HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 11/06/1984EDEN PRAIRIE
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
fUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1984
COUNCIL MEMBERS: '
CITY COUNCIL STAFF:
8:00 PM, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BOARDROOM
Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Richard Anderson, George
Bentley, Paul Redpath, and George Tangen
City Manager Carl J. Jullie; Assistant to the City
Manager Craig Dawson; City Attorney Roger Pauly;
Finance Director John Frane; Planning Director
Chris Enger; Director of Community Services Robert
Lambert; Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz,
and Recording Secretary Karen Michael
INVOCATION: Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
I. COMMENDATION FOR PUBLIC SAFETY CAPTAIN KEITH WALL FOR BEING SELECTED
OUTSTANDING CIVIL DEFENSE DIRECTOR
II. MINUTES
A. Minutes of the City Council meeting held Tuesday, August 2, 1984
B. Minutes of the city Council meeting held Tuesday, August zai 1984
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Reouest for donation of Community Center Membership for
Cahill Silent Auction
Pg.2343
Pg.2354
Pg.2373
B. Authorize to advertise for bids for tractor with loader
C. Approve Riley-Purptory Creek Watershed District Agreement with
Chanhassen and Eden Prairie on Lake Riley Study
D. Approval of Lake Region Mutual Aid with Lcretto Volunteer Fire
Department
E. Change Order #2 Flying Cloud Drive Improvements I.C. 52-064 Pg.2389
F. Agreement with Hennepin County for Federal-Aid Highway Improvement P9.2390
CS!01 y -TResolution No. 84-297)
G. Final Plat approval for Primeland 2nd Addition (Resolution No. 84-
298i-
Pg,2374
Pg.2375
Pg.2381
Pg,2394
H. Resolution accepting Land Gift in the Westwood Industrial Park
(Resolution No. 84-299)
Pg.2397
City Council Agenda -2- November 6, 1984
I. Resolution authorizing preparation of a Feasibility Report
regardifig the reconstruction of Preserve Blvd. between Prairie
Center Drive and Anderson Lakes Parkway, I.C. 52-074-1-Resolution
No. 84-301)
J. MUIRFIELD by Tandem Corporation/TCF Development Corporation.
2nd Reading of Ordinance #116-84-PUD-10-84, Zoning District Changes
from Rural to R1-13.5 for approximately 11.0 acres and from Rural
to R1-9.5 for approximately 25 acres; Approval of Developer's
Agreement for Muirfield; and Adoption of Resolution No. 84-289
Approving Summary of Ordinance #116-84-PUD-10-84 and Ordering
Publication of said Summary of Muirfield. 106 single family
lots. Location: North side of Valley View Road, west of Park
View Lane.
K. EDEN COMMONS by the Chasewood Company. 2nd Reading of Ordinance
No. 118-84, Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-2.5; Approval
of Resolution No. 84-290, Approving Development Plans for Eden
Commons. 196 multiple family residential units on 12.5 acres.
Location: Northwest corner of Franlo Road and Preserve Boulevard.
L. SUPERAMER1CA. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 119-84, Zoning
District Change from Rural to C-Hwy and Adoption of Resolution
No. 84-291, Approving Development Plan for Superamerica. 1.35
acres for Service Station/Convenience Store. Location: Southwest
quadrant of County Road 4 and Highway 5.
M. PR1METECH II by Prime Development. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No.
12-0--84-PUD-9-84, Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial-
Regional-Service; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Primetech
II; and Adoption of Resolution No. 84-292, Approving Summary
of Ordinance No. 120-84-PUD-9-84, and Ordering Publication of said
Summary of Primetech II. 1.0 acre for construction of a day care
center. Location: North of Shady Oak Road, East of City West
Parkway.
N. Approval of Snowdrifters State Grant for Trails (Resolution No.
84-302Y-
O. Clerks License List
P. Summary of Evidence, Findings and Conclusions, and Order Re:
David Brown Regoest for Variance No. 84-19
Q. BLUFFS EAST 3RD ADDITION by the Bluffs Company. 2nd Reading of
Ordinance No. 101-84, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5
for 9.63 acres, Approval of Developer's Agreement for Bluffs East
3rd Addition, and Adoption of Resolution No. 84-288, Approving
Summary of Ordinance No. 107-84 and Ordering Publication of said
Summary. 9.63 acres for 29 single family lots. Location:
West of Franlo Road, South of Lee Drive.
Pg.2399
Pg.2400
Pg,2409
Pg.2412
Pg.2416
Pg.2424
Pg.2427
Pg.2430
Pg.2442
, City Council Agenda
(,
-3- November 6, 1984
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. EDEN PRAIRIE APARTMENTS BY David Ames. Request for Zoning District
Amendment within Rm-2.5 District and Preliminary Plat of 6.47 acres
for 108-unit apartment building. Location: North of Valley View
Road, West of Edenvale Golf Club (Ordinance No. 122-84, Zoning
District Amendment within RM-2.5 District; Resolution No. 84-293,
Preliminary Plat)
B. COMPUTER DEPOT by Wilson Ridge Joint Venture. Request for
Zoning District Amendment within 1-2 Zoning District for Office/
Warehouse use on 5.42 acres. Location: North Valley View Road
east of Highway #169 (Ordinance No. 121-84, Zoning Amendment
within 1-2 District)
C. DIG1GRAPHICS SYSTEMS CORPORATION by Welsh Construction. Request
for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Office to Industrial
for 5.75 acres; Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment
Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District
Change from Rural to 1-2 for 5.75 acres for a corporate
headquarters, office, research, assembly, storage facility.
Location: Northeast quadrant of Valley View Road and Highway
169 (Resolution No. 84-294, Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment
from Office to Industrial; Ordinance No. 123-84, Zoning District
Change from Rural to 1-2)
D. REQUEST FOR MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BONDS IN. THE AMOUNT
OF $3,800 000 FOR DIGIGRAPHICS (Resolution No. 84-3n)
E. CITY WEST BUSINESS CENTER PHASES III & IV by Ryan Construction.
Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment of City
West Planned Unit Development; Planned Unit Development District
Review of 15.91 acres and Zoning District Change from Office to
1-2 for 12.63 acres; and Preliminary Plat of 12.63 acres into two
lots. Location: North of Shady Oak Road, West of City West
Parkway (Resolution No. 84-295 Planned Unit Development Concept
Amendment to City West POD; Ordinance No. 124-84-PUD-11-84, PUD
District and Zoning from Rural to 1-2; Resolution No. 84-296,
Preliminary Plat)
F. RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION ADJACENT TO EDENVALE 9TH ADDITION (Resolution
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 16566 - 16859
VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
VII. PFTITIONS„. REOUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
VIII. APPOINTMENTS
Pg.2448
Pg.2462
Pg.2469
Pg.2485
Pg.2496
Pg.2511
P9 .2512
City Council Agenda -4- November 6, 1984
/III. APPOINTMENTS
A. Appointment of member to the Historical & Cultural Commission
to fill an unexpired term to 2/28/86
IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
1. Set date for Joint meeting with Planning Commission
B. Report of City Manager
C. Report of City Attorney
X. NEW BUSINESS
XI. ADJOURNMENT.
Pg.2519
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, AUGUST 7, 1984
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
CITY COUNCIL STAFF:
7:30 PM, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BOARDROOM
Mayor Wolgang H. Penzel, Richard Anderson,
George Bentley, Paul Redpath & George Tangen
City Manager Carl J. Jullie, City Attorney Rogcl
Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Planning
Director Chris Enger, Director of Community
Services Robert Lambert, Director of Public
Works Eugene A. Dietz, Assistant to the City
Manager Craig W. Dawson, and Recording Secretar:,
Karen Michael
INVOCATION: Councilman George Bentley
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel was absent.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The following items were added to the Agenda: VIII. B. I. Meeting with Sandra
Gardebring re: Lake Ann Interceptor and VIII. B. 2. Star Cities Program.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve the Agenda and Other
Items of Business as amended. Motion carried unanimously.
II. MINUTES
A. Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, May 29, 1984
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve the Minutes of the
Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, May 29, 1984, as published.
Motion carried unanimously.
B. City Council Meeting held Tuesday, June 5, 1984
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve the Minutes of the
City Council Meeting held Tuesday, June 5, 1984, as published. Motion
carried unanimously.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Valley Curve Special Assessment Release (Resolution No. 84-198)
B. Joint Resolution of the Cities of Chanhassen, Chaska, and Eden Prairie
regarding pTeparation of the Draft Environmental Ilyact Statement for
Highways 5,169, and 212 (Resolution No. 84-207)
City Council Minutes -2- August 7, 1984
C. Set Public Hearing for Au9ust 28, 1984, at 7:30 PM to consider vacation
of a Elytion of the drainage and utility easement in Lorence 1st Addition
iValley Pond)
D. Receive Feasibility Report for Eden Road/Singletree and set a Public Hearing
for August 28, 1984, I.C. 52-011 (Resolution No. 84-199)
E. Final Plat Approval for Ridgewood West Plat Four (Resolution No. 84-200)
F. Final Plat Approval for Golden Strip East (Resolution No. 84-201)
G. Final Plat Approval for Golden Strip 2nd Addition (Resolution No. 84-202)
H. Final Plat Approval for Primeland (previously known as Prime Tech Park and
City West 2nd Addition) (Resolution No. 84-203)
I. Set Public Hearing to vacate a drainage and utility easement in the Valley
Curve Subdivision for August 28, 1984, at 7:30 PM
J. KURVERS ADDITION by Franklin J. Kurvers. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 47-84
TUF-KuiWP7S- Addition, zoning district change from Rural to R1-13.5, and
adoption of Resolution No. 84-188, approving development plan. 2.0 acres
into five single family residential lots. Location: east of Highway 101,
north of Autumn Woods, south of Rymarland Camp.
K. RIDGEWOOD WEST 4TH by Centex. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 42-84, zoning
Bri-s-tFict change from R1-13.5 to R1-9.5, approval of Developer's Agreement
for Ridgewood West 4th Addition, and adoption of Resolution No. 84-161,
approving Summary of Ordinance No. 42-84. 8.85 acres into 30 lots. Location:
Cumberland Road at Wellington Drive.
L. SCENIC HEIGHTS WEST by Kerr Companies, Inc. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No.
49-84, zoning district change from Rural to R1-9.5 and adoption of Resolution
No. 84-189, approving Development Plan. 9.5 acres into 20 single family lots.
Location: southwest quadrant of Scenic Heights Road and Red Rock Road.
M. Clerk's License List
N. Set Public Hearing date of August 28, 1984, to consider Ordinance No. 53-84,
amending City Code Section 11.70, Subd. 3. A. and Subd. 5E, regarding non-
accessory signs, including violations and fines, appeals and variances,
especially with respect to campaign signs
There was some discussion regarding item "G". Mr. Beckman addressed what
Vantage had proposed; Planning Director Enger addressed the alternatives.
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt items A - N on the Consent
Calendar. Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -3- August 7, 1984
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. City Code Amendment to Section 11.70 to regulate sips at Flying Cloud
Airport (continued from 6/19/84)
City Manager Jullie noted the Planning Commission had asked for a contin-
uance of this item to the August 28th meeting of the City Council so it
would have additional time for review and input.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Tangen, to continue this item to
the September 4, 1984, meeting of the City Council. Motion carried
unanimously.
B. PRAIRIE KNOLL by Hestia Homes, Inc. Request for Planned Unit Development
District Review and Zoning from Rural to R1-9.5, with variances, for 60
single family residential units and preliminary plat of 24 acres into 60
lots and outlots. Location: northwest quadrant of Valley View Road and
Edenvale Boulevard. (Ordinance No. 48-84 - rezoning and Resolution No.
84-167 - preliminary plat) - Continued from July 10, 1984
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published
and property owners within the project vicinity had been notified.
Brian Novak, representing Hestia Homes, addressed the proposal.
Planning Director Enger said Staff had reviewed the revised plans and concept
for Prairie Knoll and recommended approval. Enger noted that the pond which
had been proposed behind the Bowers residence Might require an overflow pipe.
Director of Community Services Lambert indicated the revised proposal satis-
fied a number of concerns which had been expressed by the Parks, Recreation
& Natural Resources Commission. The proposal now allows direct access to
the park; he noted that there will now be more parkland and the road into
the park will be built.
Skip Hanson, 15910 Valley View Road, asked what would be done with the
grade adjacent to his property. Novak said a 40' area would be set aside
by the homeowner's association to be left in its natural state. Bentley
asked if the proponent would be willing to include this area in a scenic
easement in the Developer's Agreement, Laura Isensee, 16151 South Hillcrest
Court, indicated she thought this area was part of the flood plain. Novak
said that nothing can be built on the 100-year flood plain; FHA requirements
preclude building on any flood plain. Isensee asked if there would be a
parking lot to get to the park. lambert said there would be a trail connec-
tion to Hillcrest Court from the area to the south. He indicated there is a
parking lot at Edenvale Park.
Cedric Warren, 7324 Franklin Circle, asked how long the trail would be in
this area. Lambert said it would be about a quarter of a mile. Warren
discussed the drainage problems in his area. Director of Public Works Dietz
said he was surprised at the amount of erosion in that area in 12 years.
He said that eventually the erosion can be controlled.
City Council Minutes -4- August 7, 1984
Ken Sehn, 7400 Ontario Boulevard, inquired as to where all the traffic
which would be generated from this development would go. Enger said
this project would be developed over a three year period; at the end of
three years 54 hones would be accessing here. Enger stated that this
corresponds with the City's plans to improve Valley View Road.
Isensee asked what the distance would be between this development and
Hillcrest Court. Lambert said the trail would connect with Edenwood
and not Hillcrest Court -- and the distance of the trail would be one
quarter mile between those locations. Isensee wondered when work would
begin on this proposal. Novak indicated work would begin this Fall.
Dave Bowers, 15800 Valley View Road, said he did not feel the housing
types proposed were compatible with the neighborhood. He noted that the
hones would have detached garages which are usually not well maintained
over a period of time; he said it would look like a downtown alleyway.
Bowers stated that a great deal of the existing beauty would be taken
away. He indicated there would have to be some changes made in the grade
so that the intersection with Ontario Boulevard would be made safe. He
said he felt the housing types to be offered by this proposal were so
different from those in the area that they would stick out like a sore
thumb.
Bentley requested that Director of Public Works Dietz include an analysis
of the Valley View/Ontario Boulevard intersection when he makes a report
on the Valley View/Edenvale Boulevard intersection.
Redpath said he would like to see improvements made to Valley View Road
as soon as possible; he said the Council is on record for that. Bowers
said the residents do not want to have Valley View Road improved; they
would prefer to see Highway 5 improved.
Sehn said one of the reasons he bought his home was because of the natural
beauty of the area. Bentley noted that all property owners have the right
to develop their property according to the ordinances of the City; had the
residents wished, they could have purchased the property under discussion
and allowed it to remain in its natural state. Sehn asked if the road should
be corrected prior to the development. Tangen said he doubted if this would
be the "straw which breaks the camel's back"; he noted the City is looking
for a solution to the road project. Tangen noted that there is more in that
area contributing to the traffic problem than the Prairie Knoll project.
Hansen said he had heard the abutting property owners would have to pay
$70 per front foot for improvements to Valley View Road. There was clarifi-
cation as to how street improvements are made and assessed including how
benefits to the adjacent property owner are determined.
Darlene Thoen, 15361 Creekside Court, asked if the City had ever before sold
park land. Redpath said the City would not be selling park land but rather
trading land. Thoen said at one time it was said this area would be another
Wood Lake area (Richfield nature center.)
?gt,
City Council Minutes -5- August 7, 1984
Bowers asked if the ponding area might be considered an attractive
nuisance; could the builder be required to build a fence around it.
Greg Frank, engineer for the project from McCombs, Knutson, said the
pond could be eliminated from the project; the pond was created as an
amenity. Tangen asked if Staff had an opinion as to the value of the
pond. Dietz said he would prefer to see it deleted from the plans as
past experience had shown ponds such as this to be a problem.
Bentley said he was pleased with the changes which had been made since
the Council last reviewed this project; the project had been modified
enough to take care of the concerns which he had. Redpath said he felt
the developer had done a good job. Anderson said his major concern was
the sale of the park land; now the City has retained use and he is satis-
fied.
Tangen asked Novak to indicate the locations of the 9,500 sq. ft. lots.
Novak complied. Redpath said the City has to work on the 9.5 zoning so
affordable housing can be provided within the City. Tangen said he has
some concerns about the overall concept. He said he felt there was enough
variety in the lot sizes and the types/styles of houses to be built. He
said he felt the City Council should develop a set of guidelines on how to
work with this 9.5 zoning classification; the Council should have some guide-
lines as to what should and should not be included.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to close the Public Hearing
and to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 48-84. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to adopt Resolution No. 84-167,
preliminary plat (no pond). Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to direct Staff to prepare
a Developer's Agreement as per Commission and Staff recommendations and
including the scenic easement as discussed this evening. Motion carried
unanimously.
C. BLUFFS WEST 4TH ADDITION by the Bluffs Company. Request for zoning district
change from Rural to RI-13.5 and preliminary plat of two acres into six single
family reisdential lots. Location: northeast quadrant of Riverview Road and
Homeward Hills Road. (Ordinance No. 51-84 - rezoning and Resolution No. 84-191 -
preliminary plat)
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published
and property owners within the project vicinity had been notified.
Lloyd Erickson, RCM, addressed the request.
Planning Director Enger said the Planning Commission had reviewed this at
its July 9th meeting and had recommended approval subject to the recommendations
included in the Staff Report dated July 6, 1984, with revisions as noted in
the Planning Commission minutes.
City Council Minutes -6- August 7, 1984
Director of Community Services Lambert said the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Conunission had not reviewed the request as there were no signifi-
cant park and recreation issues.
Tangen asked about the maintenance of half a cul-de-sac. Director of Public
Works Dietz said half a cul-de-sac is easier to maintain.
Ed Schlampp,10901 Riverview Road, said he was experiencing problems with
the storm sewer drainage which runs off onto his property. Bentley said he
would like to have this looked into prior to 2nd Reading of this request.
Schlampp said the problem is a serious one and has to be resolved. He reviewed
the location of his property in relation to the proposal. Tangen asked if
the City Engineer has looked into this. Dietz said he would be hard pressed
to quantify the effect of the proposed on the existing problem. Jullie
gave the historical background as to what the City has done regarding the
drainage in that area. A discussion on the drainage and the location of
the catch basins, etc., ensued.
Tom Aldridge, 10492 Wimbledon Court, asked if the developer would maintain
the bike path. Erickson said the bicycle paths would remain as they are now.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public Hearing
and to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 51-84. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to adopt Resolution No. 84-191,
preliminary plat approval as per the developer's cul-de-sac proposal.
• Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to direct Staff to prepare
a Summary Resolution of Approval as per Commission and Staff recommendations.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to direet Staff to do an analysis,
prior to 2nd Reading of the Ordinance, of the storm drainage problems in this
area and that consultation be made with Mr. Schlampp; and to direct Staff to
review the impact this project will have on the problems and to see what can
be done to resolve those problems. Motion carried unanimously.
D. Public Hearin on Feasibility Report for Valley View Road, Golden Triangle
Road and West 74th Streer(Norsemen's 6th AdditioniT I.C. 52-065 (Resolution
No. 84-204T
City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been published
and property owners listed on the preliminary assessment rolls had been
notified.
Director of Public Works Dietz address the report.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to close the Public Hearing and
adopt Resolution No. 84-204, ordering improvements and preparation of plans
and specifications for I.C. 52-065. Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -7- August 7, 1984
E. Vacation ofroadway, drainagp and_ utility easements in Shady Oak 5th
Addition (5solution No. 84-205)
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published.
Director of Public Works Dietz noted the easements proposed to be vacated
are no longer required due to changes in configuration of the building sites
on this parcel.
Bernie Frye, Min-Tex representative, concurred with Dietz's presentation.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public Hearing
and to adopt Resolution No. 84-205, terminating certain easement agreements
in Shady Oak Industrial Park 5th Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
F. Vacation of snow fence easement along West 78th Street between TH 169 and
west to Prairie Center Drive (Resolution No. 84-200
Official notice of this Public Hearing was published.
Director of Public Works Dietz said temporary snow fence easements are not
necessary and the adjacent property owner has asked that they be vacated.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Tangen, to close the Public Hearing
and to adopt Resolution No. 84-206, terminating snow fence easements along
West 78th Street. Motion carried unanimously.
G. Request for Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of
$3,400,000.00 for Comppter Depot (Tesolution No. 84-172)
City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been published.
Dick Riley, Dougherty, Dawkins, Strand & Yost Incorporated, spoke to
the request. Also present were Dan Rust of Welch Construction and Paul
Larson, Chief Financial Officer for Computer Depot Inc.
Finance Director Franc noted that it is to the City's advantage to use
as much of its "cap" or allocation as is possible. City Attorney Pauly
said he understood a new resolution was to be delivered to the City which
will indicate a closing date of October 15th.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to close the Public Hearing
and to adopt Resolution No. 84-172, giving preliminary approval to a project
under the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act, authorizing submission
of an application to the Minnesota Enerny and Economic Development Authority
for approval thereof and authorizing preparation of necessary documents in
connection with the project. Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -8- August 7, 1984
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 14991 - 15318
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Payment of Claims
Nos. 14991 - 15318. Roll call vote: Anderson, Bentley, Redpath, and Tangen
voted "aye," Motion carried unanimously.
VI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
There were no reports.
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Request for removal of stop sins on mid-block of Kingston Drive
Acting Mayor Redpath reviewed the reason for the Council's request for a
sight distance study of the mid-block stop signs on Kingston Drive.
Director of Public Works Dietz said Staff had reviewed the sight distance
of the vertical curves where the stop signs are located. He noted that
preliminary indications are that sight distances are ok north of Crown
Drive, but less than desirable at the crest south of Crown Drive. He
referred to material included in the packet which further substantiated
these findings. Dietz said there several alternatives: 1) leave the
signs as they are; 2) accept the recommendation of the Public Safety
Department which was to leave the stop sign adjacent to 7000 Kingston Drive
for southbond traffic and to remove stop signs for northbound traffic
near 7000 Kingston Drive and both stop signs near 6893 Kingston Drive;
3) authorize a $4,000 reconstruction project to improve the sight lines;
or 4) put up "Limited Sight Distance" sign and post a 20 mile per hour
speed limit.
Gretchen Shaw, 7001 Kingston Drive, questioned the Cost of redoing Kingston
to correct the sight distance because she did not feel the cost of relocating
utilities had been taken into account. Dietz said this issue had been taken
into account in making the estimates.
Roger Cook, Golf and Kingston, said he felt this was a "make work" project
-- didn't the City employees have anything better to do.
Connie Sauer, 6890 Kingston Drive, said she doesn't think it costs the City
anything to keep the signs there. She indicated that kids use the street
as there are no sidewalks.
John Witham, 6893 Kingston Drive, said he doesn't know anyone who wants
to have the signs removed. He said it is a safety issue.
Bernie Galler, 6901 Kingston Drive, asked what were cited as the reasons
for removing the signs. Redpath said the main reason was because they are
a nuisance. Anderson said there are problems in the winter with cars
getting up Kingston Drive. He added that it is difficult for someone new
to the area to see the stop signs. Director of Community Services Lambert
noted this matter had been brought up at the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Commission Meeting last evening. He said the Commission voted
;()
City Council Minutes -9- August 7, 1984
to recommend leaving the stop signs up and to look into putting in a
sidewalk along Kingston Drive.
Lyle Shaw, 7001 Kingston Drive, distributed a letter to members of the
Council which included material supporting keeping the signs where they
are. He reviewed the sight distances involved. (Letter attached.)
Anderson said he felt stop signs should be visible. He posed the question:
if we are going to have mid-block signs in one neighborhood, what is to
preclude having them in other neighborhoods?
Redpath asked City Attorney Pauly if the City had the right to clear the
easement to make the signs more visible. Pauly said the City could do so.
Bentley said he did not feel there was an overriding public health or
welfare issue involved here and saw no need to remove the signs.
Tangen said perhaps the stop signs could become "slow" signs during the
Winter when traffic problems are more apt to occur.
Anderson said he would like to see the northernmost signs removed; the
signs on the south should remain.
Redpath said he was disappointed because the residents of the area who
have complained most to him over the years were not present to voice
their opinions before the Council.
Anderson moved to adopt the recommendation concerning mid-block stop signs
as proposed by the Department of Public Safety. The motion died for lack
of a second. Tangen said he would not second the motion because there was
no connunication from those who are in favor of removing the signs.
Lee Wohl said he lives near the northbound stop sign on the south and
he said he felt the sight distance should be the same whether one is driving
northbound or southbound.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Tangen, to direct Staff to see that
the stop signs are made visible. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to direct Staff to do a
feasibility study on the need for and cost of a trail along Kingston
Drive from Golf View Drive to Holly Road. Motion carried unanimously.
Gretchen Shaw expressed concern about the need for plowing sidewalks in
the Winter. Anderson noted that Holly Road has been given priority be-
cause school kids use it to get to and from Forest Hills Elementary School.
City Council Minutes -10- August 7, 1984
B. Request for extension of Municipal Industrial Development Bonds until
December 31, 1984 for Thomas Hotel Company 'Sheraton Hotel)
Ralph Thomas was present to answer questions.
MOTION, Bentley moved seconded by Tangen, to adopt Resolution No. 84-196,
extending preliminary approval previously given to a project under the
Municipal Industrial Development Act. Motion carried unanimously.
VIII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
Bentley. - noted an erosion problem in the Hans Hagen development between
Fieldcrest and Hyland Terrace.
B. Re_pert of City Manager
I. Meetina_with Sandra Gardebring re: Lake Ann Interceptor
City Manager Jullie said he had attended a meeting with Sandra Garde-
bring and members of the Metropolitan Council regarding the Lake Ann
Interceptor. Chanhassen people were also at the meeting. He said
they requested that the Lake Ann Interceptor be built as well as the
Red Rock Interceptor. Should this happen, it would be to the City's
advantage. Jullie suggested the City contribute to the cost of the
interceptor. Redpath said some very good points were node at the
meeting. Tangen suggested the City look into doing something in
cooperation with Chanhassen so the cost might be shared.
2. Star Cities Program
Redpath noted that Marge Friederichs, Executive Secretary, Eden Prairie
Chamber of Commerce, had contacted him to request the City's assistance
in funding the Star Cities Program. The Chamber would like to have the
City contribute $500. The concensus was to designate $500 to this
Chamber program.
C. port of the City Attornet
There was no report.
D. Report of Director of Public Works
1. Award contract for 1984 Seal Coat Project (Resolution No. 84-208)
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to accept the bid for
I.C. 52-063, 1984 Eituminous Seal Coating, which had been submitted
by Allied Blacktop Co., Inc. Roll call vote: Anderson, Bentley,
Redpath and Tangen voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -11- August 7, 1984
IX. NEW BUSINESS
There was none.
X. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to adjourn the meeting at
10:58 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 1984
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
CITY COUNCIL STAFF:
INVOCATION: Paul Redpath
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: all members were present.
7:30 PM, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BOARDROOM
Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel, Richard Anderson, George
Bentley, Paul Redpath and George Tangen
City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City
Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly,
Finance Director John D. Frane, Planning Director
Chris Enger, Director of Community Services Rober
Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz,
and Recording Secretary Karen Michael
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The following item was added to the Agenda: III. L. Approval of plans and
specifications for I.C. 52-065, Norseman's 6th Addition street and utility
improvements (Resolution No. 84-221).
The following item was moved from VIII. A. to III. M. 1st Reading of Ordinance
No. 56-84, amending .City Code Chapter 9, Section 9.40, Firearms Regulations,
and Adoption of Resolution No. 222, outlining criteFia to be used for issuance
of Hunting Permits by the Public Safety Department.
The following item was deleted from the Agenda because it had been published
for September 4, 1984: IV. D. Treanor Addition by Guy K. Treanor,
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve the Agenda and Other
Items of Business as amended and published. _Motion carried unanimously.
II. MINUTES
A. weeti .nl_held Tuesdy. June 19,_R4
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve the Minutes of the
City Council meeting held Tuesday, June 19, 1984, as published. Motion
carried with Anderson abstaining.
City Council Minutes -2- August 28, 1984
B. City Council meeting held Tuesday, July 10, 1984
Page 6, para. 9: change the last sentence to read as follows: Bentley
noted that the developer had not provided adequate lot size transition
within the project.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Andersen, to approve the Minutes of
the City Council meeting held Tuesday, July 10, 1984, as amended and
published. Motion carried unanimously.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. ST. ANDREW CHURCH. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 46-84, zoning district
change from Rural to Public, approval of Supplement to Developer's Agreement
for St. Andrew Church, and adoption of Resolution No. 84-210, approving
Summary of Ordinance No. 46-84 and ordering publication of said Summary
of St. Andrew Church Supplement. 1.2 acres for church expansion. Location:
northwest quadrant of Baker Road and Valley View Road.
B. Approval of sublease with Hennepin Countylegarding leaf recycling center
C. Appointment of the Assistant to the City Manager to the Advisory Committee
to administer and monitor the feasibility study fEIT77-Opt Out"
D. Reitherman Lot Split
E. Revocation and redesignation of CSAH 39, Roberts Drive and Valley View
Road TResolution NO. 84-2171— _
F. Final Plat appl:oval for Gonyea 4th Addition (Resolution No. 84-220)
G. Set Public Hearing for easement vacation in Feffer Addition for 7:30 PM,
September 18, 1984
H. Set Public Hearing for easement vacations on Lot 1, Block 2, Fairway Woods
3rd_Addition,_for_7:30 PM, September
18,1984
I. final approval of Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of
$465,000.00 for Kinder Care (Resolution No. 84-197)
J. Accept Warranty Deed for Carmel Park
K. Resolution No. 84-221, appointing Election Judges for the Primary Election
L. Approval of plans and specifications for I.C. 5?-065, Norseman's 6th Addition
street and utility improvements (Resolution No. 84-227)
M. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 56-84, amending City . Code Chapter 9, Section
9.40, II it ReTlations, and Adoption of Resolution No. 222, outlining
criteria to be used for issuance of Hunting Permits tly the Public_Safety
Department
MOIION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve items A - M on the
Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -3- August 28, 1984
IV. PUBLIC HFARINGS
A. TURNBULL Request for Preliminary Plat of approximately 15.28 acres into
two lots for Rural housing development. Location: north of Highway 169,
east of Dell Road. (Resolution No. 84-175 - preliminary plat) - continued
from 7/17/84 Council Agenda.
City Manager Jullie indicated the proposed Option Agreement for the road
right-of-way had been prepared by the City Attorney's office.
John Turnbull was present to answer questions.
Mary Kunstmann, 10001 Dell Road, said she had lived at that address since
April; she said at this point in time they would not be willing to have the
road become a City road.
Fred Allis, 10005 Dell Road, said he concurred with Mrs. Kunstmann. He
said he is comfortable with the manner in which the road is maintained now.
Jim Allis, 10005 Dell Road, said the road is totally adquate for their needs.
He noted that it is a wooded lane and that is considered to be one of the
amenities of their property.
Redpath said his main concern is that a road be available. Penzel said the
intention was to provide for a road and not to construct one at the present
time.
Turnbull said they are thinking about their privacy and wants that protected.
Kunstmann asked if there were any residents on the road who were not able to
get in and out now. Penzel said that has not happened.
Jullie suggested that language be added to the Option Agreement to the
effect that it is not the City's intent to exercise this option at this time.
Redpath asked if this easement option would just concern Turnbull 's property
since the division had not been made. City Attorney Pauly said it would include
all of the property which is subject to the platting process. The division
which was attempted a year or so ago was not approved by the City and therefore
the parties do not get a separate tax statement which is in violation of the
subdivision ordinance of the City. The Board of Appeals granted a variance
for less than ten acres; a condition of that variance was that the applicant
had to plat the property and to grant conservation easements on the lower
portions of the slope. The application for platting is now before the Council
and a part of that process is consideration of the need for public streets.
Turnbull said that is a very legal question. Turnbull sdid he would be willing
to go along with something in the future, but he did not wish to commit to
anything right now. Penzel said there am o two recommendations before the
Council: ore as proposed or one as amended to state the City's intent is
not to exercise this option at this time.
City Council Minutes -4- August 28, 1984
Dick Feerick, 6518 Leesborough Avenue, stated Turnbull has been trying as
best he can to resolve this matter. Feerick said Turnbull came here thinking
the issue could be resolved, but there is nothing he can do because he cannot
commit for his neighbors. Penzel said Turnbull is the legal owner of record
of the 15 or 17 acres parcel; in the records, the Kunstmanns do not own any
property. Pauly noted the division is contrary to City Code.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Redpath, to continue action on this
item to the September 18, 1984, meeting of the City Council to allow the
proponent time to discuss this issue with his neighbors and attorney.
Motion carried unanimously.
B. MUIRFIELD by Tandem Corporation. Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from
Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential for approximately 25
acres; Planned Unit Development District Review, with variances and zoning
from Rural to 81-13.5 for approximately 25 acres; preliminary plat of 36
acres into 119 single family lots; and Environmental Assessment Worksheet.
Location: north side of Valley View Road, west of Park View Drive.
City Manager Jullie called attention to Planning Director Enger's memo of
August 24th in which he noted the Planning Commission had been unable to
reach a consensus for a recommendation on this project. Jullie stated,
as noted by the petitions, there is considerable opposition from neighbors
concerning the proposed density of this project.
Planning Director Enger reviewed the problems which had occurred in sending
out notices for the Public Hearings on this proposal; he particularly noted
that some notices had been hand delivered due to a mix-up in the ordering of
address labels. City Attorney Pauly noted the City had acted in "good faith"
and, in his opinion, the Public Hearing was legal.
Dick Putnam, Tandem Corporation, introduced Jim Ostenson, Tandem Corporation;
Lyle Nash, Twin City Federal, a partner in the project; Ken Adolph, engineer;
and Bud Redder, a builder. Putnam addressed the proposal. Putnam asked
that the Council consider granting 1st Reading of the Ordinance based on
the Planned Unit Development presented this evening, review of the EAW,
change the Comprehensive Guide Plan to reflect 3.1 units per acre as
acceptable and refer the project back to the Planning Commission for its
review.
Redpath said it was his opinion that the Council could not grant 1st Reading
prior to the Planning Commission's review of the proposal.
Enger said Staff had reviewed a different plan (Staff Report of July 20th)
which included a mixture of 13.5 lot sizes ringing the project. This plan
also included a transition area. Staff recommended, based on that plan,
that a further transitional area be included. Enger noted that Staff had
not evaluated the plan presented this evening. He stated the Planning
Commission had a tie vote on the original plan for Muirfield.
City Council Minutes -5- August 28, 1984
Redpath asked where the storm sewer would come through the area. Director
of Public Works Dietz reviewed what alternatives had been under consideration
including a pond in the Muirfield development. Redpath asked if the neighbor-
ing residents would be asked to participate in such a project. Dietz said they
could be; the possibilities have only recently been considered.
Tangen noted that the density has changed and as a result the whole proposal
has changed. He said he had difficulty with the density question. He
suggested this be referred back to Staff and the Planning Commission for
further review.
Bentley said he felt the Planning Commission must take affirmative action on
the Guide Plan amendment for the City Council to act. He asked the City
Attorney if this was a correct interpretation of the Planning Act. Pauly
said it was; the Planning Commission must make a recommendation on an amend-
ment to the Guide Plan before the Council can act. Bentley said he assumed
City Codes were met by the proposal and asked, at what point does the Council
look at the project to determine whether or not it meets the Guide Plan.
Enger said maximum densities are reviewed -- this is used as a basis for
density transfers, etc. He stated that it is his recommendation that this
proposal requires a Guide Plan amendment. Bentley asked if it was correct
that the Planning Commission had not taken any action regarding platting
or zoning. Enger said that was correct. Bentley expressed the fact that
he was upset with the Planning Commission for its lack of action on this
matter; he said he is also concerned about the length of time this proposal
has been in process." Enger said this has been before the Planning Commis-
sion for two meetings. Anderson said the Planning Commission has been putting
in a tremendous amount of time; one of the meetings at which this was discussed
lasted until 2 a.m. Tangen said he did not feel the Commissions are entirely
at fault. He said this proposal had changed greatly since the time the
Planning Commission had looked at it; the Council is looking at something new.
Redpath said he would like to see this returned to the Commission; this is
no longer the same plan.
Darrell Westby, 7107 Park View Lane, asked if the meeting before the Planning
Commission would be an open meeting. Penzel indicated it would be either a
public meeting or a public hearing. Westby asked if the adjacent property
owners would be notified. Penzel said they would be.
Penzel said the Council talks a lot about the 2.5 units per acre requirement
and he would like to know if that is spelled out in the Guide Plan or whether
that is a requirement of the zoning chapter of the City Code. He said he
felt two different things might be under consideration. Enger said he would
like to look into that. Tangen said he felt there should be adequate justi-
fication if the City were to go above 2.5. Bentley said he is concerned
about the judicious expedition of proposals; a had recommendation would be
better than no recommendation at all. Eiger said the Planning Commission is
looking for some direction; if they had recommended denial of this proposal,
it would not have come to the Council at all (the Guide Plan change.) City
Attorney Pauly said the City Council could recommend that the Planning Commis-
sion approve the Guide Plan proposal/amendment. This could be done and not
prejudice the City Council's further review of the matter.
City Council Minutes -6- August 28, 1984
Redpath said he felt the most recent proposal is heading in the right
direction. Tangen said he felt there should be a reason or justification
for changes in the Guide Plan.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue the Public Hearing
to October 2, 1984, and to return this matter to the Planning Commission for
its review and recommendation. Motion carried unanimously.
C. SHADY OAK RIDGE by Joseph Ruzic. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan
Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential; zoning
district change from Rural to RM-6.5; and preliminary plat of 11.5 acres for
48 townhouse units. Location: north of Rowland Road, west of Old Shady
Oak Road. (Resolution No. 84-212 - Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment;
Ordinance No. 54-84 - zoning from Rural to RM 6,5; and Resolution No. 84-213
- preliminary plat)
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published
and property owners within the project vicinity had been notified.
Ron Krueger, land surveyor representing the proponent, addressed the project
.
Planning Director Enger said this request had been reviewed by the Planning
Commission at its meeting on July 23, 1984, at which time it voted to
recommend approval subject to the recommendations included in the July 20,
1984, Staff Report.
Director of Community Services Lambert indicated the Parks, Recreation &
Natural Resources Commission had reviewed this at its August 20, 1984,
meeting at which time it voted to recommend approval subject to the recom-
mendations included in the July 20, 1984, Planning Staff Report and with
the additional recommendation that the trailway system connect to the north
property line so as to connect to Carmel Park.
Director of Public Works Dietz noted that this project would increase the
sewer service area; this is a deviation which had been suggested at the time
of the feasibility report. Since the assessment area will be increased, the
amount of the assessments against individual property owners will be reduced.
Anderson asked if the trailways which are proposed will be of ag lime.
Lambert said the recommendation is for an 8' asphalt path to be constructed
to the north. Anderson asked if this precluded a trail to the south. Lamber
t
said that had not been looked at yet.
Bentley stated concern had been expressed by residents about expanding or
extending multiple dwellings to the west of of Old Shady Oak Road. Enger
said the rationale behind this proposal was that the hill would have been
completely decimated if '...acre lots had been proposed. With the proposal
before the Council, it was felt that the smaller building footprints would
be better for the area.
2
City Council Minutes -7- August 28, 1984
Anderson asked if the trail would be a private trail. Krueger s
t
a
t
e
d
the details had not been worked out.
Penzel asked when Old Shady Oak Road would be renamed. Jullie s
a
i
d
t
h
a
t
issue can be addressed with the review of this proposal.
Redpath asked how much excavating had been done on the top of the
h
i
l
l
on this property. Joseph Ruzic, 6825 Rowland Road, said less th
a
n
2
%
of the hill had been removed.
Wayne Kinion, 6401 Old Shady Oak Road, referred to his letter o
f
J
u
l
y
3
1
,
1984, in which he outlined reasons why he did not feel the Guid
e
P
l
a
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
be changed. He said he did not want a precedent set by moving t
h
e
m
e
d
i
u
m
density "line" further to the west; he wished to see this property
r
e
m
a
i
n
as low density. Bentley asked Kinion if he would prefer to have a
h
i
g
h
e
r
density and, as a result, there would be more trees saved, or woul
d
h
e
prefer to have a lower density which would result in more trees be
i
n
g
r
e
-
moved. Kinion said he would very much like to see the plan for low
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
preserved.
Cliff Bodine, 6400 Shady Oak Road, expressed concern about the gra
d
e
l
e
v
e
l
of the area on the north. He wondered how visible these units wo
u
l
d
b
e
f
r
o
m
his property. Krueger said the grade would be raised about 4'. B
o
d
i
n
e
asked more questions about the specifics regarding the effect on
h
i
s
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
.
Bonnie Kinion, 6401 Old Shady Oak Road, said she is concerned abo
u
t
t
h
e
n
u
m
b
e
r
s
she had heard tonight. She indicated she would prefer to see the
a
r
e
a
n
o
t
developed although she fully realizes that is not a true stateme
n
t
.
E
n
g
e
r
said Ruzic's original request was for 48 units; the Planning Comn
i
s
s
i
o
n
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
e
d
this number be reduced to 36 units. Enger said he did not know e
x
a
c
t
l
y
w
h
e
r
e
the further reduction in the number of units would come from with
i
n
t
h
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
-
ment. Mrs. Kinion also expressed concern about the effect of the
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
on the watershed; she had not heard of any study being done in th
i
s
r
e
g
a
r
d
.
Dietz said that one of the requirements of the Staff Report is t
h
a
t
t
h
e
developer's engineer must provide the City with a final design f
o
r
s
t
o
r
m
sewer run-off. This has been provided by Ruzic's engineer. Ruz
i
c
s
a
i
d
h
e
could make more money if the property were developed in single f
a
m
i
l
y
u
n
i
t
s
,
but he wishes to retain the hill and that is why he is requestin
g
w
h
a
t
i
s
now under discussion.
Bentley said there has been a case made for the Guide Plan chan
g
e
.
H
e
n
o
t
e
d
the City is on the threshhold of needing to make a major policy
r
e
v
i
e
w
r
e
g
a
r
d
-
ing the Guide Plan. He said he felt the Council is going to be
s
e
e
i
n
g
m
o
r
e
and more requests such as this one.
MOTION: Bentley moved seconded by Anderson, to close the Public
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
and to adopt Resolution No. 84-212, Comprehensive Guide Plan C
h
a
n
g
e
.
M
o
t
i
o
n
carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -8- August 28, 1984
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to give 1st Reading to Or-
dinance No. 54-84, rezoning. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt Resolution No. 84-213,
approving the preliminary plat of Shady Oak Ridge for Joseph Ruzic. Motion
carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to direct Staff to prepare
a Developer's Agreement as per Commission and Staff recommendations and
including a tree inventory, staking of grading areas and providing snow
fencing for further delineation and protection, providing replacement trees
on a caliper inch for caliper inch basis for trees removed, providing more
screening of the northern area and the area facing Kinion's home, and
the trail which will go through the property will be a public trail (the
details to be resolved prior to 2nd Reading.) The name of Old Shady Oak
Road will also be changed during this process. Motion carried unanimously.
D. TREANOR ADDITION by Guy K. Treanor. Request for Preliminary Plat of 0.734
acres into two lots for residential development. Location: 16135 Valley
View Road. (Resolution No. 84-214 - preliminary plat)
This item was published to be heard at the City Council Meeting on September
4, 1984.
E. Fall 1984 Special Assessment Hearing (Resolution No. 84-219)
City Manager Jullic indicated notice of this Public Hearing was published
and notices were mailed to all property owners as listed on the proposed
assessment rolls.
Director of Public Works Dietz reviewed the following projects:
1. IC. 51-356
No comments from the audience.
2. I.C. 51-308A
No comments from the audience.
3. I.C. 52-043
No comments from the audience.
4. IC. 52-048
No commnts from the audience.
5. I.C._52-057
No comments from the audience.
City Council Minutes -9- August 28, 1984
6. Trunk Sewer and Water
Larry Griffith, representing Wally Hustad, requested action be
deferred for two weeks so they might have an opportunity to study
the assessments further; a $50,000 error had been noted and they
would like to examine the remaining assessments against their prop-
erties. He noted that he had a written objection to present as per
the requirement of the State Statute.
There was some discussion regarding a bid opening which had already
been postponed to October; Dietz indicated he would like to see the
assessments adopted so this might be completed. City Attorney Pauly
explained the procedure which might be used should the assessment
rolls be adopted this evening relative to the letting of the contract.
Dietz noted that the City had received a written objection from the
owners of Crescent Ridge regarding their assessment, Dave Kasteleck,
representing the owners of Crescent Ridge, indicated they would like
more time to review the numbers. Dietz said there would be no problem
deferring action on this assessment for 30 days as there is no bidding
process involved therefore time is not a critical factor.
7. Lateral Sewer and Water
There were no comments from the audience.
8. Tree Removal
City Forester Stu Fox reviewed the special assessments for tree
removal. He referred to his memorandum of August 28, 1984, (attached.)
Thomas Carey, 10545 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Park, owner of
property at 6310-12 Kutcher Lane, asked that the $485 assessment be
forgiven. He said this is rental property and he reviewed the problems
which he had incurred with this property. He stated he was unaware of
the fact the trees had been marked and his renter(s) did not tell him
about this.
It was suggested this matter he continued to the September 4, 1984,
meeting of the City Council which would allow Staff time to review
the situation with Carey.
An objection was filed on two properties by Faulk. It was suggested
action on this be continued for one week to allow further review.
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public Hearing
on all items except the Hustad properties (continued for one week), Crescent
Ridge (continued to September 18, 1984), Carey and Faulk (continued for one
week to September 4, 1984) and to adopt the special assessments on all but
the previously mentioned properties as noted in Resolution No. 84-219,
Exhibit A. Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -10- August 28, 1984
F. Request for Multi-family HousinRBonds in the amount of $6,000,000.00 for
Eames Partnership (Resolution No. 84-22 -0—
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been
published.
David Ames, proponent, addressed the proposal.
The consensus of the Council was that more information was needed; the
application was not complete.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to continue action on this
item to the Council Meeting to be held on September 4, 1984, to allow
City Staff to work with the proponent. Motion carried unanimously.
G. Request for Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of
$1,675,000.00 for Reynolds Printing . (R051-ution No. 84-2231
City Manager Jullie indicated notice of this Public Hearing had been
published.
Finance Director Frane asked that consideration of Resolution No. 84-223
be continued pending receipt of a check from Reynolds for the deposit and
also for verification of proper zoning and site location.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to continued action on
this request to the September 4, 1984, meeting of the City Council as
per the recommendation of Finance Director Frane. Motion carried
unanimously.
H. Request for Multi-family Housing Bonds in the amount of $13,500,000.00
for Chasewood (Resolution No. 84-195Y ----
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published.
Jerry Hertel, Juran 8, Moody Inc,, addressed the request.
There were no comments from the audience, -
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public Hearing
and to adopt Resolution No. 84-195, granting preliminary approval of
Housing Revenue Bonds in the amount of $13,725,000.00 for Chasewood
(Eden Prairie I Limited.) Motion carried unanimously.
I. Request for Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of
P,750,000.00 for Portnoy 7-Resolution No. 84-194
City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been published.
2 363
City Council Minutes -11- August 28, 1984
Gerald Portnoy, proponent, was present to answer questions.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to close the Public Hearing
and to adopt Resolution No. 84-194, granting preliminary approval of MIDB's
in the amount of $2,750,000.00 for the Portnoy Project. Motion carried
unanimously.
Finance Director Frane explained the City could make a "deposit" which
would hold the remainder of the City's cap this deposit must be made with
the State.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to deposit approximately
$34,000 with the State of Minnesota to hold the City's cap. Roll call
vote: Anderson, Bentley, Redpath, Tangen and Penzel voted "aye." Motion
carried unanimously.
• Fairway Woods 3rd Addition easement vacation (Resolution No. 84-192)
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing was published.
Director of Public Works Dietz addressed the reason for the vacation.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to close the Public Hearing
and to adopt Resolution No. 84-192, vacating drainage and utility easements
on Lot 2, Block 2, Fairway Wood 3rd Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
K. Ridgewood West 4th Addition Right-of-Way and Easement Vacation (Resolution
No. 84-18)
City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hear'ing was published.
Director of Public Works Dietz reviewed the details of this vacation request.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public Hearing
and to adopt Resolution No. 84-185, vacating drainage and utility easements
and right-of-way in Ridgewood West. Motion carried unanimously.
L. Lorence 1st Addition Easement Vacation (Valley_Pondl (Resolution No, 84-218)
City Manager Jullie indicated notice of this Public Hearing had been published.
Director of Public Works Dietz reviewed the details of this vacation request.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to close the Public Hearing
and to adopt Resolution No. 84-218, terminating certain easement agreements
over part of Lot 1, Block 3, Lorence 1st Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -12- August 28, 1984
M. Valley Curve Easement Vacation (Resolution No. 84-233)
Official notice of this Public Hearing was published.
Director of Public Works Dietz explained the reason for this request.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to close the Public
Hearing and adopt Resolution No. 84-183, terminating certain drainage
and utility easements over portions of the Valley Curve subdivisions.
Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to continue the meeting past the 11:30
p.m. time of adjournment. Motion carried unanimously.
N. Ordinance No. 53-84, amending City Code Section 11.70, Subd. 3.A. &
Subd. 5.E., regarding non-accessory signs, including violations and
fines, appe-iiTn variances, especially with respect to campaign signs
City Manager Jullie indicated notice of this Public Hearing had been
published.
Redpath questioned the 30 day period which signs can be up following
the receipt of a notice requesting their removal. Discussion ensued
with the Council's consensus being that the time period should be
reduced to 3 days.
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public
Hearing and to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No'. 53-84, amending
City Code Section 11.70, Subd. 3.A. & Suhd. 5,E„ regarding non-
accessory signs, including violations and fines, appeals & variances,
with respect to campaign signs as amended changing the 30 day time
period to 3 days.
Tangen asked what type of notification is given to candidates advising
them of campaign rules and regulations with specific reference to sign
policies and procedures. Finance Director Franc outlined the materials
distributed to each candidate when he or she files for office. City
Attorney Pauly noted what is included in State Statutes. Penzel said
candidates are urged to place signs 15' back from the curb.
VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -13- August 28, 1984
Portions of the August 28th Agenda were continued to September 4, 1984. Minutes
for that portion of the Agenda follow. Consequently, items were not acted upon in
the order in which they were listed on the Agenda.
IX. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Appeal by ()avid Brown _on decision of Board of Appeals & Adjustments on
his Lot Size Variance requcIst
Nelson Berg, 903 Excelsior Avenue West, Hopkins, attorney for the Browns,
stated he was representing the Browns regarding the issuance of a variance
request for Mr. Brown to build a residence on his 3.2 acre lot which is in a
rural zoned area. He noted the application was denied by the Board of
Appeals; the four reasons indicated were: traffic concerns on Eden Prairie
Road, a statement that the variance was too great and unreasonable, a
statement that the parcel could he used for other purposes than a single
family dwelling, and that common ownership which may result in hardship
was created by the owner. Berg indicated there were materials contained
in the Council packet from the Director of Public Works and the Public
Safety Department which indicate that the traffic concerns may not be as
great as was felt before. He also stated there was a report from the
Building Department informing that the soil and septic information was
acceptable and in conformance with City requirements.
Jim Benshoof, traffic engineer/consultant, said he was asked to address
one central question: whether it was possible to design a single family
residential driveway for this property which would meet normal traffic
safety standards. Benshoof then reviewed, using schematics, the traffic
patterns and situations on Eden Prairie Road and demonstrated relative
sight distance patterns. Benshoof also referred to.comparable areas in
the City. He stated he had inquired about the accident history on Eden
Prairie Road and the Department of Public Safety had not indicated any
problem in the vicinity of that driveway.
Berg added that the City had received a letter form the School District
dated April 23, 1984, addressed to Chris Enger, indicating that the School
District had looked into the location and access of a school pickup (this
was done at Mr. Brown's request) and had found no reason to raise any
objections.
John Hansen, 16480 Hilltop Road, stated he has lived in the City for 17
years and during that time has been involved in real estate. He reviewed
his involvement with the piece of property which is owned by the Browns
as well as his recollections of transactions in that area of the City.
He noted his children have ridden the school bus which travels on Eden
Prairie Road and he has never felt safety to be an issue. He said he
could think of no better use for the Brown property than for a single
family dwelling. Berg asked Hansen to comment on the four possible uses
which are provided for in the rural zoning district: agricultural, commer-
cial stables, public facilities and services, and single family dwellings.
City Council Minutes -14- August 28, 1984
Hansen said he felt agricultural use on this property was impossible due
to the steep slope and the forested bluff; horses would destroy the forested
area so a commercial stable operation would not be reasonable; it is not
the type of place which would be chosen by a telephone company or other
public service; consequently, there is no other reasonable use except a
single family dwelling. Hansen said most of the rest of Eden Prairie
does not have rural zoning anymore because the parcels have been subdivided
and developed into smaller parcels; he questioned the wisdom of the ordinance
which says lots in the rural area must be 10 acres in size. He said he would
like to see the bluffs protected, but did not think allowing the Browns to
build a home would damage the bluffs.
Penzel noted that the zoning on the Brown property has always been rural.
He also stated that even in 1973 the lot did not meet the five acre minimum
requirement. Hansen stated that there was a 5 acre minimum at that time and
that all lots had been grandfathered. City Attorney Pauly explained that
grandfathering is accepting a non-conforming use which is in existence at
the time of the adoption of the ordinance or the Code. Hansen said he could
recall a number of properties which had been built on in the past few years
which were less than five acres in size. Director of Planning Enger said
he was aware that seven or eight years ago building permits were issued on
parcels that had been on record prior to 1968; this did not mean it had been
a correct procedure and it was something which the Staff later corrected.
Tangen asked when the Brown lot was platted. Berg said these are metes and
bounds of unplatted property and the parcels were in existence. Pauly suggestu"
the Council refer to pages 1765 and 1766 in the Council packet which reviewed
• the history of the property. Berg noted that two separate parcels were created
in 1967 by action taken by Gingold, Jr. This warranty deed was recorded on
October 25, 1967. Berg said it is his position that by the issuance of that
warranty deed two separate legal lots were created and that predated the
adoption of the Ordinance in 1969. Bentley asked what the size of those
two lots was. Berg said the Nielsen lot was 4.4 acres and the Brown lot
was 3.2 acres. Redpath said the Brown parcel is not shown on the chart
until 1972. Berg said if you have one parcel and a portion of that is
deeded off, then you have two separate parcels of property; the title is
separate, the abstracting is separate and the tax assessment is separate.
He stated the parcels have been taxed separately since 1967. Berg noted
the Brown parcel shows up on the chart across from October 25, 1967, when
the division occurred.
Bentley said the question remains as to whether or not this is a buildable
site for housing; what is the highest and best use of that property?
Berg reOewed the financial dealings which had occurred in regard to the
property and which have further complicated the matter. He stated that Brown
is proposing a home which is compatible with the intent and spirit of the
rural zoning ordinance; he has plans for a 5150,000 home which will use
solar passive energy and therefore will he built into the hill.
Tangeo asked what assurances might have been given by the City which would
have indicated this to be a buildable parcel. David Brown, property owner,
said ho had spoken to Jean Johnson in 1977 and she had said there was no
problem with building on that property,
2;V:1
City Council Minutes -15- August 28, 1984
Dean Edstrom, 10133 Eden Prairie Road, asked that the Council affirm the
decision of the Board of Appeals. He said he did not consider the request
to be a variance but rather a rezoning. Edstrom referred to his letter
of April 10, 1984, which was included in the Council packet, in which he
discussed reasons why the variance should not be granted. He said he felt
a key fact was that the parcel was in common ownership with abutting proper-
ties at the time of the adoption of the restrictive zoning ordinance and
that this defeats any claim of hardship with respect to this parcel. He
went on to say that other residents have acquired parcels in the area so
as to increase the aneunt of acreage owned by them to further conform with
the present ordinance requirements. Edstrom said he is very concerned about
the safety question on Eden Prairie Road. He indicated there are many
accidents which are not reported to the Department of Public Safety --
in the Winter accidents caused by slippery conditions and in the Summer
accidents resulting from people travelling too fast. He said he is aware
of these because the "victims" often come to his home to use a phone to
call for assistance. Edstrom said a school bus stop at the location of
the proposed driveway would be extremely hazardous. He said there are
times when the roads are bad when the School's Department of Transportation
will call and request that their children be picked up at the intersection
of County Roads 1 and 4.
Loren Wuttke, 16860 Flying Cloud Drive, said he owns 40 acres and would
like to have the Browns for neighbors. He said he feels this is a moral
issue. He feels the property is subject to vandalism if left in its present
state. He did not feel size of parcel should be an issue.
Berg said variances require the Council to deal with each situation on the
merits of that situation. He stated that when the facts fit into a situation
where there is a hardship that is not the doing of the applicant, and circum-
stances are such that the variance can be granted in support of the spirit
of the ordinance, then there is a responsibility to do that. Berg said he
had discussed the law of the common lot situation with City Attorney Pauly
and there is conflicting law as to how to interpret that.
Benshoof further responded to some of the issues which had been brought
up during the course of the discussion.
Tangen said from what he heard this evening and from what he had read in
the materials distributed to the Council, this lot was formed prior to
zoning in 1968. He said he concluded that Brown entered into an agreement
for this property in 1977 at which time lots of this size were being allowed
to be built on; Brown may have been given information by the City which lead
him to believe this was a buildable site. He said he did not think the Council
was necessarily setting a precedent in allowing the bluff to be developed
because this property is already serviced by a road and would need only a
driveway.
Tangen moved to recommend the variance be granted. The motion died for
lack of a second.
City Council Minutes -16- August 28, 1984
Tangen expressed concern about preservation of the bluff.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to affirm the decision of
the Board of Appeals.
Redpath said for as long as he has been on the Council, there has been
concern regarding the preservation of the bluffs; that was the rationale
behind the 5 acre and then the 10 acre limitations. He stated the entire
southwest corner of the City is under that same restriction.
Bentley said he had not heard any compelling reasons for granting the
variance. He did not feel it Was in compliance with the City Code.
Penzel felt the responses in support of the granting of the variance were
justifications citing examples along the top of the bluff not at the base
and were, therefore, dramatically different from this proposal. He said
he felt the ordinance changes which were imposed originally in 1968-69
and which were modified later on would have made this lot unbuildable
even in 1977 much less 1984.
City Attorney Pauly requested that the Council provide reasons and findings
in support of whatever its ultimate decision. He suggested this be referred
to Staff for drafing in support of that position. Pauly also noted that
the Minutes should reflect the fact that pages 1750 - 1857 of the Agenda
refer to this question and are a part of the evidence which has been con-
sidered by the Council.
With the consent of the seconder, the motion was restated to read as
follows:
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to affirm the decision of
the Board of Appeals, and to refer the matter to the City Attorney for
a drafting of a Resolution stating the Council's findings, reasons for
denial and those findings. Motion carried with Tangen voting "no."
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 15319 - 15717
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Payment of Claims
Nos. 15319 - 15717. Roll call vote: Anderson, Bentley, Redpath, Tangen and
Penzel voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously.
Tangen suggested the balance of the Agenda be considered at the September 4th meeting.
Penzel asked if there was anything which required Council action this evening,
City Council Minutes -17- August 28, 1984
X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
C. Report of Director of Community Services
1. Proposed study of Lake RilEt
Director of Community Services Lambert referred to his memorandum
of August 23, 1984, in which the proposed Lake Riley Improvement
Project was discussed.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to authorize up to
$5,000 to prepare a preliminary study on potential biomanipulation
of Lake Riley to clean up the algae and weed problem. Roll call
vote: Anderson, Bentley, Redpath, Tangen and Penzel voted "aye."
Motion carried unanimously.
A. Reports of Council Members
Penzel - reported on a meeting he had with Don Chmiel and Sam Higuchi
of Northern States Power regarding the designation of a power line
routing for Highway 212.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Penzel, to adjourn the meeting to 7 p.m;
on Tuesday, September 4, 1984, at which time the unfinished business from
this evening's Agenda will be completed.
NOTE: VIII. A. 1st Reading_of Ordinance No. 56-84, amending_ City Code Chapter
9, Section 9.40, Firearms Regulations, and Adution of Resolution No. 222,
outlining criteria to be used for issuance of Hunting Permits by the Public
Safety Department was moved to the Consent Calendar as fIILM.
3-1
City Council Minutes -18- August 28, 1984
ROLL CALL: all members were present
Mayor Penzel reconvened the meeting at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, September 4, 1984,
which was contiRued from Tuesday, August 28, 1934.
VII. APPOINTMENTS
A. Appointment of member to the Human Rights & Services Commission for a
term to expire 2/28/87
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to appoint Leslie Thoreson
to the Human Rights & Services Commission for a term to expire 2/28/87.
Motion carried unanimously.
B. Appointment to the Minnetonka School District Advisory_Council (indefinite
term)
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to appoint Bob Mavis to
the Minnetonka School District Advisory Council for an indefinite term.
Motion carried unanimously.
X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & CONMISSIONS
B. Report of City Manager
There was none.
D. Report of Finance Director
1. Clerk's License List
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the Clerk's
License List with the provision that the stipulation be made in granting
the kennel license for Darrell and Sally Olson of 15608 Park Terrace
Drive that, should an animal die it will not be replaced.
Anderson noted that concerns had been expressed regarding this license
in letters received by the City Council. He asked if it would not be
easier to address the problems prior to granting the kennel license.
City Attorney Pauly said that provisions on the licensee can be placed
in granting a license. Anderson said he felt that someone requesting
a kennel license should he doing so with a clean past and not under
the circumstances under which this license is being granted. Tangen
said there would have to be a violation cited rather than just a complaint
against the licensee.
VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously,
City Council Minutes -19- August 28, 1984
VI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY_ COMMISSIONS
A. Development Commission - Recommendations on Municipal Industrial Develop-
ment Bond Guidelines
City Manager Jullie referred to Assistant to the City Manager Dawson's
memorandum of August 28, 1984. Jullie said he thought it would be
appropriate for the Council to comment on the guidelines and to refer
them back to the Development Commission for more discussion.
Redpath said he would ask the Development Commission to include family
restaurants.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bnetley, to refer the recommendations
on Municipal Industrial Development Bond Guidelines back to the Development
Commission.
Bentley asked how the Conunission came up with the percentage in #5; he
would like to know what the definition of small business is in #6; he
felt #7 might be very limiting; and in #8 he wondered what might be a
credit enhancement device.
Tangen said he had a problem with being too locked in on #5; it might
be too restrictive.
VOTE ON THE MOTION: The motion carried unanimously.
Jullie said this will probably be on the Council Agenda for the 2nd meeting
in October.
XI. NEW BUSINESS
There was none.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to adjourn the meeting at 7:22 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
2
MEMORANDUM
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
DATE:
. SUBJECT:
Mayor and City Council
Carl Jullie, City Manager
Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
October 30, 1984
Cahill Silent Auction
The Community Services staff received a phone request from Ms. Kathy Waldrup,
on behalf of Cahill Elementary School, for the Community Center to donate a
one year membership to the Community Center to be used as part of a fund
raiser for Cahill Elementary School during their silent auction.
On October 15, 1984, the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
reviewed this request and recommended approval of donating a one year family
membership to the Edon Prairie Community Center for use as a part of their
fund raiser.
The Community Services staff concur with the Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resources Commission recommendation and recommend approval of this request.
111,:md
2?) 13
MEMORANDUM
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor and City Council
Carl Jullic, City Manager
Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services/
October 30, 1984
Request Authorization to Advertise for Bids for Tractor and
Snowblower
The City Council has approved the purchase of a tractor and snowblower for the
1985 budget. Staff requests authorization to advertise for bids in the Eden
Pri...irie News on November 7, 1984.
Bids will be opened on Tuesday, November 27 1984, at 10 a.m., at the Eden
Prairie City Hall.
The estimated cost for this tractor and snowblower is $28,000
BL:md
/LI
MEMORANDUM
TO:
THU:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor and City Council
'Carl Jullic, City Manager
Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
October 30, 1984
Proposed Agreement Between the City of Eden Prairie, the City
of Chanhassen, and the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed
District Authorizing a Feasibility Study for the Lake Riley
and Riley Creek Area
On August 29, 1984, the Eden Prairie City Council reviewed the June 21 letter
from the Watershed District regarding a possible biomanipulation program for
Lake Riley. The City also reviewed the July 24, 1984 letter from the City of
Chanhassen regarding the possible study of Lake Riley.
The City concurred with the City of Chanhassen in that the "preliminary work"
referred to in Mr. Fred Richards memorandum is actually the feasibility study
that would include the recommendation of a management program and an estimate
of implementation costs.
At the August 28 meeting, the City Council approved up to $5,000 for the pre-
paration of this report under the terms of the joint participation outlined in
the June 21 memo.
Attached, for final aproval, is a copy of the proposed cooperative agreement
between the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District and the cities of
Chanhassen and Eden Prairie pertaining to the feasibility study to be undertaken
by the District for Lake Riley and connected water courses and water bodies.
The agreement limits the City's cost to $5,000, and will provide a feasibility
study similar to the study that was done on Round Lake several years ago.
Our City Attorney's office has reviewed this agreement and found it to be in
order. Staff recommends approval of this agreement.
BL:Md
IS121 325•12755
LAW MICE.
LANG. PAULY & DREGERBON, LTD.
410t1 MS CENTER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
pOSERT I. LAND
ROSIER A. PAUL?
DAVID H. MOON
RICHARD r. ROSSO
---
MASS.,. JOHNSON
JOSEPH A. MILAN
JOHN W. LAND
e• October 26, 1984
Mr. Bob Lambert
Community Services Director
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Bob:
Our office has reviewed the proposed agreement be-
tween the City of Eden Prairie, the City of Chanhassen, and
the Riley-Purgatory - Bluff Creek Watershed District author-
izing a feasibility study for the Lake Riley and Riley Creek
area.
Through several telephone conversations with Fred Richards
and Bob Obermeyer, we have satisfied ourselves that the proposed
study will not duplicate efforts made in the 1983 Metro Council
Feasibility Study of Lake Riley. The engineers -intend to
amalgamate the raw data gathered in that prior study, as well
as other studies, and make an extensive detailed management
plan for the area with specific recommendations and cost es-
timates. Such a detailed management plan is apparently re-
quired before any actual management program can be implemented
and before federal funding can be obtained.
We have looked over the entire agreement and found it to
be in order.
RAP/sai
2
RILEY-PURGATORY-BLUFF CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
CITIES OF EDEN PRAIRIE AND CHANHASSEN
Cooperative Agreement
Feasibility Study For Lake and Stream Improvement Project
PARTIES
The Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District
(hereinafter "District"), the City of Eden Prairie (hereinaf
t
e
r
"Eden Prairie"), and the City of Chanhassen (hereinafter
"Chanhassen") acting by and through their respective governi
n
g
bodies, enter into this cooperative agreement by reason of a
n
d
in recognition of the fact that the overall water and related
land management plans for the District, Eden Prairie and
Chanhassen will be affected by the actions of each of these
public bodies in adopting or permitting water and land uses
o
r
programs inconsistent with the District's overall plan
objectives for the protection, maintenance and enhancement of
public water areas within the District.
II PROJECT AREA
The land and water areas subject to this agreement are
generally described as Lake Riley and those reaches of Riley
Creek both upstream and downstream of Lake Riley impacted by
the undertakings herein described, as well as other
watercourses and waterbodies tributary to Lake Riley and tho
s
e
affected reaches of Riley Creek.
III PROJECT DESCRIPTION - FEASIBILITY STUDY
The purpose of this Feasibility Study will be to
prepare a management plan that outlines recommended
alternatives for the rehabilitation of Lake Riley, connected
watercourses and waterbodies, and land tributary thereto. The
management alternatives to be included in the study report will
be for the restoration of Lake Riley's water quality and
management techniques required within that lake's tributary
watershed area. Data available from the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff
Creek Watershed District, Metropolitan Council, Minnesota
• Department of Natural Resources, Cities of Chanhassen and Eden
Prairie, Lake Riley Homeowner's Association, and other
governmental agencies and citizen groups will be utilized in
the preparation of recommended alternatives for any public
waters' restoration. Additional data, if required, will be
collected to supplement this existing data. The management
plan contained in the Feasibility Study will be prepared to
satisfy the Federal Environmental Protection Agency's
requirements of a Phase I: Diagnostic Feasibility Study and
will include a cost estimate for implementation of any
recommended alternatives to be undertaken following the
completion of the Feasibility Study.
IV OBLIGATION OF DISTRICT
The District agrees to undertake the preparation and
completion of the Feasibility Study in accordance with Article
III herein. The District agrees that it will complete such
study by January 31, 1985 and present that study to the City
Councils of Eden Prairie and Chanhassen within one month
-2-
I t
following completion and acceptance of the Feasibility Study by
the Board of Mangagers of the District.
V COTS OF THE FEASIBILITY STUDY
The District agrees to assume and be responsibile for
the payment of the Feasibility Study, which costs shall not
exceed $15,000. In the event the total project costs exceed
the sum of $15,000, the District agrees to complete the entire
project as agreed upon and pay for all costs in excess of the
parties' financial obligations as specified in Article VI
herein.
VI ALLOCATION OF PROJECT COSTS; METHOD OF PAYMENT
Except as provided for in Article V for payment of
excess project costs, Chanhassen, Eden Prairie and the District
hereby assume and agree to pay one-third of the actual project
costs, but which individual obligation in no event shall exceed
the sum of t5,000 for each of the parties to this Agreement.
Upon submission to Eden Prairie and Chanhassen of the completed
Feasibility Study and an invoice detailing the actual costs and
expenses incurred by the District to complete the project work,
each municipality agrees to remit to the District its payment
In accordance with this Article VI.
VII FURTHER OBLIGATIONS AND UNDERTAKINGS
The Completion of and submission to Chanhassen and
Eden Prairie of the Feasibility Study shall in no way obligate
any of the parties to this agreement to undertake further
-3-
actions and/or proceedings which might be recommended i
n
t
h
e
final report unless and until the parties may agree in w
r
i
t
i
n
g
to any such further undertaking, committments and obliga
t
i
o
n
s
.
This agreement shall be in force and effect upon
execution by the parties in the manner set forth in a
resolution of the respective governing bodies approving
t
h
e
agreement and authorizing the execution of this documen
t
.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
By
Dated:
Dated:
And
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
By
And
RILEY-PURGATORY-BLUFF CREEK
WATERSHED DISTRICT
By
Dated: And
0345q
-4-
2310
October 24, 1984
TO: •CARL JULLIE
41
FROM: JACK HACKIN6 If
SUBJECT: LAKE REGION MUTUAL AID
The Loretto volunteer Fire Department has made a request to join
the Lake Region Fire Mutual Aid Association. Eden Prairie has
been a member of this organization for the past 15 years.
We would like to recommend approval of the request to our city
council.
.,1 7 I
ZafeE cREgion atuat .,„qa cAlociation
Chanhassen
Chaska
Eden Prairie
Excelsior
Hamel
Long Lake
Maple Plain
Minnetonka
Mound
Plymouth
St. Boni
Victoria
Wayzata
Secretary-Treasurer
933-2648
_David__Lee
5041 Clear Spring Road
Phone
Minnetonka, MN 55345
August 17, 1984
Dear Fire Chief:
The Loretto Volunteer Fire Department has requested to join
the Lake Region Fire League. Their new membership will require
updating our mutual aid agreement and our Articles of Association.
Enclosed herewith you will find both documents which you should
read and must have signed by the proper persons. The Articles
of Association must be signed by the Mayor of your City (except
Hamel and Loretto which are private fire departments and require
signature from the Fire Chief). The Reciprocal Fire Service
Agreement must be signed by the Mayor and the City Manager (except
Loretto and Hamel which are to be signed by the Fire Chief and
Secretary).
Please have this original copy signed and mailed back to me
at the above address as soon as possible. When all municipalities
have signed I will forward a photocopy to each department for
your records.
If you have any questions, please call me at the above phone
number (my residence) or at work 866-5085.
David Lee, Secretary/Treasurer
ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION
LAKE REGION FIRE LEAGUE
WHEREAS, the undersigned representatives of the communities
of Chanhassen, Eden Prairie, Excelsior, Hamel, Long Lake,
Loretto, Maple Plain, Minnetonka, Plymouth, Wayzata, Chaska,
Victoria, St. Bonifacius, Mound, believe that the effectiveness
of the various fire departments will be improved by join
t
consideration of problems involving fire protection, and
WHEREAS, the communities referred to above contemplate
entering into mutual assistance contracts for fire protection b
y
their duly authorized officials.
NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned persons hereby associate
themselves for the purpose of furthering the purposes outline
d
above and in order to effectuate said purposes adopt th
e
following articles of association:
1. Name: The name of this association shall be the Lake
Region Fire League.
2. Members: The members of this league shall consist of
the Chief of the fire department and two other members to
b
e
designated by the local governing body of each of the communiti
e
s
of Chanhassen, Eden Prairie, Excelsior, Hamel, Long Lake,
Loretto, Maple Plain, Minnetonka, Mound, Plymouth, Wayzata,
Chaska, Victoria, St. Bonifacius. The members of this leag
u
e
appointed by said local governing bodies shall serve until the
i
r
successors arc duly appointed and qualified.
3. Officers: The officers of this association shall
consist of a President, Vice-President, Secretary, and a
Treasurer. Said officers shall be elected by a majority vote
o
f
the members at the first meeting thereof and shall hold office
until their successors are elected and qualified. Thereafter,
officers shall be elected annually at the first meeting of th
e
members in each calendar year. The President shall preside at
all meetings and shall appoint the Chairman of such committees a
s
may be desirable from time to time. Any Chairman so appointed by
Articles of Association
Lake Region Fire League Page -2-
the President shall select members of the committee to serve with
him. The 'Vice-President shall have all powers of the President
in the absence of the President, and the Secretary shall maintain
a record of all proceedings of the Association, and the Treasurer
shall handle all funds of the Association.
4. Meetings: The members of the association shall meet
quarterly on the second Wednesday of the first month of each
calendar quarter. Such meetings shall be held as nearly as
practical in rotation in the various communities represented by
members of the Association and the place of such meeting shall be
designated by the President. Special meetings may be called by
the President from time to time.
5. Amendment of Articles: These Articles of Association
may be amended by affirmative vote of 4/5 of all of the members
of the Association at any regylar meeting. /
M CHANHASSEN o AYOR
EDEN PRAIRIE MAYOR
EXCELSIOR MAYOR
HAMEL FIRE CHIEF
LONG LAKE
MAYOR
LORETTO FIRE CHIEF
MAPLE PLAIN MAYOR
MINNETONKA MAYOR
MOUND MAYOR
PLYMOUTH MAYOR
WAYZATA
MAYOR
CHASKA
MAYOR
VICTORIA
MAYOR
ST. BONIFACIUS
MAYOR
RECIPROCAL FIRE SERVICE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made in the County of Hennepin. State of
Minnesota, by and between the municipalities of Chanhassen,
E
d
e
n
Prairie, Excelsior, Hamel, Long Lake, Loretto, Maple Plain,
Minnetonka, Mound, Plymouth, Wayzata, Chaska, Victoria, St.
Bonifacius, said parties being municipal corporations of
t
h
e
State of Minnesota, WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the said municipalities desire to make available to
each other their respective fire-fighting equipment and perso
n
n
e
l
in the case of emergencies, and each of said municipalitie
s
h
a
s
legal authority to send its fire-fighting equipment and perso
n
n
e
l
into other communities.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. If one or more fires occur within the limits of either
of the above municipalities, or within the limits o
f
a
n
y
territory in which either of said municipalities has contr
a
c
t
e
d
to furnish fire-fighting equipment and personnel, and the
fire-fighting equipment or personnel of either of t
h
e
municipalities executing this contract is, in the judgeme
n
t
o
f
the chief of its fire deparmtnet or in his absence his assist
a
n
t
or deputy in charge of its fire department, insufficient
t
o
control or extinguish the fire or fires, an "emergency" sh
a
l
l
exist for the purpose of this agreement.
2. If an emergency arises, any of the persons who are
entitled by paragraph I above to determine an emergency may
c
a
l
l
upon the fire department of one or more of the municipali
t
i
e
s
above named for assistance. If all the fire-fighting equipment
and personnel of any of said municipalities is engaged
i
n
fighting fire, the chief or other commanding officer of the
f
i
r
e
department of any such municipality whose fire-fighting equip
m
e
n
t
is not engaged in fighting fire is authorized to send equi
p
m
e
n
t
and personnel to the empty fire station to be available for
c
a
l
l
if required for any fire. It is the intention of the parties by
this agreement to cooperate in the event of an emergency by
Reciprocal Fire Service Agreement -2-
making available necessary fire-fighting equipment and personnel
from the nearest fire station and during such an emergency to
re-arrange firefighting equipment of the parties so as to make
the remaining equipment and personnel available for use in the
event other fires shall occur anywhere throughout the territory
of these municipalities.
3. Upon receipt of a call for assistance as set forth in
paragraph 2, the fire department of any of the parties hereto
shall promptly dispatch at least one fire truck with the usual
number of personnel to assist in fighting the fire which has
caused the emergency or to render stand-by service as the case
may be, provided that no fire department of any of said parties
shall be obligated to send its fire equipment or personnel beyond
its boundaries if to do so would leave such municipality without
any fire equipment or personnel available within its limits for
service at any fire which might subsequently arise therein. In
extreme emergencies, however, every effort will be made to
re-distribute fire-fighting equipment and personnel so as to make
it available for any additional fires which might arise during
the emergency.
4. The fire-fighting equipment and personnel of any fire
department assisting the fire department of another municipality
in an emergency will immediately upon arival at the scene of the
emergency be under the command of the officer in charge of the
municipality within whose boundaries the emergency is situated.
5. So charge will be made by any party for assistance
rendered to another party under this agreement.
6. (a) Each of the parties will maintain insurance policies
- Workman's Compensation or its equivalent. The covering of said
policy extending to protect said firemen of said parties when
engaged in the performance of duties under this agreement outside
the boundary of the party whose fire department he is a member,
and
(b) Damage or injury caused by negligent operation of
its fire department vehicles to the extent of not loss than
Reciprocal Fire Service Agreement -3-
$25,000.00 property liability, and not less than $100,000.00
personal injury liability, the coverage of such policies
extending to accidents which may occur while the said party's
fire department is engaged in the performance of duties under
this agreement outside the boundaries of said party.
7. No party to this agreement nor any officer or employee
of any party shall be liable to any other party or to the person
or account of failure of any party to this agreement to furnish
its fire-fighting equipment or personnel in response to a call
for assistance from any other municipality.
8. No liability shall be incurred by a party who shall have
summoned assistance under this agreement for damage to, or
destruction of, fire-fighting equipment of a party rendering such
assistance unless such damage or destruction shall be caused by
negligent or malicious conduct of any officer or employee of the
municipalities which have summoned such assistance.
9. That the governing body of each party hereto will
appoint three representatives from among its officers and
fire-fighting personnel to serve as members of an association
formed for the purpose of this agreement and increasing the
efficiency of the fire-fighting services of these municipalities
by exchange of information, standardization of equipment,
education of personnel, perfection of methods of fire alarms
throughout the territory of these municipalities and such other
matters as will serve to mutually assist these municipalities in
the prevention and extinguishment of fires.
10. Any party hereto may withdraw from this agreement by
thirty (30) days in writing to the others.
ll. A copy of this agreement will be posted at the fire
department headquarters of each party hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said municipalities have caused this
agreement to he signed in their respective corporate names by
their respective duly authorized officers by authority of their
respective governing bodies as of this . day of
1984.
'7 Mayor
Manager .
Mayor
Manager
Mayor
Manager
Fire Chief
Secretary
Mayor
Manager
Fire Chief
Secretary
Mayor
Manager
Mayor
Manager
Mayor
Manager
Mayor
Manager
Mayor
Manager
Mayor'
Manager
Mayor
Manager
Mayor
Manager
Reciprocal Fire Service Agreement
-4-
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
CITY OF EXCELSIOR
HAMEL VOLUNTEER FIRE
DEPARTMENT INC.
CITY OF LONG LAKE
LORETTO FIRE DEPARTMENT
CITY OF MAPLE PLAIN
CITY OF MINNETONKA
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
CITY OF WAYZATA
CITY OF CHASKA
CITY OF MOUND
CITY OF VICTORIA
CITY OF ST. BONIFACIUS
CHANGE ORDER NO. 2
October 15, 1984
PRO3ECT: Flying Cloud Drive
Eden Prairie, Minnesota
E.P. 1.C. 1152-064
RCM Project No. 841016
TO:
Opus Corporation
You are hereby directed to make the change
s
n
o
t
e
d
b
e
l
o
w
i
n
T
h
e
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
.
Nature of Change:
1. Add 40' of 111." Type K Copper Water Servic
e
a
t
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
1
7
+
7
0
.
2. Add 6" perforated PVC suhdrains (with fabri
c
a
n
d
w
a
s
h
e
d
r
o
c
k
)
.
Justification:
1. Requested by City for homeowner east of F
l
y
i
n
g
C
l
o
u
d
D
r
i
v
e
.
2. Required to drain subbase of Flying Cloud
D
r
i
v
e
d
u
e
t
o
t
r
a
p
p
e
d
w
a
t
e
r
p
o
c
k
e
t
s
.
Schedule of Adjustments to Contract Costs:
1.. Add: 40' of IV Type K Copper Water Servic
e
,
with corporation stop and curb box 1 LS @ $685.00 =
2. 6" Perforated PVC stibdiain with fabric
and washed rock 250 LF @ $21.00
3. Break into existing manhole/catchbasin 3 EA @ $250.00
4. Cleanouts for subc1rains 3 EA @ $125.00
.5141:n1-n21)2f Contract Atikist mcnts:
Contract Amount Prior to this Change Order
$768,330.75
Net Increase Resulting from this Change Or
d
e
r
$ 7,060.00
Content Conti act Amount Including this C
h
a
n
g
e
O
r
d
e
r
$
7
7
5
,
3
9
0
.
7
5
The Above chns ;ire Approved:
RCM, IN
By (11 1
,
Date
The Above Changes are Accepted:
C)I't IS CORVORATION
By
Date
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
By
Date
685.00
= 5,250.00
750.00
375.00
;1, /9
TO: Mayor Penze1 and City Council Members
FROM: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
THROUGH: Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works
RATE: October 31, 1984
SUBJECT: Agreement with Hennepin County for Federal-Aid Highway Improvement
Attached is a proposed agreement with Hennepin County regarding Federal-Aid
highway construction within Eden Prairie. The agreement comes to the City
for approval at this time because of the Crosstown project. However, the
agreement does cover any anticipated Federal-Aid highway improvements within
the City limits.
Specifically, the agreement provides the following:
1. Limits traffic control devices to conform to Mn/DOT standards.
2. Prohibits billboards, pumps and other private installations
within the proposed right-of-way limits.
3. Minimum speed limits should be 30 MPH; and
4. City shall prohibit parking on federally funded facilities.
The City Attorney has reviewed this proposed agreement and finds no objectionable
language. The Staff recommends approval and authorization for the Mayor and
Manager to execute Agreement #PW 32-49-84.
EAD:sg
dA0
fo/2I (13-79) '
Pennepin County Agreement
Nu. N 3?-49 -84
AGREEMENT BETWEEN MUNICIPALITY [GI:
COUNTY FOR FEDERAL-AID HICRWAY IMPRVOMERT
THIS AMOTMENT made by the City of Ed" E"1111= , Minnesota,
hereinafter called the "Municipality" with the County of nenfleRin
hereinafter, called the "County", WITNESSETH:
1l.EAS, the United States Government, through the Federal Highway
Administration of the U. S. Department of Transportation doc,s apportion Fed-
eral fonds for the construction, reconstruction and Improvement of highway
projects on af,Troved systems of public roads, and
WHEREAS, said approved systems within the limits of a Municipality
ere now 0: may be eligible for the participation of these rederal funds in
their improf,emont or construction, sod
Wild:EAR, the Federal itip,lnway Administrstion as a condition to the
use of Federal funds on approved Federal-Aid projects requires the agreement
of the Manicipalfty to control. road signs, traffic control devices, adver-
tising Gigns, miscellaneous installations, speed and parking.
NOW, THEREFORE, TEE Municipality in consideration of the expendi-
ture and use of Federal funds for the construction, reconstruction or im-
p.ovcmont of any Federal-Aid Street or Highway within the limits of the
Municipality agnes L'ith thy County as follows:
(I) No signs, traffic control devices or othr protective de-
vices r.hrll be erected on any Federal-Aid project withia the Municipality
inept as shall conform with the corr,nt Manual on Uniform Traffic
Cent 3 ol Foyle s fox: Streets and IligLways of the State of Minnesota.
(2) All iight -of -wy within the limits of the Municipality on
any Federal Aid project shall be held and maintained inviolate PS a public
- 1 -
highway and no posters, billboards, roadside stands, curb pumps, curb ser
-
vice devices or other private installations other than utilities of public
interest, and no signs, other than traffic control or protective devices
shall be permitted within the right-of-way limits of the projects. The
Municipality will with respect to such items as are within its jurisdictio
n
which may be or cause an obstruction or interfere with the free flow of
traffic or which may be or cause a hazard to traffic or which may vitiate
the usefulness of the project shall remove or cause removal of the same at
the request of either the County or the Federal Highway Administrator.
(3) The speed limits on any Federal-Aid project shall be not
less than 30 miles per hour.
(4) The Municipality shall by ordinance and continued enforce-
ment prohibit all types of parking except parallel parking on any project
financed in whole or in part with Federal funds. The City agrees that
the State may enforce the provision by an action for specific performance
,
mandamus, or other appropriate remedy and by withholding any funds due
the Municipality in possession of the State.
Dated this
day of , 19.84 „
CITY OF Eprp PRAIRIE
(SEAL)
BY
Mayor
DATE_
BY
Manager
DATE
-2- .
2 A.,1.
November 6, 1984
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 84:297
APPROVING AGREEMENT BETWEEN EDEN PRAIRIE AND
HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT
WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Department of Transportation proposes
to make certain improvements within the corporate limits of Eden Prairie,
specifically, CSAH 62;
WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration requires that certain
conditions be adhered to in order that Federal-Aid funds utilized on the
CSAH 62 project and other future projects; and
WHEREAS, Hennepin County has prepared an agreement which specifies
the Federal Highway Administration requirements to maintain eligibility for
Federal-Aid funds.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council
that said agreement # PW 32-49-84 is hereby approved and that the Mayor and
City Manager are authorized to execute said agreement for and on behalf of
the City.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on November 6, 1984.
ATTEST:
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
John D. Franc, Clerk
SEAL
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT
TO: Mayor Penzel and City Council Members
THROUGH: Carl dullie, City Manager '
Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works
FROM: David L. Olson, Senior Engineering Technician
DATE: October 30, 1984
SUBJECT: PRIMELAND 2ND ADDITION
PROPOSAL:
Prime Development Corporation has requested City Council approval
of the final plat of Primeland 2nd Addition, a replat of Outlot B,
City West Second Addition. The plat contains appeoximately 3.7
acres located in the North 1/2 of Section 1. The proposed plat will
consist of 1 lot, for the construction of a day-care center, and
1 Outlot to be replatted at a later date.
HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on October 16,
1984, per Resolution 84-276.
Ordinance 120-84 zoning Lot 1, Block 1 to Commercial Regional
Service is scheduled for final reading by the Council on November
6, 1984.
The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report is
scheduled for execution on November 6, 1984.
VARIANCES:
All variance requests not covered through the Developer's Agreement
must be processed through the Board of Appeals.
UTILITIES AND STREETS:
All utilities and streets to be installed within the plat will be
owned and maintained by an owners association. The maintenance
responsibilities for the utilities and streets are covered in the
Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Easements and Restrictions
for City West dated October 27, 1983 and recorded at Hennepin County.
A cross casement covering access to Outlet A will be necessary prior
to release of the plat. The area described through this easement
will be replatted into an outlet when Outlot A is developed.
Additional requirements for the installation of utilities and streets
are covered in the Developer's Agreement.
PARK DEDICATION:
Thu requirements for park dedication are covered in the Developer's
Agreement.
BONDING:
The requirements for bonding are covered in the Developer's Agreement.
t
Page 2, Final Plat Primeland 2nd Addition 10/30/84
RECOMMENDATION:
Remmend approval of the final plat of Primeland 2nd Addition
subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agree-
ment and the following:
I. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $100.00.
2. Receipt of cross easement for traffic access.
3. Subject to replatting to create the outlot
for access when Outlot A is platted.
DLO:sg
cc: Prime Development, Inc.
Nov. 6, 1984
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 84-.298
RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF
PRIMELAND 2nd ADDITION
WHEREAS, the plat of Primeland 2nd Addition has been
submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance
Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have
been duly had thereunder; and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan
and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota
and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EDEN PRAIRIE:
A. Plat approval request for Primeland 2nd Addition
is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the
City Engineer's report on this plat dated 10/30/84.
B. 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.
C. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to
execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City
Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions.
ADONED by the City Council on November 6, 1984.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
Soho D. Franc:, Clerk
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayer fonzel City Council MerZers
Carl J. Julie, City Manager .
Eu‘je,ne A. Dietz, Director of Public Works
October 31, 1984
Outlots A, B & C Westwood Industrial Park
The owners of the Westwood Industrial Park have provided
B, and C in the Westwood Industrial Park. This property
as a gift rather than as a required land dedication. As
owner has requested that a resolution be approved by the
would finalize this land transfer.
deeds for Outlots A,
comes to the City
such, the property
City Council which
The City Attorney's office has reviewed this information and Staff recommends
adoption of the attached resolution.
EAD:sg
November 6, 1984
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 84-299
RECEIPT OF LAND GIFT IN WESTWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARK
WHEREAS, Bury & Carlson, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, has deeded
certain property to the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Eden Prairie, Minnesota, hereby approves, ratifies and confirms the acceptance
by the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, of a gift from Bury & Carlson, Inc.,
a Minnesota Corporation, of the real estate located in the City of Eden Prairie,
Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as Outlets A, B and C, Westwood
Industrial Park, according to the duly recorded plat thereof.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on November 6, 1984.
.11-OrfT:ilifT1.---P-e-ni,- Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
1 47
Nov. 6, 1984
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 84-301
RESOLUTION ORDERING FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR
PRESERVE BOULEVARD IMPROVEMENTS
WHEREAS, it is proposed to improve Preserve Boulevard between
Prairie Center Drive and Anderson lakes Parkway (1.C. 52-071) and assess
the benefitted property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvements,
pursuant to M.S.A. 429.011 to 429.111.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council:
That the proposed improvements be referred to the City Engineer
for study with the assistance of RCM and that a feasibility
report shall be prepared and presented to the City Council
with all convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary
way as to the scope, cost assessment and feasibility of the
proposed improvements.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on November 6, 1984
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Franc, Clerk
:2-
Muirfield
CITY OF HEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 116-84-PUD-10-84
AN ORDINAPCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be
removed from the Rural District and be placed in the Planned Unit Development 10-84-
R1-9.5,R1-13.5 District (hereinafter "PUD 10-84-R1-9.5,R1-13.5").
Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of entered into
between Muirfield Associates, and the City of Eden Prairie (hereinafter "Developer's
Agreement") and that certain supplement to the Developer's Agreement, dated as of
1984, entered into between Alfred and Rose Pavelka and the City
of Eden Prairie (hereinafter "Supplement"). The Developer's Agreement and
Supplement contain the terms and conditions of PUD 10-84-R1-9.5,R1-13.5, and are
hereby made a part hereof.
Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings:
A. POD DO-84-R1-9.5,R1-13.5 is not in conflict with the goals of the
Guide Plan of the City.
B. POD 10-84-R1-9.5,R1-13.5 is designed in such a manner to form a
desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries.
C. The exceptions to the standard requirements of Chapters 11 and 12 of
the City Code, which are contained in POD 10-84-R1-9.5,R1-13.5, are
justified by the design of the development described therein.
D. PUD 10-34-R1-9.5,R1-13.5 is of sufficient size, composition, and
arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation is
feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any subsequent
unit.
Section 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and
hereby is, removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the
Planned Unit Development 10•84-R1-9.5,R1-13.5 District, and the legal descriptions
of land in each district referred to in City Code Section 11.03, subdivision 1,
subparagraph B, shall be and are amended accordingly.
Section 6. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation"
a
n
d
Section 11.99 untitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in th
e
i
r
entirety by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 7. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the 16th day of October, 1984, and finally read and adopted and ord
e
r
e
d
published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 6th day
o
f
November, 1984.
ATTEST:
John D. Franc, City Clerk
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
Exhibit A l
111-9.5 Zoning District
That part of the following described property:
That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 7,
Township 116, Range 22, lying North of a line drawn from a point on
t
h
e
East line of said Section 7 distant 1123.88 feet South from the Nort
h
e
a
s
t
corner of said Section 7 to'a point on the West line of the Northeas
t
Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 7 distant 1155.48 feet
South from the Northwest corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Nor
t
h
e
a
s
t
Quarter according to the Government Survey thereof.
Described as follows:
Beginning at the northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter; thence on an assumed bearing of North 89 degrees
17
minutes 06 seconds West, along the north line of said Northeast Qua
r
t
e
r
o
f
the Northeast Quarter, a distance of 20.00 feet; thence South 0 degrees 21
minutes 26 seconds East a distance of 144.00 feet; thence South 35
d
e
g
r
e
e
s
38 minutes 34 seconds West a distance of 136.00 feet; thence South 69
degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 155.00 feet; thence South
82 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 277.00 feet; th
e
n
c
e
.
North 88 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 184.00 fe
e
t
;
thence North 82 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 182.00
feet; thence North 88 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West a distanc
e
of
152.00 feet; thence South 10 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West a
d
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
of 123.72 feet; thence South 53 degrees 09 minutes 57 seconds East
a
distance of 106.26 feet; thence South 14 degrees 39 minutes 22 seco
n
d
s
W
e
s
t
a distance of 85.15 feet; thence South 1 degree 00 minutes 00 secon
d
s
W
e
s
t
a
distance of 222.66 feet; thence South 26 degrees 25 minutes 06 sec
o
n
d
s
W
e
s
t
a distance of 98.06 feet; thence South 55 degrees 33 minutes 35 se
c
o
n
d
s
East a distance of 80.11 feet; thence South 19 degrees 42 minutes 50
seconds West a distance of 213.02 feet, to the south line of the a
b
o
v
e
described property; thence North 89 degrees 21 minutes 28 seconds
E
a
s
t
,
along said south line, a distance of 1053.33 feet, to the east line of said
Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 21
minutes 26 seconds West along said east line, a distance of 1123.88 f
e
e
t
,
to the point of beginning.
October 24, 1984
Exhibit A2
R1-13.5 7oning District
That part of the following described property:
That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 7,
Township 116, Range 22, lying North of a line drawn from a point on the
East line of said Section 7 distant 1123.88 feet South from the Northeast
corner of said Section 7 to'a point on the West line of the Northeast
Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 7 distant 1155.48 feet
South from the Northwest corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter according to the Government Survey thereof.
Except the following:
Beginning at the northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter; thence on an assumed bearing of North 89 degrees 17
minutes 06 seconds West, along the north line of said Northeast Quarter of
the Northeast Quarter, a distance of 20.00 feet; thence South 0 degrees 21
minutes 26 seconds East a distance of 144.00 feet; thence South 35 degrees
38 minutes 34 seconds West a distance of 136.00 feet; thence South 69
degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 155.00 feet; thence South
82 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 277.00 feet; thence
North 88 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 184.00 feet;
thence North 82 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 182.00
feet; thence North 88 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of
152.00 feet; thence South 10 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West a distance
of 123.72 feet; thence South 53 degrees 09 minutes 57 seconds East a
distance of 106.26 feet; thence South 14 degrees 39 minutes 22 seconds West
a distance of 85.15 feet; thence South 1 degree 00 minutes 00 seconds West a
distance of 222.66 feet; thence South 26 degrees 25 minutes 06 seconds West
a distance of 98.06 feet; thence South 55 degrees 33 minutes 35 seconds
East a distance of 80.11 feet; thence South 19 degrees 42 minutes 50
seconds West a distance of 213.02 feet, to the south line of the above
described property; thence North 89 degrees 21 minutes 28 seconds East,
along said south line, a distance of 1053.33 feet, to the east line of said
Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 21
minutes 26 seconds West along said east line, a distance of 1123.88 feet,
to the point of beginning.
October 24, 1984
Muirfield
PUD-10-84-DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into
a
s
o
f
6/4:7/0• , 1984, by
and between Muirfield Associates, a pa
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
i
n
g
o
f
T
a
n
d
e
m
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
,
a
Minnesota corporation, and TCF Devel
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
,
a
M
i
n
n
e
s
o
t
a
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
,
hereinafter referred to as "Develope
r
,
"
a
n
d
t
h
e
C
I
T
Y
O
F
E
D
E
N
P
R
A
I
R
I
E
,
a
m
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
corporation, hereinafter referred to
a
s
"
C
i
t
y
:
"
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer has applied for a
C
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
G
u
i
d
e
P
l
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
f
r
o
m
Low Density Residential to Medium De
n
s
i
t
y
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
,
P
l
a
n
n
e
d
U
n
i
t
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
District Review and Zoning District
C
h
a
n
g
e
f
r
o
m
R
u
r
a
l
t
o
P
U
D
-
1
0
-
8
4
-
R
1
-
9
.
5
,
w
i
t
h
variances, for approximately 26.0 acr
e
s
,
a
n
d
P
U
D
-
1
0
-
8
4
-
R
1
-
1
3
.
5
,
f
o
r
a
p
p
r
o
x
i
m
a
t
e
l
y
10.0 acres, and preliminary plattin
g
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
x
i
m
a
t
e
l
y
3
6
.
0
a
c
r
e
s
t
o
b
e
k
n
o
w
n
a
s
Muirfield, located north of Valley Vi
e
w
R
o
a
d
a
n
d
e
a
s
t
o
f
P
a
r
k
v
i
e
w
L
a
n
e
,
s
i
t
u
a
t
e
d
i
n
Hennepin County, State of Minnesota,
m
o
r
e
f
u
l
l
y
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
d
i
n
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
A
,
a
t
t
a
c
h
e
d
hereto and made a part hereof and her
e
i
n
a
f
t
e
r
r
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
t
o
a
s
"
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
:
"
a
n
d
,
WHEREAS, Developer has applied to Cit
y
t
o
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
s
1
0
6
s
i
n
g
l
e
family residential detached units;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
#
1
1
6
-
8
4
-
PUD-10-84 and Resolution #84-270, De
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
c
o
v
e
n
a
n
t
s
a
n
d
a
g
r
e
e
s
t
o
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
upon, development, and maintenance of
s
a
i
d
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
s
f
o
l
l
o
w
s
:
1. Developer shall plat and develop the prop
e
r
t
y
i
n
c
o
n
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
the materiAs dated October 23, 1984, as revised, revieNed and
approved by the City Council on October 2,
1
9
8
4
,
a
n
d
a
t
t
a
c
h
e
d
h
e
r
e
t
o
as Exhibit R, and made a part. hereof, subje
c
t
t
o
s
u
c
h
changes and
modifications as are provided herein. Developer shall not develop,
2qc).=1
construct upon, or maintain the property in any other respect or
manner than provided herein.
2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by
Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of
all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in
Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. Prior to final plat, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer,
and receive the City Engineer's approval of the following:
A. Final storm water ponding and drainage plans for the
property.
B. Detailed plans for sanitary sewer, water, and streets.
Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall construct, or
cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in
accordance with Exhibit C, attached hereto.
4. Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall:
A. Submit to the Director of Planning, and receive the
Director's approval of, an overall development plan for the
R1-9.5 portion of the property as described in Exhibit A,
keyed with each specific unit type, such that no two
substantially similar units shall be located directly
across, diagonally across, or within two units directly
adjacent to each other.
Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer shall
construct, or cause the property to be constructed upon,
according to the plan approved by the Director.
B. Submit to the Director of Community Services, and receive
the Director's approval ,of the following:
1. Plans for five-foot wide concrete sidewalks, to be
constructed concurrent with street construction, for
the property along the residential streets as
depicted in Exhibit B.
2. Plans for an eight-foot wide bituminus walkway
connection, to be constructed concurrent with street
construction, through the totlot area to the
northeast boundary of the property, accessing the
existing City park, as depicted on Exhibit B.
3. Plans for the totlot and totlot structure. Said
totlot and totlot structure shall be dedicated to
the City at the time of dedication of the outlet.
Upon approval by the Director of Connunity Services, the
Developer shall construct, or cause to be constructed, those
improvements listed above in accordance with Exhibit C,
attached hereto.
2 (AO',
OWNERS' SUPPLEMENT
TO
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
MUIRFIELD ASSOCIATES
AND THE
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of 1984, by
and between Alfred and Rose Pavelka, husband and wife, hereinafter referred to as
"Owners," and the City of Eden Prairie, hereinafter referred to as "City:"
For and in consideration of, and to induce, City to adopt Resolution #84-270
for a preliminary plat approval and Ordinance #116-84-PUD-10-84 changing the zoning
of the property owned by Owner from Rural to R1-13.5 and R1-9.5 and as more fully'
described in that certain Developer's Agreement entered into as of
, 1984, by and between Muirfield Associates, and City, Owners
agree with the City as follows:
1. If Prime Development Corporation, fails to proceed in accordance
with the Developer's Agreement within 24 months of the date hereof,
Owner shall not oppose the rezoning of the property to Rural.
2. This Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against Owners,
their successors, heirs, and assigns of the property.
3. If the Owners transfer such property, owners shall obtain an
agreement from the transferree requiring that such transferee agree
to the terms of the Developer's Agreement.
Alfred yavelka
2-
Rose Pavelka
Muirfield
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 84-289
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY
OF ORDINANCE #116-84-PUD-10-84 AND ORDERING THE
PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 116-84-PUD-10-34 was adopted and ordered published at
a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 6th day of
November, 1984;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ThE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 116-84-PUD-10-84,
which is attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds
that said text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect
of said ordinance.
B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a
body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in
Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07.
C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for
inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office
of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance
shall be posted in the City Hall.
D. That Ordinance No. 116-84-PUD-10-84 shall be recorded in the
ordinance book, along with proof of publication required by
paragraph B herein, within 20 days after said publication.
ADOPTED by the City Council on November 6, 1984.
Wolfgang IL Penzel, Mayor -
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
/
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 116-84-PUD-10-84
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99,
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Summary: This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located east of Park
View Lane, north of Valley View Road, known as Muirfield, from Rural District to PUD
10-84-R1-9.5,R1-13.5, subject to the terms and conditions of a developer's
agreement. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal
description of this property.
Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication.
ATTEST:
/s/John D. Franc
City Clerk
/s/Wolfgang H. Penzel
Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of 1984.
(A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.)
Eden Commons
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 118-84
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be
removed from the Rural District and be placed in the RM-2.5 District.
Section 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be.
and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in th
e
RM-2.5 District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to in
City Code, Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and are amended
accordingly.
Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and
Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their
entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 5. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the 16th day of October, 1984, and finally read and adopted and ordered
published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 6th day of
November.
ATTEST:
"John D. Frane, City Clerk Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
211A
EDEN COMMONS LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT A
That part of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast
Quarter of Section 14, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota
lying easterly of the westerly 435.6 feet thereof.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 84-290
A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
OF COUNCIL APPROVAL OF EDEN COMMONS FOR
THE CHASEWOOD COMPANY FOR 196 MULTIPLE FAMILY UNITS ON 12.5 ACRES
BE IT RESOLVED that the proposal for Eden Connons by the Chasewood Company for 196
multiple family units on approximately 12.5 acres, located in the southwest quadrant
of Preserve Boulevard and Franlo Road, is herein approved subject to the following
specific conditions:
1. The development plan, preliminary plat, and erosion control and grading
plan, all dated September 19, 1984, and attached hereto shall apply.
2. Prior to final plat, developer/owner shall submit detailed storm water run-
off and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer.
3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, developer/owner shall:
A. Submit details of the landscape plan, which include provision for
use of outdoor space such as hard-surfaced outdoor seating areas,
decking, and decorative plantings along the interior walkways.
B. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance
of grading.
C. Submit detailed elevations of the recreational buildings for review.
D. Pay the required Cash Park Fee.
4. Concurrent with building construction, developer/owner shall:
A. Construct a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Preserve
Boulevard and along Franlo Road.
B. Construct the proposed interior five-foot wide concrete sidewalk.
ADOPTED by the City Council on November 6, 1984.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
AUBE:
John D. frane, City Clerk
7011
Superamerica
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 119-84
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be
removed from the Rural District and be placed in the C-Hwy District.
Section 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be,
and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the
C-Hwy District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to in
City Code, Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph 8, shall be, and are amended
accordingly.
Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and
Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their
entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 5. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the 16th day of October, 1984, and finally read and adopted and ordered
published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 6th day of
November.
ATTEST:
John D. Franc, City Clerk
Wolfqang H. Penzel, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Fden Prairie News on the day of
t
EXHIH1T A
That part of the South quarter of the Southwest quarter
of Section 8, Township 116, Waage 22, according to the gov-
einment survey thereof, lying Sonth of the centerline of
State Highway No. 5 and lying East of a line drawn Northerly
at a right angle to the South line of said Southwest quarter
of the Southeast quarter from a point thereon distant 951.50
feet East of the Southwest corner thereof; less and except
that part lying Easterly of a line drawn North 15 degrees
47 minutes 00 seconds fast from the South line of said South-
west quarter of the Southeast quarter from a point thereon
distant 1114.35 feet East of the Southwest corner thereof;
Also that part of the North 511.50 feet of the West 1/2
of the Northeast quarter of Section 17, Township 116, Range
22, according to the government survey thereof, lying North-
erly of a line drawn Southeasterly at an angle of 17 Degrees
00 minutes 59 seconds from the North line of said North
511.50 feet of the West 1/2 of the Northeast quarter from
a point . thereon distant 951.50 feet East of the Northwest
corner thereof; less and except that part lying Easterly
of a line drawn South 74 degrees 13 minutes 00 seconds West
from the North line of said North 511.50 feet of the West
1/2 of the Northeast quarter from a point thereon distant
1114.35 feet East of the Northwest corner thereof;
That part of the South quarter of the Southwest quarter
of the Southeast quarter of Section 8, Township 116, Range
22, lying South of the centerline of State . Highway No. 5
and lying East of a line drawn Northerly at a right angle
to the South Tine of said Southwest quarter of the Southeast
quarter from a point thereon distant 951.50 feet East of
the Sonthwest corner thereof, which lies Easterly of a line
drawn North 15 de;,rees 47 minutes 00 seconds East from the
South line of said Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter
from a point tlet con distant 1114.35 feet East of the South-
west corner thereof;
Also that part of the North 511.50 feet of the West 1/2
of the Northeast quarter of Section 17, Township 116, Range
22 lying Northerly of a line drawn Southeasterly at an angle
of 17 degrees 00 mtnutcs. 59 seconde from the North line
of said North 511.50 feet of the West 1/2 of the Northeast
quarter from a point thereon distant 951.50 feet East of
the Nol .thwe::t - corner thereof, which lies Easterly of a line
drawn South 74 degrees 13 minute:: 00 second; Vest from the
North line of said North 511.50 fell of the West 1/2 of
the NolAlle:1::t (platter Iron a poInt thereon distant 1114.35
feet Eant of the Northwest corner thereof.
Subject to easements and restrictions of record, if any:
All in Hennepin County, Minnesnta.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 84-291
A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
OF COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SUPERAMERICA
FOR A CONVENIENCE/SERVICE STATION ON 1.35 ACRES
BE IT RESOLVED that the proposal for a Superamerica service center on 1.35 acres,
located in the southwest quadrant of Highway. #5 and County Road #4, is herein
approved subject to the following specific conditions:
1. The development plan, preliminary plat, and erosion control and grading
plan, all dated August 10, 1984, and attached hereto shall apply.
2. Prior to final plat, developer/owner shall:
A. Revise the landscape plan to provide for screening of parking and
gas pumps from public roads.
B. Modify the site plan to provide an eight-foot wide bituminus walkway
along the vest side of County Road #4 and an internal five-foot wide
concrete sidewalk connection from the store to the bituminus
walkway.
C. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for
review by the City Engineer.
D. Dedicate the necessary right-of-way for County Road #4 to Hennepin
County concurrent with the plat.
3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, developer/owner shall:
A. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours prior to
grading.
B. Stake the grading limits with snow fencing.
C. Obtain access permits for driveway access within State Highway and
County Highway right-of-ways.
D. Obtain grading permits from the State Highway and Hennepin County
Highway Departments for grading work within the respective right-of-
ways.
E. Pay the required Cash Park Fee.
4. Operation of the store must be in compliance with the City Ordinance
including limitation of outdoor dispIay areas to no more than ten (10) per
cent of the building's square footage area.
ADOMED by the City Council on November 6, 1984.
Wolfgang H:—Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
Primetech II
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE 'NO. 120-84-PUD-9-84
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be
removed from the Rural District and be placed in the Planned Unit Development 9-84-
Commercial-Regional-Service District (hereinafter "PUD 9-84-Commercial-Regional-
Service").
Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of 1984, entered
into between MRTT Joint Venture, and the City of Eden Prairie (hereinafter
"Developer's Agreement") and that certain supplement to the Developer's Agreement,
dated as of , 1984, entered into between Anderson Development,
Inc., and the City of Eden Prairie (hereinafter "Supplement"). The Developer's
Agreement and Supplement contain the terms and conditions of PUD 9-84-Commercial-
Regional-Service, and are hereby made a part hereof.
Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings:
A. PUD 9-84-Commercial-Regional-Service is not in conflict with the
111) (o). AtIL
B. PUO 9-84-Commercial-Regional-Service is designed in such a manner to
form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries.
C. The exceptions to the standard requirements of Chapters 11 and 12 of
the City Code, which are contained in PUD 9-84-Commercial-Regional-
Service, are justified by the design of the development described
therein.
D. PUD 9-84-Comnercial-Regional-Service is of sufficient size,
composition, and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and
operation is feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any
subsequent unit.
Section 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and
hereby is, removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the
Planned Unit Development 9-84-Commercial-Regional-Service District, and the legal
do;criptions of land in each district referred to in City Code Section 11.03,
subdivision 1, subparagraph B, shall be and are amended accordingly.
Section 6. City Code Chapter I entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and
Section 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their
entirety by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 7. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the 16th day of October, 1984, and finally read and adopted and ordered
published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 6th day of
November, 1984.
ATfEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
PRIM:TECH PHASE TWO
That part of OUTLOT B of the plat of CITY WEST SEC
O
N
D
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
,
H
e
n
n
e
p
i
n
County, Minnesota, described as follows;
Commencing at the northwest corner of said OUT
L
O
T
B
,
s
a
i
d
p
o
i
n
t
b
e
i
n
g
o
n
the easterly right-of-way line of City We
s
t
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
;
t
h
e
n
c
e
S
o
u
t
h
6
9
°
4
9
3
3
"
E
a
s
t
186.00 feet along the north line of said
O
U
T
L
O
T
t
o
t
h
e
p
o
i
n
t
o
f
b
e
g
i
n
n
i
n
g
o
f
the tract to be described; thence North 2
8
°
5
9
'
3
8
"
E
a
s
t
1
5
9
.
5
0
f
e
e
t
a
l
o
n
g
t
h
e
northwest line of said OUTLOT; thence South 61
0 0022" East 314.88 feet along
' the northeast line of said OUTLOT; then
c
e
S
o
u
t
h
2
8
°
5
9
'
3
8
"
N
e
s
t
2
5
0
.
0
0
f
e
e
t
along the southeast line of said OUTLOT; t
h
e
n
c
e
N
o
r
t
h
6
1
°
0
0
'
2
2
"
W
e
s
t
8
1
.
0
0
feet; thence North 28 0 5938" East 30.00 feet; thence North 61 0 0022" jest
133.00 feet; thence South 28'59'38" West 2
1
7
.
5
2
f
e
e
t
t
o
a
p
o
i
n
t
o
n
t
h
e
s
o
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
line of said OUTLOT 8; thence North 38
0 1852" West 86.60 feet along said
southwest line; thence North 20°1027" Eas
t
1
0
0
.
0
0
f
e
e
t
a
l
o
n
g
a
w
e
s
t
e
r
l
y
l
i
n
e
of said OUTLOT; thence North 26'41'38" East 140.91 feet
t
o
t
h
e
point of
beginning. Said tract contains 2.05 acre
s
.
Primetech Phase II
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1984, by
and between MRTT JOINT VENTURE, a general partnership consisting of Prime
Development Corporation, a Minnesota corporation, and M-R Properties, a Minnesota
general partnership, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City:"
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Planned Unit Development District
Review of approximately 20 acres, and zoning from Rural to Commercial Regional
Service for approximately 1.0 acre, for construction of a day care center, situated
In Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A, attached
hereto and made a part hereof, and said 1.0 acre parcel of the 20.0-acre parcel
hereinafter referred to as "the property:"
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution #84-276,
and Ordinance #120-84-PUD-9-84, Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon,
development, and maintenance of said property as follows:
1. Developer shall develop the property in conformance with the
materials revised and dated August 24, 1984, reviewed and approved
by the City Council on October 16, 1984, and attached hereto as
Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided
herein. Developer shall not develop, construct upon, or maintain
the property in any other respect or manner than provided herein.
2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by
Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of
all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in
Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. Prior to issuance of any building permit upon the property,
Developer shall:
A. Submit to the Director of Planning, and receive the
Director's approval of:
1. Plans for the overall signage and lighting for the
property.
•
2. A landscape plan providing effective screening of
the parking areas from Highway #169.
Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer shall
construct, or cause to be constructed, those improvements
listed above, as approved by the Director of Planning.
B. Submit to the City Engineer, and receive the City Engineer's
approval of plans for streets, sanitary sewer, water, storm
sewer, and erosion control, which show staking of the
grading and construction limits with snow fencing, for the
property.
Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall
construct, or cause to be constructed, those improvements
listed above in said plans, as approved by the City
Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit C, attached hereto.
C. Obtain necessary permits and approvals from the State
Highway Department for grading work and work within the
State right-of-way.
4. Developer shall notify the City and the Watershed District 48 hours
prior to any grading, tree removal, or tree cutting on the property.
5. Concurrent with building construction, Developer shall construct a
sidewalk along the side of the proposed internal private roadway,
along with all other proposed sidewalks on the property.
6. Any development beyond the day care center within the overall
Planned Unit Development Concept shall require completion of the
private loop road by the Developer, as depicted on Exhibit B.
7. Developer agrees that the private loop street and the private
utilities to be constructed on the property shall be built to City
standards. Developer further agrees that the declaration of
covenants recorded with the plat will provide that, in the event the
City determines that the private loop street and the private
utilities are not being maintathed to City standards and the City,
therefore, takes over the maintenance, the owners shall accept the
assessments assigned by the City for such maintenance.
8. Developer acknowledges that the property will benefit from any
future improvements to Shady Oak Road in the vicinity of City West
and agrees to pay its fair share of the corresponding special
assessments.
OWNERS' SUPPLEMENT
TO
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
MRTT JOINT VENTURE .
AND THE .
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of
, 1984, by
and between Anderson Development, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter
referred to as "Owners," and the City of Eden Prairie, hereinafter referred to as
"City:"
For and in consideration of, and to induce, City to adopt Resolution #84-276
for a preliminary plat approval and Ordinance #120-84-PUD-9-84 changing the zoning
of the property owned by Owner from Rural to Commercial Regional Service as more
fully described in that certain Developer's Agreement entered into as of
, 1984, by and between MRTT Joint Venture, and City, Owners
agree with the City as follows:
1. If MRTT Joint Venture, fails to proceed in accordance with the
Developer's Agreement within 24 months of the date hereof, Owner
shall not oppose the rezoning of the property to Rural.
2. This Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against Owners,
their successors, heirs, and assigns of the property.
3. If the Owners transfer such property, owners shall obtain an
agreement from the transferree requiring that such transferee agree
to the terms of the Developer's Agreement.
ANDERSON DEVELOPMENT, INC.
Richard W. Anderson, President
Primetech II
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 84-292
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY
OF ORDINANCE #120-84-PUD-9-84 AND ORDERING THE
PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 120-84-PUD-9-84 was adopted and ordered published at
a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 6th day of
November, 1984;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 120-84-PUD-9-84, which
is attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that
said text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of
said ordinance.
B. That caid text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a
body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in
Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07.
C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for
inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office
of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance
shall be posted in the City Hall.
D. That Ordinance No. 120-84-PUD-9-84 shall be recorded in the
ordinance book, along with proof of publication required by
paragraph B herein, within 20 days after said publication.
ADOPTED by the City Council on November 6, 1984.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 120-84-PUD-9-84
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERT
A
I
N
L
A
N
D
F
R
O
M
O
N
E
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DES
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
S
O
F
L
A
N
D
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AN
D
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
1
1
.
9
9
,
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located west of
Highway #I69, north of Shady Oak Road, known as Primetech Phas
e
I
I
,
f
r
o
m
R
u
r
a
l
District to PUD 9-84-Commercial Regional Service, subject
t
o
t
h
e
t
e
r
m
s
a
n
d
conditions of a developer's agreement. Exhibit A, included with
t
h
i
s
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
,
gives the full legal description of this property.
Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication.
ATTEST:
/s/John D. Frane
/s/WolfganH. Penzel
City Clerk
Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
, 1984.
(A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the Ci
t
y
C
l
e
r
k
.
)
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 84-302'
RESOLUTION APPROVING CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE OF A
PUBLIC SNOWMOBILE TRAIL WITHIN THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie desires to establish, construct and
maintain public snowmobile trails, and
WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie Snowdrifters Snowmobile Club has requested
the City of Eden Prairie to sponsor the Eden Prairie snowmobile trail.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Eden Prairie, County
of Hennepin, does authorize the Eden Prairie Snowdrifters Snowmobile Club
to construct and maintain a snowmobile trail for use by the public in
accordance with the Minnesota Trail Assistance Program Manual.
ADOPTED, by the Eden Prairie City Council this 6th day of November, 1984.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Franc, Clerk SEAL
242 1/
NA 03002-02
Ref. 6/80
1 .,00,86O6INI Of
f , '.14•1181161 Itf5OUIKIS
MINNESOTA TRAIL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, Made this 11 day of October , 19 84 , between the
STATE OF MINNESOTA, acting by and through the Commissioner of Natural Resources, hereinafter
referred to as the "State," and City of Eden Prairie
hereinafter referred to as the "local unit of government," relating to the establishment of proposed trails
known as Eden Prairie Snowdrifters Snowmobile Trails
WHEREAS, the local unit of government desires to establish, construct and maintain public trails, and
WHEREAS, the local unit of government has applied to the State for a grants-in aid for said trails and
has submitted the Minnesota Trail Assistance Program's application form, maps, ownership list, work plans,
and resolution of the local unit of government authorizing the proposed trail as outlined in said documents
and said application form, map, and workplan is attached hereto as Exhibit A hereafter referred to as the
"Plan."
A. (TRAIL OBLIGATION OF THE LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT) The local unit of government
shall construct, operate and maintain the proposed trails in accordance with the Minnesota Trail Assistance
Program Manual hereinafter referred to as the "Manual" and the Application or Project Proposal form.
The local unit of government shall not amend, revise or change the approved Application or Project
Proposal without the written consent of the Regional Trails and Waterways Coordinator.
In connection with the establishment of trails, the local unit of government shall:
(1) Forthwith proceed to acquire necessary interests in lands and open trails to the public. The local
unit of government must acquire land in fee, easement, lease or permit for said trails. The term of said
interest shall be no less than four (4) months between November 15 of any year and March 15 of the
succeeding year for snowmobile and ski touring trails; and no less than five (5) months between May 15 of
any year and October 15 of the same year for equestrian trails. For each parcel of land crossed by proposed
trails, the local unit of government shall obtain from the owner of said parcel and submit to the State Trails
Coordinator a r ,rmit, lease, easement or fee title for said crossing.
(a) A person having personal knowledge of ownership shall sign an affidavit that the person
whose name appears on the document of conveyance or permit is the same person in possession of said
premises and one and the same who is grantee of the last instrument of record in the office of said County
Recorder of the county in which the land lies conveying said premises.
113) Any instrument of conveyance or permit with a consideration exceeding $500.00 shall be
accompanied by an Attorney's Certificate of Title.
(2) Construct and provide adequate maintenance which shall include keep the trails reasonably
safe for public use; provide sanitation and sanitary facilities when needed; and provide other maintenance as
the State may require.
Should the local unit of government fail to expedite establishment and construction of trails and
thereafter fail to provide for such adequate maintenance, the State may withhold future payments to the
local unit of government and terminate this agreement.
B. (tUCHNICAL ASSISTANCE) The State will give technical assistance to the local unit of government
in establishing trails.
C. (REIMBURSEMENT) The State agrees to reimburse the local unit of government 65% of the cost of
trail acquisition, development and maintenance, except grooming which will be reimbursed 90%. All costs
will be in accordance with the allowable charges and costs listed in the Manual. This grant will not exceed
$ 2 965.00 .
2 (12 S
0. iriVI is;[ N I ic Iceal unit cd ,,,.,ecrereeet ears> sebmit a request for reiettermernent and attach
%Vol ksh,,,ts furreshed by the Dep a rtmeet of Natural Resources for all approved costs incurred in acquiring,
developing, maintaining and grooming the trail, all in accordance with the Manual. Additionally, the local
unit of government must submit original receipts of actual approved purchases exceeding $50.00. Further,
the first request for reimbursement for costs incurred by grooming must be made by January 31, and the
last day of every month thereafter while costs are incurred during the grooming year.
The books, records, documents, and accounting procedures, and practices of the local unit of government
relevant to this grant shall be submect to examination by the contracting department and the legislative audi-
tor. Records shall be sufficient to reflect all costs incurred in performance of this grant.
t(1) First Payment: Upon receipt of the request for reimbursement evidencing acceptable trail costs of
$500 or more for acquisition, development or maintenance, the State agrees to reimburse the local unit of
Rouen:mem for approved costs in accordance with the Manual. All services provided by the local unit of
government pursuant to this grant shall be performed to the satisfaction of the STATE, as determined in the
sole discretion of its authorized agent and shall not receive payment for work found by the STATE to be
unsatisfactory.
(2) Subsequent Payments: Each thirty (30) successive days after the first payment, the local unit of
government may submit invoices evidencing acceptable trail costs. Said payments shall continue to be made
until authorized reimbursements for the costs of said trail as provided herein is satisfied or otherwise ter-
minated as provided herein.
(3) Trail Segments: It is understood that if the trail system is developed in segments, the local unit of
government may submit requests for reimbursement as soon as continuous and workable segments are
completed.
E. (STATE LIABILITY) Notwithstanding the grants-in-aid as provided herein, the State of Minnesota
shall not be liable for such costs as are incurred by the local unit of government because funds for said trail
are depleted, or funds are unavailable because of legislative or executive restraint.
F. (TERM) This Agreement shall be effective on the date it is executed as to encumbrance by the
Commissioner of Finance, and shall remain in effect until two years from said date.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first
above written.
APPROVED:
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT
BY: Hennepin Eden_Erairil- Minnesota
(COuoty) (Cit y) (Villa ge) (Town)
TITLE: BY
DATE: TITLE: __IlAYPT
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND EXECUTION BY
BY: TITLE • City Manager
DATE:_. DATE:._ November
COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION
BY:___
AuthOttl.
DATE:
COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE:
ENCUMBERED
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
BY:__
DATE:
Department of Nato,. PVIDUr [116
DATE:
Depart of Natural lissom..
DATE:
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
November 6, 1984
CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.)
Lovering Associates, Inc.
Pump & Meter Service
CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY)
Carpenter Construction
Character Builders, Inc.
W. Davis Construction Co.
Lan-De-Con, Inc.
Lindstrom Cleaning & Construction
Network Development, Inc.
GAS FITTER
Lake-Air Heating & Cooling Co.
HEATING & VENTILATING
Lake-Air Heating & Cooling Co.
PLUMBING
Dolder Plumbing & Heating
ON SALE WINE
Country Kitchen International, Inc.
(See Attached)
SUNDAY WINE
Country Kitchen, International, Inc.
BEER ON SALE
Country Kitchen International, Inc.
These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for
the licensed activity.
Pat Solie, Licensing
2(12:1
October 31, 1984
TO: Captain Wall
FROM: Lieutenant Bridger
SUBJECT: LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION
We have completed the record checks and background investigation
of all the principals listed on the application submitted by
Country Kitchen International Incorporated.
There is no apparent reason for our Police Division to recollimend
denial of a liquor license for this establishment. Listed below
are the agencies and persons contacted to obtain background and
character reference data.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Special Taxes
Bloomington Police Department
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
Bureau of Criminal Apprehension - 0.C.I.U.
Bureau of Criminal Apprehension - Contraband
Bureau of Criminal Apprehension - Records
Carver County Sheriff's Office
Dakota County Sheriff's Office
Drug Enforcement Administration
Department of Corrections - Minnesota
Eagan Police Department
Edina Police Department
Eden Prairie Department of Public Safety
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Hennepin County Sheriff's Office
Internal Revenue Service
Minneapolis Police Department
Minnesota Attorney General
Minnesota Liquor Control
Ramsey County Sheriff's Office
Richfield Police Department
Scott County Sheriff's Office
South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety
St. Louis Park Police Department
St. Paul Police Department
United States Postal Service
United States Secret Service
(continued)
LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION
Page 2
October 31, 1984
Affidavits of Good Character:
Mr. Lee Bcarmon
8614 Westmoreland Lane
St. Louis Park
Mr. John R. Heim
2719 Woodbridge Road
Minnetonka Beach
Mr. Richard E. Shinofield
5106 Emerson Avenue South
Minneapolis
LXB:sjm
2 L-4 "L,,
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
THROUGH: CARL JULLIE, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ROGER A. PAUL?, CITY ATTORNEY
SUBJECT: DAVID BROWN REQUEST FOR VARIANCE #84-19
DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1984
Pursuant to the Council's request, I have prepared a
proposed Summary of Evidence, Findings and Conclusions, and
Order relative to the above-captioned request for variance,
a copy of which is attached. Copies of the proposed Summary
of Evidence, Findings and Conclusions, and Order have pre-
viously been forwarded to Dean Edstrom and Nelson Berg,
attorney for David Brown. I have had no suggestions for
changes from either as of the writing of this memorandum.
The Council should consider the proposed Summary of
Evidence, Findings and Conclusions, and Order and is free
to make such changes as it may desire. The Summary of
Evidence, Findings and Conclusions, and Order should be
adopted in the proposed or revised form.
2(47,0
SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS, AND ORDER
RE: DAVID BROWN REQUEST FOR VARIANCE NO. 84-19
Variance request number 84-19 by David Brown to permit
construction of a single-family residence upon an existing
3.2-acre parcel in the Rural District, notwithstanding the
requirements of City Code Chapter 11, Sec. 11.10, requiring
parcels to be a minimum size of 10 acres or 5 acres as to
those existing as of July 6, 1982.
The matter came on for hearing before the Council on
August 28, 1984, on appeal by Brown pursuant to City Code
Sec. 2.11, Subd. 4, from the decision of the Board of Appeals
and Adjustments denying the request on July 12, 1984.
Mr. Brown appeared at the hearing with his attorney, Nelson
Berg. A summary of the evidence introduced at the hearing,
the findings, and final order follow:
Summary of Evidence
Mr. Brown applied for the variance on March 14, 1984,
for his property (the "parcel") located at 10190 Eden Prairie
Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The Brown property is presently
situated in the Rural District. With his application,
Mr. Brown submitted photographs of his parcel, a well log
pertaining to a well on property adjoining the parcel and
situated northerly and easterly thereof, consisting of approx-
imately 4.4 acres ("the Nielsen parcel"), a survey of the
parcel, a diagram showing the location of the proposed dwelling
and driveway with topographical data and elevations of the
proposed dwelling.
tj.
The parcel is irregular in shape. It is bordered on its
easterly line by Eden Prairie Road and on its southerly line
by Highway 169-212. Its westerly line commences approximately
176 feet West of the intersection of its southerly line with
the westerly right of way of Eden Prairie Road and extends
generally North to its intersection with its northerly line.
Its northerly line is approximately 550 feet North of the
northerly line of Highway 169-212. The parcel consists of
approximately 3.2 acres. City sewer and water is not avail-
able to the site at the present time. Elevations vary from
a maximum of approximately 850 feet in the northwesterly
portion of the parcel to approximately 760 feet in the south-
easterly part of the parcel. The variations in elevation
occur over a distance of approximately 300 feet and represent
an overall grade of approximately 30 percent.
The evidence includes a letter to Jean Johnson from the
Minnesota Historical Society, dated March 27, 1984, indicating
that the Brown parcel does not appear to be within an area of
known prehistoric burial mound groups along the Minnesota River
bluffs.
The parcel is situated in the Rural District in which the
City, beginning on October 14, 1969, required a minimum of
5 acres for the building of a single-family dwelling. In 1982,
the City amended the Code to require 10 acres, with the pro-
vision thatthe 5-acre minimum size applies to any 5-acre
parcel existing prior to July 6, 1982. These provisions were
-2-
214;2
adopted by the City to implement goals and objectives to
insure a safe, pleasant, and economical environment, to pre-..
serve agricultural and open lands, to promote public health,
safety, and welfare, to foster harmonious land uses and
promote stability, to prevent excessive density and over-
crowding, to promote safe traffic systems, to protect prop-
erty values, to safeguard and enhance natural amenities, such
as hills and woods, and to prevent premature urban development
until installation of streets and utilities.
The 3.2-acre parcel constitutes only 64 percent of a
5-acre parcel and 32 percent of a 10-acre parcel. The parcel
abuts a 19-acre vacant tract of land and a 4.4-acre parcel
which contains one single-family residence. The soils in the
area are salida and consist of relatively fine sandy material
which, if disturbed, easily erodes. The parcel is part of
and situated on the Minnesota River bluff area, which is of
significant aesthetic and scenic value.
Eden Prairie Road is a hard-surfaced blacktop road having
a speed limit of 30 miles per hour. The grade of Eden Prairie
Road in the vicinity of the parcel is approximately 13 percent.
The overall change in elevation of Eden Prairie Road from the
southeasterly corner of the parcel extending northerly a
distance of approximately 400 feet to the top of the Minnesota
River bluff is approximately 90 feet, resulting in an average
grade of approximately 22.5 percent.
The driveway proposed would be approximately 250 feet
long and, from its intersection with Eden Prairie Road, would
-3-
have a grade of one percent a distance of approximately 30
feet; thereafter, the graUe would increase to 10.4 percent
until it reached a distance of approximately 20 feet from
the proposed garage at which point the grade would be
approximately one percent. It would also have a turn-around
near Eden Prairie Road. Available sight distances at the
intersection of the driveway with Eden Prairie Road for a
person in an automobile exiting the parcel are 360 feet to
the left and 325 feet to the right, the latter being at the
point of intersection of Eden Prairie Road with Trunk Highway
169-212. Sight-line distance in a northerly direction for a
person in a car traveling northerly and attempting to make a
left-hand turn into the proposed driveway is not more than
190 feet. Minnesota Department of Transportation and Institute
of Transportation Engineers standard sight distances to the
left are 340 and 250 feet, and to the right are 285 and 195
feet, respectively. These standard sight distances assume a
speed of 25 miles per hour. Hennepin County requires a
minimum sight-line distance of ten times the posted speed
limit or 300 feet in the case of Eden Prairie Road. There
was testimony before the Board of Appeals that sight distances
for persons in vehicles exiting or entering the proposed
driveway would vary in winter depending upon the height of
snowbanks, as well as the height of the car, since the snow-
banks cause the road to be narrower in the winter, which would
reduce the distance of some of the sight lines.
-4-
There have been at least two reported accidents on Eden
Prairie Road in the vicinity of the Brown parcel in 1981 and
1982. There was testimony that there have been a lot of cars
running into the ditch along the road, including a City
sanding truck, which turned over on the hill. There was also
testimony that drivers of vehicles proceeding down the hill
would not be able to see a car turning left into the proposed
driveway and, at 30 miles per hour, would not be able to stop,
resulting in an accident; and if the hill becomes icy or
glazed, vehicles traveling in a southerly direction down the
hill will not be able to stop for anyone entering or exiting
the driveway of the parcel or for children crossing in front
of a school bus stopped at that point. The existence of the
driveway will create a hazard.
The estimated market value of the parcel by the City
Assessor as of January 2, 1983, was $9,300 and as of
January 2, 1984, was $12,000. The January 2, 1984, estimated
market value is based on the assumption that the Brown
parcel is an un-buildable lot with future possible use.
If the lot were buildable, the estimated market value would
be between $20,000 and $30,000.
There was testimony that the parcel could be used for
the keeping of bees, truck and personal gardens, cutting of
wood, and other agricultural uses. There was conflicting
testimony that the only reasonable use is for a single-family
dwelling.
-5-
A history of the ownership of the Brown parcel and the
Nielsen parcel, previously commonly owned by Brown's and
Nielson's predecessor in title is attached. Although Brown
received record title to his parcel in July 1980, he con-
tracted with Benjamin A. Gingold, Sr., for the purchase of
the parcel in June 1977.
Findings and Conclusions
1. The parcel owned by David Brown is irregular in
shape. It is bordered on its easterly line by Eden Prairie
Road and on its southerly line by Highway 169-212. Its
westerly line commences approximately 176 feet West of the
intersection of its southerly line with the westerly right
of way of Eden Prairie Road and extends generally North to
its intersection with its northerly line. Its northerly
line is approximately 550 feet North of the northerly line
of Highway 169-212. The parcel consists of approximately
3.2 acres. City sewer and water is not available to the
site at the present time. Elevations vary from a maximum
of approximately 850 feet in the northwesterly portion of
the parcel to approximately 760 feet in the southeasterly
part of the parcel. The variations in elevation occur over
a distance of approximately 300 feet and represent an over-
all grade of approximately 30 percent. The parcel is part
of and situated on the Minnesota River bluff area, which is
of aesthetic and scenic value.
-6-
2. M.S. Section 462.351 contains a finding by the
legislature that municipalities are faced with problems
in insuring safe, pleasant, and economical environments
and in preserving agricultural and open lands, and, in
general, promoting the public health, safety, and general
welfare, and that such problems can be mitigated by proper
municipal planning to assist in development.
3. To ameliorate those problems, the City adopted
a zoning code (Chapter 11 of the City Code and a predeces-
sor, Ordinance 135). Purposes and objectives of the Zoning
Code include, among others: to foster harmonious land uses,
to promote stability of existing land uses, to prevent
excessive population densitiies and overcrowding of the
land with structures, to promote safe traffic systems, to
protect and enhance real property values, and to safeguard
and enhance the appearance of the City's natural amenities,
such as hills and woods. The specific purposes of the
Rural District in which the parcel is located are to pre-
vent premature urban development until the installation of
drainage works, streets, and utilities.
4. The parcel is situated in the Rural District in
which the City, beginning on October 14, 1969, required a
minimum of 5 acres for the building of a single-family
dwelling. In 1982, the City amended the Code to require
10 acres, with the provision that the 5-acre minimum size
applies to any 5-acre parcel existing prior to July 6,
1982. These provisions were adopted by the City to imple-
ment the above-stated goals and objectives.
-7-
2_1-131
5. The 3.2-acre Brown parcel constitutes only 64
percent of a 5-acre parcel and 32 percent of a 10-acre
parcel. The Brown parcel abuts a 19-acre vacant tract
of land and a 4.4-acre parcel which contains one single-
family residence. The soils in the area are salida and
consist of relatively fine sandy material which, if dis-
turbed, easily erodes.
6. Eden Prairie Road is a hard-surfaced blacktop
road having a speed limit of 30 miles per hour. The grade
of Eden Prairie Road in the vicinity of the Brown parcel
is approximately 13 percent. The overall change in eleva-
tion of Eden Prairie Road from the southeasterly corner of
the parcel extending northerly a distance of approximately
400 feet to the top of the Minnesota River bluff is approx-
imately 90 feet resulting in an average grade of approximately
22.5 percent.
7. The driveway proposed would be approximately 250
feet long and, from its intersection with Eden Prairie Road,
would have a grade of one percent a distance of approximately
30 feet; thereafter, the grade would increase to 10.4 percent
until it reached a distance of approximately 20 feet from the
proposed garage at which point the grade would be approx-
imately one percent. It would also have a turn-around near
Eden Prairie Road. Available sight distances at the inter-
section of the driveway with Eden Prairie Road for a person
in an automobile exiting the parcel are 360 feet to the left
-8-
2 q?)?
and 325 feet to the right, the latter being at the point
of intersection of Eden Prairie Road with Trunk Highway
169-212. Sight-line distance in a northerly direction
for a person in a car traveling northerly and attempting
to make a left-hand turn into the proposed driveway is
not more than 190 feet. Minnesota Department of Trans-
portation and Institute of Transportation Engineers
standard sight distances to the left are 340 and 250 feet,
and to the right are 285 and 195 feet, respectively.
These standard sight distances assume a speed of 25 miles
per hour. Hennepin County requires a minimum sight-line
distance of 10 times the posted speed limit or 300 feet
in the case of Eden Prairie Road. Sight distances for
persons in vehicles exiting or entering the proposed
driveway would vary in winter depending upon the height
of snowbanks, as well as the height of the car, since the
snowbanks cause the road to be narrower in the winter, which
would reduce the distance of some of the sight lines.
8. Construction of the proposed driveway will create
a dangerous and hazardous condition at its intersection
with Eden Prairie Road, exposing the public to substantial
risk to person and property. Drivers of vehicles proceeding
southerly down the hill on Eden Prairie Road would not be
able to see a vehicle executing a left-hand turn into or
out of the driveway, or children crossing the road to enter
or leave buses, for a sufficient distance to stop, particu-
larly when the road is icy or slippery.
-9-
9. The estimated market value of the Brown parcel by
- the City Assessor as of January 2, 1983, was $9,300 and as
of January 2, 1984, was $12,060. The January 2, 1984,
estimated market value is based on the assumption that the
Brown parcel is an un-buildable lot with future possible
use. If the lot were buildable, the estimated market value
would be between $20,000 and $30,000.
10. The owners of the parcel have not shown that denial
to them of a right to build a single-family dwelling on the
parcel would deprive them of all reasonable uses of their
property. The parcel could be used for the keeping of bees,
truck and personal gardens, cutting of wood, and other
agricultural uses, including the keeping of horses.
11. On the date of the adoption of the 5-acre minimum
parcel size for construction of a single-family dwelling in
the Rural District by the City of Eden Prairie on October 14,
1969, a parcel, consisting of approximately 4.4 acres, known
as the Nielsen parcel, was owned by Benjamin Gingold, Jr.,
who at the same time was a vendee under a contract for deed
between himself and Mildred K. Graves, former owner of both
the Brown and Nielsen parcels. Because of the common owner-
ship of interests in both parcels subsequent to October 14,
1969, and the subsequent divestiture of the interests in
these parcels to separate persons, any hardship imposed by
the minimum parcel size requirement, as applied to the Brown
parcel, was created by the then owner of these parcels and
not by virtue of the adoption of the minimum lot size require-
ment by the City. The hardship, if any, is not involuntary.
-10-
2Q
12. The variance requested from the minimum parcel size
• standard of 10 acres (5 acres for parcels existing on July 6,
1982) to 3.2 acres, the size of the parcel, is too great and
is unreasonable. Granting the variance would not be within
the spirit and intent of the Code.
Order
Based upon the foregoing Findings and Conclusions, the
decision of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments denying
variance request number 84-19 by David Brown is affirmed.
Bluffs East 3rd Addition
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 107-84
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be
removed from the Rural District and be placed in the R1-13.5 District.
Section 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be,
and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the
R1-13.5 District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to in
City Code, Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and are amended
accordingly.
Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and
Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their
entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Developer's Agraement dated as of entered into
between the Bluffs Company and the City of Eden Prairie, which Agreement is hereby
made a part hereof.
Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the 4th day of September, 1984, and finally read and adopted and ordered
published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 6th day of
November, 1984
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk Wolfgang H. PeriiiFF, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
2o2-
ATTACHMENT A
BLUFFS EAST 3RD ADDITION
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Outlot 0 and Outlot E, Bluffs East 1st Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Bluffs East 3rd Addition
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of
, 1984, by
and between the Bluffs Company, a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter
referred to as "City:"
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer has applied for rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 for
approximately 9.63 acres and preliminary platting of approximately 9.63 acres for
Bluffs East 3rd Addition, located south of Lee Drive, Lane, south of Purgatory
Creek, situated in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, more fully described in
Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof and hereinafter referred to as
"the property:" and,
WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City to develop the property for 29 single
family detached units;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance #107-84 and
Resolution #84-234, Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon,
development, and maintenance of said property as follows:
1. Developer shall plat and develop the property in conformance with
the materials dated June 26, 1984, as revised, reviewed and approved
by the City Council on September 4, 1984, and attached hereto as
Exhibit B, and made a part hereof, subject to such changes and
modifications as are provided herein. Developer shall not develop,
construct upon, or maintain the property in any other respect or
manner than provided herein.
2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by
Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of
all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in
2. Lit ILA
Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. Prior to release of the final plat by the City, Developer shall:
A. Submit to the City Engineer, and receive the City Engineer's
approval of the following:
1. Final storm water drainage plans consistent with the
plans for the southeast quadrant of the City for
drainage purposes.
2. Detailed plans for sanitary sewer, water, and
streets.
Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall
construct, or cause to be constructed, those plans listed
above, in accordance with Exhibit C attached hereto.
4. Prior to issuance of any building permit for the property, Developer
shall:
A. Post a temporary dead end sign at the end of Meade Lane.
B. Submit to the Director of Planning, and obtain the
Director's approval of individual plans for each lot along
Purgatory Creek, showing individual erosion control,
grading, and restoration plans.
C. Submit to the City Engineer, and receive the City Engineer's
approval of individual erosion control and grading bonds for
each lot of the property along Purgatory Creek, assuring
compliance with the individual erosion control, grading, and
restoration plans.
Upon approval by the Director of Planning and the City Engineer,
Developer shall construct, or cause to be constructed, those
improvements listed above in accordance with the approved plans.
5. Upon completion of individual structures, Developer shall:
A. Sod each lot from the back of the curb to the back of the
individual structure.
B. Sod all drainage swales and graded areas with slopes in
excess of 3-1 as part of the overall site grading
restoration.
Said improvements shall be bonded in accordance with Exhibit C,
attached hereto.
Bluffs East 3rd Addition
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 84-288
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY
OF ORDINANCE #107-84 AND ORDERING THE
PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 107-84 was adopted and ordered published at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 6th day of November,
1984;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 107-84, which is
attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said
text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said
ordinance.
B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a
body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in
Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07.
C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for
inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office
of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance
shall be posted in the City Hall.
D. That Ordinance No. 107-84 shall be recorded in the ordinance book,
along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein,
within 20 days after said publication.
ADOPTED by the City Council on November 6, 1984.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jan D. Frane, City Clerk
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 107-84
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CIlY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99,
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Summary.: This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located west of
Franlo Road, south of Lee Drive, known as Bluffs East 3rd Addition, from Rural
District to R1-13.5, subject to the terms and conditions of a developer's agreement.
Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this
property.
Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication.
ATTEST:
/s/John_D.Frane
City Clerk
/s/Wolfgang_.H. Penzel
Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of • 1984.
(A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.)
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #84-293
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF EDEN PRAIRIE APARTMENTS
FOR DAVID AMES
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Eden Prairie Apartments for David Ames, dated October
11, 1984, consisting of 6.47 acres for 108-unit apartment building, 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
, 1984.
day of
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
November 1, 1984
Supplementary Staff Report to the October 12, 1984 Planning Staff Report
Regarding Eden Prairie Apartments
The three major park and recreation concerns regarding Eden Prairie Apartments are
as follows:
• Location of park services
2. Trails
3. Landscaping
PARKS
This site is located approximately 1400 feet cast of Edenvale Park and immediately west
of Edenvale Golf Course. Eden Prairie Apartments is also providing a private swimming
pool for their occupants.
'IRA TI
The October Planning Staff Report adequately addresses the pedestrian systems required.
The Eden Prairie Apartments development should provide for 5' hldc concrete sidewalks
along the north side of Valley View Road and along the east side of Colfview Drive;
these will provide safe pedestrian access to both the golf coarse and Edenvale Park.
GRAD1NC
Page 2 of the 0,-.talber 12 Planning Staff Report indicates that the majority of the trees
are to be saved, and then says a total of 14 out of 58 oaks will be retained; that should
be corrected to 44 out of S8 oaks will be retained.
CASH PARK FEE
The October 12 Planning Staff Report also indicates that prior to building permit
issuance, the proponent shall pay the appropriate cash park fees; however, this parcel
is within the original Ldenvale POD and is not required to pay the cash park fee.
It should he noted that in the original Fdenvale POD C.olf View Drive has planned to
extend through Edenvole ('elf Course and to loop south and west adjacent to this site and
tie into Valley View Road lheic has been some opposition to the idea of extending
GolfViewDrive through the golf aour se and directly tieing a single family neighborhood
to a multiple area. lie qovslion en road connections is basieally a Planning Commission
item; however, as the road would bo dividing the golf coarse it may be brought to the
attention of the Parhs, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission members.
BL:md
zqqg
STAFF REPORT
REQUEST:
Planning Commission
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
October 12, 1984
Eden Prairie Apartments
North of Valley View Road, West of Edenvale Golf Club
David Ames
1. Zoning District Amendment within existing RM-2.5 Zoning.
2. A Preliminary Plat of 6.7 acres into one lot.
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
DATE:
PROJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER:
Background _ _
This site was previously zoned to
RM-2.5 in 1973, according to a
specific development plan for
Master's Condominiums, which in-
volved 96 units in two, three-story,
cross-shaped buildings, with under-
ground parking. Issues discussed at
the time of rezoning that are still
valid today, are tree preservation,
density, height, appearance, and
access.
The site slopes steeply in all
directions, from a high point at
elevation 900 in the central portion
of the site. The site is heavily
wooded. A tree inventory supplied
by the proponent indicates a total
of 92 trees of twelve-inch caliper
size, or greater. The dominant tree
type is oak (58).
Site Plan
The development involves the con-
struction of a three-story apartment
building, containing 108 units at an
overall density of 16.7 units per
acre, based upon 6.47 acres of
24S-3
Eden Prairie Apartments 2 October 11, 1984
developable land. The building is constructed in a "Y" configuration at the top of
the knoll in the central portion of the site. Primary access for the property will
be off Golf View Drive. There will be an exit available on to Valley View Road for
the underground parking.
The site is being developed at a floor area ratio of about 0.44. Code would allow
up to a floor area ratio of 0.5 for a multi-story building.
Parking is provided at a ratio of two spaces per unit, with 120 garage spaces, and
96 parking spaces on grade. The surface parking area is concentrated in the
southwest corner of the site, in order to retain as many oak trees as possible.
Access
As previously mentioned, access will be from Golf View Drive and Valley View Road.
Attachment A shows a conceptual layout of Golf View Drive, which runs from Valley
View Road to existing Golf View Drive, north and east of the site, and through the
golf course. The conceptual layout is representative of the 1972 Edenvale Planned
Unit Development. Land uses planned on either side of the road are for a medium
density land use up to about 13.5 units per acre. A portion of Golf View Drive will
be constructed to the northern most property limits concurrent with building
construction on this site. Sight vision distances, along Valley View Road, are
acceptable, looking in a westerly direction. Looking towards the east, the sight
vision will be obscured by the crest of the hill on Valley View Road. The
intersection of the private driveway, with Valley View Road, is offset approximately
80 feet east of the intersection with Fairway Woods Drive. A better way of traffic
movement would be to either align the driveway with Fairway Woods, or to have it
offset at a minimum of 150 feet to the east. This would coincide approximately with
the crest of the hill, which would allow for better sight vision distance toward the
east.
Grading
The majority of grading work will be confined to the southwest corner of the site.
The shape of the building footprint, and concentration of the parking in the
southwest corner of the site, allows for the majority of trees to be saved. A total
of 14 out of 58 oak trees will be retained. Slopes of 2/1, or greater, are proposed
around the edge of the parking lot. The height of this slope will vary between
twelve to twenty-two feet. There is room adjacent to Valley View Road to extend
grading and reduce the slope to 3/1. Along Golf View Drive, the parking setback is
25 feet, which leaves no room to soften the slope. Moving the parking lot eleven
feet to the east would provide a 3/1 slope.
I andscapin2
Since the majority of mature overstory, oak, and other tree varieties are to be
retained on site, there is an appropriate scale relationship to the building. The
building will appear to blend with the site. Parking will be visible from Valley
View Road and Golf View Drive, since the parking is at a higher elevation than both
roads. The proponent is providing a row of coniferous trees to satisfy the City
requirement for screening of parking areas. There is a large planting island in the
center portion of the parking area, which will help break up the expanse of parking
area.
245'1
Eden Prairie Apartments 3 October 11, 1984
lt Architecture
The building is proposed to be constructed in a "Y" configuration at an overall
height of 43 feet. Code would allow a maximum height of 45 feet above grade for
multi-story buildings. The building is proposed to be constructed primarily of wood
and glass over the face of the building and over the exposed garage areas. Code
requires that primary building materials be brick, glass, or stone, with wood
permitted as an accent material not to exceed 25 percent of the face of the
building.
The majority of housing styles near this site have a residential scale. Roof lines
are pitched and building fronts are staggered. Adding a roof to the top of the
building would increase the overall height by approximately twelve feet. A way of
counter-acting the total height of the building, would be to lower the building
approximately ten to twelve feet further into the ground. This may result in more
grading and mo..e tree loss since a number of trees are located extremely close to
the building; however, most of the trees are box elder or elm. The majority of oak
trees are closer to Valley View Road.
Pedestrian Systems
A feasibility study for improvements to Valley View Road is being completed at this
time. Part of the improvements will include a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk on
one side of the road, and an eight-foot wide bituminus trail on the other side. The
proponent should provide for a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk along the north side
of Valley View Road. In addition, with the looping of Golf View Drive, there should
be a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk along the east side of Golf View Drive.
Conclusions
The building appears to be sited in the most appropriate location on the property.
Much of the existing natural features of the site will be retained. There will be a
minimal amount of grading work and tree loss on-site. The tree mass on-site
provides the opportunity for a blending of the building mass and architecture with
the property.
The density of the project at 6.7 units per acre is within an allowable density
maximum for RM-2.5 zoning, which is 17 units per acre. This site was previously
rezoned to RM-2.5, based upon a previous development plan for 96 units. The
density, though higher than approved plans, does not cause significant site planning
problems, since the majority of trees are being saved, and the building and parking
seem to be sited appropriately.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
The Planning Staff would recommend any of the following alternative courses of
action:
1. The Planning Commission could recoamend approval of the request for the
zoning amendment on 6.4 acres land currently zoned RM-2.5 and a preliminary
plat of 6.47 acres into one lot, based on plans dated October 11, 1984,
subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated October 12, 1984,
and subject to the following conditions:
q •57—
Eden Prairie Apartments 4 October 11, 1984
A. Prior to Council review, proponent shall:
1. Modify the buildihg plans to indicate brick and glass as the
primary building material. Modify the building to add a
pitched roof.
2. Modify the site plan to indicate a five-foot wide concrete
sidewalk along the north side of Valley View Road and the
east side of Golf View Drive.
3. Modify the site plan to realign the driveway entrance on
Valley View Road to the east property line.
4. Modify the grading plan to lower the building elevation by
twelve feet.
B. Prior to Final Plat, proponent shall:
1. Submit detailed erosion control, and storm water run-off
plans for review by the City Engineer.
2. Provide detailed erosion control, and storm water run-off
plans for review by the Watershed District.
C. Prior to Building Permit issuance, proponent shall:
1. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
2. Stake the grading limits with a snow fence.
D. The oak trees to be lost due to construction shall be replaced on a
caliper inch per caliper inch basis. The minimum tree replacement
size shall be four inches with at least 50 percent of the trees
replacement to be oak.
E. Concurrent with Building construction, construct concrete sidewalks
along Golf View Drive and Valley View Road.
F. Concurrent with site development, Golf View Drive shall be
constructed to the northern property line of this site.
2. The Planning Caanission could recommend that the development plans be
returned to the proponent for revisions to the building and site plan which
would be indicative of residential scale.
3. The Planning Commission could recommend denial of the development plans.
205?) —2451/
Planning Commission Minutes 5 October 15, 1984
C. EDEN PRAIRIE APARTMENTS, by David Ames. Request for Zoning District
Amendwnt within RM-2.5 District and Preliminary Plat of 6.47 acres
for 108-unit apartment building. Location: North of Valley View
Road, West of Edenvale Golf Club. A public hearing.
Mr. David Amos, proponent, reviewed the site features and site plan
Planning Commission Minutes 6 October 15, 1984
characteristics of the project with the Planning Commission. He stated that
the major goal of the project design was to preserve as many trees as
possible on the site. He stated that by locating the structure as shown,
only thirteen trees would be lost due to construction. Mr. Ames stated that
he would prefer to use redwood siding on the structure, instead of brick as
suggested by Staff. He added that he would also prefer to maintain a flat
roof for this structure instead of a pitched roof. Mr. Ames stated that his
only other concern was the Staff suggestion regarding the recommendation to
lower the building by twelve feet in order to provide a pitched roof which
would be screened by the height of the trees. He stated that he felt the
flat roof, with the height of the trees, would be sufficient screening for
the structure.
Planner Franzen reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff
Report of October 12, 1984.
Torjesen asked if lowering of the building by twelve feet would make a
better overall site plan for the project. Staff responded that additional
fill would be available for the parking areas. Therefore the overall
grading of the site would be improved. Regarding the pitched roof for the
structure, Staff stated that there were two multiple residential projects
within the area which did have pitched roofs, adding to the residential
character of those structures.
Hallett asked how many trees would be lost with lowering of the structure by
an additional twelve feet. Mr. Tom 7umwalde, architect for proponent,
responded that many more trees would be lost with this revised grading plan.
He estimated that approximately two-thirds of the trees would be lost, as
opposed to only thirteen trees. Planner Enger stated that the original plan
for this site, based upon its parking arrangement, showed many more trees
being lost than were currently shown on the plan before the Planning
Commission.
Torjesen asked how visible the structure would be from Valley View Road.
Staff responded that there was a 50-foot elevation change between the
elevation of the road and the proposed elevation of the building.
Therefore, from Valley View Road, the structure would not be very visible.
Planner Enger stated that he felt it was an overstatement to say that the
revised grading suggested by Staff would result in two-thirds of the trees
being lost. He reviewed the site grading proposed with the Planning
Commission, indicating that several more trees would be lost, but not two-
thirds of those upon the site.
Chairman Beaman and Hallett stated that they were not necessarily concerned
that the building have a pitched roof in this situation.
Marhula stated that he felt perhaps a compromise position would be available
for the grading of the property.
Marhula asked what tbe status of Valley View Road improvement was at this
time. He stated that he felt the access situation to Valley View Road for
this site was currently not a good one. Planner Enger responded that the
feasibility study for improvement of Valley View Road was due to be
compl ,,ted within 30 days, at which time Staff would have more information.
2,4S6
Planning Commission Minutes 7 October .15, 1984
Marhula asked if it was known whether additional right-of-way be needed and
whether there were plans to straighten out the curve in this vicinity of
Valley View Road. Staff responded that there may be need for additional
right-of-way at the location of Golf View Drive and Valley View Road for
this purpose. However, the Engineering Staff, in its review of this
project, did not feel it would effect this project.
Hallett asked how this project would affect the property owners to the
northeast in particular with respect to the extension of Golf View Drive.
Planner Enger stated that the owners of the property to the northeast would
be interested in receiving access from this new portion of Golf View Drive.
There were very few options available for accessing this piece of property.
Hallett asked if it would be necessary to extend Golf View Drive into a loop
as shown on the approved Edenvale Planned Unit Development plan. Staff
responded that this was an approved plan from the early 1970's and that this
was the first time, since that approval, that the question of the road had
been raised. He stated that the Planning Commission may choose to re-
evaluate the need for this road at any time.
Hallett expressed concern regarding the open space plan and the amount of
land dedicated for open space within the overall Edenvale Planned Unit
Development. He asked whether it would be possible for the open space to be
developed. In particular, he expressed concern that with the looping of
Golf View Drive through the golf course, new owners of the golf course may
be tempted to develop the property as opposed to maintaining it as open
space for the project. Hallett stated that he felt the City should be
cautious about the potential for development of lands planned for open space
to Planned Unit Development approvals becoming developed property. He
stated that, if the City had approved a project based on the amount of
public open space, the City should be cautious also to insure that public
open space remain as public open space and not turn into private open space,
particularly with a facility such as a golf course.
Torjesen stated that he was concerned with density. He asked if it was
appropriate density to allow development of this property based upon the
amount of traffic that would be generated onto Valley View Road. Planner
Enger responded that this was a zoned site and had previously received
approval for a 96-unit apartment complex. He stated that the major
difference in the plan was the amount of preservation of open space with the
current plan over the previous plan. A configuration of this structure
saved many more trees than the previous plan had done. Planner Enger stated
that the difference in the number of units was a total of twelve but that,
in Staff's opinion, based upon the amount of preservation of trees and the
screening of the structure, an additional twelve units would be warranted.
Further, the amount of additional traffic at peak periods onto Valley View
Road would be insignificant.
Gartner stated that she felt this plan was an improvement over the
previously approved plan for the property.
Mr. John Finch, 14120 Forest Hill Road, stated that he had lived in the City
for five years. He stated that he was appauled with what was hapiening in
the Edenvale area. He questioned v..!4ether a twelve-year old plan for this
2t)
/-1 Planning Commission Minutes 8 October 15, 1984
area would not now be outmoded and inappropriate for this neighborh
o
o
d
.
M
r
.
Finch expressed concern regarding the density proposed for this s
i
t
e
.
H
e
stated that he felt this area deserved to have parks and trails but
i
n
s
t
e
a
d
was developing this high density and light industrial. He stated
t
h
a
t
h
e
felt that the City was losing sight of what was trying to be accompli
s
h
e
d
i
n
this area for the residents and that the single family to multiple
f
a
m
i
l
y
ratio was out of balance by approval of so many high density uses
i
n
t
h
e
vicinity.
Chairman Bearman asked Planner Enger to review the approved sites wit
h
i
n
t
h
e
Edenvale Planned Unit Development against the originally approved den
s
i
t
i
e
s
for the project. Planner Enger reviewed each of the additions
i
n
t
h
e
Edenvale project, explaining the density approved for the site and th
e
n
t
h
e
density actually built upon the site. In many cases, the density ha
d
b
e
e
n
decreased, as much as 50 per cent. Several of the sites had been dev
e
l
o
p
e
d
at the approved densities. And several of the sites had been approv
e
d
a
t
densities between 10 and 30 per cent lower than the overall approved P
l
a
n
n
e
d
Unit Development for Edenvale.
Hallett asked if the Cash Park Fee for the entire Edenvale project had
b
e
e
n
waived. Planner Enger responded that the Edenvale Planned Unit Develo
p
m
e
n
t
was approved before the City required Cash Park Fees of developer
s
.
H
e
stated that this was also true of the large Preserve Planned
U
n
i
t
Development. In both cases, the City Council had reviewed the amou
n
t
o
f
open space dedicated at that time for each of these large Planned
U
n
i
t
Developments within the community. It was their determination tha
t
t
h
e
amount of open space dedicated or planned within these developme
n
t
s
w
a
s
adequate to compensate for the Cash Park Fee requirement at that ti
m
e
b
e
i
n
g
imposed. Hallett stated that there were still many acres of the E
d
e
n
v
a
l
e
Planned Unit Development which had not been developed. Chairman
B
e
a
r
m
a
n
stated that he questioned whether the City could legally obtain Ca
s
h
P
a
r
k
Fees from the sites. He asked that Staff review this with the City
A
t
t
o
r
n
e
y
and report back to the Planning Commission.
Mr. George May, Attorney for Edenvale Golf Course owners, expressed
c
o
n
c
e
r
n
regarding the loop road configuration for Golf View Drive through t
h
e
g
o
l
f
course. He asked if there was any reason to implement the loop p
o
r
t
i
o
n
through the golf course at this time. Staff responded that the only p
o
r
t
i
o
n
of the road under consideration at this time would be within the bor
d
e
r
s
o
f
the proposed Edon Prairie Apartment land use. Mr. May stated th
a
t
t
h
e
Edenvale Golf Club owners were unalterably apposed to having a ro
a
d
c
u
t
across the golf course. He stated that they also had a concer
n
t
h
a
t
property adjacent to the golf course be fenced. This would preve
n
t
a
n
d
preclude any problems with children or course users trespassing o
n
e
a
c
h
others property.
Mr. Bob Martinson, The Kerr Companies, stated that 50 per cent o
f
h
i
s
project, Village Greens Condominiums, was located upon the Edenvale
G
o
l
f
Course. He stated that he was interested in the golf course being ab
l
e
t
o
operate successfully and that he did not feel routing of the road th
r
o
u
g
h
the golf course across one of the tees would be appropriate. Mr. Mart
i
n
s
o
n
stated that he felt traffic should not Le dealt with lightly on this pr
o
j
e
c
t
either. He stated that, from his experience, the traffic was a m
a
t
t
e
r
o
f
concern in this entire area. Mr. Martinson also asked what income grou
p
t
h
e
215-7
0 Planning Commission Minutes 9 October 15, 1984
project was intended to serve. Mr. Ames responded that the projec
t
w
o
u
l
d
cost approximately six million dollars to construct. He stated that the
building would be for rental housing and would be built with
h
o
u
s
i
n
g
development revenue bonds. Rents for a one-bedroom apartment were e
x
p
e
c
t
e
d
to be between $470 and $545 dollars per month; rents for two-
b
e
d
r
o
o
m
apartments were expected to be between $540 and $680 dollars per mont
h
.
Mr. Heber Stephens, 14267 Wedgeway Court, expressed concern regardi
n
g
t
h
e
density of the project and of the overall Edenvale Planned Unit Develo
p
m
e
n
t
.
He also expressed concern regarding traffic on Valley View Roa
d
.
M
r
.
Stephens stated that he felt more concern should be given to the ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
single family residents in the area. He stated that he felt th
a
t
t
h
e
sanctity of the golf course should be preserved.
Mr. Doug Rueter, 8750 Black Maple Drive, stated that he was a resid
e
n
t
o
f
the Preserve, the other large Planned Unit Development within Eden Pr
a
i
r
i
e
.
He stated that he was concerned about the approval of so many high d
e
n
s
i
t
y
uses within these large Planned Unit Developments. Mr. Rueter state
d
t
h
a
t
he would understand if the owner of the golf course developed the prop
e
r
t
y
.
He added that he felt the Planning Commission and Council should get t
o
u
g
h
e
r
with the requirements for lower density within the community. Mr.
R
u
e
t
e
r
stated that he was running for Council and indicated that his position
w
o
u
l
d
be against high density projects in the community.
Mr. Rick Sitek, the golf pro at the Edenvale Golf Course, stated
t
h
a
t
h
e
felt the road connection of Golfview Drive concerned more people th
a
n
t
h
o
s
e
within the proposed apartment complex. He stated that he felt it wo
u
l
d
h
a
v
e
a negative impact on the golf course itself.
Mr. Floyd Siefferman, Jr., 6997 Edgebrook Place, questioned why
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
would not stick with the previous 96 units approved.
Hallett stated that he was concerned about the road extension.
P
l
a
n
n
e
r
Enger stated that the particular section of road shown with this
p
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
was necessary to provide access to the property to the northe
a
s
t
.
H
e
pointed out that, at this time, the only portion of the road bef
o
r
e
t
h
e
Planning Counission for review was that segment shown along the west
b
o
r
d
e
r
of the Eden Prairie Apartment proposal. Hallett stated that it was
o
b
v
i
o
u
s
that if the road was not looped there would be a long cul-de-sac up i
n
t
o
t
h
e
northeast area of this neighborhood which would also not be desirable
f
r
o
m
a
public safety point of view.
Torjesen stated that the City must also pay attention to the rig
h
t
s
o
f
property owners of undeveloped property and their right to devel
o
p
t
h
e
property within legal boundaries. He asked vdtat the life of a Planne
d
U
n
i
t
Development was within City Code requirements. He questioned at what point
a Planned Unit Development would no longer be binding and whether
i
t
h
a
d
been stated anywhere that a Planned Unit Development would be scheduled for
regular roviows as to its appropriateness based on an amount of time, or changes in Code, etc. He added that he felt the Staff and proponent
c
o
u
l
d
possibly come to a compromise position regarding the amount of grading to be done on site. Marhula pointed out that the site had not been "zoned"
f
o
r
9
6
units. However, there Was an approved site plan for the proper
t
y
w
h
i
c
h
inrlwld96 units.
2 (.61
(2)
Hauling Coomission Minutes 10 October 15, 1984
Chairman Boorman stated that be did not feel there would be a visible
difference between this plan at 108 Units or 96 units. He stated that the
plan for 96 units had been spread out Ore on the site and did not preserve
as many natural features of the site. Torjesen questioned the amount of
traffic impact that would result from the increased density. Planner Enger
stated that the increase would be insignificant.
MOTION 1.
Motion was made by Hallett, seconded by Marhula, to close the public
hearing.
Motion (tarried--5-0-1 (Schuck abstained)
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Hallett, seconded by Gartner, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of David AM2S for Zoning District change
from Rural to RM-2.5 for 8.47 acres for an apartment complex of 108 units
known as Eden Prairie Apartments, based on plans dated October 11, 1984,
subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated October 12, 1984,
with the following added conditions: I) Developer and owner of the goli:
course should work toi„ethee to determine the need and cost of fencing
between the two properties; 2) Exterior materials for the strrcture should
be changed to meet City Code requirements; 3) item PIA of the Staff Report
he eliminated as a condition of approval.
Hallett asked if the City could require either Party to fence the property
line between the apartment: bdilding and the golf course. Staff responded
that they would discuss the mtter with the City Attorney. Chairiaan Seaman
Fecomm,,ned that the two parties work together to a mutual resolution of any
perceived problms on this matter.
Hallett stated that he was concerned about the matter of Cash Park Fees for
the largo Planned Unit. Developments within the cwiminity and asked that
Staff check into it further. He stated that he felt the Commission should
perhaps discuss this matter with the City Council.
ration cseried--1-1-1 (Torjesen aqainsi; Schick abstained)
Turjesen stated that, while he felt the site plan was a goad one, he felt
the project should be less dodse, with a total of 96 units as previously
opprove(1.
ri:itiON it
it to weis made by Hallett, y-cendieii by Gartner, to recommend to the City
Enunk 0 opproval of the o Ore 1 icier for Pre? iminary Plat of 6.47
„cr y t. i n ! a 0 00 loL for re:!!:dle:; to be known as Eden
Prairie Toorl,r,cnts, has;:d on plots itd Octol ,er II, 1084, subject to the
rek .ieus of the Stat POrt bid Pointer I?, 1984, with the
;t ddrid condi t ions: I) tti tpter nd owner of the golf course
lit it `407,; to Pe hero tic I to toed ii cost of fencing bet ,..2eon the
two pFoporties; >. ter i or or thr structure should be (iiong ,..,(1 to
Planning Coaoission Minutes 11 October 15, 1984
meet City Code requirements; 3) Item PIA of the Staff Report be eliminated
as a condition of approval. ,
Motion carried--4-1-1 (Torjesen against; Schuck abstained)
MOTION 4:
Motion was made by Hallett, seconded by Schuck, that Staff be directed to
review the appropriateness of not charging Cash Park Fees within the
Fdenvale and Preserve large Planned Unit Developments in Eden Prairie, and
that it be determined whether the reasons for not charging Cash Park Fees at
this time are still valid.
Torjesen asked if there was a "sunset" clause within the City Code regarding
the amount of time a Planned Unit Development approval lasted, or if there
Was a time limit on decisions for such a project, after which additional
review was required.
Torjesen asked whether it would be possible to determine the "public" nature
of the golf course within the Edenvale Planned Unit Development with respect
to dedicated open space in order that the future development of the property
as anything other than a golf course could be prevented, if necessary.
Staff responded that they would research this and repwt back to the
ComAssiao.
Motion carried--6-0-0
z(V:1
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Connission
FROM: Mike Franzen, Senior Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: October 12, 1984
PROJECT: Computer Depot
LOCATION: North of Valley View Road, east of Highway #169
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER: Welsh Construction Company
REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Amendment within 1-2 Zoning District for
Office/Warehouse use on 5.42 acres.
Background
This is a continued item from the
September 24, 1984, Planning
Commission meeting. The Planning
Comnission recommended that the
development plans be returned to the
proponent for revisions, based upon
recommendations which included
modified building elevations to
reflect a more office-looking
appearance, additional landscaping,
and a statement from the Enblom
family and from Wilson Learning
indicating they approved of the site
plan revisions.
Building Modifications
The building footprint and building
square footage remain the same as
the original proposal. A total of
76,797 square feet of building area
is proposed, of which 20,832 square
feet will be office, or 27 per cent
of the building. The building will
be 21 feet high overall, as compared
to the initial plan, which was
mostly one-story. Building eleva-
tions reflect a considerably higher
percentage of glass than the
zcif,
Computer Depot 2 October 12, 1984
previous submittal. Cement board panels and porcelain coated metal panels are
predominant on the east, north, and west sides. The wall facing Wilson Learning
will be painted concrete block and concrete panel with no glass. A continuation of
the materials, columns, and building projections, reflective of the other elevations
would be more appropriate. Concrete block is not an aceptable building material in
an office district. Staff has not seen samples of the cement board panels or
porcelain steel panels. These materials should be provided for Staff review. Staff
would recommend that the primary building materials be brick, glass, or stone.
There will be two loading docks visible from Wilson Learning. They will, however,
be recessed docks, and with significant landscaping, the impacts can be downplayed.
Site Plan Modifications
There are two access points to this site on the north and south ends, as opposed to
the centrally located access with the previous submittal.
A total of 169 parking stalls are provided on site. Code would require 131 spaces.
Since the building is constructed at 21 feet, it is possible to convert to a two-
story office building over the entire footprint. This could mean up to 154,000
square feet of office, and would require the provision of 770 parking stalls, if a
total conversion would occur. Because of the large building footprint and limited
amount of site area, additional parking would have to be provided in structured
parking, on-site or elsewhere within the Wilson Learning development.
Landscaping
At the time of preparation of the Staff Report, a detailed landscape plan had not
been prepared. Staff recommends that the following guide lines be used in the
preparation of the detailed plan. The minimum plant material size should be a 2-
1/2 -inch minimum with a three-inch average for shade trees. Coniferous trees should
be a six-foot minimum height with an eight-foot average. Additional coniferous
trees will be necessary to screen the north parking lot.
Grading
The grading plan is consistent with the Planned Unit Development and is not
appreciably different from the previous plan. The plan basically cuts the hills to
fill the low areas.
Signage and Lighting
The proponent will need to provide Staff with an overall signage and lighting plan
with details for review.
Rooftop Mechanical Units
Code currently requires that all rooftop mechanical units be screened from view.
The proponent should provide details of rooftop mechanical screening with materials
architecturally compatible with those used on the exterior surface of the building.
Sight lines should be provided from US #169, Wilson Learning, and Flying Cloud
Drive, to illustrate the effectiveness of screening.
Computer Depot 3 October 12, 1984
Utilities
Storm water run-off will sheet drain across the parking areas into catch basins.
From those collection points, water will drain towards Flying Cloud Drive or Highway
#169 right-of-way.
Conclusions
The proponent has made revisions to the building and site plans, to create an
office-like appearance. Increased building height to 21 feet, and more glass around
the building, give an office-looking appearance from US #169 and Flying Cloud Drive.
Additional and larger plantings will also provide for scale and add visual interest.
If the Comnission feels that the proponent has made substantial enough
modifications, to create an office-like appearance on this site, then Staff would
recomnend that approval be based upon the following:
1. Prior to City Council review, proponent shall:
A. Submit the detailed landscape plan per the recommendation of the
Staff Report, which depicts a 2-1/2-inch caliper minimum, three-inch
caliper average for shade trees, and an average eight-foot height
for coniferous trees, with a six-foot minimum. Screening of parking
areas to occur from Flying Cloud Drive and US #169.
B. Submit examples of proposed building materials for review prior to
City Council.
C. Submit plans relative to rooftop mechanical screening, signage, and
lighting details.
2. Prior to Building Permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
B. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance
of grading.
C. Submit detailed storm water runoff and erosion control plans for
review by the City.
D. Submit detailed storm water runoff and erosion control plans for
review by the Watershed District.
z qU I
Planning Commission Minutes 2 October 15, 1984
B. COMPUTER DEPOT, by Wilson Ridge Joint Venture. Request for Zoning
District Amendment within 1-2 Zoning District for Office/Warehouse
use on 5.42 acres. Location: North Valley View Road, east of
Highway #169. A continued public meeting.
The Planning Commission continued this from the September 24, 1984, meeting
in order to allow the proponent time to revise the plan so that it appeared
substantially office in nature. Proponents had provided Staff with revised
building elevations of a preliminary nature that could provide the desired
office appearance.
Mr. Dan Russ, Welsh Construction, reviewed the project with the Commission,
explaining that the building would be a two-story structure of approximately
76,800 square feet. He stated that he had received a letter from Mr. Bob
Brown, Wilson Learning Center, stating Wilson Learning's agreement with the
project and their satisfaction with the design. Mr. Darryl Anderson,
architect for proponents, explained the revised building features and
materials to he used on the exterior. He stated that the major difference
was that the building would be more office-like in appearance. Mr. Russ
added that Computer Depot's growth in the future would be centered around
the office and repair portions of their business, as opposed to the storage
areas.
Planner fnger stated that Staff had reviewed some of the revisions proposed
in the Computer Depot site. However, at Staff's last meeting with
proponnt, all revisions hdd not been made. Planner Enger asked proponents
how much square footage had been assigned to each of the uses within the
structure. Mr. Russ responded that approximately 21,000 square feet would
be used for office, with the remainder being used for storage and assembly.
He added that the amount of square footage to be used for assembly had not
yet been finalized. Planner Enger stated that he raised the question due to
z(16,5
0
Planning Commission Minutes 3 October 15, 1984
the number of parking spaces needed for the various uses within the
structure. He stated that for an assembly use three spaces per 1,000 square
feet of gross floor area were necessary, whereas for warehousing or storage
space one space per 2,000 square feet of gross floor area were required.
Planner Enger stated that, as a practical matter, there would be a
limitation as to how much assembly would be allowed in the building based on
the amount of parking space available on the site. The current plan showed
251 parking spaces available. Planner Enger pointed out that Staff would
review the site plan in great detail at the time of request for building
permit to determine the necessary amount of parking spaces based upon the
exact square footages of use assigned at that time within the structure. He
added that exterior materials and the amount of open space would also be
reviewed at that time.
Chairman Bearman asked how much additional parking would be needed if the
majority of the storage area was converted to assembly space. Planner Enger
responded that approximately 50 per cent additional parking may be
necessary, depending on the allocation of uses within a structure. This
could change the site plan drastically from what the Planning Commission was
currently reviewing. Chairman Bearman stated that he felt the proponents
should be aware that the Planning Commission would take action only on the
plan in front of them for review at this time and that, should a plan
revision be necessary requiring 50 per cent additional parking over and
above what was currently shown, this would constitute a major change in the
site plan and require additional Planning Commission and Council review.
Chairman Bearman asked proponents what the height of the structure would be
overall. Mr. Anderson responded that the building would be 21 feet in
height overall. He stated that previously the building was 16 feet in
height.
Planner Enger stated that the exterior materials for the revised plan
included cement panel board, tinted glass, and porcelain steel panels. He
stated that it was Staff's opinion that this was a large improvement in the
types of materials shown for the original plan.
Planner Enger stated that there were several Staff suggestions for revision
of the plan before the Commission at this time, which included the
following:
1. The earthen berm on the south elevation should be higher than shown
on the current plans.
2. Samples of the exterior materials should he submitted for review
against City Codes and Building Codes.
3. The landscape plan needed revision to the plant material sizes shown
on the plan and more materials were needed throughout the site.
4. The south elevation of the building should he modified to include
the cement panel board and a two-foot wide strip continued across
the top of the building.
5. The concrete panel around the center of the building should be
2 (4(9 61,
Planning Co:mission Minutes 4 October 15, 1984
raised and continued around the south elevation to the exterior of
the two dock doors of the building.
6. Deming should be shown on the site plan and sight lines presented
to indicate effectiveness of screening of the parking areas and
loading areas.
Hallett asked what type of internal circulation pathways were available
within the project. Mr. Anderson responded that the original trail system
shown within the Wilson Ridge project would be continued through this
project. Hallett asked if tiler:: would be a connection between the pathway
along Highway 069 and the parking lot urea at the southwest corner of the
site. Mr. Anderson stated that one was not shown; however, they would
certainly be willing to add one. Planner Ender added that the trails along
Flying Cloud Drive would be constructed as part of the road project by the
City. He suggested that proponents also include a trail connection from the
front door of the structure to the east to connect to the trail proposed
along Flying Cloud Drive.
Hallrtt asked proponents where they would add parking, if it became
necessary to do so. Mr. Anderson pointed to several areas on the site that
were considnred for future parking. Hallett asked if this would result in
loss of existing trees, or a reduction in the amount of landscaping. Mr.
Andercm stated that the lot coverage would not change, that it would be
typical of any 1-2 District site with 30 per cent Floor Area Ratio.
Chaiiwn Bcarman asked if there would be enough room on this site for
packing, if the structure had been planned, and/or was converted to
chardlctely office, considering the proposed footprint of the building.
Staff responjed that there would he enough room for 50 per cent office and
50 per cent wovehouse within the structure in order to meet the parking
needs. Chairman Boatman asked if prop(ments had any idea of their future
oft ice needs and whether the current propre,ed plan would meet those needs
and the resultant parking needs. Mr. Paul Larson, Vice President of
Co .:iTuter ft-Tot, stated that currently Cowuter Depot had 50 employees. He
stated that tuture plans included up to 65 employees, but very little more,
if any. Chairman 8ear,:lan asked if he know how mueh additional office space
would he needed as a result of inc.reased e4loyees. Mr. Larson responded
thilt peyhaps an additional 10,0".)0 square feet of office, as a maximum, would
hi rey)i:.-. Chairan Hdarman asked how cunim asseaibly space would be ddded
in the future. Mr. tron respunded that additional assembly space of 6,000
to 10,N0 sq uire feet may he necessary in the future.
Hallytt stated that, with only 66 to 65 cmployees total, he would prefer
that proaondnts nnt construct the entire 7b1 partind spaces on the site at
thin ti;:!e but rather that they leave the parking areas in greed space,
maintaining the additional pecking areas only as proof-of-parking at this
tirx.
Torjesen stated that ohd of the City's concerns for tbis project would be
pladnind for the huill;rT; futioe use. He statt'd that, over a building's
thore may 1,d Italy tenets and is housed within the structure.'
15c City tili nood th Jsert,ln: ;:hAiwr d,f(dalate parking facilities wuld
he available tor eaoh it tbdse usds.
Planning CWAY,ion Minutes 5 October 15, 1984
lorjesen asked if it would be appropriate for the Plannin
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
t
o
make a "WfdXiiAle reconma.endation regarding the amount of office to be allowed
within this structure based upon the availability of
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
.
S
t
a
f
f
responded that the Building Department, whn issuing an
o
c
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
p
e
r
m
i
t
,
would check on the uses and the au n uunt of each use within the structure. If
any inconsistencies were found at tint time, Planning
S
t
a
f
f
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
notified and if necessary, Planning Staff would return
t
h
e
i
t
e
m
t
o
t
h
e
Planning Commission for review.
Terjesen stated that, in general, be was pleased with the re
v
i
s
e
d
p
l
a
n
s
.
H
e
stated thet they represented more of uhat he had thoug
h
t
t
h
e
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
ComEission had in mind upon approval of the overall Wilso
n
R
i
d
g
e
P
l
a
n
n
e
d
Unit Dvelopment.
Mr. flaniel Enblom, 10610 Valley View Road, representing th
e
E
n
b
l
o
m
E
s
t
a
t
e
,
stated that Welsh Construction had been keeping his family
w
e
l
l
i
n
f
o
r
m
e
d
o
f
the progress on this site. He stated that, in general, th
e
o
p
i
n
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
family was that this was a better building.
110f 109.
Motion was made by Cartner, seconded by Hallett, to recomm
e
n
d
t
o
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
Council, approval of the request for 7oning Oistmict Aand
m
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
1
-
2 toning District for an office/warehouse use on 5.42 ac
r
e
s
f
o
r
C
o
m
p
u
t
e
r
Dapot, bared on revised plans dated October 12, 1984,
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
t
h
e
reendations of the Staff Reports of Septe6ber 22, 1984
,
a
n
d
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
1
2
,
1984, with the following additions: I) tandscaping and
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
treatment for the property be amanded as reeramend ed b
y
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
S
t
a
f
f
a
t
the Planning Commission meeting of October 15, 1984;
a
n
d
2
)
A
n
i
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
Fthway hP located from the front of the be to the pathway to h
e
b
u
i
l
t
along Flying Cloud Drive, with another internal pathway con
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
soullswst (r)raer of the property, through the site to the in
t
e
r
n
a
l
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
system of the property.
lorjosen stated that he felt, if the plan changed substantially, the
propnuent sbould be required to return to the Planning Com
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
C
i
t
y
Coun(H1 for additional review. Torjesen stated that he
f
e
l
t
i
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
cle;-x to tlie proponen1s that the Planning Commissicn w
a
s
m
a
k
i
n
g
a
recomendaiion on a specific plan. For example, any cr.
a
n
g
c
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
strarkire afiecting thin availability of paring i.ouA req
u
i
r
e
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
rovieo by the Commission and founcil. Other CwInissiouers c
o
n
c
u
r
r
e
d
.
Gartner stated that she felt alv 'axtra" parking spaces s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
l
e
f
t
a
s
greon sparc', with the areas dasinnated as proof of parkin
g
f
o
r
t
h
e
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
plan. Hallett 09reed.
Motion rarried--5-0-0
D
Digigraphics
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 84-294
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE
COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted the Comprehensive
Nnicipiil Plan ("Plan"); and,
WHLREAS, the Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for relew
and cociaent; and,
WHEREAS, the proposal of Digigraphics Systems, Inc., for development of a
corporat headquarters for office, research, assembly, and storage uses requires the
ar iidn of the Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Eden Prairie,
nift:sota, hclel .,y proposes the amendment of the Plan as follows: approximately 5.75
acres located in the northeast quadrant of Valley View Road and Highway #169 be
miTdified from Di lice to Industrial.
AHOPIED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 6th day of November, 1984.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
Ai EST:
ilohn C. franc.; City Clod:
Perks, lice reat ion and 4slatura 1 RN ..ources. COM1111 SS i0r1
I;ob Lamliert , Director of' Cerium ty Service
s
I
T
A
L
-
Nortaillier 1, 1984
Supplementary Staff Report to the October
2
6
,
1
9
8
4
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Staff Report Regarding hi pi
lite Parks, llecreat ion anci Natural l;,.isour
c
e
s
C
c
a
m
i
l
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
r
e
v
i
e
w
t
h
i
s
v.i.a 1 in reg.ird.s to several censiiler;:tions
:
1. orelzuld ftruni:enmit Ordinance
2. Peite.,,trian Syst (in 11 and 'Frail Corridors
3. Vegetal ion Remov,-il and Preservation
4, I:elation of the St to to the City Pork a
n
d
O
p
e
n
S
y
m
c
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
59151 'tI)!,;.\ cd 0i1111 NANCE
Pape 3 of the OiTt ober 32 Planning Staff
R
e
p
o
r
t
o
u
t
l
i
n
e
s
h
o
w
t
h
i
s
s
i
t
e
i
s
a
f
f
e
c
t
e
d
by 1 0he illoreland i.mnapeiaont regnlat ions . Mt aclipa-int A of that report indi cat es
thala ir' inn of tly‘. building en. ('00.1011 -che sc.:bac:I:
roeS . Since that report 1:;:ti written, the develop
(
r
r
e
d
u
c
e
d
t
h
e
s
i
7
.
c
o
f
t
h
e
b
u
i
l
d
-
ing sl 1,11 ly; lan‘ever, between 40 and 70
f
e
e
t
o
f
the rOt end of the building still
i wi thin the I setback fren the eent ine of Nine,lti e Creek. lit the
October 76 slat': , the Planning Staff I oIl 'i to that they f
e
e
l
l
i
t
e
e
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
-
Ment the 0301 1110 of ho building is mit ega ed 11 ..0 fact that there is no
eneroacImical 01 bui d within approximat ivy :).00' of Nine-Mi le C
r
e
e
k
t
o
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
.
10 let, :ipproxir,at elyII nf coynci- uf the north side of the buildng,
ust
east of the tint otway, ("101) 011101. into the 150' setbeek and the
w
e
s
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
t
h
e
fl‘vdY, on the north side of the 1mi:din
g
,
i
s
r
i
g
h
t
i
t
t
h
e
1
8
0
'
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
.
Tht!'• 10.3 dcl Ct 1:11“1 in very di f 11(.1111 i levelop ii hoot encroaching into the
let bat 1, due to the al ignment of the (-reed threnr.h it o. The det"toPer ho
i 11,1 to a pre .cre.i 1 on ;:1e0 f opproN ir.:11c1y hal if the Ole I oca led on the
north and east side of the street • This pre
'
.
e
r
v
a
t
0
1
[
1
(
1
0
w
i
l
l
g
o
a
l
o
n
g
w
a
y
owa
ilia int i lying he 0.1tur:11 corr 1101 appearance of thi s sect ion of th
e
c
r
e
e
k
,
and shonld lie the nIt ona e for :it I h e . en,:ro..chrient into the shareland
setimed on the wei“ side of the cre e l,.
T15 .11 f. :,;11 91111 1 `,5 118
The 0e1' H1C1 11,e , 1 1 1•11)).1 :,1'.t 10 (0')',' 101,11 .1 5' con, ve t on the Lmst side of
tIm :Hilo:all. 1,7111 tile tt:.htt t'1 1 1 preVt0S ,-'ti
tle
CoH!.1...iiiII !rvvi, also reci ,ixiiond :!0' wide public 1101 casement
throo0 IIn na: th and ca. .1 of c'ilte.-I-111c Creel, t 11111
.
w
i
l
l
a
l
l
o
t
,
t o h o l l a w the el. e l l, Cloud Itr; ve
20610
south ;u (;t Valley View road, and eventually down to Smetana La
k
e
.
VECETATION RliMOVAL AND PRESERVATION
The October 21 , Planning Staff Repc.)rt outlines the fact that there are 356 tre
e
s
exce!-,!•, of 12" on the entire site; 104 will be saved. The 52 trees t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
be rciioced Will he replaced by 153 trees ; total 1 leg 521 cal i p
e
r
i
n
c
h
e
s
.
T
h
i
s
replacc;,ent far exceeds the normal requirement for a site of th
i
s
s
i
z
e
,
a
n
d
2,honld ptovide an adequate transition from the ercek corridor to the dev
e
l
o
p
e
d
15)51 ion of the site.
RELATION OE THE SITE TO PARK AND OPEN SPACE PROpiAm,
The City own!, ireporty that abuts the eastern 750 along the south
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f
.I inc of this site. This property was donated to the City for
p
a
r
k
a
n
d
o
p
e
n
s
p
a
c
e
purpvie:. and preservation of the creek corridor. The preservation area along the
creek, to the north as proposed in this property, will provide a continuous wo
o
d
e
d
natural charactur to the creek valley.
CA'A PAU FEES
The develo;,er pay the appropriate cash park fee based on 5.75 acres that is
twin re .;.oned prior to issuance of building permit.
The Col....unity Scivices Department recor.':mends approval of the Com
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
G
u
i
d
e
ylan tlruve ft om office to industrial, approval of the Planned Uni
t
.
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
District Review Amendment, with variances, and reconin:?, from R
u
r
a
l
t
o
1
-
2
P
a
r
k
for 5.75 acres subject to the October 26, 19S‘t Planning Staff Re
p
o
r
t
a
n
d
t
h
e
dd itona I recol:t,encla t ions of this November 1 Community be ices Stipp] "sent try
Report.
I ,V1 -4....)
•-;)
PROPOSF.D SITE
-VI /..%)
`k&
PUB K f
, (_( NrIr t r I --
TO.
FRCY :t:
DATE)
PROJECT:
RfflUtST:
Panning Comnission
Chris roger, Director of Planning
October 26, 1984
Digigraphics
Nnrtheast quadrant of Valley View Road and Highway f169
Welsh Construction
1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Office to Industrial
for 5.75 acres.
2. Planned Unit Development District Review Amendment for 60
acres with a variance for encroachment into the Shoreland
Management setback from Nine-Mile Creek.
3. Rezoning from Rural to 1-2 Park District Cor 5.75 acres to
allow construction of a office, manufacturing, and
warehouse building of 76,482 square feet.
_
The P1,..,w)in:! reviewed the
p-x:owsl at the October
15, Fq, op. The Planning
Rev 1 -•tn,0-R1 the Project to
the rrvi...ion so that
the ow uuld ydvsiCively fit to
the site.
The P l ft ii içi Lad concerns
with the ft T f trrrs to be
rcr.ovea 01 Ittp .-0.1t.h half of the
site. ...al IT- cHy in which thn
hilidlip lei e' Cia f..r.,ek and to
the !.! Mere WaS
developcqr
for i;n 10 t!;t ,
lognt l y Hu Shoreland
oi ;h.:. City (ode.
A r. rx Ds a n rr-o.
2 October 26, 1984
vi a
The1. 1 as provided an additional tree inventory of trees in excess of twelve
inOws is dinnnec occuring on the north half of the property which indicates that
the alna nerth and past of Nine-Mile Creek will he preservation area with a
co wI 11w nani:innt filed on the plat. The inventory of major trees in this area
shows that /8 trees in excess of twelve inches in diamnter will be saved. The
prenon ,mt alo indicates that south of the creek, approximately 52 trees in excess
of b;(,lve in diameter will be removed of 78 encoring south of the creek.
Therninre, el the total of approximately 156 trees in excess of 12 inches, 104 will
be stvyt. The f:2 trons to be removed total approximately 1,000 caliper inches and
the dovnleper has provided a plan to replace these trees inch per inch to the extent
that thnrn is area on the site to accorraodate the roplaccnent trees. The
dnvolnn-r h;,s provided a revised landscaping plan which illustrates 153 trees to
renlan th-H hnt. are to be removed, totalling 521 caliper inches of new trees.
Staff has reviewed this proposed landscaping plan, and Oile it may be possible to
crowd r.iorn inns dround the perimeter of the parking, it does not S(.'2M necessary in
order to pre.lide a transition from Nine-Mile Creek to the developed portion of the
site. It we torn: the City's landscape policy of providing one, 2-1/2-inch caliper
tree for every n -nT snnare feet of building area, 95, 2-1/2-inch trees would have to
be prnvied. ihis would translate to 237 caliper inches of trees that would
normily hn ruirnd on a commercial industrial site. liven if the Staff were to
discn,n1t si n: of the smLller stock trees that are plannPd on the site, we can easily
inA I./n..11 of 1145 caliper inches, which in itself, would he 70 per
cent '.hnve ntnn,a1 City landscaping requirement. The 521 inches, totalled by
Welh, ever 100 per cent above the normal requirement fern site of this
5170. 1;H:1 nn a proportionate basis, with tee Data, this approach to
repl.n.inn,!d. 0: rc‘cn, (nIns provide an adequate transition from Nine-Mile Creek to the
devnInvnl nnrion of this site and would significantly supplement. the approximate
five ncre ,., it c,,nservatien area north and east of Nine-Mile Creek.
The i
hn
snal1
the 1;n t LI
Ni..-r-Mft .
The r,
sUpieg
ire Ii v
Iii' ill,
i .
1111! !1:1Y1(!i
elevAio,Ii
t Ordinance requires that all buildings in the Industrial
):11 of 150 feet from the centerline of the crock. There is a
•nt on the east side of the building, however, this is mitigated by
os encroachment or building within approximately 200 feet of
, to the north.
on the site have been reduced significantly and the grade
Ninn-Mile Creek from the parking lot has been reduced from an
?./1 slope to 4/1 and 5/1 slopes.
nich ',ern originally proposed to wrap partially around the east
nit lin fairly visible from portions of Nine-Mile Creek have now
oly to the south side of the building and the office portion
m i n tort tier around the east and southeast ends of the
arca ,1 previously designated for dock high loadi ng d oors ,
-n redneed in square footaoe from 72,120 to 76,48? and the
l'Asically II? fret in dim..nsion to 10? in di me nsion to allow
building. This Iws allnwnd preservation of some
'voild the original concept.
+n , ,,it as a brick :Ind glass building on the west, north, and east
con._Tetim block on the south elevation. The mechanical equipment
Digigrdphics 3 October 26, 1984
should be screened with a material architecturally integral to the building.
SkMARY
The proprnont has responded to the Planning Dvirnission's concern regarding specific
trei;Ignt of the site through revisions to the plan and additional landscaping and
provision of information which shows a significaot preservation of trees north and
east of Nine-Mile Creek. Since this same policy of tree replacemcult was used with
the fee Data project, it would seem a. valid approach for this property. The
Planning Cumaission may wish to chose from one of the follcwing alternatives on this
project..
A. Pecw1lend approval of the Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Office to
Industrial approval of the P1 armed Unit Development District Review
[e dit, with variances, and rezoning from Rural to 1-2 Park for 5.75
acres subject to the following.
1. Revised plans submitted for the October 29, 1934, Planning
Ccomission reeling dated September 12, 1984, with revisions to be
datod October 26, 1934.
2. The area north and east of Nine-Mile Creek shall be either dedicated
to the City or preserved in an conservation easement to be granted to
the City of Eden Prairie prior to second reading.
3. Prior to grading, a construction limit snow fence must be
established around the wooded areas of the site to preserve trees
represented as being saved. Any trees lost during the construction
process proposed as being saved in the current plan must he replaced
on sitn through a calipor inch per caliper inch replacement. City
and Watershed District must be advised 18 hours prior to grading.
4. All wechancial equipent is to be screened with a material
intrically related to the building.
5. All parking and loading areas must he screened from public roads and
differing adjacent land use.
6. Nine-Mile Creek should he protected from erosion during and after
cnnstreetion ani: the graded adjacent to the creek must be
cmpletely rstored and revegetatod.
7. Provision of details of the cull it structure to to Nine-Mile Creek
to he roviewed by City inqineer.
p. The proja ..t could be approved as currently peoposed.
The project could be refueled to the preponent for further revision.
Planniny Cowrission
Midhiel D. Franzen, Senior Planner
Chris foyer, Director of Planning
peir. October 12, 1984
.1T03Lq: Diyigraphics
Northeast quadrant of Valley Viow Hood arid Highway #169
faTIICT/
Ilk M,„: lIchh Construction
II )IIHI: 1. Zoning District Change from Cemercial Regional to I-2 Park.
•Backoro3n1
lb i wi a (Oil hit 8) is part of a
60 -acre PI•olnori Unit. Development,
vtuiy aa'c wd by the Planning
!-nbru3;-y, 1004. This
sito r.r.opowd under the Plnned
Unit P's'oo3:.,iit for an Office/-
Indoridl tn , For appro;:iplately
/0,010 r3;03ro f ait of loud my area.
Thn Cd,p13133 ,sive Guide Plan in-
dicot3, 01. irc ow for this site.
Of lho (Y.'. a, it Ridge site,
only eldvoo u ;:3rn approved for
a Cowc3h3n3ive t-,nidH Plan Change--
OutIol A etch Site 1. Th2 propononts
did not r),:on.,t a Cop .orehensive
(iok:o Plan Chon ,[2,e for Out lot D at
th:11. icc, incn smiat.ific site
ds'vniny:;..nt. plow-, had not linen
poTorcd. A Pl e n d Halt Develop-
wnt. do..H.13tion for off ice/-
ii a rcqnostod and though
by thn Cc:::-micion, was
arprovedlv I ta City Council. The
pro,,,,nent will return at the October
11 5 Sal ng with a re(:npst for
(7F3iiVe Guide Plan Ch:tmlo,
Tho nxi3tW:chicchJ3•actor c3o host
c33 i IL3nHtiono1 area
1:1 Nine rile cr,ok. Nino
bIll Crec ila3:3 in a noiih-31nrly
Digigraphics 2 October 12, 1984
direction around the perimeter of the site. Adjancent to the creek, is lowland
vegetation inCluding birch, elm, aspoo, poplar, and other lowland shrubs. As the
land gets higher, away from the creek, there is upland vegetation, consisting
primarily of haldwoods, with oak as the dominant species. On this site, there are
three specific areas of oak concertrotioo. The northwest corner of the site
adjacent to proposed Flyino Cloud Crive, the central portion on a wooded knoll, and
the northeast corner of the site. A total of Y8 oak trees of 12-inch caliper size,
or greater, are located on-site. There are many oak trees of between 30-inch and 35-
inch caliper. The Planning and Engineering Staffs made a walking tour of this site
and found the site to be mostly wooded.
The site slopes in a westerly to easterly direction from a high point at
approximately elevation 890, to a low point adjacent to Nine Mile Creek at
elevation 840. In general terms, the site could be described as flat to gently
rolling, with the higher portions of the site adjacent to Flying Cloud Drive.
Land Use
When the Planned Unit Development Concept was being considered at the Planning
Comeiission, there was considerable discussion as to what would be the most
appropriate laad use for this site. Previous Staff Reports expressed reservations
relative to the inclusion of Ootlot D as a future industrial facility since specific
plans, for future development relative to grading, site planning, and architecture,
were WA ideetiHed. lb addition, the location of Outlet 0, adjacent to Nine mile
Creek in the lowlaod area provided a unique natural amenity more conducive to office
development rather than a large scale industrial development.
Land rice designations on a particular parcel of land are often determined by
location, surroundino land uses, and existing site conditions. Lee Data to the
north and thp Vantage properties to the south are planned for a considerable amount
of office use. The Wilson Ridge Rosiness Campus ens proposed primarily as an office
park. The local ion of this property, with proximity to Flying Cloud Drive on
Hiqheay 0-69 , mdes this site easily accessible to roads which can accommodate a
significant amount of traffic, typically associated with office developments. The
natural Idy of the ldnd soegests that doe to the sloping of the property from a high
point adjacent lo tlying Cloud Drive towards Nine Mile Creek, an office use may be
more appropriate. This becomes even one apparent, given the total number of
twelve-inch ealirdr oak trees on site, aod Lne extent of massing they make up on
the property. lhere are open space and buildable areas, which could be used for
building developeent in such a way that the unique natural features could be
retaind. Nine Mi;e Crook alsr offers pldiv,ino Vi04S for workers in an office park.
The natural features of the land would seooPst a multi-story office building because
of th.! doveleprit ;Imitations of the property.
Pi n
The situ plan involves the comlruction of a 78,120 square foot office,
manufdtiorine, drd warehouse buildino. There is a two-story office element planned
in HI , nJetrv.ett corner of the heildino. adjacent to Flyioo Cloud Drive.
AporoeioJtely 35,(tII) scolare feet, or /II , pec coot of the building, is proposed for
offite
!,-1P at of the site will he intensely dpveloped, with the balance
of If Ion acre site dovoIed as a scenic easement in order to protect wildlife,
veoetotion, and inteority of Nine Mile Creek.
Digigraphics 2 October 12, 1984
direction around the perimeter of the site. Adjancent to the creek, is lowland
vegetaJon including birch, elm, aspen, poplar, and other lowland shrubs. As the
land eets higher, away from the creek, there is upland vegetation, consisting
primarily of hardwoods, with oak as the derrioant species. On this site, there are
three specific areas of oak concentration. The northwest corner of the site
adjacent to proposed Flying Cloud Drive, the central portion on a wooded knoll, and
the northeast corner of the site. A total of if; oak trees of 12-inch caliper size,
or greatdoi, are located on-site. There are many yak trees of between 30-inch and 36-
inch caliper. The Planning and Engineering Staffs made a walking tour of this site
and found the site to be mostly wooded.
The site slopes in a westerly to easterly direction from a high point at
approximately elevation 890, to a low point adjacent to Nine Mile Creek at
elevation tei0. In general terms, the site could be described as flat to gently
rolling, with the higher portions of the site adjacent to Flying Cloud Drive.
Land Use
When the Planned Unit Development Concept was being considered at the Planning
Cormission, there was considerable discussion as to Oat would be the most
appropriate land use for this site. Previous Staff Reports expressed reservations
relative to the inclusion of Outlot D as a future industrial facility since specific
plans, for future development relative to grading, site planning, and architecture,
were not identified. In addition, the location of Cutlet 0, adjacent to [lice Mile
Creek in the lowland area provided a unique natural amenity more conducive to office
development rather than a large scale industrial development.
Land use designations on a particular parcel of land are often determined by
location, serroending land uses, and existing site conditio1s. Lee Data to the
north aed the Vantage properties to the south arc planned for a considerable amount
of office use. 11-ie Wilson Ridge Business Campus was proposed primarily. as an office
park. The location of this property, with proximity to Flying Cloud Drive on
Miebuoy ;':I69. makes this site easily accessible to roads which can accomodate a
significant - amnunt of traffic, typically essociated with office developments. The
natural lay of the laud suggests that due ID the sloping of the property from a high
point adjacent it flying Cloud Drive towards Nine Nilo Creek, an office use may be
more appropriate. This becomes even mare apparent, given the total number of
twelve-inch caliper oak trees on- site, and the intent of massing they make up on
the property. There are ifeen space and buildedfle areas, which could be used for
building development in such a way that Ole unique natural features could be
retained. Nine Wile Creek also offers pleasing views for workers in an office park.
The dalural feetures of the land would sufg.v.:1 a multi-story office building because
of the developmeoi limitations of the property.
Site P1--n
The site plan involves the consiTuLtion of a 78,120 square foot office,
manotec!forine, :did warehouse building. Thre is a two-story office element planned
in the nor:iwest career of the buildine, adjacent to Flying Cloud Drive.
Apprexiimiely 3f,Of0 sedare feet, or lib per ceef of the building, is proposed for
usago.
Approxieel:dly S-3/f atees of the site will be intensely developed, with the balance
of I s todeoicre site devoted as a scenic easement in order to protect wildlife,
veedlaice, dnd integrity of Nine Mile Creek.
i1,1
0;0u] dohics 3 October 12, 1984
The sme is being developed at an overall floor area ratio of approximately 15 per
cent, led upon approxiemtely 10.83 acres of land. Floor area ratio based upon 5.5
asres cf dcv(ilepal>le land, is 0.30. A large buildirg footprint and expanse of hard
surface area suggest that this site is being very intensely developed.
"ark ion
For a building of this size, based upon the proponents breakdown of office,
manufacturing, and warehouse usage, a total of 234 parking spaces would be required.
Ito prupeNent is providing for 223 parking spaces. There is adequate space
availa5le for the eleven additional spaces required.
Manacjement Reculations
Since tha property is adjacent to Nine Mile Creek, provisions of the Shoreland
kanaument Ordinance will apply to all land within 300 feet of the Normal Ordinary
high Rater mark of the creek. This means that the majority of this site falls under
Shorelaad regulations. Since Nine Mile Creek is designated as a General Development
Rater, the -stllowing regulations will apply: the minimum lot size must be five
acres; thai minimum width at the building line must he 150 feat; the minimum width at
the Ordicary High Water Mark must be 150 feet; and the minimum setback from the
Ordinary High Water ?dark must he 150 feet. Attachment A indicates tha amount of the
Imildliah chit!: eacreachos into the 150-foot Shoreland stiback requirement. Parking
is permitted within the 150-foot setback area to a minimum of 50 feet from the high
water mark of the creek, provided the parking is done in a sensitive way that
ihisihets.
Cradinq
A eow,Herahle amount of site grading work is proposed. The higher elevations of
the site will bc cut to fill the lower areas of the site adjacent to Nine Mile
Creek, the buildlsig floor elevation and proposed grades on site means that 75 per
cent of the exkting oak trees on the developable petition of the site will he lost
due to &ocloPc ,'nt. To develop a grading plan, with minimal tree loss would require
that th bchldihg be choncjed in concept to provide either a reduction in building
sguara fo..,toge, or a smaller building footprint, which would allow for more areas of
the sile hi rcmain as natural open space. In addition, a different configuration of
the building, parnaps wrapping around the central oak -wooded knoll, would also
retain more trees on site.
Prepelogt show 160 and 110-foot long retaining walls along the oast property line,
aich vary hetwoon four and fourteen feet in height. Ihe retaining walls are
propeed in order to provide enough room for manueverine of loading vehicles behind
the hoilditel, and to provide room for site access. A 180-foot retaining wall is
prepoihid along fhP west property line between four to eight feet in height to
provide r1 for parking and to save trees. Since a col6idarable amount of cut is
propes ,:j helr the!4, oak trees, Staff expects that thPse trees will not survive for a
9,Th q len:h of 1 slate a good portion of the roo -,.!, will he removed. The use of
the rehiHml 1 sug,:estt, lit the site plan ho to ti0t. An alternative
tehiliot nd qrating plan, may eliminate the need for the retaining wall.
Digipraphics 4 October 12, 1984
Utilti
San:er end water service can he provided to this site by connection to future sewer
and water lines in Flying Cloud Drive.
A storm water run-off plan has been submitted, which directs the majority of the
stoma wit-r run-oft toward two outlets adjacent to Nine Mile Creek. It will be
extrcmaly important that the detdils for the outlet controls are designed in a
sensitive maoner, which will not adversely impact the creek in a visual way, and,
also, to provide for an appropriate amount of erosion and siltation control such
that water will be as clean as possible when it enters the creek. The proponent
should provide a detailed storm water run-off plan for review by the City Engineer.
The landscape plan denotes the extent of existing wooded vegetation to be retained.
lhe majority of the existing natural vegetation to be saved, will be within the
scenic easement, on the opposite side of Nine Milo Creek. There will still be
subatantial oak tree loss in the developable portions of the site. Proposed
plantings are at minimum size. Given the silt: of the building and the extent of
Lardasurfated area coverage, Staff suggests that the planting materials be increased
in size to break op the hard-surfaced areas and for hatter scale with the building.
Parting aeeas will he visible from Nine Mile Crook and it. will be important that
plantings be of sufficient size and depth to provide for screening. Staff
rocomanids that the proposed plantings be supplemented with indigenous plant
material to provide for appropriate transition from the lowland vegetation, adjacent
to the croak, to the upland vegetation proposed, as part of the landscape plan.
This is a similar approach to lowland planting design that . was used on the Ryan
Office Building on Highway t5, in which Staff had recommended that substantial
lowland vegetation he planted as a transitional element, to include poplar, ash,
cranberry, and dogwood varieties. The use of indigenous materials would help the
hui lb iriq and parking areas blend into the natural site. Parting areas will be
visible fro:n Flying Cloud 11CO,T, since the roadway is approximately 15 feet above
mast parking areas. Additional coniferous plantings within the front yard setback
would help provide for more effective screening.
Architte ,nre
The building is proposed to be constructed primarily of mason-laid face brick and
glass for the office area:, which will be visible from Nine Mile Crook and Flying
Cloud Drive. building elevat ions for the roar portions of the building have not
been provided at this time; however, Welsh buildings have used a different, but
compatible huilding material. The proposed buildinn is long and linear. A small
portion of the building will he a two-story elemant, which provides for an
iFri eresting vertical relief for a portion of the building facing Flying Cloud Drive.
Additional maltiple story elamenta on other portiohs of the building would help
hr -eat up tic- overall linear nature of the hdilding.
Cnn,
The exist tea nattoal conditions of the .ito snanest appropriate buildable areas. It
also itIntif Hs areas vdlich n We worthy of prosarvatioa, such a: Nino Mile Creek, and
tLo (1:11, trees on site. The largo building foatprint and extent. of
on-larao nalking wetts contrary to the natatral features of the site. Approximately
2ri'?;,"
Digigraphics 5 October 12, 1984
25 per cent of the oak trees will remain, and the site is being leveled to
accorsiodaie the large building footprint. There are alternative ways of developing
this site in a' sensitive way, which might include a reduction in total square
footage, a different configuration of the building, •or a smaller building footprint.
Previous Staff Reports prepared at the time of Planned Unit Development Review of
this area suogested that this site would be most appropriately developed for an
office use because of the unique natural features and proximity to Nine Mile Creek.
The prcponent is treating a portion of the site in a sensitive way by providing for
a scenic easement across nearly half of the site. The developable portion of the
site is being developed too intensely since there is considerable tree loss, massive
grading, and extensive use of retaining walls.
The building has an office appearance adjacent to Nine Mile Creek; however, the
buildieg form would benefit from additional two-story elements, which would help
break up the overall length of the building. Portions of the loading facilities
would also be visible from Nine Mile Creek in the northeast corner of the site. A
different building configuration, which eliminates the loading facilities, or a
screening of these facilities, will be necessary.
Staff would recommend the development plans be returned to the proponent for
revisions based on the following site developmeet guidelines:
1. Apply for a Comprehensive Guide Plan change and provision of a narrative
with supportive documentation for such a change.
2. The majority of oak trees on site should be saved. .
3. The landscape plan should be modified to include additional coniferous trees
to screen parking areas from Flying Cloud Drive, and additional indigenous
lowland vegetation to provide a transitional area between Nine Mile Creek
and the developable area on site.
4. Minimization of the use of retaining walls on site.
5. Modification of the building form to break up the overall length of the
building with additional stories.
6. Compliance with all requirements of the Shoreland Management Ordinance.
7. Provision of details of the outlet structures into Purgatory Creek for
review by the City Engineer.
lir .
, "; in - ,.--
(
(1/1 --;f-)
, I i
/ ,
' f i ,
1..rtegELAND 'ar-T:Sise-r< n
•• A
ST
CENTER OF CREEK
\\ I! ,...---------:---1-__ 1
.....
...----------11 -- ------,,,‘' ‘,`? 4, ,i5. 1 r7',.. ( -`••.,k • , , , .c
r
., •N 7,------..,„, , '
i ., ''-•,,, tnS' •, I : t"--", ,t 71
t'' .,
i. /,' ', -. li ':: :1 i,•:--- 1
t1c
,,,n,,,i
- ' ' V f ---.; 'l
n
A,"
rsr, A nth. Ir• nt AM
Planning Connission Minutes 11 October 15, 1984
D. DIGIGRAPHICS SYSTEMS CORPORATION, by Welsh Construction. Request
for Planned Unit Development District Amendment of 60.85 acres and
Zoning District Change from Rural to I-2 for 5.75 acres for a
corporate headquarters, office, research, assembly, storage
facility. Location: Northeast quadrant of Valley View Road and
Highway #169. A public hearing.
Mr. Dennis Doyle, Welsh Construction, reviewed the site plan with the
Planning Commission in context with the overall Wilson Ridge Planned Unit
Development, explaining how it fit within the approved plan. Mr. Paul Dunn,
Welsh Construction, reviewed specific details of the proposed site plan with
the Planning Commission. Mr. Dunn stated that they had reviewed this site
and its potential as an office site against several factors. It had been
their conclusion that the site was not best suited for a strictly office use
based upon several factors including:
1. Premiere office sites enjoy good access. This site is not easily
accessed.
2. Premiere office sites generally require good visibility. This site
is located back away from the Highway Q69 visibility and is not in
clear vision of Valley View Road due to forestation of the property.
3. Office sites are generally located near other office sites. This
land use would be surrounded on the north and east by other
industrial uses and on the south by the Enblom property. To the
west would be a preservation area. Based upon this, their
.211?1
I ;doing Commission Minutes 12 October 15, 1984
conclusion had been that this would not be a site with other similar
. land uses surrounding it.
4. Traffic generated by an office building would be higher than that
generated by the type of structure proposed for Digigraphics.
Mr. Dunn stated that, with these factors in mind, the site had been
considered by the Wilson Ridge Joint Venture for a use such as Digigraphics
Corporate Headquarters. Mr. Dunn stated that the site was over ten acres in
size, and that he felt the amount of preservation area given ought to allow
the proponents to cut down some of the trees on this site. He added that it
was his understanding that the City could waive the right to restrict the
shoreland requirement for the property.
Mr. Vince McCondelle, Digigraphics, stated that their building was currently
located in Minnetonka. They were an information system business, dealing in
microproducts, and circuits.
Mr. Darryl Anderson, architect for proponents, reviewed the architectural
features of the site with the Planning Commission.
Planner Franzen reviewed the findings and recommendations of the October 12,
1984, Staff Report with the Commission.
Schuck asked if proponents had considered use of underground parking for the
structure. Mr. Dunn responded that the costs of underground parking
facilities were prohibited. Schuck stated that he questioned whether this
was type of project envisioned with the approvals of the original Planned
Unit Development for the Wilson Ridge Joint Venture property. He stated
that plans shown, in his opinion, did not provide justification for as much
tree removal and loss of natural features as requested by the proponents.
Chairman Bearman asked how many acres within the City were available for
industrial development of the type proposed by Digigraphics. Staff
responded that it would be between 300 to 400 acres worth of property.
r'earman asked if this project met the criteria and concerns regarding Outlot
D of the Wilson Ridge Planned Unit Development. He added that he felt the
project was too large for the site and overpowered the site features.
Chairman Dearman stated that he felt the site needed to be treated with more
sensitivity due to the natural features inherant to the property.
Schuck stated that he knew Digigraphics was a growing company and that, even
though they were only using a portion of the building at this time, the
potential for growing into the remainder of the building was likely good.
Ho,..ever, he added that he felt it would be difficult fur the Comnission to
approve the remainder of the building en a speculative basis without knowing
more details involving the eventual needs of Digigraphics.
Torjesen stated that Staff had im ,ntioa.,,,t in their report several ways in
whi,-h this building cool.' be alteroj to preserve more trees on the site.
Nr. Dunn stated that he felt the site OAS to treed for purposes of
kyle ii; it to its hinhest and best use. Planner tinier sungested that an
appl'opriate alternotive For th:!h i thang as corrently proposed woold be to
trod the site such the saw: as the tee Data site. Lee Data, he explained,
2 11
Plaoo,n9 Commission Minutes 13 October 15, 1984
had removed a wooded knoll because they were unable to accommodate it in
their . site plan; however, they had replaced the existing trees of over
twelve inches in diameter, caliper inch for caliper inch, with new trees of
smaller diameter throughout the site. Planner Enger stated that perhaps
proponents could plant more natural vegetation towards the direction of the
creek to make the building blend in more with the natural site features. He
also suggested that the loading docks could be decreased in number and
better screened.
Hallett stated that he would like to see proponents work something out which
would be less dense and which would save more trees.
Torjesen stated that the natural features of the site seem to indicate that
this particular use and design of structure for this site was inappropriate.
Chairman Beaman stated that he felt the City needed to be cautious in
consideration of the use for this site in that should the site turn into a
more office-type use with the expansion of Digigraphics, or another user,
the amount of space needed for parking would increase to five spaces per
1,000 gross square feet of floor area.
Mr. McConnelle stated that he did agree with many of the suggestions and
observations of the Staff and the Planning Commission. He stated that he
would he willing to spend time with Staff to work out the questions of
redesign and preservation further.
Torjescn stated that perhaps it would not be in the City's best interest to
allow development of sites such as this with so many features requiring
preservation.
Hallett stated that he felt the site was too densely developed.
Schuck stated that he felt this was an excellent site and should be treated
with More sensitivity.
Torjesen stated that he felt proponents should explore alternative methods
of dcveloping the site without as much grading and tree cutting.
Schuck stated that the City, in his opinion, was trying to be careful about
monitoring development and to make certain it would be appropriate not only
now, but in the future for Eden Prairie. he stated that he felt there were
many other places in the ceimnity for the small business to find rental
areas and therefore, the Digigraphics proposal for rental units may be
inappropriate in this location.
Chairman Beaman asked if Diqi7raphicis felt the multiple tenant of their
site and building plan was necessary at this time.
Mr. Peter Inblcmi, 10610 011ey View Road, stated that many of the trees had
alroady heon remov al from tie site. P0 stated that he swtild like to see the
sine of the building diminished.
N I% Pen lmt,lrn , ]Oh10 Valley Vivi.' Pitt, stated that he felt as many tries as
possit,lc :didald be saved. iie statoit that ho did not have any difficulty at
1 !ming Commission Minutes 14 October 15, 1984
all with the type of use proposed, but felt that preservation of the treed
area and the Nine-Mile Creek area should be a foremost concern.
MOTION:
Motion was made by Torjesen, seconded by Gartner, to continue the public
hearing to the October 29, 1984, Special Planning Commission meeting to
allow proponent to revise the plans according to the recommendations of the
Staff Report of October 12, 1984, and the recomnendations of the Planning
Comnission from the October 15, 1984, Planning Conmission.
Motion carried--6-0-0
was not all in use as office. lhe t.irufmres hid been designed with
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John Franc, Finance Director
DATE: November 2, 1984
RE: Preliminary Approval on IDB's Autumn Projects
(Digigraphics) - $3,800,000 - Resolution No. 84-303
This project was heard earlier on the agenda. Digigraphics
intends to initially occupy about 54% of the building. The
project will be owned by Dennis Doyle and George Welsh and
leased to Digigraphics and others. The partners expect to
have 15 to 20% equity. Resolution No. 84-303 is attached
for your consideration. This resolution does not allocate
any of the citv's "cap" in 1984 or any year thereafter.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA
Application for
Industrial Development Bond Project Financing
I. APPLICANT:
a. Business Name - Autumn Properties
b. Business Address - 11200 West 78th Street, Eden Prairie, Minnesota
c. Business Form (corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, etc.) -
Partnership
d. State of Incorporation or ogranization - Minnesota
e. Authorized Representative - Dennis J. Doyle
f. Phone - (612) 944-5810
2. NAME(S) AND ADDRESSES OF MAJOR STOCKHOLDERS OR PRINCIPALS:
a. Dennis J. Doyle
Randall Avenue
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
b. George Welsh
Eden Prairie, Minnesota
3. GIVE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF NATURE OF BUSINESS, PRINCIPAL PRODUCTS, ETC.
Real estate developer, owner, property manager, broker, and contractor.
4. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
78,500+ square feet office/warehouse headquarters/research facility for
Digioraphics Systems Corp. with excess space to be occupied by other busi-
nesses until Digigraphics grows into the whole building.
a. Location and intended use: 7277 Flying Could Drive - Outlot E - Wilson
Ridge Business Campus. Use - office, research, storage of businesses.
b. Present ownership of project site: Wilson Ridge Joint Venture.
C. Names and address of architect, engineer, and general contrator:
Architect: The Design Partnership
124 North First Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Engineer: J.A. Jameson Associates
905 Jefferson Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55102
General Contractor: Welsh Construction Corp.
11200 West 78th Street
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
5. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST FOR:
Land
Construction Contracts
Equipment Acquisition &
Installation
Architectural and Engineering
Legal
Interest during Construction
Bond Reserve
Contingencies
Loan Fees
Other
Total
$ 650,000
2,741,000
49,000
30,000
70,000
90,000
120,000
50,000
$ 3,800,000
* 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 - $3,800,000
b. Proposed date of sale of bond - 12/1/84
c. Length of bond issue and proposed maturities - 30 year term, with
"call provision" in 10 years.
d. Proposed original purchaser of bonds - Unionmutual Life Insurance
Company.
e. Name and address of suggested trustee - Unionmutual Life Insurance Co.
2211 Congress Street
Portland, ME 04122
f. Copy of any agreement between Applicant and original purchaser - N/A
h. Descrihe nature and amount of any permanent financing in addition to
bond financing - None.
-2-
2 q
BUSINESS PROFILE -
Vista Properties is a partnership associated with the principals of Welsh
Construction Corp. and Welsh Companies, Inc. Information below relates
generally to Welsh.
a. Are you located in the City of Eden Prairie? Yes
b. Number of employees in Eden Prairie? 30+'
i. Before this project: 30+
ii. After this project? Approximately 200 permanent jobs will be
created by this project, all new to Eden Prairie.
c. Approximate annual sales - $20 million +
d. Length of time in business: 7 years
In Eden Prairie: 1 year
e. Do you have plants in other locations? If so, where?
Welsh relocated to Eden Prairie from Edina in December, 1983.
Digigraphics is currently located in Minnetonka and Bloomington and
will consolidate all operations in Eden Prairie upon completion of this
project.
f. Are you engaged in international trade: No, Welsh is not. Digi-
graphics will be engaged in international trade.
8. OTHER INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT(S):
a. List the name(s) and location(s) of other industrial development
project(s) in which the Applicant is the owner or a "substantial user"
of the facilities or a "related person' within the meaning of Section
103(b)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code:
Office Buildings
11200 West 78th Street *
11000 West 78th Street
Eden Prairie, MN
Bryant Lake Business Center
Market Place Drive
Edon Prairie, MN
* Only project financed with I.D.R. Bonds.
-3-
b. List all cities in which the Applicant has requested industrial revenue
development financing. Eden Prairie
c. Detail the status of any request the Applicant has before any other
city for industrial development revenue financing. None.
d. List ally city in which the Applicant has been refused industrial reve-
nue financing. None.
e. List any city (and the project name) where the Applicant has acquired
preliminary approval to proceed but in which final approval authorizing
the financing has been denied. None.
f. If Application has been denied industrial development revenue financing
in any other city as identified in (d) or (e), specify the reason(s)
for the denial and the name(s) of appropriate city officials who have
knowledge of the transaction. N/A
9. NAMES AND ADDRESS OF:
a. Underwriter (If public offering). N/A
b. Private Placement Purchaser (If private placement)
Unionmutual Life Insurance Co.
2211 Congress Street
Portland, Maine
i. If lender will not commit until City has passed its preliminary
resolution approving the project, submit a letter from proposed
lender that it has an interest in the offering subject to
appropriate City approval and approval of the.Commissioner of
Securities.
See attached letter.
c. Bond Counsel - Dorsey and Whitney
First Bank Place East
ATTN: Jerry Mahoney
d. Corporate Counsel - Steve Davis
4114 IDS Center
Minneapolis, Minnesota
e. Accountant - Mel Harris
10. WHAT IS YOUR TARGET DATE FOR:
a. Construction start - 11/21/84
b. Construction completion - 5/1/84
-4-
ORTHilk INFORMATION CONTACT:
ire undersigned Applicant understands that the approval
o
r
d
i
s
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
b
y
t
h
e
City of Eden Prairie for Industrial Development bond
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
expresOy or impliedly constitute any approval, var
i
a
n
c
e
,
o
r
w
a
i
v
e
r
o
f
a
n
y
p
r
o
-
vision or requirement relating to any zo
n
i
n
g
,
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
,
o
r
o
t
h
e
r
r
u
l
e
o
r
o
r
d
i
-
nance of the City of Eden Prairie, or any other l
a
w
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
t
o
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
included in this project.
11. ZONING - TO BE COMPLETED BY THE CITY PLAN
N
I
N
G
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
a. Property is zoned -
b. Present zoning (is) (is not) correct for
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
u
s
e
.
c. Zoning application received on September
1
1
,
1
9
C
4
f
o
r
1
-
2
w
h
i
c
h
i
s
correct for the intended use.
d. Variances required -
City Planner
-5-
RESOLUTION NO.
3o.3
RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE AUTHORIZATION AND
ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS OF THE CITY UNDER
MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 474, FOR THE
PURPOSE OF FINANCING A PROJECT THEREUNDER;
GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE PROJECT
AND AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION BY THE CITY
TO THE MINNESOTA ENERGY AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the Council) of
the City of Eden Prairie, Hennepin County, Minnesota
(
t
h
e
City), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The Legislature of the State of Minnesota in
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474, as amended (the Act
)
,
h
a
s
found and declared that the welfare of the State req
u
i
r
e
s
active promotion, attraction, encouragement and develo
p
m
e
n
t
o
f
economically sound industry and commerce through gov
e
r
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
acts to prevent, so far as possible, emergence of bl
i
g
h
t
e
d
lands and areas of chronic unemployment; has authoriz
e
d
municipalities to issue revenue bonds to finance, in
w
h
o
l
e
o
r
in part, the cost of the acquisition, construction,
reconstruction, improvement and betterment of projects
,
including any properties, real or personal, used or us
e
f
u
l
i
n
connection with a revenue producing enterprise engaged
i
n
a
n
y
business; and has authorized municipalities to enter
i
n
t
o
"revenue agreements," as defined in the Act, with any
p
e
r
s
o
n
,
firm, or public or private corporation or federal or s
t
a
t
e
governmental subdivision or agency (the Contracting Pa
r
t
y
)
providing for the payment by the Contracting Party of
a
m
o
u
n
t
s
sufficient to provide for the prompt payment of princ
i
p
a
l
o
f
and interest on the revenue bonds.
1.02. It has been proposed that the City issue its
revenue .bonds, pursuant to the authority granted by t
h
e
A
c
t
,
i
n
an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $3,800,00
0
,
o
r
s
u
c
h
lesser amount as may be necessary, to finance costs o
f
acquisition of land within the City and the construct
i
o
n
a
n
d
equipping thereon of an approximately 78,000 square
f
o
o
t
o
f
f
i
c
e
showroom and manufacturing facility (the Project) to
b
e
o
w
n
e
d
by Autumn Properties, a partnership to be formed unde
r
t
h
e
l
a
w
s
of the State of Minnesota and in which George Welsh a
n
d
D
e
n
n
i
s
Doyle will he general partners (the Borrower) and lea
s
e
d
t
o
Digigraphics Systems Corporation, a Minnesota corpora
t
i
o
n
,
a
n
d
other tenants. The Project is to be located on Outlo
t
E
i
n
t
h
e
Wilson Ridge Business Campus, 7277 Flying Cloud Driv
e
,
i
n
t
h
e
2 (H
City. The Borrower will agree to pay the City amounts
surficient to pay promptly the principal of and interest on the
revenue bonds, and will agree to cause the Project to be
completed.
1.03. The City has been advised that conventional,
comnercial 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 scope of the Project or the economic
feasibility of operating the Project would be significantly
reduced, and that but for the aid of municipal financing, and
its resulting low borrowing costs, the Project would not be
undertaken.
Section 2. Public Hearing.
2.01. As required by Section 474.01, Subdivision 7b,
of the Act and Section 103(k) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1954, as amended, this Council held a public hearing on the
proposal to undertake and finance the Project. Notice of the
time and place of the hearing, stating the general nature of
the Project and an estimate of the principal amount of bonds to
be issued to finance the Project, was published at least once
not less than fifteen (15) days nor more than thirty (30) days
before the date fixed for the hearing, in the official
newspaper of the City and a newspaper of general circulation of
the City. A draft copy of the proposed application to the
Minnesota Energy and Economic Development Authority, together
with all attachments and exhibits thereto, was available for
public inspection following the publication of Such notice at
the place and times set forth in the notice.
2.02. All parties who appeared at the public hearing
were given an opportunity to express their views with respect
to the proposal to undertake and finance the Project. This
Council has heard and considered the views expressed at the
public hearing, including the written comments, if any, filed
with the City Finance Director/Clerk before the date of the
hearing, and the information submitted to the City by the
Borrower.
Section 3. Approvals and Authorizations.
3.01. On the basis of information given the City to
date, and the views expressed at the public hearing, it is
found and determined that the Project furthers the purposes
stated in Section 474.01 of the Act, and that it would be in
the best interests of the City to issue its industrial
development revenue bonds under the provisions of the Act to
fineiicn costs of the Project in an amount not to exceed
$3,800,000 (the Bonds).
)r)
3.02. The Project and the issuance of the bonds for
ich purpose are hereby given preliminary approval, subject to
de ,:-,ignation of funds by the City of funds from the City's
entitlement allocation pursuant to Minnesota Laws 1984, Chapter
582. The Bonds shall not be issued until the Project has been
approved by the Minnesota Energy and Economic Development
Authority, as Provided by the Act, and until the City and the
Borrower have agreed upon the details of the Bonds and
provisions for their payment.
3.03. If the Bonds are issued and sold, the City will
enter into a lease, mortgage, direct or installment sale
contract, loan agreement, take or pay or similar agreement,
secured or unsecured, satisfying the requirements of the Act
(the Revenue Agreement) with the Borrower. The amounts
payable by the Borrower to the City under the Revenue Agreement
will be sufficient to pay the principal cf, interest and
redemption Premium, if any, on the Bonds as and when the same
shall become due and payable.
3.04. The Borrower has agreed to pay directly or
through the City any and all costs incurred by the City in
connee;.ion with the Project whether or not. the Project is
approved by the Minnesota Energy and Economic Development
Authority; whether or not the Project is carried to completion;
and whether or not the Bonds or Revenue Agreement and all other
operative instruments are executed.
3.05. The adoption of this resolution.does not
corn:titute a guarantee or a firm commitment that the City will
issue the Bonds as requested by the Borrower. The City retains
the right in its sole discretion to withdraw from participation
and accordingly not issue the Bonds should the City at any time
prior to the issuance thereof determine that it is in the best
interest of the City not to issue the Bonds or should the City,
Borrower or any other parties to the transaction be unable to
reach agreement as to the terms and conditions of any of the
documents required for the transaction.
3.06. In accordance with the Act, the Mayor and City
Finneco Director/Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to
nuLmit the proposal for the Project to the Minnesota Energy and
Ecen ,Imic Development Authority for approval, The Mayor, City
Finance Director/Clerk, City Attorney and other officers,
employees and agents of the City, in conjunction with Bond
Counnel, are hereby authoricd to provide the Department with
any yeciminary information necesry for this purpose, and the
City Attorney is authorized to initiate and assist in the
preparation of such documents as may be appropriate to the
Project.
-3-
3.07. The City will cause the Borrower to comply with
all of the provisions of the Act, including Section 474.01,
Subdivision 8, thereof, in the issuance of the Bonds and the
financing of the Project.
3.08. The City's entitlement allocation for the year
1984, pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Laws 1984,
Chapter 582 (the Act), is $9,239,314, all of which has been
previously committed by the City. Consequently, nothing herein
shall be construed as obligating the City to provide the
Project with any portion of its 1984 entitlement allocation.
Further, nothing herein shall be construed as obligating the
City to provide an entitlement allocation for any year
subsequent to 1984. Additionally, the preliminary approval of
the City expressed herein is subject to the condition that on
or by March 31, 1985 the City and the Borrower shall have
agreed to mutually acceptable terms and conditions of the Bonds
and of the other instruments and proceedings relating to the
Bonds and their issuance and sale. If the events set forth
herein do not take place within the time set forth above, or
any extension thereof, and the Bonds are not sold within such
time, this resolution shall expire and be of no further
effect. This resolution is intended to constitute "official
action" within the meaning of Section 1.103-8(a)(5)(iii) of the
Income Tax Regulations so as to permit costs of the Project
paid or incurred after the date hereof to qualify as eligible
costs to be financed from the proceeds of the Bonds, if the
Project should receive an allocation pursuant to the Act.
Section 4. Special Obligations.
In all events, it is understood, however, that the
Bonds shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal
or equitable, upon any property of the City except the Project,
if it becomes the property of the City, and from the revenues
received from the Project and property pledged to the payment
thereof, and shall not constitute a debt of the City.
Section 5. Effective Date.
This resolution shall be effective immediately upon
its final adoption.
-4-
211;
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on
1984.
Wolfgang H. Fenzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Franc, City Finance
Director/Clerk
(SEAL)
-5-
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 84-295
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CITY WEST BUSINESS CENTER PHASES III AND IV
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT AMENDMENT
TO THE CITY WEST PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for
the Planned Unit Development (POD) of certain areas located within the City; and,
WHEREAS, the City West Business Center Phases III and IV is considered a
proper amendment to the City West Planned Unit Development Concept; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the
request of Ryan Construction for POD Concept Amendment approval to the City vest
Planned Unit Development for City West Business Center Phases III and IV and
recommended approval of the POD Concept Amendment to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on November 6, 1984;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City West Business Center Phases III and IV PUD Concept
Amendment, being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and legally
described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a
part hereof.
2. That the City Council grants PUD Concept Amendment approval to the
City West Planned Unit Development Concept as outlined in the
revised application materials for the City West Business Center
Phases III and IV, dated October 23, 1984.
3. That the PUD Concept Amendment meets the recommendations of the
Planning Commission dated October 29, 1984.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 6th day of November, 1984.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
T;11.-tel-E-1 :1" €7.--CliFtTECHT -
24.1 0)(-)
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 184-296
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF CITY WEST BUSINESS CENTER,
PHASES III & IV,
FOR RYAN CONSTRUCTION
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of City West Business Center, Phases III & IV, for Ryan
Construction, dated September 9, 1984, consisting of 12.63 acres into two lots, 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
, 1984.
day of
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John 0. Frano, City Clerk
IN REPORT
TO. Planning Comnission
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
October 26, 1984
City West Business Center, Phase III and IV
North of Shady Odk Road, West of City West Parkway
Ryan Construction
Anderson Incorporated
1. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 15.91 acres.
2. Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District
Change from Office to 1-2 Park for 15.91 acres with a front
yard setback variance to 35 feet and increase allowable
office space in the industrial district to 75 per cent.
FROM:
lpfOUGH:
PAU.
PROWCT.
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
FILOWN9R:
PEOHIST.
3. Preliminary
outlet.
Background
This is a rontinuod item from the
October 12, 1984, Planning Com-
mission re-oiing. The Planning Com-
mission returned the plans to the
pvuponent For modification of the
site plan to take advantage of the
open ,s..vc-n in front of the pond and
to save e';1 ,,tin9 at oral vegetation
1:11 be srooning packing areas from
uso.f, acro ,.c the pond. In addition,
building el ;Nation ..; were to be
modifind to reflect a higher
P ,'rconiago of glass in order to
croain an ()nice a :T.,arance. It wa ,.
rec.:Y1-10mit'd t UA the fermi of
9:1 lclbnj B by muditif ,d to introduce
a,tditional two-stol•v clo;u ,nts to
hyod% linr nature of the
ono-,.tory building.
acres into two . lots and one
J 7:1s n t:'-:,:i1:7).i77:1
--f"\ '+'''-- - • ' \ )
PROPOSE SITE _
i,.: 'r,i_i: K.
1 —
_,-
\ s::!1vw
. '4 12:2711;K---
.76 -21 .
---.--,-------r— 1
.2 .'c N . , _AN 1 j '''7 "- • '$. ' • [:•-•
/
[
I ..
p) -,,,3 1
.-1.. \ , •.... .,.. - i'----''/NJ
;
--- 1 ....-, -,-.! \\,------.
City Pest III and IV 2 October 26, 1984
Site Plan Modifications
There have been two primary site plan modifications. In Phase III there is a
different parking arrangement adjacent to the pond, which provides for more open
area and the opportunity to save the oak trees along the site border. This
additional open space would allow adequate room for berming and plantings to screen
parking areas from other land uses across the pond.
A second plan modification is that portions of Buildings E and F have been jogged
approximately 20 feet towards the interior to create a 30 -foot green space in front
of the building, which helps break up the overall building mass.
Modifications
Building elevations have been changed to reflect a higher percentage of glass to
brick in areas previously recommended by Staff. In some cases, glass was extended
to the roofline, in others, spandrel panels were added under the windows. The
combination of glass and spandrel panels will have a glass- looking appearance.
Glass has been added to the elevations of Phase IV buildings, but no jog in the
building; has been incorporated at this time. An additional two-story element would
be beneficial. If possible, Buildings G and H should he jogged in a similar manner
to Buildings E and F. This would provide more green space in front of the building.
Con c lusions
If the Comlission feels that the proponent has made modifications to warrant
approval then Staff would recounend that approval be based upon plans dated October
?3, 1984, and subject to the following:
1. Front yard setbck variance to 35 feet.
2. Allow up to 75 per cent office in an industrial zoning district.
3. Suhmission of detailed grading plan to reflect site plan modifications.
4. Submission of a detailed landscape plan reflecting site plan modifications
and provisions for screening of parking areas from across the pond.
St 1',1
The Planning Comission could recommend either of the following alternative courses
of aUion:
1. The Planning Cmmission could recomend approval of the request for Planned
Unit Developront Co,w.ept kc ,end -oent, Planned Unit Peveloftlent District Review
tor 15.91 acres (with variances), and /ening District Change to 1-2 Park for
12.17 acres and a Prelimilv.ry fl it of 15.91 acres into two lots and one lot
based on plans dah•d !:,ept:-,ber 14, 1984, revised October 13, 1994, based
upon 1 ,,,c,:puda i uric in the Staff Repnrt and subject to the following
(.onditiefG:
A. Prior to Council revio, proponent sh111:
City West III and IV 3 October 26, 1984
1. Submit detailed landscape plan for review.
2. Submit detailed grading plan for review.
B. Prior to Final Plat, proponent shall:
1. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control
plans for review by the City Engineer and the Watershed
District.
C. Prior to Building Permit issuance, proponent shall:
1. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
2. Stake the grading limits with a snow fence within the wooded
areas.
3. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in
advance of grading.
D. Concurrent with building construction, construct sidewalks to
connect to City West Parkway and the trail system proposed along the
pending area.
2. The Planning Commission could recommend that the plans be denied.
2'a) 0
RLPORT
Planning Cardssion
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
October 12, 1984
City West Business Center, Phase III and IV
North of Shady Oak Road, West of City West Parkway
Ryan Construction
Anderson Development, Inc.
1. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 15.91 acres.
2. Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District
Change from Office to 1-2 Park for 15.91 acres.
3. Preliminary Plat of 15.91 acres into two lots and one
outlot.
TO -
ip0 M :
11 ,PU'Pl•
DATE:
PROJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
FEE OWNER:
FIESIZST:
Background
This site is part of the original
• 1931 City West Planned Unit
Development. The City West Planned
Unit Development on this site Was
amended in 1982, according to a
specific rezoning and development
request from Anderson Development,
Inc., known as City West Plaza I,
II, and III, for 240,000 square feet
of office in three, five-story
buildings, centered around a plaza
area with views across the pond.
There were two, two-level parking
ramp ,, included with this proposal.
The low huilding footprints, and
structured parking, allowed for 63
percent open space on site.
City West Business Center Phase III
and IV, is in continuation of a
similar site plan and building
oppre.:;;11 used in Phases I and II
which are currently under con-
struction along Shady Oak Road.
2a)1
City West Phase III and IV 2 October 12, 1984
Phases III and IV differ from Phases I and II by an upgrading of the percentage of
office from 25 to 75 per cent, upgrading the exterior materials of the project from
burnished block 'and glass to brick and glass, and increasing the amount of
landscaping in the project around the perimeter of the site, as well as within the
service court area.
The Comprehensive Guide Plan depicts office use for this site. The attached Planned
Unit Development plan, and image sketch, show what was envisioned in 1982 as a
potential land use. Since this site is guided Office, a decision must be made as to
whether this site still remains appropriate for an office use, and if so, at what
scale. Surrounding land uses in City West are developing primarily as office with a
limited amount of commerical uses. The Primetech (65 per cent office) and O'Neill
(100 per cent office) projects to the east of this site are approved office uses
currently under construction. Phases I and II of the Ryan project, south and west
of this sue, are office in character, though the sites are zoned for industrial
use.
Often it is the case that existing site features will suggest an appropriate use of
the land. This site offers two unique natural amenities including a pond which
becomes a point of orientation for the land uses, and existing natural vegetation,
which can be incorporated into the site plan to reflect the original site character
and can be used for screening and scale. There are a number of trees along the
pending area and the northwest corner of the site. Vegetation along the pond
consist primarily of lowland vegetation including poplar, ash, and cottonwood.
There are a number of specimen oak trees along the northwest corner of the site
which should be retained as part of the overall landscape plan.
Land Use Proposal-Office or Industrial?
In 1981, when the City West Planned Unit Development was first considered by the
Planning Commission and the City Council, there was considerable discussion as to
whether, or not, office uses in this location would compete with office sites in the
Major Center Area. The Major Center Area plan allows for intense office and
commercial usage because of the ability of the existing and proposed transportation
systems to handle the additional traffic. Also, because of its location at the
junction of two major highways, building development could be intense, and larger
and taller buildings would be possible. Though a high percentage of office use was
planned as part of the original City West proposal, the general character of City
West today might be described as a high-tech area, rather than a traditional office
park, considering that the only pure office building under construction to-date is
the O'Neill Office Building. Primetech Phases I and II, and City West Business
Phases I nd II, are being developed between 50 and 75 per cent office with a
limited mount of manufacturing. Because of the architectural design, building
materials, landscaping, and screened loading areas, the developments have an office-
like appearance. With this type of land development occuring, it appears that City
West is not competing with the traditional office markets envisioned for the Major
Center Area.
Since some manufacturing is being proposed, a question to he answered is whether
this project is office or industrial. The project has characteristics of an office
park, including brick and glass all around the building, one and two-story office
elelmats, screened loading facilities, parking at a ratio of four space per 1,000
square feet of gross floor area, and generous landscaping.
City West Phase III and IV 3 October 12, 1984
By comparison to the originally approved Planned Unit Development request by
Anderson Development, there are some marked differences. The original Planned Unit
Developeent was office, had more open space, more landscaping, and took advantage of
the views across the pending area. In addition, the proposed five-story office
buildings would add height and scale to the City West development. The new concept
plan, though office-like in character, makes limited use of the pond, and has less
open space because of the larger building footprints and large areas of surface
parking.
Ordinance Site Coverage FAR
City West
III & IV
30% Site Coverage 23% Building
0.3 One-story FAR 81% Building
and parking
0.5 Multi-story FAR
0.29
Original
30% Site Coverage
11% Building
0.34
Office Plan
0.3 One-story FAR
0.5 One-story FAR
* Based on 12.63 acres developable land.
Site Plan
The current site plan request involves two building phases, with a total of 161,520
square feet of gross floor area in four buildings. The buildings are primarily one-
story, though there are second story office elements planned with each building.
Phase III involves approximately 82,500 square feet, and Phase IV involves
approximately 79,000 square feet. The buildings are designed with an exterior
office appearance around the perimeter of the building and with an enclosed service
area. In addition, open space is included in the service area in an attempt to
provide an attractive appearance when viewed from taller buildings such as the hotel
in City West.
The project is being developed at a floor area ratio of 0.29. Although this is a
relatively low floor area ratio for office land usage, because of the large building
footprint and on-grade parking, the site plan appears very tight and open space
appears a minimum. Only a portion of the project takes advantage of views across
the pending areas. The proposed buffer zone, for the parking areas adjacent to the
pond is only ten feet and will not provide enough area for adequate screening of the
parking areas when viewed from other office and commercial land uses across the
pond. This will be addressed in more detail under the landscape section, however it
is important to note at this time, that development of the Landmark proposal will
have a heavy emphasis upon the hack of the by facing the pond, and there will
be views into this project from the restaurant and outdoor plaza areas. Therefore,
it is hrportant that this project have a clean office appearance when viewed from
across the pending area.
A total of 590 pick inn spaces are provided cei-site. For a project of this size,
based upon 15 per cent off 4e, 1?.!: per cent manufacturing, and 12.5 per cent
wdrehou!,ing, toile teeild regnirc the provision of 677 parking spaces. The proponent
has provided d prwf-a-parking plan, which adds parking around the perimeter of the
st Phase III and IV 4 October 12, 1984
sitc, but primarily intends to utilize proposed green areas in the service court for
bfitional parking, if needed. Parking is provided at a ratio of 3.65 parking
twcf.., per 1,000. "High-tech projects", such as Vantage and Primetech, have
typically been proposed at a ratio of four parking spaces per 1,000 square feet.
With mf-of-parking, the parking ratio would be 4.2 to 1,000 square feet of gross
floor area.
Access to this site will be by driveway from two curb cuts along City West Parkway.
There are three existing curb cuts along City West Parkway. Two of these will be
reerred. The existing curb cut, which aligns with a median cut in City West Parkway
in Phase IV, will be utilized. A new driveway and a new median cut are proposed
along City West Parkway adjacent to Phase III. This should align with the driveway
entrance along the north property line of the hotel proposed to the east across City
West Palk.way.
The proponents are requesting a 35-foot setback (required in Office Districts) on
the primary front and secondary front yards along City West Parkway in lieu of the
50-foot setback normally required in the Industrial Districts. Since the project
has an office appearance, perhaps the office setbacks may be appropriate, provided
effective screening of parking areas can occur.
Traffic Impacts
For a project of this size, based upon 75 per cent, 12.5 per cent manufacturing, and
12.5 pee cent warehouse, can be expected to generate approximately 1,700 vehicle
trips per day. The original office proposal, based upon 240,000 square feet of
office, would have generated approximately 2,900 vehicle trips per day. The
reduction of vehicle trips would lessen the potential traffic impacts upon Shady Oak
Road.
Grading
A general way of describing the proposed grading is that the small hills on this
site will be cut to fill the small depressions. Generally speaking, there will be a
cut of approximately ten to twelve feet, and ten to twelve feet of fill across the
site. Proposed grades, adjacent to the pond, are at 2.5/1, and appear to be very
artificial looking. The grading plan should be revised to reflect a softening of
this slop. This can be achieved in a number of ways. One alternative would be to
lessen the slope to 3/1, and to create a curvilinear pattern to the proposed grades,
as opposed to rectangular.
Archi I Jsr ture
Four buildings are proposed on-site which contain one and two-story element
s
.
Build ins arc proposed to be constructed primarily of mason-laid face brick and
glass. The buildings will reflect a curvilinear pattern, in that rounded edges are
proposed on the corners, which is similar to Primetech. The building forms are
similar to Phases I and II. Phases I and II were proposed with right- angled
corn ors and constructed of burnished block, as opposed to brick. Though the
building elevations suggest an awkward proportion of oilss to brick on the ono story
eleirls. the color rendoring, suggests a different scoring pattern, and a slig
h
t
building grojtion above the windows, which Staff believes makes for a more
attrirl builOing. In addition, Staff suggests that the vertical height of the
winde,'s he increased by at least two feet so that the proportion of glass to brick
-
City West Phase III and IV 5 October 12, 1984
would be more higher. The interior facing of the buildings around the service areas
will be constructed of concrete block, painted to match the brick. Elevations of
the courtyard areas indicate that there will be no dock-high doors.
A high percentage of the one-story building elements will be visible from City West
Parkway. Because of the low percentage of glass to brick on these walls, the
appearance is more like warehouse than office. Staff reconnends that the building
form be changed to reflect a similar varying height relationship to that used on
Phases I and II. (See Attachment B) The introduction of additional two-story
elements, or glass parapet extension, would give the buildings a more office-like
appearance.
Roof-top mechanical is proposed to be screened from view with a two-foot, eight-
inch, parapet wall around the entire perimeter of the building. The proponent
should provide site lines showing the effectiveness of screening from City West
Parkway and other adjacent land uses.
Utilities
Sewer and water service can be provided to this site by connection to existing sewer
and water lines in City West Parkway. The water main will need to be looped through
this site, making a connection to City West Parkway, Ryan's Phase II project to the
south and the future office site to the north. The water line should be an eight-
inch pipe. Additional fire hydrants will be needed, and some must be relocated.
The proponent should discuss this with the Fire Marshall.
Storm water run-off will drain in two primary directions. The majority of storm
water run-old will drain in a westerly direction, through a series of catch basins
and storm sewer pipes into the pending area. The balance of the storm water run-off
will drain toward City West Parkway. The proponent should submit details of the
outlets into the ponding area, which will minimize erosion, minimize siltation
flowage into the pond, and be aesthetically pleasing such that a control structure
would not be visible from adjacent land uses.
Pedestrian Systems
The site plan should be modified to provide a method of internal pedestrian
circulation, which would connect the proposed office areas to the proposed trail
around the pond. lhe trail around the pond should be constructed concurrent with
building construction.
I andscaning
Although the total amount of plant materials proposed on site appears to be
generous, because of the amount of hard-surfaced area and buildine mass, Staff
sugeests that additional, or larger, plant materials be introduced on-site. Other
examples of high-tech projects, such as Primetech, introduced many large trees of
four to six-ink ..11 caliper in 07e, or greater, for shade trees, and eight to twelve
feet in heieht for coniferous trees. Bermine and plantings along City West Parkway
should ho odequate to screen parking areas from view. Parking areas, when viewed
from adjacent land uses aeross the pond, will be visible and Staff recommends that
additional coniferous plantings be incorporated along the west property lino.
The existio9 oak trees, in the northwest corner of the site, will be lost due to
eie-e
City host Phase III and IV 6 October 12, 1984
construction. A reduction in building square footage, or a change in the building
footprint, would allow an opportunity for these trees to be saved. The proponent
should provide a tree inventory of the site for review.
Conclusions
Since the initial proposal on this site had three mid-rise office buildings, a
decision must be made as to whether, or not, the present submittal is office- enough
in character to be considered as a legitimate office use on this site. The Staff
Report raises several issues, which are building and site plan related. If these
issues are properly addressed, and perhaps with modification, the project may be
more acceptable. If the Commission feels that the proposed "high-tech" buildings
represent the best use of the land, Staff would recomnend that the development plans
be modified in the following ways:
1. The Site Plan should be revised, by either a reduction in building square
footage, or a different building footprint, which would allow for more open
space in front of the pond. This may save existing natural vegetation, and
provide adequate room for screening of parking areas from adjacent land uses
across the pond.
2. Building elevations should be modified to reflect a higher percentage of
glass to create an office appearance.
3. Building form should be modified, to introduce additional two-story
elements, to break up the long and linear nature of the one-story building,
especially along the north portions of buildings G and H. Additional two-
story elements on building E and F would also be beneficial.
STAFF RECOriMiNDATIONS
The Staff would recomnend that development plans be returned to the proponent for
revisions based upon the recommendations outlined in the conclusion section.
2 so
7r.511^-",s, , •
• r-**,.. • • _ _ 2."C" • rruAkrt..)--7 :77 r cr.". ! r! •5•• I WEST ELEVAT:ON A E A r nJt,_/.4 •,•-• . Z.7_\ • n rr-1, "‘"=•.•••••. siN.1 4 cr! - _ i . ;•• ; . _ I I I C -a,: , !•• : ----- -. 1— .... •- - .. .1'. °n!... L. 7E_61/...J1." .t“Gs.1.-1 ,.. 1 1F-N! .15 5:1 „TtL,'`rr JsT 'cc. . . „.; Cr % I 4 - tr:F.• t tstt . rS-•••1".• I n-4 t • II ; L,L.rvacoror'r 1 - . •-• r
E. CITY UEST BUSINESS CENTER PHASES III & IV, by Ryan Construction.
Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment of City West
Planned Unit Development and Planned Unit Development District
Review of 15.91 acres; Zoning District Change from Office to 1-2 for
12.63 acres; and Preliminary Plat of 15.91 acres into two lots and
one outlet. Location: North of Shady Oak Road, West of City West
Parkway. A public hearing.
Mr. Pat Ryan, Ryan Construction, reviewed the proposal with the Planning
Commission, explaining the request for the Planned Unit Development Concept
Arendment and explained the advantages of the type of project for office
service use over a pure office use for this property. He pointed out that
with 75 per cent of the square footage of the project being office, and the
remainder being for storage/assembly space, the reduction in traffic would
he approximately 1,200 trips per day.
Planner Enger reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff Report
of October 12, 1984, with the Planning Commission.
Gartner, Hallett, and Marhula, stated that they were not as concerned with
the proposed change to the Planned Unit Development Concept for City West as
th:1 wore with the appropriateness ot use for the site. Marhula added that
he did not feel this was a major change in proposed use within this Planned
Unit Davelopment. He stated that he felt that while the proposed plan may
be ditforent as in terms of its footprints and layout than the previously
approved plan for the site, the use proposed was basically the same.
1)cting Chairman Torjesen stated that be felt it was imperative that changes
to plans he smde with justificmtion. He statA that he felt, in this case,
the rfilde proposed had been t,ubstantiatud by tha facts that it Was a change
w!iich re ,tultod in less dense use of the property. Acting Chairman Torjesen
gIrt i a ;d whether the "contnrpieco" function of the previously approved
H oan for this site wculd he lost with this type of plan as opposed to the
prtionsly wrovcd plan.
itvor stated the provious plan had hi per rout impervious surface
t"vor ,Ith'; the current PLn hal ii per vent impervioes surface coverage.
ho stated that the height oi the ttni!diuus from the previous plan
w.r . not all in tv:0 es oil CC. liii stTuctuces had been designed with
;YAP;
f 1,011ing Coumission Minutes 15 October 15, 1984
underground parking. In addition, the other plan oriented the buildings
more towards the pond to the north. He stated that attempt had been made to
orient as much of the buildings as possible towards the pond for the current
plan. He stated that, perhaps, additional work could he done to accomplish
this effect to a greater degree for the current plan.
Mr. Ryan stated that, based upon their experience, the amount of parking
required by the ordinance would not need to be built. He stated that they
would request to allow the extra parking area at this time to be left in
green space for proof of parking in the future if necessary.
Hallett asked if the pathway system would be part of this development. Mr.
Ryan responded that the pathway system was currently under construction, and
would be continued through this site.
The Commission and proponents discussed the plan in greater detail, making
suggestions and discussing ways in which the plan could be altered to
specifically take better advantage of views of the pond to the north.
Proponents asked if it would be possible to he scheduled for the November 6,
1984, Council meeting. The Planning Commission concurred that this would be
appropriate in this case.
MOTION:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Schuck, to continue the public
hearing to the October 29, 1984, Planning Commission meeting, directing
Staff to publish the item for the November 6, 1984, City Council meeting.
Motion carried-5-0-0
t-,
01/431U
VAC rl5 November 6, 1984
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 84-300
VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-NM FOR
VALLEY VIEW ROAD
IN EDENVALE 4th ADDITION
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has right-of-way for Valley View
Road described as follows:
That part of Valley View Road, dedicated in the plat of Edenvale 4th Addition,
according to the recorded plat thereof, lying southerly and southeasterly of
the following described line:
Commencing at the most northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 2
in said plat;. thence South 39 degrees 49 minutes 07 seconds
East, along the southwesterly right-of-way line of said
road, a distance of 846.03 feet to the point of beginning
of the line to be described; thence southeasterly a distance
of 403.71 feet, along a non-tangential curve, concave to the
northeast, having a radius of 1492.40 feet, a central angle
of 15 degrees 29 minutes 57 seconds, and a chord which bears
South 54 degrees 12 minutes 17 seconds East, to the north-
easterly right-of-way line of said mad, and there terminating.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on November 6, 1984, after due
notice was published and posted as required by law:
WHEREAS, it has been determined that the se:id easement is not
nocessary and has no interest to the public, therefore, should be vacated.
NOW, THEREFME, RE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as
fellows:
I. Said drainage and utility easement as above described is hereby
vacated.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare a notice of completion of the
proceedings in accordance with M.S.A. 412.851.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on November 6, 1984.
[ST:
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
SEAL
m H. Franc, Clerk
6,1984
i6?11 VOID OUT CHECK
vDio OJT CHECK
11,1', VOID 0111 CHECK
61::,f) B1117 EXPENSES
1555/ WNNESOTA DEPARTMENT Or P/S MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION
16568 0 PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR
16569 INTERCONTINENTAL PCKG CO WINE
161,70 (0 ; 1005 COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR
16571 EAGLE WINE CO WINE
165/2 QuAl.ITY NINE CO WINE
16573 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING CO WINE
165/4 jORZON HOVERS WHOLESALE LIQUOR LIQUOR
16515 BECK? WARNER ELECTION SUPPLIES
16516 UNITLD WTI'S POSTMASTER POSTAGE-ELECTION
1657/ MACA TRAINING CONFERENCE FEE-AN1MAL CONTROL
165/8 011'45 GIBBS OCTOBER PACKET DELIVERY
16579 FAST SinE 5EVERAGE CO BEER
16580 BALBARA MAjTSON INSTRUCTOR-SWIMING CLASSES/FEES PAID
16581 VEDERAL RESERVE BANK PAYROLL 10/12/84
1658? COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 10/12/84
16583 DEpARTMENT OE EMPLOYEE RELATIONS PAYROLL 10/12/34
16504 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM PAYROLL 10/12/84
85 AELRA LIEL INSURANCE CO PAYROLL 1O/12/84
,86 68E51 WEST LIFE INSURANCE CO PAYROLL 10/12/84
16587
11:11 150 WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS PAYROLL 10/12/84
1238 INTL UNION OF OPERATING ENG DUES
16589 P R A PAYROLL 10/12/84
16590 c81 ,:11SSIONFR OF REVENUE SEPTEMBER 1)4 FUEL TAX
IWQ cT,".ISSIONFR OF REVENUE SEPTEMBER 84 SALES TAX
1169 , 1: PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE COMMERCE & INDUSTRY DAY
W'%OV BURNS CARL SON SKATING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID
r,o n ufM WA FAMILY YMCA
CONFERENCE-COMMUNITY CENTER
1.512TI12110 STATES POWER CO SERVICE
ii '1 III KRATOCHVIL INSTRUCTOR/EXFROISE CLASSES/FEES PAID
1E LARSON
REFUND-EXERCISL CLASSES
IY MORTON REFUND-EXERCISE CLASSES
'-"F 11111 LEN REFUND-SWIMINC CLASSES
1212 :) KNFUTSSERG REFUND-EXERCISE CLASSES
Y '516 111(00
RE=O-SWIm'IING CLASSES
12 HAUF
REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES
FMRINCTON
NITIPB)-RACQUETBAll CI ASSES
.KER`; CONFERENCE
CONFERENCE-SENIOR CENTER
WINE CO
WINE
ty! IIY WINE CO
LIQUOR
!.O ITMALIS & SONS CO
LIQUOR
cfmFR & CO INC
LIQUOR
lup; cm WINE CO
WINE
wINE CO
WINE
DIW•,I.T;S 111101TSALE L11 1100
'QM-1;Z
oN n INHEAL PCKD CO
WINE
15 .,13 iE 1E5/Y0RI11
BNN PERMIT4i.NOI.KSON IPAES PP=•AY
1,.611 I Y., LA!:11SC41'I158
TIMNR'.=,-NOONO LA PAZ
16515 p6im11.11
PO0116F-0015,? INFORMATION MAPS
1VI 20110011 1111111 11111
BOOK-FIK;INICRI
% Hi i;* I IS WIlELGOIS S I1526 DLPT
16.0 0
68.2
68.2 5
69.1 8
8.75
3083.1/
284.48
3070.77
567.51'
2269.11;
1402.97
1973.00
56.47
100.00
15.00
65.00
3045.85
136.50
18443.59
9417.07
12967.81
35.00
114.00
4039.00
100.75
689.85
15663.90
879.58
11407.75
12.00
112.70
100.00
4613.08
8.00
6.00
26.00
14.00
26.00
10.00
23.00
25.00
25.00
154.4E,
958.06
3625.9?
2462.79
415.7?
362.20
200.4 1
3778.00
593.0
6.01)
80.00
RORTHIRN STATES POWER CO SERVICE
f REMY CASH POSTAGE-CITY HALL
R.LRGENCY SERVICE SYSTEMS INC RADIO REPAIR & PARTS-POLICE & FIRE DEPT
IPA!:cls REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTE CONVERENCE-POLICE DEPT
N.4ERIRAA HUAANE ASSOCIATION POSTERS-ANIMAL CONTROL
RERARDS
1.66E4 IRSTY PRINTS
16(‘M INIERCONTINENTAL PCKG CO
I661'6 RM.ITY WINE CO
166N
1W IN CITY WINE CO
1E6?R PRIOR WINE CO
166R joHNE,ON BROTHERS WHOLESALE
16630 EAGLE WINE CO
16631 PATREIS & SONS CO
16632 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC
16633 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO
16634 ED GREGORY
1663S ii0RK1NS POSTMASTER
16635 STATE TREASURER
16637 RALIRI KRATOCHVIL
15639 BARBARA SIEGLE
16639 KATHY HOMES
16640 FETR1ZAT RESERVE BANK
16641 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE
16642 DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEES RELATIONS
16643 AETNA LIFE INSURANCE & ANNUITY CO
16644 mINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM
16615 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO
16c 4 RRRITO WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS
. 7 PERA
16:;4R NORt!EST BANK OF HOPKINS
16640 SmPuRBAN NATIONAL BANK
16650 ACRD-MINNESOTA INC
16661 sTOART ALEXANDER
1665? ARERICUI EXCELSIOR CO
I 163 T001 ( (CAN WATER WORKS ASSOC
1654 EARL E ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC
16666 A'.'!A ENGINEERING INC
1461.6 E ,,ER‘TIC MANAGEMENT CONSULTING
1 167 AER11R1D COFFEE CO INC
316 16 ASPHALT INC
,,R.AIATED WELL DRILLERS INC
lfR:;,0 ATA. T INFORMATION SYSTEMS
1E661 AT F 1NTORMATION SYSTEMS
T WAREHOUSE CO
16.3 AAC
NS
BY JON
PARNES
1 INC
LUMBER-FOREST HILLS HOCKEY RINK
PRINT SENIOR CITIZENS NEWSLETTER
WINE
WINE
WINE
WINE
LIQUOR LIQUOR
WINE
WINE
LIQUOR
LIQUOR
SOFTBALL & F00113ALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
POSTAGE-SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER
FEE-DNR PERMIT-ENGINEERING DEPT
INSTRUCTOR-EXERCISE CLASSES/FEES PAID
REFUND-EXERC1SE CLASSES
REFUND-PRE NATAL CLASSES
PAYROLL 10/26/84
PAYROLL 10/26/34
PAYROLL 10/26/84
PAYROLL 10/26/84
PAYROLL 10/26/84
PAYROLL 10/26/84
PAYROLL 10/26/04
PAYROLL 10/26/84
PAYROLL 10/26/84
PAYROLL 10/26/84
OFFICE SUPPLIES
MILEAGE
LANDSCAPE MATERIAL-HOMEWARD HILLS
FILM RENTAL-WATER DEPT
WARNING SIGNALS
COUPLER/BUSHINGS-PARK MAINTENANCE
INC WATER TREATMENT OF POND-P/S BUILDING
CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER
BLACKTOP-STREET DEPT
PIPE-PARK MAINTENANCE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SPOTLIGHTS-P/S BUILDING
TEST SPEEDOMETER-POLICE DEPT
FLOWERS-CITY HALL
NAME TAGS-SENIOR CENTER
VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
-SERVICE-MITCHELL ROAD & TECHNOLOGY DRIVE/
19940.70
10.4?
3504.01
40.00
10.00
78.20
100.40
126.46
1949.17
350.50
147.08
1687.86
2654.75
245.92
2565.86
3112.73
487.50
32.58
30.00
26.00
26.00
22.00
17539.90
9057.58
12931.47
114,00
35.00
4266.00
108.75
15059.17
570.00
37.50
1028.25
41.75
392.35
45.00
307.10
44.81
220.00
52.00
8256.84
36.00
40.05
768.00
126.10
12.00
76.95
10.50
137.50
52674.96
-EDEN ROAD/ANDERSON LAKES RARKWAY/VALLLY VIEW ROAD/
PRAIRIE CENTLR ORIVE
JULY & AUG IMIOUND FEES
1060.00
SERVICE-MINUTES FOR PARK & RECREATION DEPT
75.00
E7Ty Or ID 0 6 1110110W
R0ETICI1ER
1 LI R I
2/311:3
• FDILIG & SONS INC
LEL M BRANDT
HRANN [NO TESTING INC
DAVID BROWN
PAHL BROWN
166/6 RmIlliERS ENGINEERING CO
10E/6
601 1S RAN SUPPLY
)66/i CARTIX CORP
11.08 10'.:; EN SYSTEMS
166/9 CERTIFIED POWER TRAIN SPECIALISTS
1600 CHANHASSEN SADDLERY
166:41 CUANHASSEN VETERINARY HOSPITAL
16682 CHAP IN PUBLISHING CO
1660O CHEMIAWN
106u4 RIcHARu B OGILVIE TRUSTEE OF THE
1G8n5 CLEAN SWEEP INC
l66B8 COM'.'..ISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION
18807 ODYCE CONLEY
16688 CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY INC
16689 Cl ?? EQUIPMENT INC
16690 CPT CORP
18681 CROWN (USER STAMP CO
16692 CURT IS INDUSTRIES
18814 CFRITOM FINE APPARATUS INC
16684 CUTLER MAGNER CO
16686 DNA:0
RAVIF.S WATER EQUIPMENT CO
16697 CRAIG W DAWSON
168pO, RONOME & ASSOCIATES INC
16888 DO:ES SOu SERVICE
IWO DoRHOET INC
16/0! BRISRILS SUPER VALU
167AR Tim RuRSMORE
187o4 I11 EASTMAN
CI 01115 COUNTY
1 81o'' ED: F: PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COM1ERCE
I676T N PRAIRIE FIRE RELIEF ASSOC
16/T1 my DE EDINA
16/DI !RA!AN I TAM'S
R:T7Nr...Y DI CAL PRODUCTS INC
-i-oRcY SERVICE SYSTEMS INC
18/!: -ERG!,:ii 00E0 INC
167! ! ':•!!!!!!• MANACINEWT INC
16,! !NUR
16;'•!! R!!!: IRS
167IT HR BROTHERS & SONS INC
10! SEUL CO
)iWP 'H:Y.K FERN
m ,Y mAINTENANCE INC
IT Fny
IT 10Y
SERVICE-PARK MAINTENANCE 454.n.•
HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 60.01 .
-SERVICE-CARMEL ADDITION/FLYING CLOUD DR/ 2636.3:
VALLEY VIEW ROAD
[WWII. OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 136.11
roomALL & VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 462.5 0
TUBE SLIDE-STARING IAKE PARK 4000.0
SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 330.7'
CARGOA DIOXIDE-WATER DEPT
FREIGHT CHARGES-ANIMAL CONTROL
REPAIR TREE TRUCK 34.50
HaTEN-ANIMAL CONTROL 18.97
SERVICE-ANIMAL CONTROL 91.00
LEGAL ADS 282.2
LAWN FERTILIZATION-P/S BUILDING 412.00
SEBVICE-VALLEY VIEW ROAD & COUNTY RD 4 468.41'
SERVICE-ROUND LAKE PARK 130.6;
SERVICE-PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE 2038.301
SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT
-RESCUE KIT/FIRE EXTI000ISHERS/FLASHL1GHTS 1934.73
500 FEET OF 2 1/2" HOSE
PAINT-POLICE DEPT/LINE TAPE -ASSESSING 93.8?
SCHOOL-POLICE DEPT 300.00,
DESK SIGNS-COMMUNITY SERVICES 19.20
BOLTS & NUTS/DECALS/LUPE-EQUIPMENT MAINT 210.2
TRUCK MOUNTED NOZZLE-FIRE DEPT 2182.50
QUICKLIME-WATER DEPT
-CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER/POLICE/COMMUNITY 397.35
CENTER
PVC MANDRIL-CARMEL ADDN 84.99
EXPENSES 15.21,
SERVICE-SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT 38.41 '
SOD-STARING LAKE PARK . 2928.47
FORMS-POLICE DEPT 95.00
SUPPLIES-CITY HALL & COMMUNITY CENTER 230.0!.
HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PATO 105.0G
SUPPLIES-COMMONITY CENTER 17.20
WITHHOLDING FROM EMPLOYEE PER COURT ORDER 3.05
PRINTING OF INFORMATION PACKET 283.06
FIRLMANS PENSION FUND 47195.0R
SEPTEMBER 84 TESTS 169.00
MILEAGE-FORESTRY DEPT 41.51;
PORTABLE RESUSCITATOR-FIRE DEPT 967.76
REPAIR SIREN-POLICE DEPT 21.00
6 SHOCKS/PA1NT-F1IOIPMENT MAINTENANCE 136.2P
COOLING SYSTEM. P/S BUILDING 159.6
SFPIIIMBFR & OOTOGER EXPENSES 330.11
HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAM 382.5o
MANNNLE COVLkS 650.00.
STEEL-PARK MAINTENANCE
ITYPiNSES-POLICI DEPT 28.00
REPAIR FARE TRUCK 326.7/
MIITAGE-RARK PLANNING
MILEAGE-PARK PLANNING
60NK-H11NECY DISTRIBUTORS INC
/6, 1. CONcRACTING INC
!A N[RAL CuMUNICATIONS INC
OITICE PRODUCTS Co
ff,', :NEN PAINT
g I cOODRICH TIRE CENTER
1,!'JTP1'.R INC
HACKING
ii;.ON GLASS
I67A :±;;IN HARRIS
167:31
IF 001 RN COUNTY TREASURER
16732 JELVERY L HOVLID
16/3i 111 (C1005. CONFERENCE
16734 INTL OFFICE SYSTEMS INC
1(dli 0 & R RADIATOR CORP
107 RI jAK OFFICE PRODUCTS CO
15/3/ XI OFFICE PRODUCTS INC
CARPETING-FIRE STATION 111
SERVICF-SHAR HILL CIRCI1 & PORTAL DRIVE
RADIO REPAIR & PARTS
Oulu SUPPLIES-CITY NALL
PAINT & FRINER.TAC MAINTENANCE
21 TIRES-POLICE CA15114 TIRES-EQUIP MAINT
WINTERI/E LAWN SPRINKLER SYSTEM-P/S BLDG
EXPENSES-P/S P01(01 NC.
? WINDSHIELDS•K STREET DEPT
EXPENSES-SUMER PROGRAMS
SERVICE-PARK MAININANCE
EXPENSES-WATER DEPT
DUES-BUILDING DEPT
RIBBONS-WATER DEPT
NEW RADIATOR CORE-FOUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
OFFICE SUPPLIFS-POLICE DEPT
-OFFICE 501PLICS/C0AT RACK/3 FILE CABINETS
WATER DEPT
1568.61
3923.0/
913.01
257.8/
1492.17
60.0u
78.1 9
250.82
122.80
16.75
25.0o
163.26
118.22
70.70
1090.31
1673 01/ONE ,IOHNSON EXPENSES-P/S BUILDING
161".A DAVID KREEER BASKETGALL OFFICIAL/FELS PAID
IORiO AI FOOTBALL OFFICIA1 /FEES PAID
10741 LANCE SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES
16/4? ifY:N)UO/HANSEN TRAILER SERVICE & E 14IPE0/0 RINGS/SIVEL-ECRESTRY DEPT
I6g3 liNE INSURANCE INC NOTARY BOND
11114 1 .11. PED EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT
15745 LIONS TAP OVERPAYraT OF VOLLEYBALL FEE
I IRIS SEPTEMBER 24 Sf:RVICE
lUiY I (RAISIN INSTRUCTOR/SCUBA CLASSES/FEES PAID
mACTM1 EQUIPMENT INC VALVE-STREET DEPT
10/1 ) UMY MASON HOCKEY oFriciarrEs PAID
s o 1/C MATSON [XI'! USES-POLICE DEPT
ANES INC CEMENT-STREET & PARK DEPT.
FAKERIES INC EXPENSES
W:AL OXYGEN & EQUIP CO OXYGEN-FIRE DEPT
,IWOLIAN GRAPHICS ENVELOPES-CITY HAIL
RI VONE CONE) INC NOVEMBER 84 PAGER RENTAL
PRINTING INC MAPS-CITY NALL
fli.ITAN FIRE EQUIP CO REPAIR AIR COMPRESSOR
kITAN WASTE CONTROL COMM SEPTLITER 84 SAC CHARGES
!A%') PODUCTS CO CONCESSION STAND WIN ITS-COMMUNITY CTR
i6PHALT CORP REF U ND HYDRANT NETER DEPOSIT
ST ASPDAI I CORP BLACKTOP
FRIBUNE CO EMPLOYMENT AD-PUILDING DEPT
ACADEMY OF PROSECUTION CODE BONS-POLICE DEPT
=1"..01A BAR SUPPLY INC SO! PLIES-LIQuoR sTon P?
OF P/S CRT SERVICE-MI.10E DEPT
-.91'0 GAS CO SERVICE
•<JITA REC K PARK ASSN MFFUNCE-Cir=NITY SERVICES
1:FC F, PARK ASSN CONELRENE-AULITIC COORDINATOR
1/1 110 0 1.0 NEWSPAPERS INC ADS-1.11 W!:LS
lIT ER (IV ELECTRIC CO-OP SERVICE
T:::!-RIC REPAIR FAN M:1TOR-PARK MAINTENANCE
H\ RADIO RI-PAIR 1. PAR -i5-!DLIP ,,IENT mAINTENANCE
:,iRl'ATING CO 1CLAY -PARK MAMINANCE
66.3;
12.00
200.00
103.0r.
103.75
60.00
10.63
5.00
13582.20
816.00
135.86
100.00
122.01)
58.50
40.86
97.00
629.97
77.72
2719.0,1
105.00
63483.76
218.0?
218.66
2517.0;
84.60
67.50
43.90
40.(K)
1523.5u
100.01
100.0
54.01.
36.26
26.50
67.1 -/
55.0
125.0o
4.59
90.0 4
1011.2S
32.3/
5054.0o
18.00
51.00
5.00
87.84
100.00
553.1",,
10.59
2845.00
332.37
1809.75
47.5n
200.09
325.00
19.77
21.64
58.50
320.08
153.50
112.50
106.14-
19574.28
10938.22
17.50
40.00
1286.75
54.56
556.23
140.14
1627.55
150.00
165.96
162.6?
53.00
64.29
10.00
132.53
177.44
2310.63
118.50
171.0G:
87.54
87.60
2654.45
1294.3:i
137.2
(rORY 1 MUELLER VOLLEYBALL orricikirrEs PAID
NJTWERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE
HD.JPEAND BuF,INESS COMMUNICATION REPAIR DICTAPHONE MACHINE-POLICE DEPT
WPN BELL 1fLEPHONE CO
SERVICE
NYIPO)I INC LMER DOOR HINGES-COMMUNITY CENTER
O1I1IE ERDOUCTS OF MN INC
2 119150 COPIFIER & DISK DRIVE
';ICFLEY OISON SWIM AID-COMMUNITY CHTER
10Y A URILOFF
HOCKEY OEFICIAL/EFES PAID
Y,UI PASSIM OVERPAYMENT OF HOCKEY FEES
14NNE,YEVANIA OIL CO 01T-S1REET DEPT
DOFRIX SYSTEMS INC SUPPLIES-SENIOR CENTER
PHTTuS INC PRIN1S-PL091lI99 DEPT
PHOTO VICK
PHOTOS -POLICE DEPT
PITNEY BOAS POSTAGE MACHINE-COMEIUNITY CENTER
POMER EIEG CO INC 10)111)949 TROPHIES/SWIMMING MEDALS/FEES PD
PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC
FUSES/IAITS-COMAMITY CENTER
PRAIRIE tAWR C GARDEN
BATTERY-WATER DEPT
0911 ,E LEVELOPEMRT
RUMP FIRE HYDRANT METER DEPOSIT
167D? PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING
FORMS-PLANRIn NEPT
I;,793 09931 :1 BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC
REPAIR RECORDER-MANAGER
15)94 2TNi3 & METER SERVICE INC
MANHOLE COVER-P/W BUILDING
16191) QUALM FITNESS
INSTRUCTOR/EXERCISE CLASSES/FEES PAID
16/96 R & R SPECIALTIES INC -TACHOMETER/BUSHING KIT/REPAIR 79118014I
ENGINE & CARBURATOR-COMUNITY CENTER
I67D7 RAIHROJ MECHANICAL INC
BEARING FOR HOT WATER HEATER-COMMUNITY CTR
11 7(9 FRFD 9A7AVI VOUTY;3ALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
II))/99 REHRECNICS CORP
EQUIPMIEfti PARTS-COMMUNITY CENTER
1.p':90 RIEKI-CARROL4.-MULI.ER ASSOC INC -SERVICII-SANITARY EIFT STATION/PLYING
CLOUD DRIVE/N334EMAN INDUSTRIAL PARK
1601 CITY OF RICHFIELD
10/1-12/31/84 DISPATCH SERVICE-POLICE DEPT
RICEEIELD PLUMBING CO NIPPLE-PARK MAINTENANCE
1G,KT9 71, 'INTo VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
II P'Nj) RESCUE INC
RESPONDER BOX/PAINT REAR SIDE-FIRE DEPT
16405 BD.TJy.m EXPRESS INC
FREIGHT CHARGES-FIRE DEPT
R01S;4ALE FARM GARDEN PET SUPPL DOG IOOD-CANIRL UNIT
110:-R4 SERVICE CO -RIOT,]N ALTERNATOR/STARTER/ALTERNATOR-
EQUIPM'AT MAINTENANCE
CARIESYS•FEMS OF EIPLS REPAIR CABLE Cl!) BY CITY
sS SERVIcE SALES USED ORYER-COM:IMITY CENTER
RECREATION CO
PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT-PARK DEPT
VI 5') 91/ WORKS INC DOG TAGS-CITY HALL
HOCKEY 011 19111 PAID
Ii;OUSTRIES INC
PORTABLE RE 4194095-PARE DEPT
',:!),PLY COMPANY INC CAR UASH-STREET DEPT
MCORP
SERVICF-P/S 60H DING
13)3 II AnY -MIX INC
CONCRETE-P(1110E DEPT
; TEACH 9 I. 1904)110)4 INC
SERVICE-NEW CITY HALL
TIPS RECORDER CO
REPAIR ALARM SYSTEM-P/S BUILDING
n 1 4191•1.9 NCL:EEN.N 114 EXPENSES
31113111 OiTiCIAL/FEES PAID
WF ST
I' (1(4 (4 FIRE PEPE
540IIM0IIILE TRAILS ASSOC SERVICE
A S!iiuP,;',AN PWILISH INC LEGAL ADS & HAPPFNINC,S
SOHORP)AR POLISH INC ADS .I iQuoR sTors
'PEcIALTY SCREENING
wRAYCO INC
‘AAIE TREASURER
'uEIE OF MINNESOTA
:Jm01,80 SPRING COMPANY
0')11 STREICHER GUNS
0110100 LION CHEVROLET
SUL1.IVAS SERVICES INC
RU 01018 CORPORATION
TENNESSEE CHEMICAL CO
[RANK THORNBER CO
TRESTMAN MUSIC CENTERS
TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO
TUIR CITY PET SUPPLY CO
UNIFoRMS UNLIMITED
UNITED LABORATORIES INC
UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC
VaLEY INDUSTRIAL PROPANE INC
VAuKHRS INC
VESSCO INC
VIUDM INCORPORATED
VOSS ELEURIC SUPPLY CO
KEITH WALL
WARMINGTON WOODCOCK & WILLLIAMS
WATER PRODUCTS CO
OFSTERN STATES FOREST PRODUCTS
WHOLESLE LIGHTING INC
2 AUAM WIETHOFF
16861 30: WIETHOFF
16854 lILELOCY AUTO PARTS CO
16855 X-ERGON
15865 XEROX CORP
16667 JIM -LAIC
16808 7?OGLER INC
16859 ZIEGLER TIRE SERVICE CO
4650 ,;91
16R12
1L831
16835
16837
16S12
16639
16ON
10101
16842
16843
15844
16845
150.45
16647
15858
I5R49
18850
POLICE BADGE
REPAIR CAR WASH MACHINE-POLICE DEPT
310D QUARTER 84 BUILDING SURCHARGE
FEE-PULL C11 & P/W BUILDING
CAR SEAT SPRINGS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
PISTOL/REPAIR GUN-POLICE DEPT
-PAINT SEALANT/CABLE/RUB CAP/REPAIR REAR-
VIEW MIRROR/REPAIR HEATER
PuMP TANK-SENIOR CENTER
REPAIR AERIAL TRUCK-FIRE DEPT
FERRI FLOC-WATER DEPT
BALLOT COUNTER-ELECTION EQUIPMENT
SUPPLIES-COMINITY BAND
OXYGEN-FIRE DEPT
CAN SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT
HELMET/NAMETAGS/JACKETS
CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT
BOLTS Es, NUTS/WASHERS-PARK MAINTENANCE
GAS CYLINDER-COMMUNITY CENTER
1 FLAG/REPAIR FLAG-POLICE DEPT
REPAIR RELAY-WATER DEPT
SERVICE-COMMUNITY CENTER
LIGHT BULBS-P/S BUILDING
EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT
PA SYSTEM FOR SCHOONER DAYS
-92 REGULATORS 52668.00/SEWER PIPE/CURB
BOX/BLADES/AIR FILTERS
!OMER-FOREST HILLS HOCKEY RINK
LIGhT BULBS-WATER DEPT
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
1100/S-PARK MAINTENANCE
SOLDER-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
SERVICE
LICENSE RENEWAL-BUILDING DEPT
CAP SCREWS-PARK MAINTENANCE
EQUIPMENT PARTS
42.00
18113.0!,
20.110
31.10
176.50
359.83
50.00
526.12
4518.9
12002.3
119.50
49.68
15.20
361.85
125.51
43.50
181.67
145.00
143.70
46.33
54.18
78.37
115.00
3224.38
3438.80
243.60
72.00
25.00
15.00
34.45
1710.61
40.00
84.40
159.E
$548685.08
') 1
November 6, 1984
Cash Disbursements by Fund number
Fund # Description
Amount
10 General
$244,936.96
11 Certificate of Indebtedness
16,687.21
15 Liquor Store-Prairie Village Mall
27,271.00
17 Liquor Store-Preserve
22,792.72
31 Park Acquistion & Development
11,034.57
36 P/S & P/W Building
198.90
51 Improvement Construction Fund
45,003.81
57 Road Improvement Construction Fund 1,199.38
73 Water Fund
33,514.78
77 Sewer Fund
63,890.87
81 Trust & Escrow Fund
3,332.40
02 Fire Relief Fund
47,195.00
90 Tax Increment Fund
31,627.48
Total $548,685.08
OCT i 5
6 eceA6vc}/o, /9 4/
-?).' eg..."
LL-„A-.A.-.12-cieryt-at-2-..r2-c-..1
(1)Z-- 97-4-1A-4t-CAA4 75-.+A•-n0
/./
Cl_
a
(12
•
(.--e/V-42.ell-k-,t-e.--v-ix LL