HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 07/25/1972MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE VILLAGE COUNCIL
Tuesday, July 25, 1972
7330 P.M., Village Hall
Members present were: Mayor Paul R. Reath, Councilmen Nesbitt, Cosmano
and Councilwoman Meyers. Also present was Village Manager George C. Hite,
Village Attorney Harlan Perbix and Clerk Edna Holagren.
I. MINUTES OF JULY 11, 1972
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers to approve the minutes of July 11th with
the following corrections
F. Acceptance of $89.370 Federal Grant for Waste Water. Resolution No. 446.
Page Four.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers to adopt Resolution No. 546 accepting the
Federal Grant for Waste Water Treatment Plant in the mmunt of $89,370 and
authorizing the Manager to sign the acceptance. Mr. McCulloch seconded,
etc.
With this correction, Mr. Redpath seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
PRESENTATION OF OFFICIAL FLAG
An official Eden Prairie flag was presented to Mayor Reath by Richard M.
Vogel, Chairman of the Eden Land Corp. Board of Directors. The Mayor
thanked him on behalf of the Council.
II. PUBLIC HEARIMS
A. Richard Rieman. Outlot A, Edenvale Indistrial Park-2nd Addition.
Planned Unit Development Application. Resolution No. 546.
Request for Reclassification from Zoning Oistrict I GEM to I 2 Park.
Ordinance No. 179. First Reading.
Preliminary Plat. Resolution No. 550.
ol Don P en Peterson, Edenvale reviewed and presented an office and marsh • site
plan in Edenvale Industrial Park-2nd Addition. The area of 6.9E1 a es
is proposed to be developed into small industrial lots on Bledc 2. Mr.
Peterson stated that such features of developing as shared parking
driveway areas, private truck service drive effectively screened frjm view
and flexible development using 5, 10 and 15,000 square foot buildh4s of
good design yet varied in appearance are proposed. Mr. Richard Rieman
stated that there would be occupancy of a variety of business' and contractors.
The Manager reviewed the three phases of the hearing request ; Planned Unit
Development amendment, reclassification of zoning and Preliminary Plat approval
He recamended to the Council that approval be given for development of small
industrial lots on Block 2 with a minimum of 16,000 square feet and that
building plans, site and landscape plans be approved by the Village staff
before building permits are issued.
Council Meeting
July 25, 1972
Page Two
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to adopt Resolution No. 546 amending the
Edenvale PUD of 1970 as per their application booklet of May, 1972 and
subject to approval and ratification by the Planning Conmission at their
next meeting. Mr. Comae seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
A motion was made by Mr. Giessen° to adopt the first reading of Ordinance
No. 179 approving the reclassification from Zoefing District I GEN to I 2
Park in Edenvale Industrial Park-2nd Addition. Mrs. Meyers seconded. All
voted aye. Motion carried.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to adopt Resolution No. 550 approving
the preliminary plat of Ede:revile Industrial Park-2nd Addition. Mr. Cosaano
seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
B. Wallace Hustad. Creek IKnolls Addition. Request for Reclassification
roar1 Zoning District Rural to District Residential RI42. Ordinance
No. 180. First Reading .
The Manager reviewed the zoning request for Creak Knolls Addition. He
stated that a letter had been received from Martin Diestler, Bluff Road
objecting to the proposal for rezoning from rural to residential. The
Manager stated that Mr. Diestler's objections were well founded as he
feared that this would mean "spot zoning" for the area. Mr. Hite cited
that the land hold agreement for no further platting on the adjoining
150 acres until utilities a re extended into the area should be executed.
He also suggested that the scenic easements in the plat be reviewed by
the Park Cormission before the second reading of the ordinance is adopted.
A motion was made by Mr. Cowen to adopt the first reading of Ordinance
No. 180 with land hold agreement and scenic easement are executed. Mr.
Nesbitt seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
C. Hipps Construction Co. Proposed Preliminary Plat. Hipps Mitchell
Heights Addition. Mi t clhei 1 B Scenic Heights. Resolution No. 547.
The Manager reviewed the proposed preliminary plat for Hipp's Mitchell
Heights, Phase I. The plat contains 14 townhouse units and 10 single family
home sites located adjacent to Hiawatha and Scenic Heights Road. He
rem:mended approval subjec t to the review of recommendations 1, 2 and 3
in the Planning Report dated July 16, 1972 as follows: landscape architect
continue involvement in superivision for the oration of the project and
that the developer have a plan for sewer, water, storm sewer, streets,
parking facilities, etc, including lateral services and water meter
locations submitted to and pproved and signed by the Vi llage Engineer
and Building Inspector before the "developer agreements" are signed.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers to adopt Resolution No. 547 approving
the Preliminary Plat, Hipps Mitchell !nights Addition subject to
reccamendations in the Planeeing Report dated July 16th. Pr. Cowen°
seconded. All voted aye. :Motion carried.
Council Meeting
July 25, 1972
Page Three
D. New Town Developers. Proposed Preliminary Plat. Atherton Addition.
Mitchell 4 Scenic Heights. Resolution No. 548.
Mr. Doug Johnson presented and reviewed the proposed preliminary plat
for Atherton Addition, New Town Developers.containing 89 units in Phase I.
The Manager expressed some concern with the placement of the units, not
the number. He noted jJtne Fi1foemission has recoomended
approval as submitted but that he wo ul that the 3 extra units
be removed. He stated that at the time of the request for zoning and POD
Concept Plan Approval at the March 28th Council raaeting,approval on the
townhouse portion of the application be limited to 86 units with an open
space in the center of the development. Mr. Hite felt that 89 units did
not conform to the initial concept plan.
Mrs. Meyers asked if plans still included a recreation and maintenance
building. Mr. Johnson rept fed that there would be a pool and patio but
no recreation building.
There being no further questions or comments Mr. Nesbitt made a motion to
close the hearing and adopt Resolution No. 548 approving the Prel Caine
Plat - Atherton Addition - New Town Developers removing 3 units, ..11"1"11117,
lots 7, 8 and 9, Block I - Second Addition. Mrs. Meyers seconded.
voted aye. Motion carried.
E. Edenvale Planned Unit Development. Proposed Amendments to Concept
Development Plan. Resolution No. 549.
Mr. Peterson, Edenvale reviewed the proposed mendeents to the Edenvale
PUD of 1970. He stated that the revised PUO land use plan would include
the realignment of the fairways in the Edenvale Golf Course, realignment
of residential areas adjacent to the golf course and a proposal for a
neighborhood connercial center at the intersection of Val ley View and
Mitchell Roads comeined with a church site of 4.2 acres. Mother change
proposed is the inclusion of a 160,000 square foot mall shopping facility
at Mitchell/Valley View in the south quadrant.
The Council questioned whether it was appropriate to have a shopping
cneter so near to the Hammrt center site in The Preserves Mr. Peterson
stated that he felt that there was a need for a center close to the needs
of the people in the area. He cited that the Biker/Mitchell area would
contain a planted grouping of a service station, church and community
commercial center. Mrs. Meyers stated that she felt that it was not wise
to generate more traffic with this community center and that it would be
difficult for pedestrians to reach the area. Mr. Peterson replied that
there would be a pedestrian crossing with traffic lights.
There being no further questions or comments Mr. Nesbitt made • motion to
close the hearing and adopt Resolution No. 549 approving the PUO app.
lication by Edenvale. Mr. Colman° seconded. Messrs hdpeth, Nesbitt
and Cassano voted aye. Mrs. Meyers voted no. Motion carried.
All
Council Meeting
July 25, 1972
Page Five
VI. FINANCES
A. Poondsonts to 1972 Budget. Resolution No. 5 114.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers to adopt Resolution No. 544 authorizing
amendments to the 1972 budget. Mr. Common° seconded. On roll call, all
voted eye. Motion carried.
B. Sale of Thorn House.
A motion was made by Mr. Colon° to authorize the sale of the Thorp house
on Staring Lake for $5,235. Mr. Nesbitt seconded. On roll call, all voted
aye. Motion carried.
Meeting adjourned at 9s30 P.M.
Edna M. MoIngren, Clerk
Council Meeting
July 25, 1972
Page Four
III. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
A. Michael J. Richter. 13030 Franlo Road. Request for Private Kennel
License.
The Manager recommended that the request by Mr. Richter be deferred to
the next council meeting until the adjoining neighbors are notified.
B. License Application List Dated July 25. 1972.
A emotion was made by Mr. Coseano to approve the license application
list dated Jul y 25th as follows:
q IGARETT4,& BEER-OFF SALE
den Pra ri• Grocery-Galion Nyhmemer
WELL LICENSE
Wes Erickson Well Co.-liesley E.Erickson
PLUINUIG LICENSE
Heyde Pluibing & Heating, Inc. - Burton R. Heyde
Mrs. Meyers seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
IV. APPOINTMENTS
A. Southwest Suburban CATV Study Commission. 2 Appointments.
Resolution No. 539.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to adopt Resolution No. 539 appointing
the Village Manager and Councilwoman Mrs. Meyers to the Southwest Suburban
CATV Study Commission. All voted aye. Motion carried.
B. Village Manager
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to appoint Robert P. Heinrich Village
Manager as per his letter of agreement dated July 19, 1972. Mrs. Meyers
seconded. On roll call, al I voted aye. notion carried.
C. South Hennepin Human Services Planning Board. itth Appointment.
A motion was made by Mr. Cosmano to appoint Rev. Alden Keiski to the
South Helnapin Hum Services Planning Board, for a term of one year
to expire January 1973. Mr. Nesbitt seconded. All voted aye. Motion
carried.
V. RECOMMENDATIONS Ate REPORTS
A. Ordinance No. 173 6 1744. Amending. Traffic Ordinance. Second Reading.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to adopt the second reading of Ordinances
173 and 174A and order published. Mrs. Meyers seconded. All voted eye.
Motion carried.
B. Ordinance No. 176. Bundles Koine. Second Reading.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to adopt the ascend rtildfni of Ordinance
No. 176 and order published. Mr. Cose seconded. All voted aye. notion
carried.
AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE VILLAGE COUNCIL
Tuesday, July 25, 1972 7:30 P.M., Village Hall
INVOCATION - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - ROLL CALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Paul Reath, Ralph Nesbitt, John McCulloch,
Joan Meyers and John Cosmano.
COUNCIL STAFF: Village Manager, George C. Hite; Village Attorney,
Harlan Perbix; Clerk, Edna Holmgren.
I. MINUTES OF JULY 11, 1972
II. PUOl.IC HEARINGS
, deLky
,..)
. Richard Rieman. Outlot A, Edenvale Industrial Park, Planned Unit
Development Application E. Request for Reclassification from Zonint .a.....;„
crt District I GEM o I 2 Park. 4.). •14 -0 OA-4, 179 .....,t4.-t
gt Wallace itusta . Creek Knolls Addition. Request for Reclassification., n,
from Zoning District Rural to District Residential RI-22. e2A41 ao -f.i.4..t/Cfp
ve. Hipps Construction Co. Proposed Preliminary Plat. Hipps Mitchell
Heights Addition. Mitchell & Scenic Heights. KW 7
\1(. New Town Developers. Proposed .Preliminary P 1 at .
7 Mitchell & Scenic Heights. r..4./ 5-44,
. Edenvale Planned Unit Development. Proposed Amendments to Concept
Development Plan. 44.) .544 g
III. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
64 Michael J. Richter. 0480 Frank> Road. Request for Private Kennel—
License.
1. License Application List Dated July 25, 1972.
IV. APPOINTMENTS
Southwest Suburban CATV Study Connission. 2 Appointments.
Agenda '11. Village Manager.
Addition: ,o
t
s
th
r320ALH aver vices Planning Bcird. lath Appointment.
V ,* cog Atl
Je. Ordinance No. 173 & 174A. Amending Traffic Ordinance. Second Reading.
\f}l. Ordinance No. 176. Building Moving. Second Reading.
VI. FIANCES
.(1,‘ Amendments to 1972 Budget. Resolution No. 544..
.f/ Sale of Thorp House.
Atherton Addition.
to,
J.
-
Azzi ‘1,
LL /LA4
61,
we Li& Zei -„
//dee,.
sixotee,6
4144'135 ,
-ark
- dti
—
/c___
Att_ le,e/
A1,24,t4 6..4s- f •
e-o-xer.-14f, Arza.41144.A.--,r1,-..i
t L. ;34 a, 4 7714n Azi n-m-rt gert.(4,-zr
..fkke2 Mv
ii' /1fl4
er?,v ,n-,40t4r7- 5010yr...."
4i a'
7,(frr _ 4 1/1 t_.-"Z-4. go
4)6(-7-221 ,v7re4 - ,4f 7 44'
„lit,z77 twta
A k/C-Aiz_e4.4)- 5
'-'71'Aef-74a 2 te-Tese,7 -
Co-miniczi24 40-7n4n.c.-t-d
4,1.1114.C./ %Lad/ 41..a 41/7.4g.
2,e4t),
411<i .44/tiAL.,-- ‘c-14),
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE VILLAGE COUNCIL
Tuesday, July II, 1972
7:30 P.14., Village Hall
Members present were: Mayor Paul R. Redpath, Councilmen Nesbitt,
McCulloch and Councilwoman Meyers. Al so present was Village Manager
George C. Hite, Village Attorney Harlan Perbix and Clerk Edna Holmgren.
I. MINUTES OF JUNE 13 AND 27, 1972
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to approve the June 13th minutes as
written. Mrs. Meyers seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers to approve the June 27th minutes with
the following correction and addition:
E. St. John's Wood, Page 4, Paragraph 2. Mrs. Meyers questioned the
impact of lower project density; that there was no pool in the
original plans and the inclusion of a winning pool on the cost
per unit. Mr. Gustafson stated, etc.
E. License Application List Dated June 27th 1 'age 5.
Plumbing & Sewer Licenses.
J. McClure Kelly Co. - J. L. Kelly
With these corrections, Mr. McCulloch seconded. All voted aye. Motion
carri ed.
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Mitchell Heights Sanitary Sewer. Resolution No. 540.
The Manager presented and reviewed the proposal for Sub-Trunk Sanitary
Sewer in the Mitchell Heights area. The estimated cost of the project
is $248,733 for 1,273 units with a proposed assessable cost per unit
of $195.39.
The Manager stated that the project would serve three parcels, Shelter
Development, Parcel 4500 containing 515 units, Rocket Development, Parcel
5000 with 593 units and Hipp Construction, Parcels 3630 and 2800 with
165 units. He noted that the trunk watermain has been installed on
Mitchell Road to serve lateral extensions to the area. Mr. Hervey Coleman
Shelter Development appeared to state that he was concerned about the
layout of the project in regard to location as it cuts across the property
the method of assigning units and methods of proposed assessment. The
Manager informed Mr. Coleman that sewer could be located on or adjacent
to the parkway and that at the time of the assessment hearing Shelter's
requests would be considered. He stated that he felt that the proposal
was the least costly design for the three properties. Mr. Coleman asked
as to the two other petitions to inprove Atherton Road extension of
water utility. The Manager replied that none will be recommended until
sewer is approved. Mr. Doug Johnson, New Town project stated that he was
in favor of the trunk sewer as proposed and was anxious to begin with
their project. A representative of Hipps Construction stated that they
were also in favor of the sewer project.
Counci 1 Meeting
July II, 1972
Page Two
There being no further questions or comments, M
r
s
.
M
e
y
e
r
s
m
a
d
e
a
m
o
t
i
o
n
to close the hearing and adopt Resolution No. 5
4
0
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
i
n
g
S
u
b
-
T
r
u
n
k
Sanitary Sewer in the Mitchell Heights area.
M
r
.
N
e
s
b
i
t
t
s
e
c
o
n
d
e
d
.
A
l
l
voted aye. Motion carried.
B. Street Vacations.
1. Portions of Valley View Road. Resolution No.
5
4
1
.
The Manager reviewed a petition for vacation
o
f
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
V
a
l
l
e
y
V
i
e
w
Road by the Eden Land Corp. where the road wi
l
l
b
e
r
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
i
n
E
d
e
n
v
a
l
e
2nd Addition. Temporary easements have been
s
e
n
t
t
o
t
h
e
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
portions of the road and the new roadway right
o
f
w
a
y
w
i
l
l
b
e
d
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
to the Village when the plat is filed.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to close the h
e
a
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
a
d
o
p
t
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
s
:
No. 541 authorizing the vacation of portions of
V
a
l
l
e
y
V
i
e
w
R
o
a
d
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
stipulation that the new right of way will be
d
e
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
when the plat is filed. Mr. McCulloch second
e
d
.
A
l
l
v
o
t
e
d
a
y
e
.
M
o
t
i
o
n
carried.
2. Portions of Bluff Road. Resolution No. 542,
The Manager reviewed a petition for vacation o
f
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
B
l
u
f
f
R
o
a
d
by Wallace Hunted in conjunction with the plat
t
i
n
g
o
f
C
r
e
e
k
K
n
o
l
l
s
.
A motion was made by Kr. Nesbitt to close the h
e
a
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
a
d
o
p
t
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
No. 542 authorizing the vacation of portions of
B
l
u
f
f
R
o
a
d
.
M
r
s
.
M
e
y
e
r
s
seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
3. Portion of Canterbury Lane. Resolution No. 5
4
3
.
The Manager reviewed a petition by Eden Land C
o
r
p
.
a
n
d
R
i
c
h
a
r
d
M
a
v
i
s
o
n
to vacate the north 20 feet of Canterbury Lan
e
e
x
t
e
n
d
i
n
g
j
u
s
t
n
o
r
t
h
o
f
the Mavison driveway. Mr. Putnam, Planning
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
t
s
t
a
t
e
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
l
a
-
just north of the Mavison property is not zone
d
a
n
d
t
h
e
o
w
n
e
r
f
e
e
l
s
t
h
a
t
it is reducing the access by this vacation. Th
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
r
e
p
l
i
e
d
t
h
a
t
access could be to County Road 67 on the nor
t
h
a
n
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
i
s
r
likely to be zoned for residential use as it
i
s
s
i
t
u
a
t
e
d
n
e
x
t
t
o
i
n
d
i
s
t
r
i
property and the railroad. He suggested that
t
h
e
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
m
i
g
h
t
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
'
the vacation with consideration that if the la
n
d
t
o
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
i
s
z
o
n
e
d
residential, the road could be opened. Mr. Ma
v
i
s
o
n
n
o
t
e
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
n
e
i
g
h
;
were concerned about a road extension to Birch
I
s
l
a
n
d
i
f
C
a
n
t
e
r
b
u
r
y
R
o
a
d
is not vacated. A real estate firm representat
i
v
e
w
a
s
c
o
n
c
e
r
n
e
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
.
was no pattern of roads in the area and felt that the Village should wai
with the vacation until the 33 acres to the north are zoned.
Mayor Redpath stated that he felt that the Council
n
e
e
d
e
d
t
i
m
e
t
o
w
o
r
k
with the staff on this matter. The Manager repli
e
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
u
s
e
o
f
t
h
e
land to the north of the road should be resolve
d
.
Mrs. Meyers questioned as to who retains ownershi
p
w
h
e
n
a
r
o
a
d
i
s
v
a
c
a
t
e
The Manager replied that it would revert to the ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
*
m
a
r
t
Council Meeting
July 11, 1972
Page Three
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to continue the hearing until the
July 25th Council meeting. Mrs. Meyers seconded. All voted aye. Motion
carried.
III. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
A. Condon Nauele. Consent on Liquor License Application.
Mr. Bob Naegele, Jr. appeared to arrai ify on their request for a liquor
license at the June 27th Council meeting. He stated that they had planned
a restaurant much like Lord Fletchers on their property on Highway 169
and 494. Completion date is set from 16 to 18 months with a $670,000
anti cipated building cost.
The Mayor stated that the Village did not have an ordinance for thi s type
of operation and the Council must set the criteria first. The Manager note ,
that this was the first application of this type and that the Council must
first adopt an ordinance. He suggested that this matter be placed on the
next Council work session agenda.
B. Creek Knolls Addition. Final Plat Approval. Resolution No. 537.
The Manager reviewed and recommended Final Plat approval for Creek Knolls
with the following conditions: that the roads are constructed or a
developer's agreement, a scenic easement - Outlot A as identified in the
Preliminary Plat and easement presented to the Village at the time of
platting and a document identifying the dedicated area of a minimum of
100 feet on each side.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to adopt Resolution No. 537 authorizing
Final Plat approval of Creek Knolls Addition when the appropriate docum-
ents have been drawn and signed before platting. Mr. McCulloch seconded.
All voted aye. Motion carried.
IV. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS
A. 'reposed Ordinance Regulating Oper a,ion of Motorcycles, Mini-Bikes,
and All Terrain Vehicles. Ordinance No. 175. Second Reading.
A second reading of Ordinance No. 175 was held. Several persons expressed
their objections to the exclusion of mini-bikes from the Forest Hi ll s
School/Park property and asked that the Council designate trails in the
Village. Others indicated that mini-bikes were noisey, constituted a
hazard to non-motorized persons using park facilities, were destroying
grasses and causing ruts which could erode the hills.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers to adopt the second reading of Ordinance
No. 175 as amended and ordered published; the Park & Recreation Commission
be instructed to designate areas on Vi i lags Parks which ft feels would be
suitable for mini-bike use. Mr. Nesbi tt seconded. All voted aye. Motion
carried.
Council Meeting
July 11, 1972
Page Four
B. Brauer & Associates. Engineering Agreements for Redrock & Baker Road
Area Public Improvement Projects.
A mot ion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to authorize the Mayor and Manager to
sign Engineering Agreements for Redrock & Baker Road Area Public Improvernen*
Projects. Mrs. Meyers seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
C. Proposed Ordinance Amending Traffic Ordinance. Ordinances No. 173
and No. 174. First Reading.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to adopt the first reading of Ordinances
No. 173 and No. 174. Mr. licCulloch seconded. All voted aye. Motion
carried.
0. Proposed Southwest Suburban CATV Study Commission. Resolution No. 538.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers to adopt Resolution No. 538 authorizing
the Mayor and Manager to sign a Joint and Cooperative Agreement for a
Southwest Suburban CATV Study Commission to cost $2,000 annually as needed
but not to exceed $2,000. Mr. McCulloch seconded. On roll call, all voted
aye. Motion carried.
Two appointments to the Commission will be made at the next Council meeting
on July 25th.
E. )esignation of Acting Village :4anager•
Upon the Manager's recommendation, a motion was made by Mr. McCulloch to
appoint John Franc, Finance Director as Acting Village Manager. Mrs. Meyer
seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
F. Acceptance of $09,370 Federal Grant for Waste Water. .
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers to accept the Federal Grant for the
1/aste 'later Treatment Plant in the amount of $89070. lir. McCulloch
seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
G. Prgoosed Ordinance Regulating the Movi of Buildings. Ordinance No.
176. First Reading.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers to adopt the first reading of Ordinance
No. 176. Mr. McCulloch seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
V. FINANCES
A. Audit of Claims 10479 through 10631.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers to approve claims 10479 through 10631
for payment. Mr. McCulloch seconded. On roll call, all voted aye.
Mot ion carried.
B. Cash b Investment Resort Dated July 11. 1972.
A motion was made by Mts. Meyers to accept the Cash & bwesbent Report
dated July 11th. Mr. McCulloch seconded. All voted eye. Notion carried.
Council Meeting
July 11, 1972
Page Five
AGENDA ADDITIONS
1. Don Rippel. Oury-Carlson. Mining License 6. Permit. County Road 67
Between Baker Road E. Railroad.
Don Rippel, representing Bury-Carlson reviewed the application for a
mining license and permit to operate a pit on the east half of the Peters
property in Section 3. The Peters home on 3 or 4 acres is proposed as an
exemption to the 20 acre parcel. Mrs. Peters has acknowledged her approval.
No change is proposed on 3.3 acres on the east side of the property. The
Manager noted that this area protects the Village interest and gives the
owner use of the property and provides a green area and a break between the
St. John's hood and industrial area.
Mr. Rippe' stated that it would be a crushing operation and the time sched-
ule would be from 3 to 5 years depending on the need for material.
Upon the Manager's recommendation a motion was made by Mrs. Meyers to grant
a permit and license for the Bury-Carl son pit. Mr. McCulloch seconded.
All voted aye. Motion carried.
2. Parkland Purchase. Staring Lake. Taking of Option to Purchase the
Don Paurus Property.
The Manager reviewed and recommended taking an option on the Don Paurus
property at Staring Lake for park purposes. It is located in the northwest
area of Staring Lake on 1.1 acre of lakeshore property with 325 feet of
frontage on Staring Lake including a house and a small horse barn.
The option price is $1,000 and will extend until October 1, 1972 at which
time the remaining $42,000 of the total purchase price of $43,000 will be
due in cash. The Village will assist Mr. Peurus in renting his house, he
will receive the rent payments until the time of closing after which all
rent payments will be made to the Village.
Upon the Manager's recommendation a motion was made by Mr. Meyers to take
an option in the amount of $1,000 on the Don Peurus property. Mr.
McCulloch seconded. On roll call, all voted aye. Motion carried.
Meeting adjourned at 11:00 P.M.
Edna M. Holmgren, Clerk
PLANNING REPORT
DATE:
July 3, 1972
PROJECT:
Edenvale Industrial Park - 2nd Addition
APPLICANT:
Richard E. Rieman
LOCATION:
Edenvale Industrial Park
REQUEST: Approval of replat of outlots A & B and 2 & 3 of Block 2 and
Development stage approval.
REFER TO: Booklet of 5/72 and commission minutes of June 6, 1972.
COVENT: Mr. Rieman's industrial park proposal in Edenvale is
consistant with the concept and general requirements of
the zoning ordinance. As in many new developments, some
technical requirements such as; set-backs, site acreage,
and minimum lot size are not totally within our current
zoning standards. The intent of the industrial park
section is to...
"establish and maintain high standards of
site planning, architecture, and landscape
design that will create an environment at-
tractive to the most discriminating industries
and research & development establishments."
and "to provide and insure the continuity of
locations for industries that can operate on
small sites with minimum mutual adverse impact."
To achieve this overall objective, fir. Rieman's concept
uses small lots of a 16,000 square foot [ninimum (1/3 acre)
planned in groups of 1, 2 or 3 lots. The use of a small
individual, industrial/office/warehouse building, minimum
of 5,000 square feet offers some flexibilities not normally
gained with standard industrial development.
The project as proposed has an element of chance since
this styl e of industrial park has not been developed to
date in t his metropolitan area. This small element of
chance means that other development options should be
available if this concept is not as successful as anticipated.
The positive features of developing, using this industrial
site planning concept are: shaved parking and driveway
areas, private truck service drive effectively screened
from view, high taxable value spread over small businesses,
minimum wasted space on the site (either used or sizable
open areas), flexible development possible using a 5, 10
or 15,000 square foot building, potential for good architectual
design of harmonious yet varied appearance, use of nearby -
recreational facilities and pathways and good utalization
of utilities. Tailoring specific zoning requirements to
work with Nr. Reiman's concept should produce an excellent
small building industrial park in Edenvale
wir
Planning Rep,
Edenval e Indus Park - 2nd Au,:ition
Page Two
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Recommend to the Council approval of the Development Plan
for Edenvale Industrial Park - 2nd Addition for 6.98 acres
to be developed into small industrial lots on Block 2.
2. Recommend to the Council approval of the replat of Block 2
into small industrial lots, minimum of 16,000 square feet
which Is smaller than normally permitted under the 1-2 Park
zoning classification.
3. Recommend to the Council that building plans, si te & landscape
plans for specific site and related parcels be approved by
the VII lage staff before building permits are iitued.
• 40*--e.-
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: July 5, 1972
PROJECT:
APPLICANT:
REQUEST:
REFER TO:
COMMENTS:
Edenvale Concept Plan - 1972 Revision
Eden Land Corporation
Concept Plan Approval of 1972 Revisions
Commission Minutes of June 6, 1972
COMPARISONS: EDENVALE 1970 CONCEPT PLAN TO 1972
CONCEPT PLAN REVISION
UB
PACE
GOLF
COURSE
TOTAL
UNITS
SINGLE
FAMILY
MULTI
FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
AC.
DU/RES.
AC.
1.970 8.6
cres
115.5
acres
4142
units
96 units 4046 417.6 ac. 9.0
1972 7.8
cres
108.7
acres
3935
units
109
units
3826 402.6 ac. 9.0
bIFFER
ENCE
1N72
-.8
cres
-6.8
acres
-107
units
+13 -220
units
-15. ac. SAME
The 1972 Concept Plan for Edenvale differs from the 1970 Plan
in two general areas. One, the replanning of the golf course has
dictated some modifications of residential parcels, and secondly,
the provision of community shopping and neighborhood service
sites,
The replanning and development of the golf course has changed
the parcel configuration and in many areas utilized the fairway
edges as pathways. A parcel change is where Valley View Road
goes under the railroad tracks, the golf course plan, and the road
realignment has left a buildable parcel of land south of the road
in between the golf course. One affect this has is to diminish
the amount of golf course view from Valley View Road, but it has
given units an ideal building site. This parcel will require great
care in development because of the railroad tracks.
PLANNING REPORT
PAGE IWO
Another parcel directly affected by the golf course is the M2
parcel of 14.2 g. ac. north of Valley View Road east of the
club house. This parcels westerly boundary parallels the pro-
posed driving range and becomes a very difficult area to utilize
for building purposes. Care will have to be taken to insure
that development of this site does not over-develop the build-
able areas because parts are unsuitable for building. In other
words, density credits for each acre of land should be carefully
evaluated at the time of development.
Generally, the parcels that border fairways and greens will need
to be developed with consideration for the requirements of less
than the accurate golfer. If the course becomes public or semi-
public in the future, the potential conflicts with private owners
could be a problem if proper structure design and site planning
aren't used.
Changes in the road systems have been made to accommodate soil,
grade, and Village planning considerations. These realignments are
Improvements to the original plan, some of which have been sugges-
ted by adjacent residents; such as the possible connection of the
single family area east to Baker Road.
The second general area of change is the re-thinking of the commer-
cial services provided in Edenvale. The major change is the 19
acre site adjacent to the Valley View/Baker Road intersection proposed
as a c-reg-service. Metro Associates is proposing to build a
160,000 sq. ft. community shopping center at this location opening
by late 73' or 74'. A major change in the 1970 concept plan is the
creation of a commercial intersection having commercial and institu-
tional uses on three of the four corners. Questions that must be
answered are whether these developments will cause traffic prob-
lems, unsightly commercial uses, and provide compatable uses to
the regional center.
Traffic considerations are very important to the shopping center and
the County Highway Department since both Valley View and Baker
Road are community arterial streets. Present plans indicate that
Baker will be a four-lane divided with median strip requiring sig-
nalized/turn-lane intersections. Future plans for Valley View Road
through Edenvale connecting to the ringroad include four-lane
divided similar to Baker Road. The traffic movements necessary
to serve these developments could be handled very well by these
two streets. Access points for the proposed uses will require
set-back distances from the intersection and these would be con-
sidered as development plans are submitted. The proposed land
uses indicate that the streets with proper access design are com-
patible.
it
PAGE THREE
The question of unsightly strip commercial uses should not be a
problem because Frlenvale and the Village will have design con-
trol on any development. Also, the corner has a heavily wooded
southeast corner which will remain. The typical gas station corner
will not develop at this location.
A question was asked about the compatibility at this community
shopping center with the Major Center area. It is the feeling of
regional center developers, Homart in particular, that the stores
in a small 160,000 sq. ft. center would be compatible and non-
competing with the regional center retail stores. The Jr. department
store and major super market are not uses included in the retail
center but are needed with the larger shopping area. The stores in
this center would not attract users from the metropolitan area like
the regional center does but rather fulfill the weekly living needs
within the community. The location at the center away from the
regional shopping center is appropriate with Metro Council guide
lines for regional center development.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
I . Recommend approval of the Revised Concept Plan dated June 1972,
as presented to the Village Council. This plan is a guide and can
be amended as development plans are submitted if appropriate.
2. The provision of the commercial corner at Valley View and Baker
Road is subject to design/planning review and development approval
by the Village to insure a visually pleasing and functional area.
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, JULY 18, 1972
7:30 P.M.
EDEN PRAIRIE VILLAGE HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Pro-Tern Fosnocht, Schee, Casey
Sorenson, Brown, Mikelson, Nesbitt. Also present, Dick Putnam,
Planner.
I. Election of chairman to replace Mary LaGrow. Brown moved,
seconded by .orenson, to nominate Norma Echee as chairman of
the Planning Commission. No further nominations were made.
Casey moved, Brown seconded to close nominations. Schee was
elected unanimously as chairman and assumed chairmanship of
the meeting from chairman pro-tern Fosnocht who remained as
chairman pro-tern.
Minutes of Tune 20 and July 5 meetings were reviewed. Fosnocht
moved and Casey seconded to approve the June 20 minutes.
Motion carried and Sorenson moved and Brown seconded to approve
the July 5 minutes. Motion carried unanimously.
III. Petitions, Requests, and Communications.
A. Kemrich, Inc. in request for zoning change from rural to RI 13.5
for a single family division, approximately 13 acres located north
of :Nzk Lake Trail and east of Bellhurst addition.
Harold Olson of Caswell and Assoc., engineers and site planners
on the project presented the single family plot for 27 number of
single family 13.5 lots. The proposed plot connects to Ginavale
Lane and also to Duck Lane and also to Duck Lake Trail and ends
in a cul-de-sac overlooking the large marsh to the north. The
lateral systems gill run down the streets as well as storm sewer
and water.
The property directly to the east owned by Mrs. L.C. Marks is
narrow, being only 135 feet in width and extending back six to
seven hundred feet along the easterly property line and is a
critical element of this proposal. From a suggestion by the staff,
the developers have asked Mrs. Marks if she would participate in
a joint development with them for single family units on the back
portion of her property or in selling parts of or all of her property
to the developers. At this time, she will not cooperate and so
they have developed two alternative plans, One was submitted this evening without her property included and they have another
that does include her property. The Commission was concerned that she be fully aware of the situation; that her land would be extremely
difficult to develop without developing in conjunction with these
people. To the east of her property is the church site that will not
have any residential use. Mr. Fosnocht asked that the Planning
Staff contact Mrs. Marks and advise her of this situation and ask
her to attend the next Planning Commission meeting.
PLANNING COMMILSION MINUTES
JULY 18, 1972
PAGE TWO
The land to the north is located in the lowland area, and has
been dedicated or will be dedicated to Eden Prairie for parkland.
This is approximately an acre and a half. There is also an ease-
ment connection between the proposed street and that park site
between lots 12 and 13 indicated.
Casey moved, Sorenson se.onded to referthe Kemrich plat to the
Park and Recreation Commissior and to the staff for a report and
recommendation. Motion carried.
B. Elliason Construction. Request R1 13.5 zoning per 50 acres,
single family development, west and south of Round Lake and
north of Highway Five.
Mr. Olson from Caswell and Assoc. presented the proposed plat
which indicates 113,500 sq. ft. single family lots clustered in
small cul-de-sacs using Heritage Road and the proposed Round
Lake Parkway as access points. Thc proposed plat connects to
Atherton Way and the Heritage Park addition and the Parkway.
The lots are primarily clustered in smell groupings on short cul-
de-sac streets. This, Mr. Olson pointed out is the prime type
of single family home location. They try to integrate the new
building with the existing Heritage Park addition by using similar
frontages and lots adjacent to Heritage Road.
A strong point here is the considerable amount of public open
space land dedicated within this 50-arc project. Noted on the
plat are the two areas of public access and space. One is
running south along the easterly property line to Highway 5 and
then along Highway 5 as a buffer, and one runs west from Round
Lake through the development connecting with the marsh adjacent
to Mitchell Lake. The northerly public space runs through a
heavily wooded area and attempts to preserve this wooded character.
The developers feel that the land on the east side that runs north-
south to Round Lake Park should be duplicated on the adjacent
property to provide an extensive public pathway system running
to Highway Five and at some point under to Mitchell Lake. Then
to supplement this public space there is quasi-public or easement
space indicated. These provide each lot with pedestrian access
and also small play spaces within the project itself. Mr. Eliason
proposes to handle these spaces through an easement arrangement,
with each lot owner to maintain his own lot.
Mr. Olson noted a possibility to use smaller lots of possibly 6,000
to 8,000 sq. ft. each, to develop lower cost single family housing
on one of the cul-de-sacs. This would be worked out with the
Village later as an experiment to provide the amenities and life
style of single family living at a cost of under 330,000. Currently
this development's proposed price range is approximately 30-S0 or
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JULY 18, 1972
PAGE THREE
$60 , 000 per unit. The planner noted that this idea might be
a way for the Village to implement its policies of providing
good quality housing at a lower price for families, and that is
something Elliason's are willing to agree to.
The Commission suggested that the Ellinson's and Mr. Olson
investigate the possibility of approaching this from a P.U.D.
standpoint. The Commission felt the information presented in
this plat form was not sufficient for a project of this scale and
magnitude. They also felt that the provision for public open
space and semi-public open space was suitable to the flextbilities
and design that the PUD approach provides and they urged the
developer and the staff to investigate further.
Casey moved and Brown seconded that the Elliason Construction
Round Lake Estates proposal be referred to the Human Rights
Commission for consideration of the lower cost housing units and
to the Park and Recreation for review and recommendation and to
the staff for a report. Motion carried.
C. Perkle and Arndt Baywood single family subdivision request RI
13.5 zoning. Project located west of Co. Rd. 4 and to the south
of Duck Lake Trail adjacent to Duck Lake. Larry Hanson from
Schoell and Madson presented the Baywood single family plat for
27 lots located adjacent to Duck Lake. After outlining the
engineering aspects of the project, drainage and sewer and streets,
Mr. Hanson explained the concept of providing single family lots
with private lake shore access to Duck Lake on a cul-de-sac
arrangement. The street noted as Baywood Terrace would stub to
the property line and could provide access to the north at a
later date. It was desired to extend this street to Duck lake
Trail through Mr. Stodola and Mr. Deaver's property. Also, indi-
cated was the street Bay Drive, which would provide access for
a future development by the adjacent owners of that property. It
would work in conjunction with this proposed project.
Mr. Hanson noted the areas designated as Oudot B indicated in
green as thc quasi-public open space areas for this 13 acre pro-
ject. The functions of these would be a small tot lot type space
for children's play area located on the northerly central pert. It
would also serve as a drainage way. The pathway leads from that
children's play space to the lake and would be screened by a
small fence type barrier just to define the pathway. At the lake
is an area, approximately 120 feet in width that is intended for a
small marina facility; dockage for canoe or small sailboat and small
picnicking area for the lots in this subdivision. This space would
be maintained through covenants or deed restriction by owners of
this subdivision. This space would be maintained through covenants
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JULY 18, 1972
PAGE FOUR
or deed restriction by owners of this subdivision and would be
useable by that group. To supplement this space, as indiant.cd
on the plat, a portion of the adjacent land could be added to
Outlot B to enlarge it if the owners of the adjacent land desire
to develop their land at a future date.
A question was raised about the access on to County Road 4 that
Bay Lane has. As proposed it would join approximately where
the driveway currently is for the properties to the south. This
entrance would be modified to make a perpendicular to existing
County Road 4. Because of the grades from the bridge over
the railroad tracks and also the distance from Duck Lake Trail.
This may not be feasible, and so a study will be needed. The
planner noted that these plans will have to be submitted to the
Hennepin County Highway Department since County Road 4 is under
their jurisdiction for approval and they would be reviewing the site
limitations to that intersection.
Fosnocht moved and Nesbitt seconded to refer the Baywood sub-
division proposed plat to the Park and Recreation Commission and
to the staff for review and report. Motion carried.
IV. Reports and Recommendations.
A. Edenvale concept plan revision dated June, 1972. Requests
approval of the 1972 plan to amend the July 1970 land use
plan.
The planner briefly reviewed the staff report dated July 5, which
reviews the differences between the 1970 and 1972 concept plan
for Ed:nvale. In comparing the two, the differences are very
minor. Primarily, the total number of units and the residential
acreage have decreased,and the dwelling units per residential
acre remains approximately the same. He outlined the two major
areas of difference. The first being the replanning of the golf
course has suggested some modifications to certain residential
partials and secondly the provision of the community shopping
center at the new intersection of Baker and the move to Valley
View Road. He discussed certain parcels that will have particular
problems in design bordering on the fairways and the greens of
the proposed golf course. This is a very desirable residential
environment but will require great care and placement of structures
and screening to insure that conflicts between golfers and residents
will not occur in the future. The major change from the original
concept plan is the inclusion of a 160,000 sq. ft. community
shopping center at Baker and Valley View. In reviewing this,
the staff believes it to be a valid location for such a center,
for the automobile access to this site is excellent and it is
something that Eden Prairie currently needs. In addition there is
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JULY 18, 1972
PAGE FIVE
no development currently around this center and it will have a
minimum impact upon any existing development. The staff was
concerned with limiting the development around that intersection
so as not to end up with typical strip development common to
suburban areas. In looking as the plan submitted by Edenvale,
it appears that the types of development proposed on the corners
of the intersection will be of a very high quality and complimen-
tary type to insure that the comer will be designed in a sensible
traffic pattern and appeal.
Recommendation.
Casey moved and Fosnocht seconded to recommend to the Eden
Prairie Council that the 1972 concept plan for Edenvale PUD be
approved to replace the 197 0 concept plan and to recommend that
this plan be used as a guide subject to amendment upon detailed
design and subject to amendment upon detailed design and subject
to planning Ind zoning commission review and approval. Motion
passed with Sorenson the only objection.
B. Edenvale Industrial Park. Second Addition. Rezoning and replat
of a proposed industrial park development of approximately 6.8
acres. The planner reviewed the staff report dated July 3, 1972,
discussing the Reimen proposal for Edenvale Industrial Park. He
noted the positive features which offered flexibility to the normal
industrial development and provided for a unique and different
industrial type useage within Eden Prairie and the metro area. He
also discussed the potential problems that may develop with this
project. One, being the current zoning of the project I—general,
which permits outside storage and is generally conceived as a
more larger industrial use than the 16,000 sq. ft. lots proposed.
Therefore, rezoning would be necessary. The problems that may
arise from a change of ownership at a later date was also noted.
Also problems of parking, if the use changes, could cause problems
in the future.
Mr. Hite suggested that the matter be handled using a PUD concept
plan as the first stage, thereby establishing a contractual relation-.
ship between the developer and the Village that would allow for
flexibility ind expedite the planning and design of the proposed
use. Secondly, that rezoning must be accomplished on the parcel
of land from I-general to industrial park in a two acre minimum
category. Thirdly, that replatting of Outlot A in Block 2 into
smaller lots could be accomplished with the stipulation that if
development did not occur in the prescribed matter under the con-
cept plan that the replatting would be null and void and revert
back to two acre minimum lots size. This suggestion by Mr. Hite
seemed acceptable to Mr. Reimen and Mr. Peterson from Edenvale
and to the Commission Members present.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JULY It, 1972
PAGE SIX
Mr. Reimen and Eclenvale will put together the proper material to
supplement their request in accord with the PUD procedures and
also a letter to the Village discussing the PUD proposed.
Recommendation.
1. To recommend to the Council that the PUD concept plan approval
for the Reimen Industrial Park within the Edenvale Industrial Area
be approved. Secondly, the rezoning from I-general to 1-2 Park
be granted and thirdly that replatting of the lots as indicated on
the PUD submission be granted with a stipulation that if a devel-
opment is not carried out as anticipated that the platting is null
and void and the lots revert back to the standard 1-2 Park re-
strictions and fourthly that development must conform with the PIM
concept plan.
2. The Planning Commission requests that the Council grant approval
of this project contingent upon review of additional submission
which should include further definition of parking requirements,
distance between buildings, specific deviations from the 1-2 zoning
and the phasing of the development.
Casey moved and Sorenson seconded that these two recommendations
be forwarded to the Council. The motion carried unanimously.
C. Hipp's Mitchell Heights PUD Phase I request preliminary plat approval.
The preliminary plat has 14 townhouse units and 10 single family
home sites on the first phase located adjacent to Hiawatha and
Scenic Heights Road. Planner briefly reviewed background of this
plat and noted that it has been reviewed and found to be in con-
formance with the Village requirements and the initial concept plan
submission by Mr. Hipps.
Action Taken.
Fosnocht moved and Brown seconded that the Planning Commission
recommend to the Council the approval of the preliminary plat for
Hipps Mitchell Heights PUD Phase I in accordance with the recom-
mendations in the staff report dated July 16, 1972. Motion was
passed unanimously.
D. New Town Development. Athertown Townhouse Development.
Requesting preliminary plat approval on Phase I located east of
Mitchell Road near Scenic Heights Road. The planner presented
the preliminary plat for the Atherton Townhouse Project approved
approximately three months ago by the Council. In discussing the
proposal for 89 units on the 13.3 acre site, a question was raised
by the Planning Commission concerning the center court area of the
project which had units protruding into it from one of the clusters.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JULY 18, 1972
PAGE SEVEN
It was understood by the many Planning Commission Members that
these units had been removed. When they approved a project that
was for 86 units, they understood those units were deleted -vhen
the project was reduced from 96 to 86 units. Mr. Fosnocht and
Sorenson felt that the developer was adding on units to what was
approved in the initial concept plan and this was inconsistent with
what was approved, which indicated no units in the center of the
development. The planner said that in his interpretation the units
were never removed completely from the center court, but only
the second row, and the number was lessened. He brought this
up as a matter of discussion between New Town Development and
the Village. The Village Staff report indicated that ideally those
units in our feeling should be removed but from conversations with
New Town development and its site planner. It was felt by the
developer that those units were beneficial to the project in the
center and that they wish to have them remain to create a court
that would be private to the townhouse development. Also, the
exceptional view fforted to those units that extend into the court
space.
Another question raised was that this project falls into the 6.5
category, but was approved at 86 units, which is not at the
maximum allowable under 6.5 category. It was the understanding
of New Town development that they were building to the maximum
allowable under 6.5 since they had initially submitted rezoning
for 11 2.5 and was suggested by the staff that the 6.5 category
was the one that their project should fall under as it is a town-
house sale project. The Commission understood that the zoning
categories are only brought in as an after thought in that in PUD
proceedings or prccedures;the important part is the plan and not
the zoning category. Therefore, the Commission feels that the RM
6.5 category and the number of units acceptable under the category
is not as important as the plan itself.
At this juncture in the meeting, Sorenson moved and Fosnocht
seconded to continue action until the next meeting on the Atherton
Townhouse Project, and until plans ore reviewed further by the
staff and another staff report is written dealing with the 86-89,
unit difference.
Discussion on this motion was brought forward indicating the time
span this project has been before the Village, and the developer
felt he would be severely handicapped if there are further delays
at this point. Also the developer was under the assumption that
the plans as submitted were those approved by the Village. A
question was called and a roll call vote was taken. Sorenson
and Fosnocht voted in favor of the motion and Brown, Casey, and
Nesbitt voted no to the motion. The motion did not pass.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JULY 18. 1972
PAGE EIGHT
Brown moved and Nesbitt seconded that the recommendations in
the Planning Report dated July 16, 1972, be recommended to the
Council and that an addition #5 be added stating that the 89
units proposed in the preliminary plat be approved rather than the
86 as previously approved noting that this increase in units does
not exceed the 5.5 zoning category.
Discussion of this motion was centered around the fact that the
Village has made a committment and the developers have proceeded
in good faith with the committment as understood by the staff to
develop the units in conformance with the concept plan and that
to delay action at this point would seriously handicap the developer.
Also the fact that the plan itself has been greatly improved by
numerous changes made by the developer at the request of the
Village.
Action Taken.
Motion carried 3-2 with Brown, Mikelson, Nesbitt voting in favor
of the motion. Fosnocht and Sorenson voting no. Schee and
Casey obstaining.
Meeting was adjourned at 11:95 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Wayne Brown, Secretary
LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
A1LY 25, 1972
CIGARETTE & SEER-OFF SALE
Eden Prairie Grocery - Kelton Ityhesmer
WELL LICENSE
Was Eridtson 11.11 Co. - Wesley E. Eridcson
PLUNKS/ LICENSE
Novde Phobias & Nesting, Inc. - Burton R. Heyde
4"
'
JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN C.ATV STUDY COMMISSION
The parties to this agreement are governmental units of
the State of Minnesota. This agreement is made pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59.
I. GENERAL PURPOSE
Communities in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area,
including the parties to this agreement, are now being requested
to enfranchise the operation of cable television ("CATV") systems.
CATV holds out great potential and importance as a communications
medium. It is therefore of the utmost importance for communities
to attempt to deal with the enfranchising process, and with sub-
sequent regulation of CATV, in a manner best serving the public
interest.
This Will necessitate an in-depth study of a variety of
matters including the nature and potential of CATV, its operational
characteristics, how to secure reasonable access for use by the
public, what should be done to assure interconnectibility with other
systems in the area, what is a suitable geographic and market area
for a franchise, how system capabilities should be maintained and
improved during the franchise and, generally, what would be the best
procedure for the parties to follow in granting franchises and admini-
stering them.
The general purpose of this agreement is to provide an organi-
zation, of limited duration, which can undertake such studies and
make specific recommendations to the governing bodies of the parties
as to how to proceed with the enfranchising and regulatory processes
in these communities. By joint and cooperative action the parties
can share in the expenses of such study, can develop a uniform approach
to the matter of enfranchising, and can explore the possibilities of
joint or conunon action on a permanent basis.
II. DEFINITION OF TERMS
Section 1. For the purposes of this agreement, the terms
defined in this article shall have the meanings given them.
Section 2. "Commission" means the organization created pur-
suant to this agreement, which shall be known as the "Southwest
Suburban CATV Study Commission". The commission consists'of its
board of directors. Each party is entitled to two (2) members on the
board of directors.
Section 3. "Council" means the governing body of a party.
Section 4. "Party" means a municipality which enters into
this agreement.
III. PARTIES
The municipalities eligible to become parties to this agree-
ment are the Villages of Eden Prairie and Edina, the Cities of
Hopkins, Minnetonka, St. Louis Park and Richfield, any municipality
contiguous to any of these named municipalities, and any other
municipality contiguous to any municipality which becomes a party.
IV. BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Section 1. The governing body of the commission shall be
its board of directors. Each party shall be entitled to two (2)
directors, each of whom shall have one (1) vote. The council of
each party shall appoint its two (2) directors, one Di of whom shAll
ar of the council and the other an administrator or F. taff
vsv enrranchising in the fommunktv. Directors shall serve without
compensation from the commission, but this shall not prevent a member
from providing compensation for its directors if such compensation
is authorized by the party and by law.
Section 2. There shall be no voting by proxy, but all votes
must be cast in person at board meeting by the director.
Section 3. Directors shall be appointed to serve until their
successors are appointed and assume their responsibilities, but
directors shall serve at the pleasure of the council appointing them.
When a council appoints a director it shall give notice of such
appointment to the city manager of the City of St. Louis Park. Such
notice shall include the mailing address of the person so appointed.
The names and addresses shown on such notices may be used as the
official names and addresses for the purposes of giving notices of
any meetings of the commission.
Section 4. A majority of the board of directors shall con-
stitute a quorum of the board.
Section 5. A vacancy on the board shall be filled by the
council of the party whose position on the board is vacant.
—2—
Section 6. A director shall not be eligible to vote on
behalf of his municipality during the time that it is in default
on any contribution or payment to the commission. During the
existence of such default the vote or votes of such party shall
not be counted for the purposes of this agreement. If a party
remains in default for a period of more than sixty (60) days on any
billing from the commission the membership of such party automati-
cally shall be terminated.
V. MEETINGS - ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Section 1. A party entering into this agreement shall do
so by the duly authorized execution of a copy of this agreement by
Its proper officers. Thereupon, the clerk or other appropriate
officer of the party shall file a duly executed copy of this agree-
ment, together with a certified copy of the authorizing resolution,
with the city manager of the City of St. Louis Park. The resolution
authorizing execution of the agreement shall also designate the first
two (2) directors from that party. The agreement shall become
effective when it has been authorized by four (4) of the eligible
municipalities and when the appropriate documents have been filed as
provided above. Within thirty (30) days after the effective date
of this agreement the manager of the City of St. Louis Park shall
call the first meeting of the board which shall be held no later than
fifteen (15) days thereafter.
Section 2. At the first meeting of the board and in July of
each year thereafter while the commission is in existence the board
shall elect from its directors a president, a vice-president and a
secretary-treasurer.
Section 3. At the organizational meeting, or as soon there-
after as it reasonably may be done, the board shall adopt bylaws
governing its procedures including the time, place and frequency of
its regular meetings. Such bylaws may be amended from time to time.
Section 4. Special meetings of the board may be called
(a) by the president (b) by the executive committee, or (c) by
the executive committee upon the written request of a majority of
the directors. Five (5) days written notice of special meetings shall
be given to the directors. Such notice shall include the agenda for
the special meeting.
Section 5. The specific date, time and location of regular
and special meetings of the board shall be determined by the executive
committee.
-3-
Section 6. Notice of regular meetings of the board shall
be given to the directors by the secretary-treasurer at least seven
(7) days in advance and the agenda for such meetings shall accompany
the notice. However, business at regular meetings of the board
need not be limited to matters set forth in the agenda.
VI. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE BOARD
Section 1. The powers and duties of the board shall include
the powers set forth in this article.
Section 2. It shall take such action as it deems necessary
and appropriate to accomplish the general purposes of the organi-
zation.
Section 3. It shall consult with persons knowledgeable in
CATV and persons having a special interest therein, such as industry
representatives, research organizations, educational institutions,
other political subdivisions, municipal organizations, regulatory
organizations, technical experts and any other persons who can provide
pertinent information concerning CATV franchising and regulation.
Section 4. After study it shall undertake to identify matters
of common concern to the parties and shall recommend a course of
action to be pursued by the parties in the granting and enforcement
of CATV franchises. In that connection it shall consider and make
recommendations on whether the parties should have uniform ordinances,
whether they should undertake to grant a franchise to the same party
and whether they should establish a continuing organization to admini-
ster and enforce any franchise or franchises which are granted by the
parties. It shall undertake to make such recommendations no later
than December 31, 1972.
Section 5. It may prepare and recommend suitable documents
for use in the granting of franchises by the parties. In the event
that the parties determine to pursue a common or a joint course of
action in the granting of franchises it may assist in the carrying
out of such joint or common course of action.
Section 6. It may enter into any contracts deemed necessary,
by the board, to carry out its powers and duties, subject to the
provisions of this agreement.
Section 7. It may accept gifts, apply for and use grants,
enter into agreements required in connection therewith and hold, use
and dispose of money or property received as a gift or grant in
accordance with the terms thereof.
-4-
Section 8. It shall cause an annual, i
n
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t
a
u
d
i
t
of the books of the commission to be m
a
d
e
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
m
a
k
e
a
n
a
n
n
u
a
l
financial accounting and report in
w
r
i
t
i
n
g
t
o
t
h
e
p
a
r
t
i
e
s
.
I
t
s
books and records shall be available
f
o
r
a
n
d
o
p
e
n
t
o
e
x
a
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
by the parties at all reasonable tim
e
s
.
I
t
s
h
a
l
l
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
t
h
e
annual budget for the commission as
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
i
n
t
h
i
s
a
g
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
.
Section 9. It may delegate authority
t
o
t
h
e
e
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
committee of the board between board
meetings. Such delegation of
authority shall be by resolution of the
b
o
a
r
d
a
n
d
m
a
y
b
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
e
d
in such manner as the board may determin
e
.
Section 10. It may investigate the ope
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
A
T
V
s
y
s
t
e
m
s
in other cities, but the expenses of trave
l
a
n
d
s
u
b
s
i
s
t
e
n
c
e
o
f
directors in making any such investig
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
b
o
r
n
e
by each
party for its directors and no such ex
p
e
n
s
e
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
i
n
c
u
r
r
e
d
b
y
a
n
y
director without prior authority from
t
h
e
c
o
u
n
c
i
l
a
p
p
o
i
n
t
i
n
g
h
i
m
.
Section 11. It may exercise any other
p
o
w
e
r
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
a
n
d
incidental to the implementation of i
t
s
p
o
w
e
r
s
a
n
d
d
u
t
i
e
s
.
VII. OFFICERS
Section 1. The officers of the board
s
h
a
l
l
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
o
f
a
president, a vice-president and a sec
r
e
t
a
r
y
-
t
r
e
a
s
u
r
e
r
w
h
o
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
elected at the regular annual meetin
g
o
f
t
h
e
b
o
a
r
d
h
e
l
d
i
n
J
u
l
y
o
f
each year. New officers shall take o
f
f
i
c
e
a
t
t
h
e
a
d
j
o
u
r
n
m
e
n
t
of the
annual meeting of the board at which
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
e
l
e
c
t
e
d
.
Section 2. A vacancy shall immediat
e
l
y
o
c
c
u
r
i
n
t
h
e
o
f
f
i
c
e
of any officer upon his resignation, d
e
a
t
h
o
r
u
p
o
n
h
i
s
c
e
a
s
i
n
g
t
o
be an officer or employee of his muni
c
i
p
a
l
i
t
y
.
U
p
o
n
v
a
c
a
n
c
y
occurring in any office, the executive committee shall fill such
position until the next meeting of th
e
b
o
a
r
d
.
Section 3. The three (3) officers shall all be members of the
executive committee.
Section 4. The president shall presid
e
a
t
a
l
l
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
s
o
f
the board and the executive committ
e
e
.
T
h
e
v
i
c
e
-
p
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
h
a
l
l
a
c
t
as president in the absence of the p
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
.
Section 5. The secretary-treasurer sh
a
l
l
b
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
keeping a record of all of the proceedings of the board and executive
committee, for custody of all funds, for the keeping of all fina
n
c
i
a
l
-5-
records of the organization and for such other matters as shall be
delegated to him by the board. Any persons may be engaged to perform
such services under his supervision and direction, when authorized
by the board. He shall post a fidelity bond or other insurance
against loss of organization funds in an amount approved by the board,
at the expense of the organization.
VIII. FINANCIAL MATTERS
Section 1. Commission funds may be expended by the board
in accordance with the procedures established by law for the expendi-
ture of funds by villages. Orders, checks and drafts shall be signed
by any two (2) of the officers. Other legal instruments shall be
executed by authority of the board, by the chairman and secretary-
treasurer.
Section 2. The financial contributions of the parties in
support of the commission shall be equal. The contributions to the
commission for the calendar year 1972 shall be two thousand and no/100
($2,000.00) dollars per party. Contributions for subsequent years,
if any, shall be established as hereinafter provided.
Section 3. A proposed budget shall be formulated by the
board and submitted to the parties on or before August 1 of each year,
except that in 1972 this need not be accomplished before September 1.
Such budget shall be deemed approved by a party unless, prior to
October 15 of the year involved, the party gives notice in writing
to the board that it is withdrawing from the commission. The board
may revise its budget in response to or as a result of a notice from
any party that it proposes to withdraw from the commission. Final
action adopting a budget for the ensuing calendar year shall be taken
by the board on or before November 1 of each year. The total contribu-
tions from parties provided for in the final budget shall be divided
equally among the parties to arrive at the required contribution of
each party. The total contribution any party may be required to make
during any calendar year shall not exceed two thousand and no/100
($2,000.00) dollars.
Section 4. Upon dissolution of the commission any funds
remaining shall be returned to the parties in proportion to their
contributions to the commission.
'IX. DURATION
Section 1. The commission shall continue until its annual
meeting in July of 1973, and thereafter from year to year .unless the
number of parties shall become less than four (4) . None of the parties
-6-
shall withdraw prior to that date. Thereafter, withdrawal of a
member at the end of any year may be accomplished by that party's
filing a written notice thereof with the secretary-treasurer by
October 15 of that year. The commission may also be terminated
by mutual agreement of all of the parties at any time.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned party has caused this
agreement to be signed on its behalf this day of
1972.
WITNESSED BY: of
By:
(Its
By:
(Its