "CC CC U U U O 3 0 0 0 '0 C 0 r M U I 4 0 1- no illo . F. F. (1 R N — - 0X a) U) CO N- 7. 1-.0 0 U . CO •.S 0 T •O i( N F. 4J U 1-. .IC 0 -. ( C 1. VI U 0 C N F. 4J ..1 CI d Cl u CC C1 •.I el • r, II • • October 13, 1983 • Dear Landowner: As you may recall, your property was inspected this past summer for evidence of Dutch • Elm Disease and Oak Wilt. Shortly thereafter, you received a notice pursuant to City Code, Section 9.62, Shade Tree Disease Control, to remove the diseased tree(s) so detected not later that 20 days after receipt of said notice and to verify there- after with the City that such removal had been accomplished. To-date our records indicate that the diseased tree(s) on your property have not been removed, and so we now urgently request that you make arrangement to complete such removal not later than November 18, 1983. If removal is not completed by this date, it will be necessary for us to recommend to the City Council that they order the tree(s) to be removed pursuant to City Code, Section 9.62. The terms under this • procedure are: 1. A public hearing will be conducted by the Council and the removal will • be ordered. 2. The City will hire a tree removal contractor who will complete the removal ane disposal of the marked tree(s) on your property. 3. All costs thereof will be billed to you and payable to the City within 30 days. 4. If payment is not received, the total amount plus interest is added as a special assessment on the following year's tax statement for your property. Whenever possible, we wish to avoid this cumbersome process and so your full coopera- tion by removing the tree(s) promptly will be most sincerely appreciated. Your immediate attention to such removal will also help protect other trees in the community which, as we know you will agree, add significantly to the property values and natural beauty of Eden Prairie. If you have any questions or if removal is already completed, please call my office, at 937-2262, ext. 48. Thank you. . Sincerely, • ,Auus.,1--(1&.-:)716 Stuart A. Fox City Forester SAF:md 1 11"1_. • TO: Mayor & Council FROM: John Frane DATE: December 14, 1983 RE: MIDB'S for Kinder-Care Learning Center - $465,000 Resolution 83-299 Kinder-Care Learning Centers, Inc. proposes to construct a Kinder-Care { facility on Part of Lot 1 Block 1, Eden Glen (Highway 169 and Singletree Lane). The parcel has POD concept approval for offices which is consistent with the proposed use. The facility would employ about 15 persons. Resolution 83-299 is attached for your consideration. r • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA .` Application for Industrial Development Bond Project Financing . • 1. APPLICANT: . .a. Business Name - . • • Kinder Care Learning Center. • b. Business Address . P.O. Bbx 2151 Montgomery Alabama 63103 c. Business Form (corporation, partnership, sole proprietor- • ship, etc.) - Corporation . • d. State of Incorporation or organization - e. Authorized Representative - Richard J. Nordlund f. Phone - . 332-0955 2, NAME(S) AND ADDRESSES OF MAJOR STOCKHOLDERS OR PRINCIPALS: a. Kinder-Care Learning Centers is a publicly held company listed on the National Over-the-Counter Market. b. . c. -l- >( 11 3. GIVE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF NATURE OF BUSINESS, PRINCIPAL PRODUCTS, ETC: Kinder-Care is the nation's largest provider of Day-Care in the U.S. They operate over 900 centers in 35 states. 4. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Part of Lot 1, Block 1 EdenGlen Singletree Lane & Glen Lane • a. Location and intended use: 169 and Single Tree Road b. Present ownership of project site: Jesco, Inc. c. Names and address of architect, engineer, and general contractor: Architect: Charles Novak 14750 So. Robert Trail • Rosemount, Minnesota 55068 5. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST FOR: Land $180'000 Construction Contracts 250,000 Equipment Acquisition and installation* Architectural and Engineering 10,000 Legal 15,000 Interest during Construction 10,000 Bond Reserve Contingencies - Loan Fees Other Total $ 465,000 *Heating and air conditioning should be included as building costs. Indicate the kind of equipment to be acquired here. • • 6. BOND ISSUE - a. Amount of proposed bond issue - $465,000 • b. Proposed date of sale of bond - December 30, 1983 c. Length of bond issue and proposed maturities - 20 year Level debt. d. Proposed original purchaser of bonds — • One Bank • e. Name and address of suggested trustee - • • National City Bank Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480 f. ' Copy of any agreement between Applicant and original purchaser -• g. Describe any interim financing sought or available -_ Interim Financing will be obtained from bond proceeds. • h. Describe nature and amount of any permanent financing in addition to bond financing - • 7. BUSINESS PROFILE OF APPLICANT. • a. Are you located in the City of Eden Prairie? Yes - Highway 5 and Mitchell Road . b. Number of employees in Eden Prairie? 15 full and paYt-time employees • i. Before this project: 15 • • • ii. After this project? 30 employees ' e. Approximate annual sales - $243,100 d• Length of time in business Thirteen (13) years in Eden Prairie Two (2) years • • e. Do you have plants in other locations? If so, where? • Kinder-Care operates 900 centers in 35 states ( f. Are you engaged in international trade? No . • 8. OTHER INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT(S): { • a. List the name(s) and location(s) of other industrial development project(s) in which the Applicant is the owner or a "substantial user" of the facilities or a "releated person" within C , the hemeaning of Section 103(b)(6) ' of the Internal Revenue . Highway 5 & Mitchell Road • -4- • b. List all cities in which the Applicant has requested industrial revenue development financing. Bloomington, Burnsville, Cottage Grove • cant c. Detail the itatior°industrial request developmentirevenuesfinancing. any other c y Kinder—Care Learning Center is proposing to open a day care facility in Bloomington, Burnsville and Cottage Grove. The company has other facilities in the Twin Cities, but they lease the ' facilities from private investors. d. Listany city in which the. Applicant has been refused industrial development revenue financing. Burnsville has denied one application but with the change of administration has asked to company to reapply. e; List any city (and the project name) where the Applicant • has lapprovalrauthorizingpthe��financingchas bbeenldenied. final appro None • • .5- . • itr1I 1 (' Applicant has been denied industrial development f, If in any other city as identified • revenue financing• in (d) or (e), specify the reason(s)ofiicials_ who for the denial , and the name(s) of appropriate city have knowledge of the transaction. 9. NAMES AND ADDRESS OF: a. Underwriter (If public offering) ( •Private Placement Purchaser (If private placement) b. . i. If lender will not commits until.City yphasing passed its preliminary ' the project, submit a letter from proposed lender that it has an interest in the offering subject to appropriate City • • approval and approval of the Commissioner • of Securities. - • First Corporate Services has placed Seven (7) Commercial Development Revenue Bonds for Kinder-Care and • they will also place this issue. • _g_ . e ,I.. • . ' b. Bond Counsel - Briggs & Morgan c. Corporate Counsel - Ball, Ball & Prescott d. Accountant - 10. WHAT IS YOUR TARGET DATE FOR: • a. Construction start - March 1, 1984 . b. Construction completion - July 1, 1984 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: . The undersigned Applicant understands that the approval or disapproval by the City of Eden does Prairie for Indusimpliedly Development bond financing revision • constitute any approval, variance, or waiver ao otherr ione or requirement relating to any zoning, other law or ordinance of the City of Eden Prairie, or any • .applicable to the property included in this project. ' Kinder-Care Learning Center ; Applicant 1 . 0 By . 1I 33 Date t 11. ZONING - TO DE COMPLETED BY THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT a. Property is zoned - P.U.D. • b. Present zoning (ie) (is not) correct for the intended use. No c. Zoning application received on Pending for CRs which is correct for the intended use. • • d. Variances required - City Planner • • • -8- • • RESOLUTION RECITING A PROPOSAL FOR A COMMERCIAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT PROJECT GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE PROJECT PURSUANT TO THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF SAID PROJECT TO THE ENERGY, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS IN CONNECTION WITH SAID PROJECT (KINDER--CARE LEARNING CENTERS, INC. PROJECT) WHEREAS, (a) The purpose of Chapter 474, Minnesota Statutes, known as the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act (the "Act") as found and determined by the legislature is to promote the welfare of the state by the active attraction and encouragement and development of economi- cally sound industry and commerce to prevent so far as possible the emergence of blighted and marginal lands and areas of chronic unemployment; (b) Factors necessitating the active promotion and development of economically sound industry and commerce are t the increasing concentration of population in the metropolitan areas and the rapidly rising increase in the amount and cost of governmental services required to meet the needs of the increased population and the need for development of land use which will provide an adequate tax base to finance these increased costs and access to employment opportunities for such population; (c) The City Council of the City of Eden Prairie (the "City") has received from Kinder-Care Learning Centers, Inc., a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Delaware (the "Company") a proposal that the City undertake to finance a Project hereinafter described, through the issuance of revenue bonds in the form of bonds or a single debt instrument ("the Bonds") pursuant to the Act; • (d) The City desires to facilitate the selec- tive development of the community, retain and improve the tax base and help to provide the range of services and employment • opportunities required by the population; and the Project will • assist the City in achieving those objectives. The Project will help to increase assessed valuation of the City and help maintain a positive relationship between assessed valuation and debt and enhance the image and reputation of the community; (e) The Project to be financed by the Revenue Bonds is a child learning and day-care facility to be located on part of Lot 1, Block 1, Eden Glen in Eden Prairie and consists of the acquisition of land and the construction of buildings and improvements thereon and the installation of equipment therein, and will result in the employment of additional persons to work within the new facilities; (f) The City has been advised by representa- tives of Company that conventional, commercial financing to pay the capital cost of the Project is available only on a limited basis and at such high costs of borrowing that the economic feasibility of operating the Project would be significantly reduced, but Company has also advised this Council that with the aid of municipal financing, and its resulting low borrowing cost, the Project is economically more feasible; (g) Council-adopte&-o.k41,ovcmb ;-4-983, a public hearing on the Project was held on , 1983, after notice was published, and materials-made available for public inspection at the City Hall, all as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 474.01, Subdivision 7b at which public hearing all those appearing who so desired to speak were heard; (h) No public official of the City has either a direct or indirect financial interest in the Project nor will • any public official either directly or indirectly benefit financially from the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The Council hereby gives preliminary approval to the proposal of Company that the City undertake the Project pursuant to the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act (Chapter 474, Minnesota Statutes), consisting of the acqui • - sition, construction and equipping of facilities within the City pursuant to Company's specifications suitable for the operations described above and to a revenue agreement between • the City and Company upon such terms and conditions with provisions for revision from time to time as necessary, so as to produce income and revenues sufficient to pay, when due, the principal of and interest on the Bonds in the total principal • • amount of approximately $465,000 to be issued pursuant to the Act to finance the acquisition, construction and equipping of the Project; and said agreement may also provide for the entire interest of Company therein to be mortgaged to the purchaser of the Bonds; and the City hereby undertakes preliminarily to issue its Bonds in accordance with such terms and conditions; 2. On the basis of information available to this Council it appears, and the Council hereby finds, that the Project constitutes properties, real and personal, used or useful in connection with one or more revenue producing enterprises engaged in any business within the meaning of Subdivision la of Section 474.02 of the Act; that the Project furthers the purposes stated in Section 474.01, Minnesota Statutes; that the availability of the financing under the Act and willingness of the City to furnish such financing will be a substantial inducement to Company to undertake the Project, and that the • effect of the Project, if undertaken, will be to encourage the • development of economically sound industry and commerce, to assist in the prevention of the emergence of blighted and marginal land, to help prevent chronic unemployment, to help the City retain and improve the tax base and to provide the range of service and employment opportunities required by the population, to help prevent the movement of talented and educated persons out of the state and to areas within the State where their services may not be as effectively used, to promote more intensive development and use of land within the City and eventually to increase the tax base of the community; 3. The Project is hereby given preliminary approval by the City subject to the approval of the Project by the Minnesota Energy and Economic Development Authority or such other state officer having authority to grant approval (the "Authority"), and subject to final approval by this Council, Company, and the purchaser of the Bonds as to the ultimate details of the financing of the Project; 4. In accordance with Subdivision 7a of Section 474.01 Minnesota Statutes, the Mayor of the City is hereby authorized and directed to submit the proposal for the Project to the Authority requesting its approval, and other officers, employees and agents of the City are hereby authorized to provide the Authority with such preliminary information as it may require; • 621 I 5. Company has agreed and it is hereby determined that any and all costs incurred by the City in connection with the financing of the Project Whether or not the Project is carried to completion and whether or not approved by the Authority will be paid by Company; . 6. Briggs and Morgan, Professional Association, acting as bond counsel, and First Corporate Services, Inc. are authorized to assist in the preparation and review of necessary documents relating to the Project, to consult with the City Attorney, Company and the purchaser of the Bonds as to the maturities, interest rates and other terms and provisions of the Bonds and as to the covenants and other provisions of the necessary documents and to submit such documents to the Council for final approval; 7. Nothing in this resolution or in the documents pre- pared pursuant hereto shall authorize the expenditure of any municipal funds on the Project other than the revenues derived from the Project or otherwise granted to the City for this purpose. The Bonds shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property or funds of the City except the revenue and proceeds pledged to the payment thereof, nor shall the City be subject to any liability thereon. The holder of the Bonds shall never have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City to pay the outstanding principal on the Bonds or the interest thereon, or to enforce payment thereof against any property of the City. The Bonds shall recite in substance that the Bonds including interest thereon, are payable solely from the revenue and proceeds pledged to the payment thereof. The Bonds shall not • constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation; 8. In anticipation of the approval by the Authority and the issuance of the Bonds to finance all or a portion of the Project, and in order that completion of the Project will not be unduly delayed when approved, Company is hereby authorized to make such expenditures and advances toward payment of that portion of the costs of the Project as Company considers necessary, including the use of interim, short-term financing, subject to reimbursement from the proceeds of the Bonds if and when delivered but otherwise without liability on the part of • the City; 9. It is further found, determined and declared that it is the present intent of the City Council to authorize the " issuance and sale of the Bonds but the City reserves the right in its sole discretion to withdraw this preliminary approval of • 261E the Project if at any time the City Council determines that the public interest and the purposes of the Act will not be served by the Project; and 10. This resolution is subject to the condition that within twelve months from the date of its adoption the City and the Company shall have agreed to mutually acceptable terms and conditions of a revenue agreement, the Bonds and of the other • instruments and proceedings relating to the Bonds, and their issuance and sale. If such agreement does not take place within that time or any extension thereof and the Bonds are not sold within such time, this resolution shall expire and be of no further force or effect. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, this day of , 1983. Mayor Attest: • City Clerk • 2C,2`) I i P7CEM3ER 20,1933 ,.J54 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER -FIREARM SAFETY CERTIFICATIONS-COMMUNITY 140.00 SERVICES 11055 CHASE MANHATTAN SERVICE CORP TELEPHONE SERVICE-PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING B62.6:< 11056 NCRT CO L1D DECEMBER RENT-LIQUOR STORE 3465.6u 11057 DANA GIBBS PACKET DELIVERY 52.00 11058 SUPPLEES 7 HI ENTERPRISES INC DECEMBER RENT-LIQUOR STORE 3398.42 11059 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR 7070.12 1106D TWIN CITY WINE CO WINE 352.90 11061 PAUSTIS & SONS WINE 515.82 11062 QUALITY WINE CO LIQUOR 2855.19 11063 MARK VII SALES INC WINE 235.70 11064 INTERCONTINEiNTAL PCKG CO WINE 949.24 11065 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 873.21. 11066 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 195.00 11067 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING WINE 21B.56 11068 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE CO LIQUOR • 3339.63 11069 GRIGGS COOPER & CO LIQUOR 7574.3' 11070 NORWEST BANK OF HOPKINS PAYROLL 300.00 11071 CREEK KNOLLS PARTNERSHIP LAND-FRANLO PARK 11775.00 11072 INSTY PRINTS PRINTING-FLYERS-COMMUNITY SERVICES 107.25 11073 VDID OUT CHECK 0.00 11074 WENDY BURNS-CARLSON SKATING INSTRUCTOR-FEES PAID 771.00 11075 RALPH KRATOCHVIL INSTRUCTOR-EXERCISE CLASSES-FEES PAID 82.13 11076 CHUCK BORGMAN STAIRWAY LIGHTS-WATER DEPT 24.90 ( '77 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF P/S MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION-POLICE DEPT 12.00 :.u73 LABELLES -- BRIEF CASE-COUNCIL MINUTES 39.97 11079 CHRIS ADAMS REFUND-KARATE CLASSES 24.03 11080 COM?MISSIONER OF REVENUE SALES TAX 102.75 11081 STATE OF MINNESOTA BIKE REGISTRATIONS 9.00 11082 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 360.1C , 11063 MARK VII SALES INC WINE 54.26 11064 TWIN CITY WINE CO WINE 1412.7 110B5 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR 7259.47 11066 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE LIQUOR LIQUOR 5555.89 11087 QUALITY WINE CO LIQUOR 2466.5U 11088 PAUSTIS & SONS WINE 24.96 11089 INTERCONTINENTAL PACKAGING CO LIQUOR B95.44 11090 CAPITAL CITY DISTRIBUTING CO WINE 157.52 11091 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR 7760.59 11092 DANA GIBBS PACKET DELIVERY 65.0G 11093 GEER WHOLESALE INC BEER 5290.60 11094 CITY CLUB DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 5542.7c 11095 COCA COLA BOTTLING MIDWEST INC MIXES 419.80 ; 11096 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 4823.74 11097 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO BEER 7386.SC: 1109E KIRSCH DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 2B.8n 11099 A J OGLE CO INC BEER 643.9''. 11100 PEPSI COLA BOTTLING CO MIXES 538.2'. '1101 ROYAL CROWN BEVERAGE CO MIXES 38.f') 102 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 7998.2 ' 11103 PETTY CASH EXPENSES 64.7) 11104 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK PAYROLL 12/9/83 16707.9 11105 CO`',rIISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 12/9/83 9420.3,, 11106 PERA PAYROLL 12/9/83 14992 r 11107 INTERNATIONAL UNION DF OPERATING DUES 532.0 .`' iaanc+,11n (,.:0 • 11103 UNIT-N WAY OF M1NNEAPOLIS PAYROLL 12/9/83 71.50 11109 G7LAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE PAYROLL 12/9/33 3592.0.' t10 AETNA LIFE INSURANCE CD PAYROLL 12/9/83 108 6: 11 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM PAYROLL 12/9/33 65 C' 11112 EARB;^OSSA & SONS SERVICE-CITY WEST PARKWAY 4051.5' 11113 1ST STATE BK OF SPRING LK PK SERVICE-EDENVALE BLVD 35884.1 11114 F F JEDLICKI INC SERVICE-SHADY OAK ROAD UTILITIES 8606.2, • 11115 RICHARD KNUTSO°I INC SERVICE-VALLEY VIEW ROAD/PRAIRIE CENTER DR 58010.31 11116 RICHARD KNUTSON INC SERVICE-ARGON GLEN UTILITY 2709.6E. 11117 MINNKOTA EXCAVATING INC SERVICE-CARDINAL CREEK 3RD ADDITIDN 2209.1- 11118 NDRTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO SERVICE-PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE 18776.9.' 11119 ORFEI & SONS INC SERVICE-LORENCE 1ST & 2ND ADDITIONS 14557.5- -11120 W & G REH3EIN BROS INC - 'SERVICE-LIME SLUDGE REMOVAL & DISPOSAL 71974.4E 11121 SHAFER CO'.TRACTING CO INC SERVICE-PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE 115556.9% ---11122 SHAFER CONTRACTING COMPANY - -SERVICE-PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE 162071.4E 11123 DUANE JAMES CABLE FIREMAN CALLS • 386.00 11124 FRANKLIN PAUL ELLERING FIREMAN CALLS 332.0 11125 LOWELL D LUND FIREMAN CALLS 764.00 11126 RAYMOND MITCHELL FIREMAN CALLS 1558.0G 11127 ACRO-aINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 456.92 11128 ALTA MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS SERVICE-AIR CONDITIONING-COMMUNITY CENTER 2520.0J 11129 AI0IERICAN LINEN SUPPLY CO NOVEMBER SERVICE-MOPS/DUSTERS-LIQUOR STORE 17.7C 11130 AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK & TRUST CO BOND PAYMENT 365847.7: 11131 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATIDN 1984 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS DUES 270.00 11132 AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS CALCULATOR/LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 295.72 11133 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC STREET SIGNS 4177.3C 11134 ARMOR SECURITY INC 1ST QTR 84 ALAKM SYSTEM-SENIOR CITIZENS 96.00 { 35 ART MATERIALS INCORPORTED SUPPLIES-PARK PLANNING 16.50 .4s36 BACH"ANS FLOWERS-CITY HALL 38.50 11137 BEN NETT RINGROSE WOLSFELD JARVIS -SERVICE-MITCHELL ROAD & TECHNOLOGY DRIVE/ 30332.65 -CITY WEST STREETS/ANDERSON LAKE PARKWAY/ PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE 11138 BIG BOBS REPAIR SHOP REPAIR LOCKS-P/S BLDG 25.00 11139 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON OCTOBER 83 IMPOUND SERVICE 335.00 11140 BLUMBERG PHOTO SOUND CO 3 LAMPS-FIRE DEPT 61.05 11141 BOYER FORD TRUCKS SEAL/ 0 RING-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 73.60 11142 BRAUN ENGINEERING TESTING INC -SERVICE-LDRENC ADDN/VALLEY VIEW ROAD/ 1409.4G -HOMEWARD HILLS ROAD/ARBON GLEN DRIVE -CREEK RIDGE ESTATES/EDENVALE BLVD/PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE/CARLSDN DRIVE 11143 BROWN PHOTO -FILM PROCESSING-PLANNING/POLICE/PARK 236.48 PLANNING 11144 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC ROCK 567.2E 11145 BUSINESS FURNITURE INC FILE-ASSESSING DEPT 367.D; 11146 BUTCHS BAR SUPPLY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 265.35 ' 11147 STEPHEN CALHOON MILEAGE-PARK PLANNING 22.00 11148 CAPITOL ELECTRONICS INC REPAIR RADIO-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 29.05 11149 CARGILL SALT DIVISION DEICING SALT-STREET DEPT 510.47 1115D CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER -EXHAUST/DISTRIBUTOR/AIR FILTERS/FAN BELT/ 1817.97 -LAMP/BEARINGS/CLAMPS/GAS FILTER/IiOSES/ -SPARK PLUGS/MUFFLER/SWITCH/BATTERY/BRAKE -PARTS/WIPER GLADES/VALVE/ADAPTER/STARTER/ THERMOSTAT/OIL SEALS/PLIERS/WATER PUMP :!.151 CLERK DF COURTS EMPLOYEE WITHHOLDING PER COURT ORDER 18.12 91109195 I , , in:, CC"?ISS I0NER OF REVENUE NOVEMBER SALES TAX 14891.41 t S3 CL'OIISSION R OF TRANSPORTATION SERVICE-PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE 4944.7. 1 _ACOPY EQUIPMENT INC -REPAIR BLU-RAY MACHINE-ENGINEERING/ 43.50 PENCILS-PARK PLANNING 1 11155 CUTLER-MAGNER COMPANY QUICKLIME-WATER DEPT 3552.D' 1 11156 WAND F DAHLBERG DECEMBER EXPENSES 80,0;' 11157 DALCO CLEANING SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER/POLICE 81.10 11158 EUGENE A DIETZ NOVEMBER EXPENSES 242.7L 11159 DIRECT SAFETY COMPANY SAFETY EQUIPMENT-WATER DEPT 211.70 11160 DOLEJS ASSOCIATES INC SERVICE-AIR CONDITIONER-COMMUNITY CENTER 235.2j 11161 DRI INDUSTRIES CLIPS/SNAP RINGS/WING NUTS/SCREWS 141.02 •-11162 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU SUPPLIES-COS&1UNITY CENTER 194.42 11163 DURO-TEST CORPORATION EQUIPMENT PASTS-COMMUNITY CENTER 192.83 --11164 EDEN PRAIRIE CLEANERS CLEAN BLANKET-POLICE DEPT 2.50 11165 EDEN PRAIRIE TRANSMISSION CONVERTER/SWITCH-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 422.60 11I66 EDEN PRAIRIE TRASHTRONICS NOVEMBER TRASH PICKUP 280.00 11167 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC FLARE KIT/FIRE EXTINGUISHER-STREET DEPT 49.85 1116E EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC MEDICAL SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 41.B5 11169 EMERGENCY SERVICE SYSTEMS INC REPAIR ELECTRICAL ON POLICE CAR 6D.00 11170 ENERGY-SAVING PRODUCTS 2 56" CEILING FANS-PARK DEPT 250.0J 11171 ENGINEERING NEWS-RECORD 3 YEAR SUBSCRIPTION-ENGINEERING DEPT 75.00 11172 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC MANHOLES-DRAINAGE 424.00 11173 FINLEY BROS ENTERPRISES INSTALL BASEBALL OVER THROW FENCE-PARKS 1987.C.y 11174 FLDYD SECURITY SERVICE-LIQUOR STORE 194.7E 11175 JAN FLYNN MILEAGE 39.2E, 11176 FOX MCCUE & MURPHY SERVICE-METRO GRANTS 2567.7 '77 G L CONTRACTING INC SERVICE-CORPORATE WAY 422.00 ...178 C & K SERVICES NOVEMBER SERVICE-JACKETS/TOWELS 73.30 11179 JOIN GARDINER HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 195.00 11180 GENERAL COMUNICATIONS INC RADIO REPAIRS 242.60 11181 GENERAL ELECTRIC CD STARTER SWITCHES-WATER DEPT 141.77 11182 GENERAL SFETY EQUIPMENT CORP REPAIR PUMPER-FIRE DEPT 1199.00 11183 DALE GREEN CO SOD-POLICE DEPT 8.4C 11184 HARMON GLASS WINDSHIELD-STREET DEPT 123.44 "'-11185 HARVEY THORFINNSON & SCOGGIN P A SERVICE-METRO CONTRACTING 691.00 11186 HAUENSTEIN & BURMEISTER INC EQUIPMENT-STARING LAKE PARK 46.60 11187 HEDBERG & SONS CO STEEL ROD-P/S BLDG 12.00 11188 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER OCTOBER 83 BOARO OF PRISONERS 2204.0' 11189 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT & COLLECT EMPLOYEE WITHHOLDING PER COURT ORDER 80.0 11190 KATIE HOLTNEIER REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 11.0C 11191 HOPKINS PARTS CO BEARINGS/AIR FILTER/PIPE 184.93 11192 HORWITZ INC MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR SHUT OFF VALVE FOR SPRINKLER SYSTEM-POLICE 191.51 11193 HUDSON MAP COMPANY MAPS-ENGINEERING DEPT 12.6: 11194 IMPRESS CD'•IPANIES BUSINESS CARDS-POLICE DEPT 25.C; 11195 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 272 NOVEMBER 83 CUSTODIAL SERVICE 1297.G 11196 INGRAM EXCAVATING SERVICE-ROUND LAKE ESTATES 360.C: 11197 J M OFFICE PRODUCTS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 596.9 11198 CHRIS JESSEN FOOTBALL OFFICIALS/FEES PAID 76.01 11199 TED JOHNSON VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 32.C` 11200 WAYNE S JOHNSON SERVICE-INSTALL SHELVES-P/S BLDG 7D6.7, .• 11201 JUSTUS LION1ER COMPANY LUMBER 186.1f NO2 KARULF HARDWARE INC -BATTERY CLAMPS/TAPE/CONCRETE/WIRE/ROPE/ 1209. •. -GASKET SEALANT/4 HUMIDIFIERS/BULBS/MAUL/ -ELECTRIC PLUG/FILTERS/PAINT/WRENCHES/WIRE THREADED RODS/BOLTS/NAILS/DEICE SALT/HOOKS 4032526 1 . 1 11203 KRAEMERS NONE CENTER TARP/SHOVEL/REFLECTORS/10 LIGHTS 226.27 1'':04 KINBERLY B KRETZMAN COURT REPORTING-LANDFILL SITE I & II 535.OG 05 ROBCRT LAMBERT DECEMBER EXPENSES 198.2' 11206 LANCE SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE 12.41 11207 LANDCO EQUIPMENT INC SEAL KITS-FORESTRY DEPT 15.60 11208 LEEF BROS INC NOVEMBER SERVICE/RUGS/DUSTMOPS/COVERALLS 486.3e 11209 ROGER LIND HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 195.0J 11210 LOGIS NOVEMBER SERVICE 2837.22 11211 LONG LAKE FORD TRACTOR EQUIPMENT PARTS-PARK MAINTENANCE 60.30 11212 LYMAN LUMBER COMPANY LUMBER-PARK DEPT 204.64 11213 GENE MARTINSON EXPENSES-COMMUNITY CENTER 9.90 11214 JAMES L MATSON EXPENSES 33.00 11215 MATTS AUTO SERVICE INC TOWING SERVICE • 1Q9.95 11216 MCFARLANES INC CONCRETE-PARK MAINTENANCE 60.00 11217 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC EXPENSES-STRESS WORKSHOP 26.64 11218 MEDICAL OXYGEN & EQUIP CO OXYGEN-FIRE DEPT 35.10 11219 METRO FONE COMMUNICATIONS INC DECEMBER 83 PAGING RENTAL 89.52 11220 METRO PRINTING INC CITY MAPS 1256.00 11221 METROPOLITAN FENCE REPAIR LAGOON FENCE-WATER DEPT 240 0n 11222 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS NOVEMBER SAC CHARGES 35763.75 : 11223 KAREN MICHAEL MILEAGE 6.50 `- 11224 MIDLAND PRODUCTS COMPANY CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 288.35 11225 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP BLACKTOP 50.90 11226 MINNEAPOLIS AREA CHAPTER RESCUE BOOKS-COMMUNITY CENTER 6.00 11227 MINNEAPOLIS STAR & TRIBUNE CO EMPLOYMENT AD-POLICE DEPT 92.40 11228 MPLS STAR & TRIBUNE EMPLOYMENT AD-PLANNING DEPT 240.00 '229 MINNESOTA FIRE INC SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 31.21 l .30 MINNEGASCO SERVICE 2729.62 11231 MINNESOTA MFOA 1984 DUES-FINANCE 10.O00 11232 MINNESOTA PLAYGROUND INC TIME CARDS-COMMUNITY CENTER 48.01 11233 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP NOVEMBER SERVICE 36.47 11234 MODEL STONE CO CURBS-VALLEY VIEW ROAD-PARK DEPT 239.10 11235 MODERN TIRE CO REPAIR TRACTOR TIRES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 113.36 11236 NATIONAL CITY BANK OF MPLS BOND PAYMENT 117683 36 11237 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO NOVEMBER SERVICE 3.79 11238 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 1395.87 11239 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 6189.45 11240 NORWEST BANK MPLS N A BOND PAYMENT 703173.20 11241 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO SERVICE 2947.15 11242 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO SERVICE 1464.46 11243 NORTHWESTERN PRINTING FORMS-ENGINEERING DEPT 69.00 11244 NORTHWESTERN SERVICE INC REPAIR FURNACE-CITY HALL 135.3',' 11245 OFFICE PRODUCTS OF MN INC 8ATTERY-ENG DEPT 25.00 11246 OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC CHAIN-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 159.3G • 11247 PEPSI COLA POP-CONCESSION STAND/COMMUNITY CENTER 99.75 11248 CONNIE L PETERS MILEAGE 12.50 11249 SCOTT PETERS BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAIO 16.00 1125D D C PETERSON DOOR COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS-PARK MAINTENANCE 13.25 11251 PITNEY BOWES 1ST QUARTER 84 POSTAGE MACHINE RENTAL 59.25 11252 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC LAMPS-COMMUNITY CENTER 244 00 1)253 PRECISION BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC REPAIR TAPE RECORDER-MANAGER 48.0u '54 PRIOR LAKE AGGREGATES INC SAND 2314 i -.Z55 R-K HOMES INC REFUND-BUILDING PERMIT 1389 5u 88493982 %( 3 )12SS R & R SPECIALTIES INC SHARPEN ZAMBONI BLADES-COMMUNITY CENTER 79.80 7 DAVID RAQUET SMALL TOOLS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 25.81 1168 FRED RAZAVI VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 336.00 11239 RECREO,'ICS CORP THERMOMETER-COMMIUNITY CENTER 14.G5 11250 RIEKE-CARROLL-MULLER ASSOCIATES I -SERVICE-HOMEWARD HILLS RD/ARBON GLEN/ 8398.12 -CARDINAL CREEK 3RD ADDITION/LAVONNE IND PARK./WATERMAIN ON CTY RO 67/ RAINBOW DR/ PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE 11261 ROAD MACHINERY & SUPPLIES CO -STEEL POSTS/PAINT DUMP TRUCK BODY/MOTOR- 1035.02 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 11262 SAILOR NEWSPAPERS EMPLOYMENT AD-POLICE/COMMUNITY CENTER 80.00 11263 SAILOR NEWSPAPERS INC ADS-LIQUOR STORES 108.00 11264 ST PAUL STAMP WORKS INC DOG LICENSES • 142.97 11265 JIM SALENTINE VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 96.00 11266 LOYD SCHANKE REFUND-EXERCISE CLASSES 17.00 11267 SEARS ROEBUCK & CO -TWO TELEPHONE ANSWER MACHINES-CITY HALL 329.73 SANDER/GRINDER-WATER DEPT 11268 CITY OF SHAKOPEE COPIES OF SURVEY-PLANNING DEPT 4.40 '.' 11269 SHAKOPEE FORD INC -CARBURATOR KIT/REPAIR CARBURATOR LINKAGE/ 913.24 -REPLACE HEATER CORES/REPLACE REAR MAIN -SEAL/WHEEL ALIGNMENT & BALANCE/FUEL PUMP/ SQUAD CARS 11270 STEVEN R SINELL EXPENSES-ASSESSING DEPT 10.00 11271 KARY SMITH BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 40.00 .. 11272 W GORDON SMITH CO GREASE/HYDRAULIC FLUID/WINDSHIELD WASH 495.14 11273 SNYDERS DRUG STORES INC SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 11.92 ( .74 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING INC -EMPLOYMENT ADS-COMMUNITY SERVICES/POLICE 114.00 COMMUNITY CENTER 112i5 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING INC ADS-LIQUOR STORES 154.44 11276 BRUCE STRANDBERG HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 225.O0 11277 STANDARD SPRING COMPANY SEALS/SPRINGS/PLATES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 147.4E 11278 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET -VALVE/PINION/GEAR/REPLACE FUEL TANK/ 491.63 REPLACE HEATER CORE-SQUAD CARS ;; 7. 11279 SUN NEWSPAPERS EMPLOYMENT ADS-COMMUNITY SERVICES 27.00 11280 SUNRAM LANDSCAPING SERVICE-EDENVALE BLVD 3193.0 11281 SUPPLEE ENTERPRISES INC SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE/CITY HALL 26.41 11282 TIRES PLUS TOWING SERVICE 35.0E 11283 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO OXYGEN-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 68.Of. ' . 11284 TWIN CITY TESTING WATER SAMPLES-WATER DEPT 338.00 ;' 11285 TYPE HOUSE+DURAGRAPH SUPPLIES-PARK PLANNING 42.6G '' 11286 UZ ENGINEERED PRODUCTS HAIR PINS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 42.4 11287 VETERINARY DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORIE TEST-ANIMAL WARDEN 15.O0 11288 VIKING LABORATORIES INCORPORATED SODA ASII/CHLORINE-COMMUNITY CENTER 215.9 11289 WATER PRODUCTS COMPANY HYDRANT REPAIR KIT/REPLACE HYDRANT 1416.1E 11290 WATER PRODUCTS COMPANY 75 FT SEWER PIPE-STREET DEPT 559.E 11291 PAUL WELD HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 195.07 11292 WEST WELD WELDING ALLOY-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 100.3i .' 11293 WHITTEN CORPORATION • 5 ROPE ANCHORS-COMMUNITY CENTER 105.0, 5 11294 XEROX CORPORATION SERVICE 13B4.1: 11295 JIM ZAIC 1984 PLUMBING LICENSE 40.0. : '295 ZIEGLER INC 2 BATTERIES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 152.9 .297 ZIEGLER TIRE. SERVICE 4 TIRES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 473.0 11298 JIM WALTER PAPERS XEROX PAPER 542.21 '+ 2224232 $2003587.4': 2«d (,_cember 20, 1983 Cash Disbursements by Fund Number , Fund # Description Amount 10 General $105,273.55 11 Certificate of Indebt 49.85 15 Liquor Store-Prairie Village Mall 60,956.41 17 Liquor Store-Preserve 38,709.93 30 Cash Park Fees 2,567.75 31 Park Acquistion & Development 12,715.10 33 Utility Bond Fund 2,694.80 36 P/S & P/W Bond Fund 910.26 42 68 G.O. Debt Fund 40,973.20 44 Utility Debt Fund 644,677.29 45 Utility Debt Fund ARB 400.00 51 Improvement Construction Fund 74,359.17 52 Improvement Debt Fund 501,053.80 57 Road Improvement Construction Fund 1,918.68 73 Water Fund 86,526.20 77 Sewer Fund 36,822.06 Trust & Escrow Fund 1,165.85 Tax Increment Construction Fund 391,813.55 TOTAL $2,003,587.45 !r MEMOIMIN TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services . DATE: December 15, 1983 • SUBJECT: Proposal for Surface Management Ordinance for Byrant Lake Attached is a November 15, 1983 memo to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission regarding a proposed surface management ordinance for Bryant Lake. This memo gives the rationale for the proposed restrictions on the lake: Limit the speed of water craft to 15 miles per hour from 12 o'clock Noon • until 6 P.M. on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays from Memorial Day through Labor Day. Also, attached to this memo is a copy of the approved minutes of the November 21 meeting of the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission when this item was • discussed. The Council will note that the Commission disagreed with the staff recommendation and recommended the Council not adopt a surface use ordinance, but instead recommended the following: 1. Request the Hennepin County Park Reserve District enforce only allowing 20 cars with boat trailers on the park site. 2. Buoy off the northern tip and southern end of the lake as no wake zones. 3. Close off anauthorized access points on to Bryant Lake (at least investigate • the Thelma Haynes property access). This recommendation was approved on a 3-1 vote, Baker voting no. The Community Services Staff and the Park Reserve District Staff continue to support • the proposed ordinance recognizing that the Sheriffs Water Patrol will only have limited patrolling time at Bryant Lake and that it would be difficult for our Public • Safety Department to enforce this ordinance without a boat. Community Services Staff and the Park Reserve District Staff feel that allowing 20 boats on the lake with the potential for additional 40 boats from property owners does not solve the concern for safety on Bryant Lake. With the sire and configuration of Bryant Lake one jet boat could make it unsafe for any other boats on the lake; or 3-4 boats pulling water skiers could also present a dangerous situation on that lake. • • Staff would point out that many hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent on the acquisition of a regional park facility. The major natural resource and reason for locating this regional park here is the lake. The lake is what attracts users to Bryant Lake Park. This is a regional facility that should offer a wide variety of opportunities for recreational use of this regional resource including fishing, sailing, canoeing, swimming, sail boarding, and water skiing during certain times of the day. By reducing the speed limit during the afternoon hours the lake is open to a wide variety of users. This also allows water skiing after 6 P.M. (on weekends and holidays) which is usually after the wind has gone down and offers the best time for skiing anyway. There would be no restrictions on water skiing at anytime during the week all summer long. Staff requests authorization to draft an ordinance that would restrict speed limits to 15 miles per hour on Bryant Lake from 12 Noon until 6 P.M. on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays from Memorial Day thru Labor Day. BL:md • 20 • • • bll:!;ORP,NI UM • TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services DATE: November 15, 1983 SUBJECT: Proposal for Surface Management Ordinance for Bryant Lake On May 13, 1983, the City of Eden Prairie received a letter from Hennepin County Park Reserve District informing the City that the Park Reserve District Board removed the 20 horsepower limitation on Bryant Lake as it had applied to the boat launch facility at Bryant Lake Regional Park. On May 17, the Eden Prairie City Council directed staff to work with the staff from the Park Reserve Distrct to develop recommendations for a water surface use manage- ment ordinance for Bryant Lake. • On June 20, the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission discussed possible alternatives for a surface management ordinance. However, after a lengthy discussion with residents from the Bryant Lake area, the Commission continued this item until Fall of 1983 and requested City staff to work with Park Reserve District staff on monitoring the number and types of boats that used Bryant Lake during the summer of 1983. • Attached to this memo is the June 14, 1983 memo from staff that recommended limiting the size of the motors to 25 horsepower on Sundays from Memorial Day through Labor Day. That memorandum indicates that the Department of Natural Resources prefers to regulate speed rather than horsepower, but agrees that regulating horsepower is easier. Also, attached to this memo is a November 7 letter from staff to the Bryant Lake Area Residents and a copy of the survey completed by the Park Reserve District staff during the summer of 1983. After considering the discussions between the Commission and residents at the June 20 . meeting, and reviewing the watercraft activities survey completed in the summer of 1983, staff have discussed possible alternative ordinances with representatives from the Department of Natural Resources and the Sheriff's Water Patrol. The problem at Bryant Lake seems to be the number of runabouts between noon and 6 p.m. on weekends and • holidays; however, these numbers would not be a problem if the speed on all these boats was controlled; therefore, speed is the problem. In an attempt to allow a variety of users on the lake, and therefore more people to enjoy the water surface on weekends and holidays, and to eliminate the dangerous situa- tion of many high speed boats in a confined area; the Community Services Staff would • recommend that the City consider adopting a water surface use management ordinance that would provide the following restrictions on Bryant Lake: . Limit the speed of water craft to 15 miles per hour from 12 o'clock Noon until 6 p.m. on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays from Memorial day thru 1 Labor Day. t 2667 • -2- Te Community Services Staff recognize the difficulty in controlling this ordinance { and have discussed enforcement of this ordinance with the Hennepin County Water Patrol and our own Public Safety Department. Licutenan^ Larry Peterson, Hennepin County Water Patrol, has indicated that the County Water Patrol would patrol Bryant Lake as much as possible, especially during the first part of the summer and would spot check it on a regular basis throughout the summer. Eden Prairie's Public Safety Department could also set radar on the shore occasionally to monitor boat speeds if this becomes necessary. The City would request the Park Reserve District to install a sign at the launch inform- ing everyone of the regulation. The City would also send letters to all property owners that have access to the lake informing them of the regulations if this ordinance is passed. If the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission recommend approval of this sur- face management ordinance, the recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council. If Council then approves the ordinance, it must be forwarded to the Department of Natural Resources for review by their Ordinance Review Task Force prior to final approval by the Commissioner of Natural Resources. BL:md •) • • APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE. PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES CCPr•IISSIoN t4ONPAY, NDVI?IBER 21, 1983 7:30 P.M., CITY HALL CO?MISSION ?EMBERS PRESENT: Marty Jessen, chairperson; Raiford Baker, Pat Breitenstein, Jesse Schwartz CQ\t4ISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Marge Friederichs, Gary Gonyea, Jerry Kingrey • CQ'1\TISSION STAFF: Bob Lambert, Director of Conmamity Services OT-ER: Mark Weber, Eden Prairie News I. ROLL CALL • • The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by chairperson, Marty Jessen. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Breitenstein moved to approve the Agenda as published. Schwartz seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. f III. MINUTES OF NOVE BER 7, 1983 MOTION: Schwartz moved to approve the minutes as published. Briitenstein seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. IV. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMIUNICATIONS - None V. RECO>DIEND:ATIONS AND REPORTS A. Reports of Commissioners - None B. Reports of Staff 7, ` Connnunity Services Monthly Report - Lambert referred to this as an inionn:i ion item. VI. OLD BUSINESS S' Proposed Surface Management Ordinance for Bryant Lake Lambert reviewed the Staff Memo of November 1S, 1983, which refers to the Council's direction that Staff cork with the Hennepin County Park Reserve District (ITCPRD) to develop recomnendations for a water surface use management ordinance for Bryant Lake. At the request of this Coimnission, Staff, together with the IICPRD monitored the number and types of boats that used Bryant Lake during the sunnier of 1983 (results attached to November 15th memo). .(IO Minutes - Parks, Recreation F, approved Natural Resources Connission -2- November 21, 1983 Based on discussions with the HCPRD and the Department of Natural Resources, Staff recommends that the City consider a water surface use management ordinance that would provide the following restrictions on Bryant Lake: Limit the speed of water craft to 15 miles per hour from 12:00 noon until 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays from Memorial Day through Labor Day. Greg Mack was present on behalf of the 11CPRD. Baker asked if the proposed ordinance is consistent with other DNR ordinances. Lmnbert said yes and they support this recommendation. Mack added that the key in enforcing the ordinance will be assistance from the County water patrol-- 11CPRD cannot enforce laws governing water craft on the lake. Resident Jim Perkins, 7012 Willow Creek Road, spoke several times and feels that there should not be a law to control the lake useage as that leads to enforcement and he feels the proposed ordinance would be almost impossible to enforce (one reason being boats are not required to have speedometers). He pointed out that safety is of prime importance. In view of that, the • fact that there are too many boats on the lake is more important than the speed they travel. Limit the nunber of boats coming through the Park boat launch (by limited parking). Twenty-five boats as proposed by HCPRD is too many--10-12 is more reasonable. He also referred to the erosion problem caused by so many boats as they turn around on the south end of the lake. He feels the neighbors have never suggested limiting the use of the lake, only that fewer boats be allowed on the lake. The problem will work itself out if people can't launch their boats because parking is filled, eventually they will loose interest in coming. He feels strongly that if a 15 mph limit is enforced, there will be less use of the lake and eventually the residents w' will come into control again which is just what the City and County don't want. Don Sorenson, Willow Creek Road, also feels 15-20+ boats is too many for Bryant Lake. The topography of the lake should be considered--long and narrow and very shallow at either end. Sorenson also noted that boats are being launched at Thelma Haynes property which is adding to the nunber of boats on the lake. lie also pointed out that the main reason the park is there isn't only the lake==it will be used no matter how many boats are launched. He agrees the topography of the lake should be considered in determining how many boats/acre--find out how much useable water there is and then figure the acreage and number of boats allowable. Resident Phil Parsons, Beach Road, said the residents on Bryant Lake have a great deal invested in property and home expense. He feels the proposed regulation will prohibit their heating activity on the lake during peak srmeuer times which infringes on one of the main reasons they chose to live there--boating. Since it appears from the survey that 2/3 of the boats on the lake come through the park larurch, this is where the limitations should be placed. If parking is limited, the overcrowding of boats on the lake will diminish and safety can be restored. • >(,U Minutes - Parks, Recreation G approved Natural Resources Commission -3- November 21, 1983 Resident Gedney Tuttle, Willow Creek Road, suggests the two extreme ends t' of the lake which arc not conducive to good water skiing, should be closed 4 to s}:iiers. He mentioned there arc bays in Lake Minnetonka where closed throttle and no skiing is permitted and it does not seem to be a problem. Bryant Lake simply narrows down too much at both the north and south ends for good turn around use and also the erosion problem created by turning around at high speeds is greatest at those two points. Resident Joe (larding, Willow Wood, said he has not had his speed boat on the lake in 2 years because he feels the lake is not safe--too many boats. He feels if the number of boats is limited there will be no problem or need for an ordinance. Lambert said he is not surprised by the residents comments. The property owners do have a lot invested in their homes, etc. The fact is, however, the lake and those waters must be available to everyone. The metro area has invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in the park and has a right to its use. Bryant Lake has become unsafe so controls are necessary. The number of boats/acre (1/10 acres) is a minimum standard set by the DNR. If the proposed controls are adopted more people can use the lake. He added that he feels buoys to prevent skiing at either end of the lake is a good • • idea. Mack said the present facility permits a maxima of 30 trailers in the parking • area. However, the present facility is not very controllable due to • inadequate layout, etc., and that is why improvement is necessary. He • added perhaps even 10 runabouts presents an unsafe situation, that is why the horsepower regulation permits more activity on the lake but it will be • safer in nature with reduced speed. Schwartz asked when does the City lose DNR funding in terms of management of the lake? Lambert and "tack said the DNR will not manage the lake as • • well in terms of stocking, etc., if below the minimum number of boats is • allowed on the lake. Jessen said the DNR is very concerned about non-discriminatory use of the lake. In light of that,tTe City is trying to look for a reasonable solution • to the management problem. • Baker said he feels it is a mistake to allow only 10-1S boats through the public access, It is far more difficult to enforce the number of boats than • the speed. Presently there are 2 uncontrollable accesses to the lake • (Haynes property and billow Crock homeowners access) so by regulating the number of boats at the park launch only, nothing is accomplished. He feels the City should stick to the original proposal of regulating speed. Lambert noted the discussion was supposed to focus on a lake surface management ordinance ant instead it has been on the number of boats allowed on the lake. They arc two different issues and should be handled separately. u�f 2 Minutes - Parks, Recreation f, approved Natural Resources Coianission -4- November 21, 1983 MOTION: Schwartz moved to recommend the Council not adopt a surface use oidinuncc. Instead, 3 steps should be taken to address the safety and use problems: 1. Request the UCPRD enforce only allowing 20 cars with boat trailers on the park site. 2. Buoy off the northern tip and southern end of the lake as no-wake zones. 3. Close off unauthorized access points onto Bryant Lake (at least investigate the Hayes property access). Breitenstein seconded the motion and it carried. Baker voted naye, the others in favor. VII. NEW BUSINESS - None VI I I. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. ( Respectfully submitted, • Carrie Tietz Recording Secretary 264,2) MEMORANDUM TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services DATE: December 2, 1983 . SUBJECT: ARC Lease Attached is a copy of the proposed Lease Agreement Between the City of Eden Prairie and the Association For Retarded Citizens of Hennepin County. This lease is for Camp Indian Chief located within Birch Island Park. The lease is for continued operation of a day camping and overnight camping program for mentally retarded and developmentally delayed children and adults within Hennepin County, as well as other disadvantaged residents of Hennepin County. The term of the lease is for a period of 30 years commencing on January 1, 1984 and terminating on December 31, 2014, and provides an extension of an additional ten year period if the lessee so desires and the lessor approves the extension • at that time. ARC is required to maintain the property, pay for all utilities and keep insurance on all of the property to the same extent the City would insure the facilities. Attached to this memo is map showing Birch Island Park, including Camp Indian Chief. The trail connection from Birch Island Road along the north portion of the camp to Eden Prairie Road will be constructed by the City at some future date. This item will be reviewed by the City Council on December 20, 1983. Community Services Staff recommend approval of this lease agreement. BL:md • • • 2600 1 \ i •\ fit.u i '\ E., \ •\ p / 4 : ,. .. .‘k• -•,,) `., 1 1 1 1 I. • 'Sid..: `.`.i i,. ii Pf sr"• --,....._._ __\,...\\ i ,' i ftc� xi• 1 > 1 a r N ., , a f r--4 ii . / ( Ia.i — 2,,y,r-s • • LEASE This Lease is made and entered into as of the day of , 1983, by and between the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Lessor" and Associ- ation for Retarded Citizens of Hennepin County, a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "Lessee"; WHEREAS, Lessor is the owner of certain land situated on the north shore of Birch Island Lake, adjacent and west of Birch island Lake Park, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof, together with certain improvements thereon, on which site Lessee has operated the resident, day or outpost camping- recreation program for mentally retarded and developmentally delayed children and adults within Hennepin County and other disadvantaged residents of Hennepin County for a number of years, all of which is hereinafter referred to as "the premises"; and, • WHEREAS, the County of Hennepin under the laws of Minnesota, • conveyed and quit claimed to Lessor the premises by means of a quit claim deed which restricts use of the property to a resident, day or outpost camping-recreation program for mentally retarded and develop • - mentally delayed children and adults within Hennepin County and other disadvantaged residents of Hennepin County; WHEREAS, Lessee desires to lease the premises from Lessor upon certain terms and conditions as hereinafter set forth, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises herein recited and of the covenants, conditions and agreements hereinafter set forth • to be made, kept and performed by the parties hereto, the parties mutually agree as follows: I. Lessor hereby leases to Lessee, and Lessee hereby leases from • Lessor, the premises, during the term, in consideration of the pay- ment of the rents by Lessee to Lessor and in accordance with all of the covenants, terms, provisions, and conditions hereof. II. Lessee shall use the premises for the operation and conduct of • a resident, day or outpost camping-recreation program for mentally retarded and developmentally delayed children and adults within Hennepin County and other disadvantaged residents of Hennepin County. If Lessee discontinues the operation of said program for any reason, then this Lease is automatically terminated. III. Lessee's term of possession of, the premises under the Lease shall be for a period of 30 years commencing on the day of • , 1983, and terminating on the day of , 19_ Lessee desires that the term of this Lease be extended for an additional term of ten years following the initial term. Lessor's intent is to grant the extension, provided that an extension of the • term appears, at that time, to be in the best interests of the Lessor and to be consistent with its obligations and responsibilities. Lessee acknowledges that it has given no consideration for the present expression of intention to extend, and that improvements it makes on the premises are made at the risk that the term may not be extended. • -2- 1 uI'7 IV. Lessee has inspected the premises. No representation, state- ment or warranty, expressed or implied, has been made by or on behalf of the Lessor as to the condition of the premises. The taking of the possession of the premises by Lessee shall be conclusive evidence that Lessee accepts the same "as is". In no event shall Lessor be liable for any defect in the premises. V. 1. Lessee shall keep and maintain the premises and all improve- ments in a safe, sanitary, and sightly condition, in good repair, and shall restore and yield the same back to Lessor upon the termination of this Lease in such condition and repair as shall exist at the commencement of this Lease, ordinary wear and tear excepted, and if such premises shall not be so kept by Lessee, Lessor may enter the { premises (without such entering causing or constituting termination of the Lease, or an interference with the possession of said premises by Lessee) and do all things necessary to restore said premises to the condition herein required, charging the cost and expense thereof to Lessee and Lessee agrees to pay Lessor, in addition to the rent and charges hereby reserved, all such costs and expenses. Lessor shall have no duty or obligation to repair or rebuild any structure on the premises, whether the repair be structural or otherwise. 2. Lessee covenants and agrees to keep said premises and improve- ments situated thereon free and clear of any and all liens in any way arising out of the use thereof by Lessee. 3. Lessor, its agents and employees shall have the right at reasonable times to enter the premises for the purpose of inspecting the same from time to time. • -3- c4 VI. Lessee shall not sublet the whole or any part of the premises or assign all or any part of its present interest in this Lease with- out first obtaining the written consent of Lessor to any such sublease or assignment. VII. In the event the premises, or any part thereof, shall be damaged or destroyed by fire or other casualty, the same shall be promptly repaired or rebuilt by Lessee at its expense and as soon as funds are available, provided, however, that Lessee may elect at its sole option, which shall be exercised by written notice to Lessor given not later than 90 days after such damage or destruction, not .to repair or recon- struct any or all buildings which are a part of the premises. Upon written notice of such election from Lessee to Lessor, the obligation • of Lessee to pay rent shall cease and this Lease shall thereupon terminate. Lessor shall have no obligation to repair or replace in the event of damage or destruction by any cause whatsoever or by natural wear and tear or use, any building, structure, fixture, equipment, or improve- ; ment to or upon the premises whether owned by Lessor or Lessee. VIII. • In the event that all or any portion of the premises shall be taken by eminent domain proceedings, or by purchase in anticipation of such proceedings, the proceeds payable in connection therewith by the condemnor, except as hereinafter provided, shall be paid to the Lessor. • -4- 11,'/c,► I Lessee shall Le entitled to assert a claim for the value to it during the remainder of the term hereof of any capital improvement or improvements made by Lessee on or to the premises. Any award in any such proceedings for any such improvement or improvements in excess of such amount shall be the property of Lessor. IX. Lessee, for the duration of this Lease, and any extension or renewal thereof, in the operation of its program, shall conform to all applicable laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. • . . X. . - • - . • ' Lessor shall not be liable for any damages to any property or person at any time that may occur in or upon the premises, other than damages due to the negligence of Lessor, and Lessee covenants and agrees that it will indemnify and hold the Lessor free and harm- less of and from all claims of whatever kind or nature for damages by • or to any person or property whomsoever or whatsoever, other than as shall be caused by the negligence of Lessor, but including any personal injury or injuries to any person or property alleged or claimed to have been caused by any act of commission or omission of Lessee, its agents or employees. XI. Lessee shall assume all risks incident to or in connection with the uses of the premises hereinunder and shall be solely responsible for all accidents or injuries of whatever nature or kind to persons or property caused by its operations on the premises and shall indemnify, defend and save harmless Lessor, its authorized agents and representa- tives, from any penalties for violation of any law, ordinance or -g- regulation affecting its operations, and from any and all claims, suits, losses, damages or injuries to persons or property of whatso- • ever kind or nature arising directly or indirectly out of such uses of the premises, or resulting from the carelessness, negligence or improper conduct of Lessee, or any of its agents or employees. Lessor shall not be liable to Lessee for damage to property of Lessee or any loss of revenues to Lessee resulting from Lessor's acts, omission or neglect in respect to the premises. XII. Lessee shall maintain in force during the entire term of this lease, general liability insurance in the names of Lessor and Lessee for injuries to persons occurring in or on the premises; such insur- ance shall at all times be in the greater amount of (1) $2,500,000 f for personal injury or death and property damage resulting from any • one accident or occurrence on a combined single-limit basis, or (2) the maximum limit of coverage provided by general liability insurance carried by Lessor from time to time. • Such insurance shall be effective under a valid and enforceable policy or policies, with terms acceptable to Lessor, issued by an insurer of recognized responsibility approved by Lessor upon submission of the policy or policies to Lessor at least ten (10) days prior to the effective date or any renewal date as the case may be. XIII. Lessee shall maintain in full force and effect during the entire term of this Lease, a policy or policies of insurance, naming Lessor as an insured therein, insuring any property of Lessee and Lessor, • except removable personal property of Lessee, situated on or about the premises against loss by fire and other perils in the amount of full -6- 16, 1 insurable value thereof. Such policy or policies shall be upon terms { acceptable to the Lessor and issued by an insurer of recognized responsibility approved by the Lessor upon submission of the policy or policies to the Lessor at least ten (10) days prior to the effective date or any renewal date as the case may be. Any and all amounts paid or payable to the insureds for any loss under any such policy of insurance (the "proceeds") shall be paid or payable to the Lessor to be held as follows: (a) In the event Lessee repairs or rebuilds in accordance with paragraph VII hereof, any building or improvement on the premises as a result of any damage or destruction covered by any such policy of insurance, the proceeds Or so much thereof as shall cover the cost thereof, shall be applied in payment of the costs of such repair or rebuilding and the balance of the proceeds shall be the sole property of Lessor. • (b) in the event Lessee elects not to repair or rebuild any such building or improvement in accordance with paragraph VII hereof, all of such proceeds shall remain the sole • property of Lessor. XIV. • Duplicate memorandum copies of all insurance policies secured by the Lessee shall be delivered to Lessor, together with satisfactory evidence of payment of premiums thereon at least ten (10) days prior • to the effective dates of such policies. All renewal policies to be procured by the Lessee or copies thereof, together with satisfactory evidence of payment of premiums thereon, shall be delivered to the -7- ) (J Y • • • Lessor at least thirty (30) days before the expiration date of the policies then in force. XV. Lessee shall be responsible for and shall pay all the taxes on equipment, furnishings, fixtures and property placed on the premises, if any, and shall pay promptly any and all utilities used by it on • the premises for the duration of the term of this Lease. XVI. This Lease is made upon the condition that if the Lessee shall neglect or fail to keep, observe and perform any of the covenants and agreements contained in this Lease, which are to be kept, observed or performed by it, or if the Lessee shall vacate said premises or aban- don the same during the term of this Lease, then and in any of said cases the Lessor may immediately or at any time thereafter, and with- out further notice or demand, enter into and upon said premises, or any part thereof, and take absolute possession of the same fully and absolutely, without such re-entry working a forfeiture of the rents to be paid and the covenants to be performed by the Lessee for the full term of this Lease, and may at the Lessor's election lease or sublet said premises, or any part thereof, on such terms and conditions and for such rents and for such time as the Lessor may elect, and after crediting the rent actually collected by the Lessor from such reletting on'the rentals stipulated to be paid under this Lease by the Lessee from time to time, collect from the Lessee any balance remaining due from time to time on the rent reserved under this Lease, charging to the Lessee such reasonable expenses as the Lessor may expend in putting .8- 26 3 t}1C premises in tenantable condition. Or the Lessor may at its election and upon written notice to the Lessee declare this Lease • forfeited and void, and may thereupon re-enter and take full and absolute possession of said premises as the owner thereof, and free from any right or claim of the Lessee, or any person or persons claiming through or under the Lessee; and such election and re-entry last mentioned shall be and constitute an absolute bar to any right to enter by the Lessee upon the payment of all arrearages of rent and costs after a dispossession under any suit or process for breach of any of the covenants of this Lease, and the commencement by the Lessor of any action to recover possession of said premises aforesaid shall be deemed a sufficient notice of election of said Lessor to treat this Lease as void and terminated, without the written notice above specified. XVIL In the event of the termination of this Lease by Lessor as hereinbefore provided, Lessee shall, and hereby waives any and all claims of any character for damages or loss which it may sustain for any reason or cause whatsoever. XVIII. The failure of the Lessor at any time to require performance of Lessee of any of the provisions hereof shall in no way affect the right of Lessor thereafter to enforce the same, nor shall the waiver by Lessor of any breach of any of the provisions hereof be taken or held to be a waiver of the provision itself. • XIX. Lessor agrees to pay any and all installments for special assessments _g- levied against the premises during the term of the Lease as they become ae and payable. Lessee agrees to pay any and all taxes on the premises - as they become due and payable. XX. ' Lessor reserves the right and Lessee specifically agrees to permit, the construction of a trail over the northerly part of the premises consisting of approximately a 20 foot wide corridor more par- ticularly described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof. XXI. Time is declared to be of the essence of this Lease, and the terms hereof shall inure to and be binding upon the parties and their respective legal representatives, successors and assigns. This Lease embodies the entire understanding of the parties with respect to the ,abject matter hereof and shall not be amended or modified except in writing signed by the parties. XXII. All notices to be given to Lessor or Lessee shall be given in writing and hand-delivered or by depositing in the United States mail, certified, and postage prepaid, addressed to: CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ASSOCIATION FOR RETARDED CITIZENS 8950 Eden Prairie Road .OF.HENNEPIN COUNTY. Eden Prairie, MN 55433 • XXIII. Lessee further covenants with Lessor that at the expiration of the term of this Lease peaceable possession of the premises shall be jiven to the Lessor. 2(,5 XXIV. Lessee, upon performing the covenants, conditions and agree- ments contained, shall and may peacefully have, hold and enjoy the premises and privileges hereinafter granted. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Lease this day of , 1983. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, "Lessor" • By By ASSOCIATION FOR RETARDED CITIZENS OF HENNEPIN COUNTY, "Lessee" • By By STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1983, by and of the City of Eden Prairie. Notary Public • • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1983, by -11- - � � • and of Association for Retarded Citizens "of Hennepin County. Notary Public • • • _12_ 24 .7 • TO: Mayor and City Council =. Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission 1ThW: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services DATE: December 9, 1983 SUBJECT: Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge/Recreation Area and State Trail Comprehensive Plan The City has received a copy of the draft comprehensive plan for the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge/Recreation Area and State Trail. The plan was prepared by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The comprehensive plan is intended to provide the public, municipalities and interest groups with an indication of the recreation development in resource management activi- ties intended for the future. The plan summarizes past public involvement and manage- ment commitments, and identifies the problems and concerns which will influence the • natural and recreation potential of the valley. The comprehensive plan also recommends corrective and preventative steps needed to resolve these issues and outlines the responsibilities of governmental agencies and others to carry out a coordinated develop- ment and management program which would provide the greatest amount of public u:-e and protection of the wildlife and the natural and cultural resources of the Minnesota Valley. A copy of this 187 page document is located at the Community Services Department and several copies are located at the library for public review. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources requests any comments on this plan be • submitted by January 1, 1984. • On February 2, 1981, Mr. John Tietz, representing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, gave a presentation to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission regarding 1. the proposed plan for the Wildlife Refuge/Recreation Area. At that time, the Commis- sion urged the City Council to support what was "concept C" as proposed by the refuge planners and furthermore, to "limit and carefully manage development of snowmobile trails in Eden Prairie, and that equestrian trails be included that would connect Eden Prairie trails to the Minnesota River Valley Trail, and to support the expansion of the refuge boundaries to include the bluff area as proposed by the refuge planners". The Commission also supported the hunting plan that would limit hunting by permit". On February 3, the Eden Prairie City Council considered the action taken by the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and unanimously supported the same action. The draft comprehensive plan has eliminated any snowmobile trails within the Upgrala Unit (the Eden Prairie portion of the wildlife refuge) but does include equestrian trails, as well as bicycle, hiking and cross country skiing. The only hunting that will eventually he allowed in the Upgrala Unit will be for handicapped hunters and for a hunter education facility that will provide facilities for interpretative and educational programs for young hunters. The only portion of the bluff area that is included in the wildlife refuge is south and cast of 169, just north of Crass Lake. 1G��Y • • -2- The trail access points are at Indian Road and through the Highway 169 underpass, 3 which arc the two access points recommended by the City. There is approximately 2,448 acres of land to be acquired by the Federal Government for the National Wildlife Refuge within the City of Eden Prairie. An additional lel acres of land within the Wildlife Recreation Arca is to be acquired by the City of Eden Prairie. j. A great deal of the plan provides objectives and performance standards that county and municipalities are encouraged to adopt to preserve floodplains, wetlands, the bluffs and upland areas within the Wildlife Refuge and Recreation Area. Eden Prairie has always recognized the bluffs of the Minnesota River as a distinct element of the Minnesota valley landscape and an essential part of the valley resource as a whole. Eden Prairie recognizes that the bluffs arc composed almost entirely of highly erodible, sandy soils which arc difficult to control, stabilize and revegetate once disturbed . • The comprehensive plan points out that the bluffs provide a rich and varied environment for a variety of plants and animals, as well as a refuge for wildlife particularly during periods of high water. "The bluffs provide a transition and buffer between the valley floodplain and the urbanized lands adjacent to the valley. The physical nature of the bluffs and their established plant communities act to filter and absorb many of the elements produced by the surrounding urban environment which would compete with and possibily c'egrade the physical and social resources and values of the valley". The comprehensive plan has established as an objective the following: "To maintain the natural state of bluffs which are adjacent to wetland, wildlife or recreation areas and susceptible to severe eroison". Performance standards: No uses or physical encroachments on the river bluffs should be allowed which would, or have the tendency to: • 1. Increase the possibilities of soil erosion due to slope or soil type. 2. Decrease the natural diversity of the animal communities present, fragment • wildlife habitat or create a community or habitat type which is physically dominated by exotic species. • 3. Disrupt traditional routes or areas used for local migration or refuge during periods of flooding or other natural catastrophries of the valley floor. 4. Be inconsistent with the objectives of encouraging land uses compatible with the perpetuation of the natural land forms, vegetation, and the uses of an area in relation to recreation, education, research, and aesthetics. S. Increase the amount of storm water runoff to an amount that is greater than what occurs naturally. RECO?EMENDATIONS; Counties and municipalities should, if they have not: • 1. Idenitify the Minnesota River bluffs in their comprehensive plans noting areas of steep slopes (12i-13'), very steep slopes (greater than 18%) and areas of moderate, high, an extremely high erosion potential and adopt policies for their planning and management. -g_ 2. Encourage a setback from the bluff edge sufficient to reduce erosion potential and promote aesthetics. 3. Require dedication of bluff lands for conservation purposes as a part of regulating subdivision of land. 4. Encourage the use of earth tones in the construction and coloring of bluff top structures. 5. Adopt a bluff management overlay ordinance to supplement existing zoning ordinances and to effectuate the objective and performance standards for protection of the river bluffs. 6. Investigate the possible use of transfer of development rights as a compensation for landowners who own bluff property. The plan also provides a lengthy list of objectives and planning and management stategies to encourage public use and to provide a variety of recreational opportunities. Attached is a copy of a chart showing the recreation opportunities proposed for the Upgrala Unit and a copy of the map showing the Upgrala Unit development plan. I have also attached a copy of a Appendix B, which describes a variety of land preservation and protection techniques which might be used to protect the Minnesota River Valley and the adjacent bluffs prior to the acquisition and development of the Wildlife Refuge and Recreation Area. The City of Eden Prairie has already adopted a floodplain ordinance, a shoreland management ordinance, and a steep slope ordinance. The Commission and Council may want to consider some of the other measures discussed in Appendix B to protect the bluffs and the floodplain. The Community Services Staff recommend the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and the City Council to support the comprehensive plan for the bluffs and the floodplain. BL:md • Thn Plan 1 Recreational Opportunities f Fff:i. lI STvE a F e o, OC ,6. C ti v �° ', 1. Goo oc o 4- .� y p 4- �c w, e l thS IHiL:t LI A. 1LJ;AI IU71 I' Guided Tours 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 Interpretation • • • • • O 0 • Wildlife Mgt. i`emonstratinn 0 0 0 • 0 • 0 • Hiking • • 0 0 • • • 0 • 0 • 0 0 • • Bicycling • • 0 • O 0 • o • • Cross-Country Skiing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • • 0 0 0 0 • • Horseback Riding ( • • 0 • 0 0 • 0 • 0 Snowmfolling • • 0 0 O 0 • Dug Sledding l 0 i. ACiE} ;;SEO ACTIVITIES E Boat Access • • • I Canoeing O 0 Fishing 0 0 • • 0 0 • 0 • Hu.'i11NG + Upland Bird 0 0 O J 0 0 • • .. Waterfowl '0 0-1 ea o 0 • 0 • • i. Archery peer 0 0 • • O O O 1i 0 0 O 0 O Small Game • 0 O • • 0 • I. --1 trapping O 0 e1 0 O O • 0 B. 4 1. LAND bASiO AL Ti t Camping 4 L—o • • Trail Camping 0 l 0 • • f Picnicking AIO O • Field 009 Tridlinq ..,. , H 0 i 1 1 114 r i • r L , r) 1 � N� I—` I^u sin •0'- ,; (' 1 5 ,/)• er- t.1 ' I • . J • k� !'1 `mil i /a I a r, 4 i // 1\ ',3 0 v 1:-1 3 Qtl3 a N h i:i *..s,..t•:. ',.‘!It.,.'i A*- tetz k ''' ' - Q /ar % ^� N AA} el'. g rf n li. i Qc! J' .`v ..' 1„Qgn.�A o ',c c aQ eq z • c , (,':•su:'/) - `P1 S Inn = ,s, ''• Lti.r..:?JN 5 ._1 . °� -yes,• 1 :\ \yam a Z a's� F •hwl t:_d 8 �\. ..~ i $ '•1� :'.. //1 �' �i t;�-�� / N Appendix 3 (,1,%==:�, INT ROD UCT10N A variety of land preservation and protection techniques exist which can be used in the lower Minnesota River Valley. The techniques discussed vary in the d.gree to which they afford protection to the resource nod range from indirect influence on land use to direct control of some or all of the possible uses for a given area. • The techniques discussed will focus on options and opportunities for citizen and community involvement in protecting the lower Minnesota River Valley. These techniques can be used individually or in concert to create a blanket or tapestry which affords comprehensive protection to the valley resources. The reasons for employing a variety of methods are to provide flexibility in the resource protection process,save money,and allow selection of a method or I methods most suitable for the protection objective at hand. The protection methods discussed in this appendix have advantages and disadvantages,most of which center on the I purchase cost,acceptability to the landowner, the impact on municipal taxes,operation and maintenance of the properties, and adherence to preservation agreements over the long term. In any case,continued citizen and government involvement is needed to support the effort to protect the Minnesota Valley. Citizens can become involved at any level of the valley protection effort and by encouraging their city,regional, and state representatives to do the same. Government can a influence land use decisions and ensure the continued existence of important resources by using three basic powers: } taxation,regulation, and acquisition. The following table summarizes and compares the various methods available for protecting lower Minnesota River Valley lands. 1 TAXATIO N The method by which real property is taxed con delay the • pressure to develop property and provide incentives for restoring or even donating important natural and cultural 1.1 resources. Property tax, federal estate tax, and state inheritance tax can be impncted by the following methods to create positive incentives which discourage development on -- 1 lands which contain imlwrt;uat natural and cultural resources. These tax incentives arc realized through prcferrentuai assessments,deferred taxation,restrictive agreements,and ,1 other m ore specific incentives. lneentive.s for restoring or 1 donating resources arc also offered through deductions mid tax shelter stcnm.jug from private donations of real property. g 2(((5 161 • Appendix E3 Evaluation of Protection Alternatives • // :/ 74, e 4C4`4V`46 �l�`4� 44 TAXATION Preferential Assessment Low Low Limited Low None Low Deferred Taxation Medium Medium Limited Low None Low Restrictive r Agreement High High Limited Low None Low Incentives High High Variable Low Variable None REGULATION Sensitive Land Zoning High High Good Low Variable Low Floodplain Zoning Low High High Low Fair Low Shorciand Zoning High high Good Low Fair Low Subdivision Regulation Medium High Good Low Good Low Land Use Plan Designation Low Low Good Low None Low Trensfer of Development Rights High High - Low Variable None ,t ACQUIsI rloN Fee Title High High Variable High High High Development Right Easement high High Fair Variable Good Medium Lease High Moderate Good Moderate High None Cooperative Agreement High Low Good None high None Registration high Moderate high None Variable None 162 _ Appendix B c Preferential Preferential assessment reduces taxes by requiring Asse:csment assessors to assess eligible land on the basis of some current use value versus current market value. Three options for preferential assessment can be used in the lower Minnesota Valley. 1. MS 272.67 permits any local unit of government,except 1 those in Hennepin County,to divide its city into urban and rural services areas. While only the local tax assessor has the authority over the classification or reclassification of J property, the community can establish a tax district which would receive preferential assessment. Thus, property which is rural in character and does not receive urban services can be taxed at a rural rate. 2. Property owners who have wetlands or native prairie on ' their property may claim them exempt from taxation. In the 1 • case of native prairie,application for exemption mist be made to the county assessor and the prairie area evaluated by the Department of Natural Resources(MS 272.02). 1 Exemption of wetlands and native prairie from taxation does not diminish any right of ownership or grant the public any additional or greater right of access to those lands. 3.The wetlands and native prairie credit programs,authorized by MS 273.1 15 and 273.116 respectively,provide an incentive .1 for preserving these natural resources. As long as owners preserve the wetland or native prairie, they are eligible to receive a credit on the taxes paid on the remainder of their property. To qualify for the program,the property owner must initially qualify for the exemptions outlined above and retain the wetland or native prairie for the year during which credit is received. As with the exemptions outlined above, the county assessor shall be responsible for administering the tax credit 1 program. Deferred Taxation Deferred taxation is similar to preferential assessment except that a sanction is applied if land is converted to a non-eligible use. The sanction often involves the repayment of some or all of the taxes which have been saved prior to the conversion of the land. One option for deferred taxation can be used in the 1 lower Minnesota Valley. 1.Green Acres Tax Option provides farmers a way to be taxed 1 at the agricultural value of their property(MS 273.11). The county assessor oversees the program through which the tax option is administered. Once the land is enrolled in the program,spacial assessments associated with public capital expenditures are c!cferred as long as the property qualifies for Green Acres treatment. ? 163 Appendix B Rcatrictivc A restrictive agreement includes both preferential Agreement assessment and, in most eases,a sanction similar to those used in deferred taxation. in addition,a restrictive agreement requires the property owners to sign a contract in which they agree to retain the land in eligible uses for a certain period of time. At present only one option for restrictive agreements can be used in the lower Minnesota Valley. 1.The Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves Act establishes a policy and program for preserving agricultural lands in the metropolitan area(MS 473). The program is rooted in the local and regional comprehensive planning process outlined in the Metropolitan Land Use Planning Act(MS 473.851). Through the Agricultural Preserves Program,property owners of land designated for long term agricultural use in a local • comprehensive plan may apply to the local planning and zoning authority for acceptance to the program. The program • requires owners to enter a restrictive agreement which states that the land will be kept in agricultural use for a minimum of eight years. Once enrolled in the program,the land is taxed according to its agricultural use and is exempt from the political and economic factors which influence land use or are detrimental to productive farm operations in the metropolitan • area. Should it he determined that the agricultural preserve is not longer desirable, either the landowner or the local government can terminate the agreement and the preserve • expires eight years from the date of notification. Other Tax Both state and federal tax laws can provide incentives to Incentives private individuals and corporations to preserve,restore,or • donate natural and cultural resources. These incentives are • realized through the net cash return after taxes that occurs through deductions and the tax shelter effect of donating real property. At present, three incentives exist which have application in the lower Minnesota Valley. • 1.The Federal Tax Reform Act of 1976(PL 94-455,See. 2124) • provides two incentives for the rehabilitation of historic buildings • a.The first incentive allows the owner of a"certified . historic structure to amortize the coat of a"certified rehabilitation"in lieu of otherwise allowable depreciation deductions for income tax purposes. b.The second incentive allows the owner to take accelerated depreciation,if the property in question qualifies as a"substantially rehabilitated historic property." A substantially rehabilitated historic property is any certified Ii.;torie structure far which the cost of certified rehab ilita tiro exceeds either35,000 or the adjusted basis of the property,whichever is greater. 164 2 LG, • ,, Appendix B k 12.The Internal Revenue Code(Chapter 1701:3b)encourages the making of charitable contributions by allowing an individual a deduction against ordinary income equal(with certain exceptions)to the value of the donation. Corporations i can deduct the value of gifts of property worth up to 5 percent of the company's net income before taxes. 1 Both individuals and corporations are able to spread the value of their donation over five years following the gift. The result is that a taxpayer's liability is reduced,possibly by a considerable amount. This reduction in tax liability permits it both individuals and corporations to express the maximum possible generosity while making the cost of doing so as low as possible. 3. In 1980 the U.S. Congress enacted PL 96-541 which permits private landowi ers to obtain a federal tax deduction for the value of development rights donated in easement for conservation purposes(see discussion on acquisition of 1 development rights for an explanation of easements). The legislation identifies four conservation purpose,any of which ?� . can be deducted • �] a.The preservation of land areas for outdoor recreation or education • 3 b.The protection of plant and animal habitats and ecosystems 3 e.The preservation of open space d.The preservation of historically important land areas or 1 certified historic structures. REGULATION Regulation is the exercise of the local power to control the use of land. The basis for this control is a concern for the health,safety, and general welfare of the public. This concern and the ability to regulate are tempered by the taking clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution which states that "private property (shall not)be taken for public use without just compensation." I The question of what cotutilates a"taking"and the presumed relationship between the private ownership of land and an unrestrained private right to develop is mining increased attention in the courts. At present,if land case regulations are r based on first rate ccologie;il,economic, and social research • and arc persuasive in tel of the public interest,they may be SWt lined as n public right. The following are methods of regulatiag land use. III 1 2 t(5 Appendix B • Sensitive Lands The Metropolitan Council has developed model ordinances • ____—_— Zonirig which addre s the issue of conservation and protection of environmentally sensitive lands. These model ordinances, developed pursuant to MS 473.201,are laid over existing local regulations and nre intended to provide regulatory options to local governments. Three approaches to environmental protection are offered. 1. Environmental site planninr, ordinance. The ordinance requires the preparation and approval of a site plan which • includes a performance bond. Approval of the site plan is contingent on the proposal's ability to satisfy a set of • standards which address various local concerns. These • concerns may include soil erosion,,wetland preservation, the preservation of fish anal wildlife habitat,or other matters important to the local government. 2 Environmental overlay district ordinance. The ordinance establishes a number of environmental districts which overlay the established land use zoning districts. The environmental districts address the protection, preservation,and maintenance of wetlands,woodlands, unique habitats,soil erosion,groundwater recharge,and • restrictive soils. Use of a given parcel of land will he determined by the regulations for the underlying land use zoning district, provided the additional requirements and standards of the environmental overlay district are met. 3. Conservation district ordinance. The ordinance establishes a single conservation zoning district. The purpose of the ordinance is to preserve natural resources and environmental quality in order to avoid public expense resulting from inappropriate development. The intent is to prohibit uses which are incompatible and conversely to allow, through conditional use permit,uses which are compatible with the purpose of the zone. Floodplain MS 104.01 directs local governments to develop floodplain Zonin_ zoning ordinances which comply with the requirements for management of floodplains(Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Chapter 7:N It 85-93)and the National Flood Insurance Program(PI,90-448). The purpose of these programs is to promote sound land use practices on floodpinins in order to reduce flood damage, • decrease public expenditure and inconvenience, and ensure that a community's flood prone lands are put to their most appropriate use. 166 I 1 i Appendix B Shoreland The Shoreland Management Act(MS 105.485)is intended Youiay to provide guidance for the wise we of shorelauads and their -' related land resources in order to preserve the economic and natural resource values and enhance the quality of the state's 3 surface waters. The Statewide Standards and Criteria for ,t Management of Shoreland Areas of Minnesota(Ninnesota Department of Conservation Rules,Chapter G:CONS 70-77) and the Statewide Standards and Criteria for Management of Municipal Shoreland Areas(Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Rules, Chapter 6:NR 82-84)establish minimum guidelines for the use and development of shoreland areas by establishing sewage treatment requirements, minimum lot • sizes,building setbacks,and subdivision provisions. "Shoreland"is land within 1,000 ft of the ordinary high water mark of a protected water;land within 300 ft of a river or • stream;or the landward extension of the designated floodplain of a river or stream,whichever is greater. To administer the program,three classes of development standards were 3 developed to account for the different physical and cultural characteristics of the state's streams and lakes. These three classes are Natural Environment (lakes and streams), • Recreational Development(lakes),and General Development Makes and streams). Subdivision Local units of government are authorized to regulate Regulations where and in what manner the subdivision of land will be rj permitted. This authority is given to cities by MS 462.358 and to counties by MS 394.25. The local subdivision regulations can control the density to which an area may be subdivided and require that a reasonable portion of a proposed subdivision be dedicated to the public or preserved for public use. The size of this reasonable dedication meet be tied to the need created by the approval of the proposed subdivision. The city can also accept money in lieu of dedication. This money roust .. :,- be spent for the same use that the dedicated lands would have been. Land Use flan As part of a community's comprehensive planning effort Designation in the metropolitan area,a community is required to designate the location,intensity.and extent of different land uses that will occur within its jurisdiction(MS 473.859). One hind use that rnest be addressed in the land use portion of the community comprehensive plan is parks and open space (MS 473.859,sued. 3). 1'he:;c lands ore d-a.signated administratively during the planning process and unless they id are considered part of the metropolitan parks and open space system administered by the Metropolitan Council, the lands enjoy no legal protection and the proposed or designated tee cnn be changed by amending the city's comprehensive plan. Lund use designation can,however,be a strong method of protection if the relative!dem fletillet:of n designated area cnn be demonstrated clearly to policy makers and if dcsiguntion will help fulfill the legal requirements or organizational incentives for implementing other protection techniques. n„,' 167 • • • Appendix B Transfer of The transfer of development right::(Ti)It)is gradually 6cvc nncnt Rights becoming n useful land management technique, The method combines the concept of zoning with compensation to owners of restricted lands. The compensation, in this case, comes from developers who wish to build on less restricted land rather than from the government. Transfer of development rights schemes have many different forms,but generally have two basic components. First, environmentally valuable land inside the planning jurisdiction is defined on a map and zoned for little or no further development. Other land in the planning jurisdiction is zoned for further development. The second component of a TI)R plan involves the inducement mechanism for transferring development rights from the no-growth zone to the growth zone. • The idea is that the development rights are separated from the • land in the no-growth zone and are made available for • • purchase and attachment to land in the growth zone. The use of TDR should be considered as a supplement to other • regulatory methods of land use control and a way to provide and alternative use to property owners whose land is important to the valley concept. ACQUISITION Acquisition of the right to develop property is the most direct way of protecting natural or cultural resources. MS 412.211 • authorizes statutory cities to acquire real or personal property within or without their corporate limits. Counties are authorized to acquire and hold real and personal property for the use of the county by MS 373.01 and 378.08. • Such purchase or acquisition of development rights is authorized as long as the acquisition is related to a proper public purpose. The preservation of open space land is considered such n purpose(Op. Att. Gen. 469-12,April 11, 1974). There are at least five ways which the development rights for a given area of land can be acquired. Fee Title Fee title acquisition is the simplest and most direct way • Acguuriron to acquire development rights. Through this method alf of the rights associated with title ownership are held and the property is fully owned. Fee title acquisition can be accomplished through direct purchase,donation,or a variety of other means. As mentioned earlier, it is within the authority of a local government's power over subdivisions to require the dedication of land. This fee rnn:tbe used for the acquisition of lands that would serve the same purpose as those that would have been dedicated(MS 482.358). • 168 76 10 • • l Appendix B rb bey clop ment Development rights easement is a way of acquiring part `� 1{ighls Easement or all of the right to develop or modify property. Development rights easements are also referred to as scenic, conservation,or development easements. Easements are interests in land which give the casement owner a limited • right on the property of a given landowner. These rights can • be sold or donated and are transmitted through a standard deed of conveyance. The value of a given easement is directly related to the rights included in the conveyance and can be determined by calculating the difference between the fair market value of the property unrestricted and the fair market value of the property restricted by the terms of the easement. Leases Leases describe rental agreements. The lease states the terms of the agreement, including the property rights temporarily acquired by the renter, the rights retained by the property owner, the duration of the lease, the amount of rent,and how the rent will be paid. As with management agreements,it is important to record the lease with the county clerk as additional insurance of long term protection of the resource. Cooperative A cooperative agreement is a legal contract to manage Agreements property in a specific way for a stated period of time to • achieve purposes mutually understood. The agreement does not permanently restrict the deed of the property but does create a legal interest in the property that can be recorded with the county clerk. If the agreement involves a "consideration"(usually a nominal sum of money)and has been legally recorded, it claims an interest in the property and is enforceable throughout the duration of the agreement. • Cooperative agreements typically provide a means for breaking the agreement provided that suitable notice is given. Registration Registration of significant lands,resources and habitat types ,{ can provide the recognition and incentives needed to support the efforts to preserve and protect the lower Minnesota River Valley. A registry program can also influence development indirectly by helping document"the greater than local significance"of a given resource. Organization and development of a registry must focus on the special nature of the resource to be protected and the civic-mindedness and nencrasity of the owner to voluntarily protect the resource in question. The real protection method used then is the commitment of the landowner to protect the resource in question and the formal recognition rand appreciation of this commitment. l69 2/_1/ Appendix B MLTIIODS The following are descriptions of a number methods for . facilitating the acquisition of development rights. These _ methods can be used to pursue and/or achieve various levels of • protection provided by different techniques of acquiring the right to develop property. • Donation or dedication is an option for acquiring land Donation which has not been utilized to its potential. As cited in the _--- discussion on tax incentives,federal income tax laws encourage making charitable contributions by allowing a deduction against ordinary income equal(with exceptions)to the value of the donation. Consequently, the taxpayer's liability is reduced,often by a considerable amount. This encourages both individuals and corporations to express the maximum possible generosity and results in the greatest savings for all parties concerned. • There are several ways to solicit donations:community drives, • formation of a special foundation, or the use of a catalog or "wish book"which would give the donor a number of choices or projects to which the donation could be applied. it should be noted that every potential donation of land may have features which are unique, and therefore the method of conveyance should be structured to meet the needs of both parties,the character of the land,and be as financially advantageous to the donor as possible. Bargain Sales Bargain sales provide an option in instances where a landowner will not consider making a full donation of a property. A • bargain sale combines the advantages of a gift and a sale by • selling property to a qualifying organization at a price that is less than its fair market value. The result is part-sale and part-charitable donation of the property. The amount deductible as a donation for income tax purposes is the difference between the fair market value of the property and the actual sale price. The taxable gain from the sale is the difference between the selling price and the cost basis allocated to the property sold. A bargain sale provides the landowner with some actual cash as well as a capital gain tax reduction and a charitable donation deduction. Exchange Management and development objectives on public and private land holdings sometimes conflict. The exchange of scattered • public ownership for private lands within management units - may allow each landowner to more efficiently and productively manage these lands. MS Sections 94.341 and 94.349 establish the Minnesota Land Exchange Board. This board provides the conditions and procedures fur laud exchange with the DN R. The National Wildlife Refuge Act authorizes the',WS to exchange lands(1G USC 668dd). Land is eligible for exchange only when the exchange involves Iands of equal value its determined by a land exchange appruisor of the DN R or FWS. 170 r'.,n • Appendix B • ,s Purchase Purchase and resale allows land to be purchased and then ant)lies_a_le returned to the tax rolls after it has been burdened with • restrictions similar to those found in an casement. The appropriate restrictions are written into the deed before s transfer back to the private sector. The net result of this procedure is the same as purchasing the rights directly. In both cases,the restrictions on development should"run with the land,"that is, they should become a part of the deed and be binding on all future owners. 3 Rights of The right of first refusal or"first option to purchase"is hirst_Refusel an agreement with a landowner to first offer the land to the • . holder of the right if the owner decides to sell or receives a bona fide offer on his/her land. • • In short,it is arranging for formal notification of a possible 3 change in hued ownership and use with sufficient lead time to assess the present and future possibilities for the land, negotiate options with the present and perspective owner, and/or make an offer. As with other agreements,a right of first refusal should be recorded. • Right of g When a parcel of a"designated type"(e.g.,open space) Preemption land comes on the market,a governmental body, under the right of preemption,can substitute itself for whoever has made an offer for the land. Then it may purchase and resell the property with restrictions. The public purchases only .4 those properties which,in fact, come on the market,at the • time they come on the market,and if the proposed purchaser would convert the itund to an unacceptable use. Thus, the total number of purchases are likely to be less under fee simple . acquisition or purchase and resale. The purchases are also likely to be somewhat spread out over time rather than occurring all at the beginning of the program period. Although there is no formal program based on its use in the United States,preemption is used extensively in Europe and is • a power that is compatible with the American legal system and values. There Ls ample precedent for it in the private market's use of the right of first refusal. • One of the aims of the comprehensive plan is to FINANCIAL TOOLS coordinate the lend use and management objectives that 3 transcend the jurisdictional boundaries of the governmental units involved. The achievement of regional land management and protection objectives seldom can be accomplished solely J through policy end regulation. Although they may prove adequate where a problem is fairly clear and enforcement is possible,policy end regulatory toots generally work better when supported by appropriate financial tools, Financial tools can eerve as nel;iitive reinforcement by piagybaclnng costs onto regulation and enn provide en incentive for cooperating with the public sector in land management by substituting cost ,. 3 for regulation or by providiugsubsidies. Financial tools also can and flexibility to the more rigid eppra•ich of regulation. 1 7'9 171 I L i Appendix B Local governments have the authority to use these tools directly. The value of the tools will depend largely on the commitment of local governments to the objectives in this comprehensive plan. There are four major financial tools which could be used in i land management in the lower Minnesota River Valley. They complement both a local government's regulatory powers over the location,extent, and intensity of land use and their function of providing public services such as sewer,water,and roads. All of these tools have broad applicability and local governments con implement them without depending on appropriations from other levels of government. Capital Improvement Capital improvement programming can effectively Prograniatg establish a part-part development management system. First, the local government prepares a capital improvement program that itemizes future expenditures planned over several years for growth-shaping public improvements,such as sewers and roads. This enables the government to anticipate major improvements and provide necessary funding. To be effective, the capital improvement program mist be coordinated with the government's planning process and regulation of land development. Development is allowed to take place only in • areas where existing public facilities or planned new facilities are adequate to serve it. When a local government's executive branch prepares the capital improvement program, it ensures coordination by inviting the planning board to participate. This gives the board a practical view of what facilities the locality can • afford to build,and when. When the planning board reviews requests for new subdivisions, it has the authority to disapprove a subdivision,if it finds that existing and programmed sewer and road facilities would be inadequate to serve the development. Marginal Cost Charging developers the full costs of extending public Pricianj services to new subdivisions—marginal cant pricing—is another • —�' fiscal device for controlling development. Local governments have the authority to determine how they charge for public services. Most fund sewers,roads,and other services from property tax revenues or average cost fees. In effect, fringe development is subsidized by average rates because it costs more to serve low-density scattered development. A local government using marginal cast pricing allocates all incremental cysts of sprawl development to the developers and,in turn,to the new residents and business owners. No public funds are committed to extension of service beyond the l urban areas established in the local plan. The result is that fringe development takes place only if people who choose to • locate beyond the established area are willing to pay all public service casts. 172 Appendix B • This strategy eliminates one problem created by urban sprawl; scarce public resources are not used for facilities to serve fringe development. Urban sprawl may be curtailed because higher housing coats may reduce demand for housing in outlying areas. Where marginal costs pricing alone is not a adequate to curb urban sprawl,local governments can use regulatory tools such as planning,zoning,and agricultural preserves. Tax-Exempt Tax-exempt bonds can be issued by the state or a Cionds governmental jurisdiction within a state. They provide capital at low interest rates because bonds arc exempt from the federal income tax. The bonds, therefore,are marketable at a lower interest rate than non tax-exempt bonds. Tax-exempt bonds are used to fund public infrastructure costs—sewer,water,streets—of development and redevelopment. They also fund much of the pollution control equipment required to meet national environmental standards. Grants There are two types of grants-catagorical and block. Uses of categorical grants are narrowly defined and closely regulated by the funding agency. Bloc':grants may serve a broader range of purposes and allow more flexibility to recipients. Land management objectives funded by grants include parklands acquisition,wetlands acquisition,subsidized housing construction and rehabilitation,inner-city redevelopment,and construction of highways and bridges. Grants do have some drawbacks. Because most grant money 3 comes from the federal or state governments,local governments cannot control their availability. They also are constrained in using the money by restrictions imposed by the funding agency. 3 I 1 1 2('/r 173 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST December 2D, 1983 1984 RENEWAL LICENSES DN SALE LIQUOR CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) Abby's Restaurant ABJ Enterprises ON SALE_LIQUOR & SUNDAY LIQUOR Adolphson & Peterson, Inc. GSB Investments Eden Prairie Mr. Steak Prairie Wood, Inc. Fiddler's Deli & Lounge Rodin's Quality'Concrete Kabuki Restaurant White Diamond Builders, Inc. Chester's Restaurant (see attached) Baton Corporation Groumresch Construction 3.2 BEER ON SALE Cedar Hills Golf Park CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY) Edenvale Golf Club Eugene Drabek Remodeling Li Jerry's Super Valu Lion's Tap Feerick Development, Inc.. Margies Harvey Homes, Inc. Terrific Lunch Co. Hogar Construction Robert H. Mason, Inc. 3.2 BEER OFF SALE Minnesota Home Builders, Inc. Quality Pools Driskill's Super Valu Trumpy Homes, Inc. Eden Prairie Grocery Van Eeckhout, Inc. PDQ rood Stores Waters, Gluts & O'Brien Construction Prairie Dairy HEATING & VENTILATING Gambling Air Comfort, Inc. Eden Prairie Legion C. 0. Carlson Air Conditioning Owens Services Corporation PRIVATE KENNEL LICENSE R & S Heating & Air Conditioning SBS Mechanical, Inc. Robert Naegele (see attached) Yale, Inc. Allan Nash (see attached) PLUMBING CIGARETTES Medicine Lake Mechanical, Inc. Driskill's Super Valu Eden Prairie Grocery VENDING Eden Prairie Legion Eden Prairie Mr. Steak Laserdyne Corporation Jerry's Super Valu Lion's Tap CLUB ON SALE & SUNDAY LIQUOR PDQ Food Store Prairie Dairy Eden Prairie Lesion Terrific Lunch Co. Olympic Hills Golf Club (see attached) These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the litensed activity. Pat. Solie, Licensing • • GUSTAFSON&ADAMS,P.A. AITORNI:1'S AT LAN' SPITE 411 1400 METRO BOULEVARD MICHAEL.1 ADAMS • EDINA,MINNESOTA 1,43S OF COUNSEL CRECOR1D CCSTAFSON HARRY GUSTAFSON TELEPHONE 111211115.72T7 JAMES D A7'KINbN 111 DANIE.I.R.T1SON CARYD PIIIISTROM December 13, 1983 NILLIAM Al.HADICHT DEXTER 0 CORLISS • Mr. Carl Jullie City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344-2499 RE: Olympic Hills Corporation (Renewal of on-sale liquor license 1984) Dear Mr. Jullie: During the course of the annual renewal of our on-sale liquor license, the question has arisen as to whether Olympic Hills Corporation would qualify for a "club" on-sale liquor license, as defined by MSA §340.07 Subd. 15 and §4.01 Subd. 15 of the City Ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. In the past, we have viewed the 15-year existence requirement contained in MSA §340.11 Subd. 11 • • as a bar to our obtaining a "club" license. This subdivision of the statute is the one which authorizes municipalities to issue on-sale and "club" licenses. The statute formerly contained the provision that a bona fide club had to be in existence for 15 years; this 15-year requirement was changed to three years by an enactment of the 1983 Legislature, found at 1983 Laws of Minnesota Chapter 259. In light of the above, Olympic Hills Corporation feels that it is qualified for a "club" license under City Ordinances and state law. It is my understand- ing that you are in harmony with our position, and that this matter is on the Consent Calendar for the December 20, 1983 meeting; nevertheless, it is my intention to personally attend the City Council meeting on that date along with Ted Parkin, the manager of the club, to answer any questions the City Council may have in regard to this matter. In the interim, if you have any questions, please feel free to contact Ine. As always, we appreciate your courtesy and cooperation. With warmest personal regards, GUSTAFSON & ADAMS, P.A. Michael`d? Adams MJA/lh cc: Ted Parkin, Manager Olympic Hills Golf Club DJVMisc. 2.C.-i TO: Mayor and Council • FROM: Pat Solie thru John Frane DATE: December 14, 1983 RE: Delinquent Taxes on Liquor License Property The Eden Prairie City Code states a liquor license should not ( be approved when there are delinquent taxes on the property. Chesters Restaurant has been delinquent on their taxes for the years 1981 - 1982 and 1983. r. ( • L I}N f i , Chanhassen -Chaska--Eden Prairie 7905 Mitchell Road.Eden Prairie,MN 55344 • < fco' 612/937-2700 REPORT ON THE ALLAN NASH KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION From the neighbors: "Dogs in kennels; Lab runs loose often-couple of times a week, Setter runs sometimes, Poodle runs sometimes. • Barking at all times of the night - no control whatso- ever. This happens 5 to 6 hours continuously" "Barking is the only problem - no, they don't keep them under control." "Because of the barking, we moved our bedroom downstairs. Dogs are a nuisance - I won't sign any approval for this. Barking is a problem." RECO:1 KNDATION FROM ANIMAL CONTROL The dog kennel should be moved up by the house and the dogs should be brought in at night (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM). Nancy Riley, Animal Control Offer NR:dh BE A GOOD MIDI IKOR - CON1 ROL YOUR PEA S If ,,- i - ra 4 �I ...f I.YwM��C�1I 11A 1� YY� LYY�tlYI `.0Nt4't YC:I ,r Chanhassen—Chaska -Eden Prairie f`� 7905 Mitchell Road,Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Grp 612/937-2700 • RECOMMENDATION ON THE NAEGELE KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION: I have not received any complaints on this party's dogs, nor have I ever impounded them. Nancy Riley, Anima�Control Off. cer NR:dh Bli A GOOD NI_IGI(I3OR - CONTROL YOUR PE I'S Z(7C)