HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 08/22/1972/GENOA
EDEN PRAIRIE VILLAGE COUNCIL
Tuesday, August 22, 1972 7$30 P.M., Village Hall
INVOCATION - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - ROLL CALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS, Mayor Paul Redpath, Ralph Nesbitt, John McCulloch,
Joan Meyers and John Comma.
COUNCIL STAFF' Village Manager, Robort P. Heinrich; Village Attorney,
Harlan Perbixs Clerk, Edna Holeaven.
/MINUTES OF AUGUST 8. 1972
Actions Motion to approve.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
/A. Edcnvale. Shelter Development Corp. Rawest for RN 2.5 Zoning.
111—TaMT1 FHA 236 Proposal. (Letter from Attorney General and
Planning Report attached)
Actions I. Motion approving Briarhill FHA 2$ Proposal and District
Rural to District Residential Multiple PM 2.5 or deny.
2. First Reading of Ordinance No.117. '
B. Minneapolis Chapter of American Institute of Architocts/Eberhardi.
Windslow. (Planning Report Attached). 1 ,2 -ti e ' • •
Actions 1. Motion approving Minslope 236 Proposal and District Rural
to District Residential Molt* IN 2.1 OP
2. First Reading of Ordinance No. 181.
C. Elliason iBuilders. Inc. Round Lake Estates PUB. (Planning Report
Attached).
Actions 1. Motion adopting Resolution No. 560, Round Lake Estates PUB
or deny.
2. Motion approving relcassification from Zoning District Rural
to RI 13.5.
3. First Reading of Ordinance No. 182.
11. Motion adopting Resolution No. 561, Preliminary Plat approval
Round Lake
Council Agenda
August 22, 1512
Page Two
%/D. Kanwich Inc. Edenborouoh Subdivision. (Planning Report Attached).
Actions I. Motion approving reclassification from Zoning District
Rural to RI 13.5 or deny.
2. First Reading of Ordinance No. 183./
3. Motion adopting Resolution No. 562/Preliminary Plat approval •
Edenborough Subdivision.
Donald H. porkl•DouqIas D. Arndt. Bavitood Subdivision. (Planning
Report Attached).
Actions lt / Motion approving reclassification from Zoning District
Rural to R1 13.5 or deny.
1,/ 2. First Reading of Ordinance No. 184. %/
3. Motion approving Resolution No. 563,/Preliminary Plat approval -
B snood Subdivision.
F. Hipps Construction. Edenvale. (Planning Report Attached).
Actions 1. Reclassification from Rural (Edenvale PUO) to Residential
Multiple RN 6.5 or deny.
2. cliirmieReading of Ordinance No. 174.//
. Motion adopting Resolution No. 564, Preliminary Plat approval •
Hipps Construction Co. - Edenvale.
Dru•Har Construction Co. Valley Knolls Addition. (Planning Report
Attached).
Actions I. Motion approving reclassification from District Rural to
D n , ri
District RI 13.5 or deny.
2. First Reading of Ordinance No. 185.
3. Motion adopting Resolution No. 565, Preliminary Plat approval
Valley Knolls Addition.
III. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Tree Chtepino Operation at International Disposal Cor po ration of
Minnesota.. Inc. _PDC). Conducted by Hennepin County Nparteent of
Public Works. (Presentation by Hennepin County Department of
Public Works, Mr. Luther Nelson).
Actions No action raquirsd. Use permitted with the existing plan.
E.
Council Agenda
August 22, 1972
Page Three
1/1). Report on Operation Alternatives Services and Recommendation for
an Action Program. (Report by Eden Prairie Drug Committee).
Actions
I/C. Michael J. Richter. Request for Small Kennel License. (Report
Attached
Action:
1/II. Approval of List of Judges and Counters for September 12A 1972 and
November 7, 1972 Elections.
Action: Motion to approve list.
/ Minnesota Highway Department Maintenance Fat lity Located Between
Highway 169 and Interstate 212, North of Ma r Center Area.
Actions Motion adopting Resolution No. 567. .
1/F. Human Rights Commission Motion to Approve Staff Report Dated July 30,
1972 - Windslope POD.
Action: Receive and file.
IV. RES OLUTIONS AND ORDIIONCES
A. Resolution Supporting Metro Sewer Board and Metro Council Proposal
Allocating Reserve Capacity Costs to Future Users.
Actions Motion adopting Resolution No. 566.
V. A Resolution of Intent Not to Treat Industrial Wastes. Environmental
Protection Aaencv.
Action: Motion adopting Resolution No. 559. I
V. FINANCES
/ A. Fire Department Relief Association. Financial Requirements.
Actions To receive and file. No action required.
AGENDA ADDITIONS
I. Duck Lake Trail 6 County Road fl.. Pedestrian Pathway.
Action:
2. License *siltation I.1st Dated Augiat 22. 1972.
Actions Approval.
,
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE VILLAGE COUNCIL
Tuesday, August 8, 1972
7:30 P.M., Village Hall
Members present were: Mayor Paul R. Redpath, Councilmen Nesbitt,
Cosmano and Councilwoman Meyers. Also present was Village Manager,
Robert P. Heinrich, Village Attorney Harlan Perbix and Clerk, Edna
Holmgren.
MINUTES OF JULY 25, 1972.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to approve the minutes of July 25th
with the following corrections:
Page I - Acceptance of $89,370 Federal Grant for !faste !later.
Resolution No. 545.
Page 4 - second paragraph - second sentence. He cited that the Baker/
Mitchell area would contain a planned grouping of a service
station, church and neighborhood, cortmercial center.
I11th these corrections, Mrs. Meyers seconded. All voted aye. Motion
carried.
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Nine Mile 1A Sub Trunk Sanitary Sewer. SAN 2-1-12. Pro 'ect
Hearing. Resolution No. 553,
The Manager presented and revised a petition for sanitary sewer in a
portion of the north half of Section 3 from Manhole No. 23 northeasterly
approximately 2,400 feet to Baker Road. The estimated cost of the project
Is $'91,300 for an estimated assessable area of 61.68 acres with a
proposed cost of $1,1480.22 per acre.
The Manager stated that the project had been petitioned by 8 property
owners and would serve the area of St. John's Wood.
Mrs. Meyers made a motion to close the hearing and adopt Resolution No.
553 authorizing the Nine Mile IA Sub Trunk Sanitary Sewer. Mr. Cosmano
seconded. Al I voted aye. Motion carried.
B. Minrteapol is Chapter of American Institute of Architects/Eberhardt.
Windslope. Reclassify from, Distri ct Rural to District Residential
Multiple RM 2.5. Ordinance No. 181. First Reading.
Mr. Donner representing The Preserve, Mr. Johnson, the Treasurer of the
Minneapolis Chapter of American Institute of Architects and Mr. Baldwin,
Landscape Architect presented and reviewed the !findslope zoning request.
The project is located in The Preserve north of the Neill Lake Center in
the westerly corner on a 10.8 acre site. Mr. Johnson reviewed MAIA's
objectives of provision for moderate income housing at a high standard
of architectural and environmental qual ity. He stated that the basic
Council Meeting
August 8, 1972
Page Two
buildings will be three-unit apartment structures with individual
entries from a central stairway. There will be 1, 2 and 3 bedroom
units with the buildings grouped in 12 and 18 unit clusters with
storage and mechanical space at ground level in the stairway areas.
There are parking courts planned that will provide a partial screen
from the road.
The Mayor questioned whether there is any rent supplement proposed
for the project and Mr. Johnson replied that there was not at this
time but would utilize the conventional 236 program.
Mrs. Meyers inquired as to the projected rental rates. She was
informed that rates are proposed of $135 for 1 bedroom, $165 for
2 bedroom and $225 for 3 bedroom units.
The Mayor inquired if any plans had been included in the project
for collection of bottles for recycling. Mr. Bonner replied that
there had not but that perhaps some provision could be made for an
area in the project for that purpose.
There being no further questions or comments, a motion was made by
Mr. Cosmano to continue the first reading of Ordinance No. 181 to
August 22nd until the attorney general's ruling is available on subsid-
ized projects and a recommendation is made by the Planning Commission
on the Ilinslope project. Mr. Nesbitt seconded. All voted aye. Motion
carried.
III. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
A. License Application List Dated August 8, 1972.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to approve the License Application List
dated August 8th as follows:
PLUMBING SET-U°
Backdahl & Olson Plumbing Brandin' Iron - Joseph Ruzic
Clarence 01 son
Mr. Cosmano seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
B. Notice of Acceptance of State Water °ollution Control Agency Grant.
$40,625. Resolution No. 554.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers to adopt Resolution No. 554 authorizing
the Manager to sign the acceptance of the State 'later 0 ollution Control
Agency Grant for $40,625. Mr. Cosmano seconded. All voted aye. Motion
carried.
vt
Council Meeting
August 8, 1972
Page Two
buildings will be three-unit apartment structures with individual
entries from a central stairway. There will be 1, 2 and 3 bedroom
units with the buildings grouped in 12 and 18 unit clusters with
storage and mechanical space at ground level in the stairway areas.
There are parking courts planned that will provide a partial screen
from the road.
The Mayor questioned whether there is any rent supplement proposed
for the project and Mr. Johnson replied that there was not at this
time but would utilize the conventional 236 program.
Mrs. Meyers inquired as to the projected rental rates. She was
Informed that rates are proposed of $135 for 1 bedroom, $165 for
2 bedroom: and $225 for 3 bedroom units.
The Mayor inquired if any plans had been included in the project
for collection of bottles for recycling. Mr. Bonner replied that
there had not but that perhaps some provision could be made for an
area in the project for that purpose.
There being no further questions or comments, a motion was made by
Mr. Cosmano to continue the first reading of Ordinance No. 101 to
August 22nd until the attorney general 's ruling is available on subsid-
ized projects and a recommendation is made by the Planning Commission
on the Iiinslope project. Mr. Nesbitt seconded. All voted aye. Motion
carried.
III. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
A. License Application List Dated August 8, 1972.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to approve the License Application List
dated August 8th as follows:
PLUMBING SET-IP
Backdahl & Olson Plunking Brandin' Iron - Joseph Runic
Clarence Olson
14r. Cosmano seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
B. Notice of Acceptance of State Irater aollution Control Agency Grant.
$40,625. Resolution No. 554.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers to adopt Resolution No. 554 authorizing
the Manager to sign the acceptance of the State 'later *ollution Control
Agency Grant for $40,625. Mr. Cosmano seconded. All voted aye. Motion
carried.
Council Meeting
August 8, 1972
Page Three
IV. BIDS AND CONTRACTS
A. Advertisement for aids. Fuller Road-Lincoln Lane Sanitary Sewer
and Water. Westgate East and Westgate West Sanitary Sewer and
Water. Resolution No. 558.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers to adopt Resolution No. 558 authorizing
advertisement for bids for the Fuller Road, Lincoln Lane, Westgate East
and Westgate West utility projects on September 11, 1972 at 2 p.m. Mr.
Nesbitt seconded. All voted aye. Ration carried.
V. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
A. Out lot A. Edenval e Industrial Park-2nd Addition. Recl ossif cation
from District I GEN to 1-2 Park. Ordinance No. 179. Second Reading.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to adopt the second reading of Ordinance
No. 179 and order published reclassifying Edenyale Industrial Park-2nd
Addition from District I GEN to 1-2 Dark zoning. Mr. Cosmano seconded.
All voted aye. Motion carried.
B. Wallace Hustad. Creek Knolls Addition. Reclassification from Distric
Rural to District Residential RI-22. Ordinance No. 180. Second
Reading.
A motion was made by Mr. Cosmano to adopt the second reading of Ordinance
No. 180 and order published reclissifying Creek Knolls Addition from Rural
to Residential RI-22 zoning. Mr. Nesbitt seconded. All voted aye.
Motion carried.
C. Resolution Authorizing Signatures of Village Manager and Acting Mayor.
Resolution No. 552.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to adopt Resolution No. 552 authorizing
signatures of the Village ;lanager and Acting Mayor on checks. Mrs.
Meyers seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
VI. APPOINTMENTS
A. Suburban Rate Authority. Appointing Village Manager. Robert P.Heinric
as Delegate. Resolution No. 551.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to adopt Resolution No. 551 appointing
the Village Manager, Robert P. Heinrich as a delegate to the Suburban
Rate Authority. Mrs. Meyers seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
B. Appointment to Human Rights Commission.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to approve the Mayor's appointment of
Launch l Teslow to the Human Rights Commission to fill out the term of
Roger Doerger which expires on December 31, 1374. Mr. Cosmano seconded.
All voted aye. Motion carried.
Council Meeting
August 8, 1972
Page Four
VII. FINANCES
A. Audit of Claims 10632 through 10764.
A motion was made by Mr. Cosmano to approve claims 10632 through 10764
for payment. Mrs. Meyers seconded. On roll call, all voted aye. Motion
carried.
13. Cash E. Investment Report Dated August 8, 1972.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to accept the Cash 6, Investment Report
dated August 0th. Mr. Cosmano seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
AGENDA ADDITIONS
I. Edenvale 3rd Addition. Final Plat Approval. Resolution No. 555.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to adopt Resolution No. 555 approving
the Final Plat of Edenvale 3rd Addition. Mr. Cosmano seconded. All
voted aye. Motion carried.
2. Harold Sprouts. Lot Division. Resolution No. 556.
A motion was made by Mr. Nesbitt to adopt Resolution No. 556 approving
the lot division requested by Harold Sprouts, Plat 56721, Parcel 5393
in Section 21. Mr. Cosmano seconded. All voted eye. Motion carried.
3. Doris Rice. Lot Division Resolution No. 557.
A motion was made by Mr. Cosmano to adopt Resolution No. 557 approving
the lot division requested by Doris Rice, Plat 56722, Parcel 3060 in
Section 22. Mr. Nesbitt seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried.
Meeting adjourned at 10 P.M.
_I
Edna M. HoIngren, Clerk
viish 2b I
r iects
iven
However, the projects
will be entitled to a 20 per
I cent assessment after the .....AllAtagISOIN MIMI SUN Thurs., Aug. 24, ,
' I5-year period for the re-
mainder of the term of the 6 , .
loan, no matter what the , Projects population is then.
An affirmative answer to , From Pegs I
fly PAULA IIIRSCHOFF
Village council approval
Tuesday of both FHA 236
lower-income projects pro-
posed for Eden Prairie fol.
lowed the arrival of a ruling
from the stale attorney
general's office clarifying
the tax lime which has de-
layed progress on the
projects.
The council amended the
proposal,' to ,Include market
rate and rent supplement
units, thus providing oppor-
tunity for a wide income
range In both develop-
ments.
GEORGE CARTER,
speaking for The Preserve.
which originally had hen-
toted over the provision of
rent supplement units, stat-
ed, "We recognize the im-
portance to Eden Prairie of
providing an economic mix
In the village and have now
decided to abide by the
council's decision in this
matter."
The only opposition came
from Councilman John
McCulloch who voted
against both proposals and
their amendments. He later
stated that he does not be-
lieve subsidized housing Is
the best means of upgrad-
ing lower-income families.
lie also expressed concern
about providing facilities
for the increased popula-
tion, particularly schools
for the estimated 345 chil-
dren the projects will bring
into the village.
THE PERPLEXING tax
question concerned a state
statute which provided for
an assessment rate of five
per cent market value on
projects financed under the
National Housing Act in
communities of under 10,-
(100 population. The special
rate, designed to encourage
the development of moder-
ate-income projects In
small municipalities, ap-
plies for 15 years from the
date of original construc-
tion.
mate Attorney General,
Warren Spannaus, ruled
that since the population of
Eden Prairie is below It,-
000, according to 1970 cen-
sus figures, the five per
cent rate would indeed ap-
ply-
A SECOND question was
whether the village could
increase the assessment
from 5 to 20 per cent if the
village population exceeds
10,000 within the ii-year
period.
The village may not do
so, according to Spannaus'
ruling. "To allow an in-
crease In the assessment
rate would frustrate the
legislative scheme and
might IMP& the security
of the financing 'rause-
lion," he stated in a letter,
to village attereay. Harlan!
the last question posed 'to
the attorney general by the
village staff held the key to
council approval of the
projects: Credit the proper-
ty owner voluntarily agree
with the village to settle the
difference between the
end Co per cent aosessment
rates for the next 15 years?
Roth The Preserve and
FAICIIVRIC have indicated an
interest in entering agree -
meets with the village for
tke assessment differen-
tial, according to village
manager Doh Heinrich.
HOWEVER, the village
must use the additional
funds generated by the vol-
untary payment to increase
municipal services rather
than to reduce the mill
rate.
Both projects are being
developed under section 238
of the National Housing Act
which provides assistance
to lower-Income housing In
the form of monthly pay-
ment§ to the mortgagee.
Such payments reduce
coats to the occupant by
paying part of the interest
on the mortgage insured by
FHA.
Shelter Development
Corp. IS sponsoring the
Brlarhill project to be lo-
cated on 10.9 acres in north-
west Edenvale. The plan
proposes 252 apartment and
townhouse units with a
projected population of 360.
The Minnespolle chapter
of the American Institute
of Architects has formed.
nonprofit housing corpora-
lion to sponeor the Winds-
lope project with Ebel ,
hardt Co. Windslope is pro-
posed for a 101 acre hill-
indent. north of Neill Lake
and would consist of ICI
units with a projected pops-
lotion of 542. The sponsor-
ship is unique In that all
profile from the develop-
meal would revert to
project improvements.
THE 011UNCIG also ap
preen' the following pre-
Ilailosry platilage: Kew
rich Inc. 'a Edenborougl
subdivision on Duck Labs
Road, Donald H. Perkl'
and Douglas D. Arndt'
Haywood subdivision ot
Mitchell Lake and Hipp
Construction Co.'s pre*
lei/demote.
STAFF REPORT
JUNE 19, 1972
PROJECT: Brierhill an FHA 236 Multifamily Development
APPLICANT: Shelter Development Corporation
REQUEST: Rezoning of a 1Q8 acre site in Edenvale to RM 2.5
LOCATION: About 2500 feet north of Valley View Road adjacent
to the railroad right-of-way in Edenvale's Northwest
Area.
REFER TO: 1. Booklet dated May 16, 1972, and revisions
and additions dated June 6, 1972.
2. Planning and Zoning Commission minutes
dated: May 16, 1972, June 6, 1972.
3. Minutes and handout material from an
information meeting with all Eden Prairie
Commissions dated April 8, 1972.
4. Human Rights Commission and Park &
Recreation Commission reports.
COMMENT:
Reviewing the Planning Commission minutes on this project
from pre-submittal conferences until the last joint Human
Rights/Planning Commission meeting clearly indicates that
the Commissions and staff's comments are well documented.
Therefore, discus sion of the project in this staff report
would be redundent and only the staff recommendations
are included.
RECOMMENDATION; TO THE EDEN PRAIRIE VILLAGE COUNCIL:
1. The Planning Commission recommend rezoning of the
10 acre Briarhill 236 site in Falenvale to RM 2.5
in accordance with the approved Edenvale P.U.D.
Plan 70-4.
2. Include in the Planning Commissions recommendation
the statements from the Park & Recreation ace Human
Rights Commissions regarding Briarhill.
3. Recommend that fencing and/or screening be required
along the southeasterly boundary adjacent to the
railroad right-of-way.
4. Recommend that design flexibility be used in
stairway and corridor type in the 3 story apartment
buildings. Shelter Corporation arid the Village staff
should investigate alternate circulation systems for
the third floor units to achieve the best solution.
Options to the exterior gallery would be a double
loaded interior hallway or interior stairways which
serve clusters of units. Evaluation of these options
must be made during the detailed design phase be-
fore building permits could be issued.
STAFF REPORT
JUNE 19, 1972
PAGE IWO
5. Recommend inclusion of MARKET RATE rental units
in the Briarhill project. The opportunity of housing
special FHA 236 requirements to mix residents of
varied income levels within buildings is strongly
recommended.
6. Recommend provision of RENT SUPPLEMENT units
within the Briarhill project. The opportunity of
using special FHA 236 requirements to randomly
mix rent supplement 236 moderate income and market
rate units is highly desirable in providing a balanced
residential environment in Eden Prairie.
7. Recommend further investigation by the Village staff
and Shelter Development Corporation of the Minnesot
a
State Tax law requiring communities with under 10,00
0
population to tax FHA 236 SUBSIDIZED HOUSING
PROJECTS at 5% full and true value. (communities
with 10,000+ people use 20% full and true value)
To our knowledge, this is the first interpretation
of the 1971 law and currently there are some unresolved
legal questions and their application to Eden Prair
i
e
and the Briarhill Development.
5/19/72
Dick Putnam
Planner
8/22/72
•'-^ '14
111110RAIDOM TO IDS PRAIRIE VILLAGE COMM
Res Opinion of Attorney flenwal dated August 18, 1972.
Ch2 August 18, 1972, the Minnesota Attorney Generals office issued
its opinion regarding inquiries aide by the Vilimp Attorney in connection
with interpretation of Minnesota Estates Section 273.13 subd.17 and subd.
In ammary, the Attorney ameralla opinion regarding the first three
gesetAons pond by the village is that the Village of Men Prairie, according
to the last federal census would fall under subdivision 17b of the statute
(ander 10,000 population) and the under the statute the 5% preferential real
estate proper* tax provision meld be applicable. He stated further that this
subdivision (5% preferential tratment) would remain in effect for the fell 15
year period from the data of comletion of We original construction even hough
• subseqsant census should determine the village to have. population in acmes of
)0,000. The minion further states that at the end of the 15 year period the
preferential treatment than comes under subdivision 17 entitling the project to
the XII preferential amesseent rate until completion of the original tern of
the loan.
In response to inquiry b. 4, the Atternri Oeneral states "that the
Misr in no way soy require a volantery agreement for parent of taxes as a
eendition of project sproval or imams of permit" Be says that in the nee
at head it appears that the applicant has 'dexterity ome forward and offered
to enter into a voluntary agreement for an kerosine' rata and as such, an agree-
ment would be valid presuming it seta other regeireenta including sufficient
oeneldnitice. The Attorney Ounrel doss not gime his opinion regarding consider-
ation as to the case at hand, homer, be intimates that the Village's obligation
to inerease services rather than edam the WM rate night constitute eameider-
atlas in this cam.
It is sy opinion that um ispertant questions are mind reprdiag
list mold onntitste sistosta ocaidersties on the pet of the villsp in
.cieeneetion with such an agreement for voluntary payment. If the consideration
were held not to be valid the village eight find nob an agreement to be unenforos-
side in spite of its being fully committed to the approval of the project and
issesene of penatte.
japjanOls In the event the Village feels as a policy natter
that an adequate) and eatiefactory agreement for voluntary payment of additional
tames is a primary consideration, then I would recommend that the village attorney
be directed to examine and issue his opinion on a proposed apeement prior to
final mitten on approval of the project. Asia alternative, the omen could
Isle find action at this tine in reliance on the epirit of cooperation Aid)
his Wee apparent on this project.
he Village Should remain aware that ender the opinion of the Attorney
'Meal, if final approval of the project eboald precede approval of a voluntary
sreement far a higher aeoesement, the village could not later withdraw its
If prowl Weed upon inability to arrive at a satisfactory voluntary agreement.
Keith Simons,
One of the Attorneys for
time Village of dun heirie
WARREN SPANN ANS
ATTORNICV OP.NPRAI.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
ST. PAUL 55101
August 18, 1972
Ir. Harlan Porbix
Attorney for Village of Eden Prairie
P. 0. Box 190
17 Tenth Avenue South
Hopkins, HinnesOta 55343
Dear 14r. Perbix:
In your letter to this office you present substantially
the following
FACTS
The Village of Eden Prairie is a village located
in the metropolitan area with a ponulation of under
10,000 as determined by the last federal census.
The village has under consideration a housing
development consisting of 126 units proposed pursu-
ant to section 236 of the Federal Housina Act of
1963. The proposal has been actively encouraged
by the village in response to its recognized
obligation to provide housing for low and moderate
income families.
Minn. Stat. 5273.13 subd. 17 (1971) contains
a preferential assessment rate of 201 of market
value for housing structures for the elderly or
for low or moderate income families if such
housing structures are financed pursuant to
the National :lousing Act. The preferential
rate is granted for 15 years from the date of
completion of the original construction or sub-
stantial rehabilitation, or for the original
term of the loan.
1. The statute as first enacted in 1969 nrovided for the
preferential rate for 15 years from the data of the completion
of the original construction only. Minn. Laws 1969, ch. 422.
The statute was enlarged to its present form by tlinn. Laws 1971,
Ex. Sees., ch. 31 art. IX.
Mr. Harlan Perbix - Page 2
August 18, 1972
Minn. Stat. 5273.13 ;ubd. 17b (1971), enacted
in 1971, provides for a magnified preferential
assessment rate of 5`:i of adjusted market value
where the structure eualifies under subdivisions
17 and 17a, and is located in a municipality of
less than 10,000. Unlike subdivision 17, the
term of the preferential rate is for 15 years
from the date of the original construction.
If the 5% assessment rate of subdivision 17b is
applicable, the village would be providing muni-
cipal services to the housing project and the
project's residents which are not compensated
for by this low rate of assessment.
Although the subsidy project has been actively
encouraged by the village, there is concern
that the village must also respect its existing
obligation to the community to maintain a viable
tax base. To alleviate this Concern, the project
owner desires to have his property assessed at a
higher rate for some portion of the 15•year
period. The Federal Housing Administration is
also reluctant to finance the project because
of the uncertainties present concerning the
interpretation of these statutes.
You then ask substantially the following
QUESTIONS
1. Is the assessment rate established by Minn.
Stat. 5273.13 subd. 17 (1971) or the assess-
ment rate established by Minn. Stat. 52 73.13
subd. 17b (1971) applicable to National Housing
Act projects located in the Village of Eden
Prairie?
2. If subdivision 1713 is applicable, may the
village increase the assessment from 5 to 20
percent of market value when the population of
the village exceeds 10,000?
3. If subdivision 17b is applicable and the
structure is assessed at the lower rate for
15 years from the date of original construction,
can the structure then be assessed pursuant to
subdivision 17 for the remainder of the original
term of the loan?
Hr. llarlan Perbix - Page 3 August 18,1972
4. If subdivision 17b is applicnble, may the
property owner enter into an agreement with the
village whereby he assumes an obligation to pay
taxes pursuant to an assessment rate higher
than 5%?
OPINION
1. Minn. Stat. 5273.13 subd. 17 (1971) provides for a
general 20% assessment rate whereas Minn. Stat. 5273.13 subd. 17b
(1971) provides for a 5% assessment rate for structures located
in municipalities with a population of less than 10,000. Thus,
if Eden Prairie has a population of less than 10,000, subdivision
17b is applicable.
Minn. Stat. f,645.44 subd. 8 (1971) provides:
"When used in reference to population, 'population'
and 'inhabitants' mean that shown by the last
preceding census, state or United States, unless
otherwise expressly provided."
Section 273.13, subd. 17b, does not specify the method of deter-
mining population. The last state census was apparently held in
1905. The last federal census was held in 1970. Therefore, the
2
last preceding federal census is to be used. The population of
Eden Prairie was, as of the last federal census, under 10,000.
Thus, the provisions of subdivision 17b of section 273.13 are
applicable.
2. In response to your second question, we are of the
opinion that the village may not increase the assessment rate to
---
2. A contrary result might be reached if the village was in-
corporated subseauent to the last preceding federal census,
(Ellis V. village of Bloomington, Inc., 245 Minn. 292, 72 li.B.2d
350 14 (1971)) but those facts
arc not present here.
fir. [Jarlan Perbix - Page 4 August 18, 1972
20 percent of market value if the population should rise to
10,000 or more during the 15-year period.
Minn. Stat. f.:273.13 subd. 17b (1971) provides as follows:
"rothwithstanding any other provision of law,
any structure located in a municipality of less
than 10,000 population which qualifies under
subdivisions 17 and 17a shall for 15 vear%_from
the date of the completion of the orianii con-
s triiCtion, Be assessed at!lve nercent o? the
mai-3:et value thercOl, provIdee that the
Tir marTervaITie as etetermined by the assessor
is based on the normal approach to value using
normal unrestricted rents."
(Emphasis added.)
The provision that a structure "shall for 15 years" be assessed
at the rate of 5% is clear and unambiguous. No provision of sub-
division 17b provides that the assessment rate shall be changed
upon an increase in population.
It is therefore our opinion that the assessment rate may not
be increased should the population surpass 10,000 at some time
during the 15-year period. See Minn. Stat. §645.16. Moreover,
the legislative intent also supports this conclusion. The legis-
lative intent quite clearly is to stimulate these types of projects
by providing preferential assessment rates for the benefit of the
project owners and the institutions and agencies providing the
source of capital. The legislature was especially desirous of
stimulating these projects in municipalities of under 10,000 and
thus provided a very low assessment rate. It is reasonable to
Mr. Harlan Perhix - Page 5
August 18, 1972
assume that the population of many municipalities would surpass
10,000 during the 15-year term, especially since the projects
themselves usually generate population growth. To allow an
increase in the assessment rate would frustrate the legislative
scheme and might very well impair the security of the financing
transaction which was based on the lower assessment rate for the
15-year term. In our opinion, the legislature did not intend
that this statute be so interpreted, but rather intended that
population be determined at the time of original construction,
as measured by the last preceding federal census.
therefore answer your second question in the negative.
3. Subdivision 17 contains an assessment rate of 20% of
market value for these structures for a period of 15 years from
the date of completion of the original construction or substantial
rehabilitation, or for the original term of the loan.
Subdivision 17b, on the other hand, contains an assessment
rate of 5% of adjusted market value for these structures for a
period of 15 years from the date of completicn of construction.
The lower rate of assessment set forth in subdivision 17b
Is premised upon two factors: (1) a structure which qualifies
under subdivision 17 and 17a and (2) location of the structure
in a municipality of less than 10,000 population determined at
the time of original construction.
At the termination of the 15-year period, the assessor must
then reclassify the property. If the structure originally
Mr. liarlan Perbix - Page 6 August 18, 1972
qualified for assessment under subdivision 17, which it did,
that qualification would still exist at the end of the 15-year
period. The structure thus would be entitled to the 20% assess-
ment rate for the remainder of the time it qualifies for
subdivision 17 treatment, which is the original term of the
loan.
The population of the municipality at the end of the 15-year
term is immaterial. If the population is still under 10,000,
the benefits of 17b classification have been exhausted by the
expiration of time, and there is no statutory authority to extend
the 15-year term. The benefits of subdivision 17 are still available,
however, because the structure is still one which qualifies under
subdivisions 17 and 17a.
We answer your third question in the affirmative.
4. In response to your fourth question, we are of the
opinion that the village in no way may require a voluntary agree-
ment for payment of taxes as a condition of project approval or
issuance of permits. This is not the case here, however; the
property owner has suggested that it pay at a higher assessment
rate. We are of the opinion that a property owner may voluntarily
assume a valid, legally binding obligation to pay taxes pursuant
to a higher assessment rate by entering into an agreement with
the village to do so.
Mr. Harlan Perbix - Page 7
The general rule is stated as follows:
"Where supported by sufficient consideration,
the agreement of a property owner with the tax
authority to pay taxes for which he might not
otherwise have been liable, may be enforced."
August 18, 1972
Corpus June Secundum 561.
In Commonwealth v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 347 Pa. 410, 32 A.2d
631 (1943), a parent corporation contractually agreed to pay liquid
fuel taxes chargeable to a subsidiary's acquisition of the property
of another liquid fuel dealer in exchange for the issuance of a
distributor's permit to the subsidiary without charging penalties
for sales previously made without the permit. The Court held that
the parent corporation assumed the obligation for good and valuable
3
consideration. In Boyer Bros. v. Board of Commirs of Routt County,
87 Col. 275, 288 P. 408 (1930), the contract in question was an
agreement by Wyoming ranchers to pay certain sums to a Colorado
county "as a matter of equity," even though the stock were grazing
in a federal forest preserve in Colorado in accordance with a
federal permit. The court held that the permit was granted by
federal, and not county authorities, and thus the county gave
nothing and provided nothing by way of consideration. The court
thereupon held the agreement unenforceable.
3. The case was remanded for a determination whether, in fact,
the subsidiary corporation was the party liable for the taxes.
The court later held that the original liability was not that of
the subsidiary corporation whose obligations the parent corporation
had assumed, but a copartnership and thus the parent corporation
was not liable for the taxes. Conznonwealth v. Socony:Vacuum Oil
Co. 352 Pa, 527, 43 A.2d 98 (inw:
Very truly yours,
WARREN SPAENAUS
Attorney Cenerl al4AN.. • cEPI .
JOHN R. RENWICK
Mr. Harlan Perbiz Page 0 August 18, 1972
The relevant c!uestion then becomes whether there is
sufficient consideration for the contract here proposed. The
issue of consideration is determined under normal contract
principles. Ile are of the opinion that here such an agreement
can be supported by valuable consideration.
Because the agreement has not yet been negotiated, we are
reluctant to categorically specify the consideration to be
rendered by the village. However, it is clear that the additional
funds generated by the voluntary payment will be utilized by the
village to increase municipal services rather than reduce the
mill rate.
Under the particular facts of this case, this result is in
accord with the legislative intent of Minn. Stat. §273.13 subds.
4
17, 17a and 17b, to stimulate this type of construction.
We therefore answer your fourth question in the affirmative.
Deputy Attorney General
WS :JRIZ: db
4. iio mention was made of the other taxing authorities, such as
the school district and the county. We assume that the other taxing
authorities will receive their proportionate share of the benefits
pursuant to the agreement.
Am 1 5 VM7
7286 Topview Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
August 12, 1972
Mr. Robert neinrich
Eden Prairie Village Manager
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Dear Mr. Heinricht
At its meeting on August 1, the Eden Prairie Human Rights Connie-
son took the following action which it wishes to convey to you
IA/Williams, S/Connaughty that approval be given to staff report
dated July 30, 1972 - Windslope P.U.D. Motion carried.
Discussion concerning the motion centered around the part of the
staff report which recommends that A/Eberhardt joint part-
nership be encouraged to consi the inc us • f market rate and
rent supplement units in the indslope project. is the opinion
of the Human Rights Commissi• • • . „. within a 236 project
significantly increases its chances or success.
We hope that the Village staff, Planning Commission, and Council
will continue to work for a wider range of income levels in their
consideration of the Windelope proposal.
Sincerely,
Judy Sohuok (Mrs. B.A.)
Secretary
Human Rights Commission
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, August 1, 1972
7:30 P. M. , Village Hall
Members pre sent were: Chairman Norma Schee , Secretary Wayne
Brown, Ralph Nesbitt, Don Sorenson, Patrick Casey and Jammie
Mikelson. Also present were Robert Heinrich, Village Manager,
Dick Putnam, Planning Assistant, and Ed Handler.
I. INTRODUCTION OF ROBERT HEINRICH, VILLAGE MANAGER.
MINUTES OF JULY 18, 1972
Casey moved, Mikelson seconded, to approve the July 18 minutes
as corrected. Motion carried.
III. PETITIONS, RECUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
A. Doris Rice - Property Division. Mr. Putnam presented the
proposal for the property division of the Doris Rice property located
northwest of Starring Lake, which is bordered on the south by
Research Road and on the west by Mitchell Road.
The proposal requested a division of the 2.3 acres into two par-
cels, 1.3 acres and 1 acre respectively. Mr. Putnam noted that
the property was unplatted, and the surrounding area was not ex-
tensively developed. Several members of the Commission mentioned
that the staff should advise Mrs. Rice to build her proposed house
In the southern section in such a way that it would not prevent
her from subdividing that southern section at a later date, if she
would ever choose to do so. Mr. Putnam noted that this proposal
is also consistent with the Redrock Plan.
Action Taken
Sorenson moved, seconded by Casey, to recommend to the Council
the property division of the Doris Rice property. Motion carried
unanimously.
B. Harold K. Sprouls - Property Division — 9150 East Starring Lane.
Mr. Putnam presented the proposal for the property division of the
Sprouls property located west of Starring Lane. The proposal re-
quests a subdivision of the 1.6 acres into two parcels of .9 and
.7 acres. Mr. Sprouts requests the subdivision with the option
of building a second house in the southern section.
Mr. Putnam noted that this parcel, as well as the surrounding area,
is platted and that the area is thoroughly developed. Therefore,
the proposal is consistent with the surrounding area, which is
heavily populated with single family units on 3/4 to one-acre
lots. The Commission questioned whether or not there were any
covenants to this property concerning the subdivividing of the
property since it is in a platted area.
Minutes
Planning & Zoning
August 1, 1972
Page 2
Action Taken
Sorenson moved to recommend to the Council the property division
of the Harold K. Sprouls property, contingent upon no restrictions
against the subdivision of that lot or a restriction against more
than one unit on one lot. Seconded by Casey. Motion carried.
C. Valley Knolls Addition - Bru-Mar Construction Preliminary
Plat and Rezoning - RI 13.5 for Single Family Subdivision on
Duck Lake Trail. Mr. Mary Anderson, assisted by Mr. Bruce
Anderson and Mr. Fred Haas, presented the request of the Valley
Knolls Addition approval of the preliminary plat and rezoning.
Mr. Anderson's presentation touched on several aspects of the
proposal. The proposal consists of 49 lots with a total of about
25 acres. The area consists of two exceptions to the proposal;
one located at the corner of Barberry Lane and Duck Lake Trail,
and the other just west of Duck Lake Road. These two areas
are owned by a woman, who they have made an agreement with,
to leave them as exceptions. Mr. Anderson noted that there is
sewer and water in Barberry Lane and that it is about to be
blacktopped. He said that if this proposed preliminary plat is
accepted, he would like to have the three stubs put in now,
so as to save costs and manpower later when they put in sewer
and water. Mr. Anderson also noted that they have dedicated
about 4 to 4 1/2 acres to the Village as Parkland in the northern
section of the Valley Knolls Addition. He pointed out that there
is a valley bordering the northerly proposed lots, and this really
is completely unsuitable for development but would be quite
appropriate for parkland and park development. Mr. Anderson also
added that the area to the east near Duck Lake Road would be
the last development phase of the project, probably in one to
three years, according to when sewer and water is installed.
The Commission asked Mr. Anderson if he had considered any
other type of scheme for his layout. The Commission seemed
concerned about the cost of snow plowing cul-de-sacs. Mr.
Anderson replied that he had plans for a grid iron, as well as
a loop layout, but from discussions with the staff and from their
suggestions he had settled on the three cul-de-sac layout, with
the knowledge that this would be the best design to follow. Mr.
Anderson was then asked If he had considered installing walkway
systems, perhaps on the lot lines. Mr. Anderson responded that
from his previous experience in other developments, walkways
had not been a success due mainly to noise and littering. The
Commission responded by saying that something must be done to
keep the children off the street, especially if the park is going
to be for their full time use. Mr. Anderson was also asked why
all three cul-de-sacs opened up on Barberry Lane. He said that
Minutes
Planning & Zoning
August 1, 1972
Page 3
there is water and sewer there already, though Duck Lake Trail
has these facilities also. Duck Lake Trail, he felt, would be a
much too busy street to connect the cul-de-sacs with particularly
In the case of the smaller children.
Action Taken
Mr. Nesbitt moved, seconded by Casey, to refer this request to
the Park and Recreation Commission for review, to set a hearing
date of August 22nd, and refer it to the Village Engineer, the
Maintenance Foreman, and the staff for study. Chairman did
not call for vote as it was not necessary.
D. Ordinance 178 - Amendment to Ordinance 135 - Landscaping.
Mr. Handler presented the proposal for Ordinance 178. He re-
viewed Section One and noted that the "Site Plans" were to secure
minimum standards for good quality. He pointed out that RI zoning
in part (c) was left out because this procedure would not be
realistically adaptable to single family units. Mr. Handler then
said that Subdivision 2.3 of Ordinance 135 is being repealed but
that its content would be included in the new Subdivisfon 2.3
Mr. Handler specifically mentioned that the performance bond in
Section 3 along with the site plans are the main scope of the
Ordinance. Mr. Handler explained that the performance bond is
a way of making developers finish their landscaping and screening
according to the plans they submitted. He then noted that the
next additions to Section 3 were Just requirements, they were
flexible, but held everyone to general requirements as they in-
cluded the word "all" to refer to open areas. He explained that
the last additions which are more specific in character, were the
ones in Ordinance 135 that were put in this order for the reason
of being more specific. Mr. Handler explained that Section 5,
which was to be the new Subdivision 2.8 was the same paragraph
with one additional sentence referring to previous approved site
plans that had been deleted in Section 4. He explained that he
felt it should be numbered, rather than general language for future
amendments may be possible.
Action Taken.
Casey moved to recommend to the Council the approval of Ordinance
178 subsequent to review by the Park and Recreation Commission.
Seconded by Brown. Motion carried unanimously
E. Hipp's Townhouses in Edenvale - Request approval of 26
Unit Preliminary Plat, Mr. Putham ' Presented the proposal and
was assisted by Mr. Paul Jensen, an architect from Edenvale.
Mr. Putnam first indicated to the Commission that previously the
concept plan and rezoning had been approved by the Council. He
then explained that this preliminary plat is in reference to the
changes prescribed by the Commission previously.
Minutes
Planning & Zoning
August 1, 1972
Page 4
Mr. Putnam noted that the buildings had been moved a small
distance to appropriate the saving of trees as this was a con-
cern of the Commissions. Mr. Putnam also stated that four
parking spaces had been moved from the entry drive to across
the street to also save trees. He then noted a change in the
location of sanitary sewer lines due to a new Village requirement
of outside lines. However, this could be worked out between
the developer and the Village Staff. It should be noted that
these plans were submitted at a very late date, and the Commission
was quite accommodating to take action on such short notice.
Action Taken
Sorenson moved, seconded by Brown, to recommend to the Council
the approval of the Hipp's Townhouses in Edenvale, Preliminary
Plat, subject to approval of sewer and water by the staff, con-
firmation by the staff, that the building staking is advantageous
to the plans. Motion carried unanimously.
IV. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Windslope — 236 Housing Project in the Precerve_-_1_168_Units.
Mr. Putnam discussed the staff report dated July 30, 1972, on
the Windslope project in the Preserve, co-sponsored by the MAIA.
He noted that the Preserve has "front ended" many of the necessary
urban services needed for residential development, and that the
necessary facilities are either "in place" or under planning/design
contact. He also added that the Village and the Preserve are
jointly providing the needed community services to the Windslope
Project, and will continue to do so in the future. Mr. Putnam
then indicated that the MAIA has assembled a development team
that will provide professional services throughout the project, and
that the physical responsibilities necessary for a successful
project are well conceived and workable. He also mentioned that
the Eberhardt Company and the MAIA are studying the "soft-ware"
capabilities needed and are attempting to determine the proper
services required in a 236 development. He added that the
"committment" is there, but the final management team is not
complete regarding the social systems. Mr. Putnam assured the
Commission that the capability of the Village to provide services
to the 168 subsidized units in the Preserve is excellent.
Mr. Putnam said generally speaking that Windslope is in an
excellent location for subsidized housing. He mentioned examples
such as streets, underpasses, pedestrian pathways, and commercial
and employment services as being easily attainable. Mr. Putanm
then indicated that the Windslope project is consistent with the
Preserve Concept Plan. He mentioned several aspects of what
he felt to be an excellent site plan; the parking adjacent to the
Minutes
Planning & Zoning
August 1, 1972
Page 5
road, the "service court" and "entry courts" to handle usable
open space. The buildings get the maximum number of units
away from the auto areas, and the site plan is an excellent use
of the site/building relationships while incorporating the needs
of the residents.
Mr. Putnam then discussed the unit type and mentioned that there
are 1, 2, and 3 bedroom units and the buildings are grouped in
12 and 18 unit clusters, etc. Mr. Putnam indicated that two-
thirds of the three bedroom units are on the second and third
floors, which is not ideal, but were there due to the need to
"stack units" of the same size. This only affects 14 of the
units and may not be a serious problem.
Mr. Putnam noted that Windslope will provide for the moderate
income level. The proposed financing uses the standard 236
programs, and if the units are not rented under subsidy they
may be rented at market rate. He also indicated that Windslope
does not propose rent supplement nor a percentage of market rate.
Mr. Putnam pointed out that the staff at Eberhardt will be expanded
to provide a full time "social program" oriented professional that
will coordinate the subsidized projects Eberhardt manages, and an
"on site" social worker will assist the resident in every day needs.
Mr. Putnam showed concern that no interior recreation space is
proposed.
Mr. Putnam noted some political considerations that were favorable
to the Windslope project. That being the location greatly reduces
any public disfavor (if there were any). It appears the Village
and School District will not be penalized by the 1971 tax law
concerning tax abatement, and the attorney general's ruling will
be available soon.
In summary, NI. Putnam noted that the Windslope 236 subsidized
project in the Preserve is very well designed. Physically, the
project is as good as any planned in the metro area, market or
subsidized. The factors contributing to the physical product are
location, developers, project design team, and the amenities of
the site and units proposed.
The Commission emphasized the need for interior common recreation
space and asked Mr. Hustad if he could supply some additional
information, as well as a committment, to have interior recreation
space. He replied that they were planning to have this space,
but it depended on their financial situation, as they are a minimum
divided corporation. However, he said he would furnish the
Commission with more information.
Minutes
Planning & Zoning
August I, 1972
Page 6
Recommendation
1. The Windslope project for moderate income housing in the
Preserve be approved as an excellent multi—family residential
environment.
2. The development plan be approved and the 10.8 acre site be
rezoned to RM 2.5 based upon the site plan and the 168 units
proposed.
3. The Village encourage the MAIA/Eberhardt Joint partnership to
consider the inclusion of market rate units and rent supplement
units in the Windslope project.
4. That the Windslope project include adequate interior common
spaces for the residents.
Action Taken
Casey moved, seconded by Nesbitt, to have the Windslope--236
housing project in the Preserve be considered at the next meeting.
Note
No action '',as taken at this meeting because of the short time
the information was available to the Commission.
B. Minnesota Highway Department's Proposal for a Maintenance
Facility Between Highway 169 and Interstate 212 North of
Major Center Area. Mr. Putnam discussed the staff report
dated July 14, 1972, concerning the Minnesota Highway Depart-
ment's proposal for a maintenance facility. Mr. Pat Chandler
was here from the highway department to answer questions.
Mr. Putnam indicated that Mr. Chandler has said the location of
this maintenance storage facility is excellent from their point of
view. The site has excellent access on and off the freeway with
little distraction to other uses. However, Its location in the Eden
Prairie Major Center Area raises some questions as to appropriate-
ness of land use, size of the site limits on any proposed use
and the site is visible from three adjacent areas.
Mr. Putnam said generally speaking the concept behind this facility
is well put together. The utilization of the land is good. Heavily
screening the maintenance facility from close view is very necessary,
and the two accesses proposed appear workable. One access at
the southerly end would be preferred. In addition, the priority
given to landscaping in this proposal, over $32,000, is also
necessary.
Minutes
Planning & Zoning
August 1, 1972
Page 7
Mr. Putnam expressed very strenuously that the questions of
land use of all the land between 212 and 169 are very important
ones at this point in time. The land north of the Nine-Mile
Creek, which becomes narrow and low, and the land south of
the site should be left as a buffer/open space area. Mr. Put-
nam noted Mr. Chandler concurred that the land should be left
open. He added that an agreement between the Village and
Highway Department should be arranged at the time Village approval
is granted and completed concurrently with the building permit.
Mr. Putnam stated that the existing grades of 169 and the proposed
grades of 212 are not indicated in the plan submitted by the highway
department. Therefore, it is difficult to evaluate the proposed
grading plan. He also noted that in reviewing the grading plan,
the intent of the concept was to have ungulating earth berms with
varied tree nasses providing uaderstory and canopy screening.
However, the earth berming plan suggested in the concept site
plan was not followed when the final engineering grades were
applied. The rather loose and somewhat "playful" earth forming
of the concept plan has been replaced by a stark earth wall. Our
suggestion is that the grading plan be prepared in accordance with
the concept site plan. Mr. Putnam also noted that the drainage
seems workable, keeping it in the southerly end of the site away
from the creek. He suggested there should be Investigation
concerning the use of some of the earth forms in combination
with retaining walls to form material storage areas or pockets
that would be landscaped to more fully screen and break up the
large paved areas.
Mr. Putnam explained the landscaping proposed in the site plan
indicates an upper story of larger trees (15-25 feet in height)
that will provide an adequate screening canopy, and the use of
lower understory vegetation such as sumak will provide an excellent
visual screen • In addition, the attempt was to give a more natural
appearance to landscaping as in the concept plan. This applies
to the creek as well as the berm.
Mr. Putnam indicated that from evaluation of the landscape plan,
it is felt that the initial flare of the concept has been greatly
reduced in preparation of the planting plan. He said using a few
species of trees, and combining them in repetitively groupings is
not the intent of the plan. The clustering of the Russian Olin,
Hackberry and Green Ash at various locations could well be modi-
fied to incorporate a little more diversity in nature tree type.
Mr. Putnam also added that the use of two forms of sumak as
understory is excellent, and if this is carried out as indicated
would provide a natural unifying element.
Minutes
Planning & Zoning
August 1, 1972
Page 8
Mr. Putnam concluded by saying the landscaping approach used
is adequate, and the budget should be sufficient to provide good
landscaping treatment. Mr. Putnam suggests using more varities
of trees and by using species of larger trees. He also noted the
possibility of planting areas within the blacktopped area to break
up the large asphalter surface visible from distance. In addition,
Mr. Putnam said the various B and B trees proposed should pro-
vide excellent 15-16 foot canopy screening within the next few
years.
The Commission expressed concern and asked questions on several
aspects of the proposal. The first centered on the grading and
landscaping plans. Mr. Chandler replied that the highway depart-
ment's landscape architect could get together with the Village Staff
to make corrections. The second concern was about the northern
access to the site, which Mr. Chandler acknowledged that he is
considering eliminating that access as pending the completion of
certain surveys. The last major concern was about the open space
surrounding the site. Mr. Chandler again acknowledged that he was
in complete agreement with the Village on the open space question.
Recommendation
These recommendations include the amendments as moved by Soren-
son, seconded by Casey,and approved by the Commission at the
meeting of August 1, 1972.
1. Since the Village may not have jurisdiction over the highway
department use s on highway department property, we feel that
both parties must work together to achieve the best solution.
Mr. Chandler feels it is possible and it is our recommendation
to work closely with the highway department on this project.
We feel this facility is inappropriate at this location as it is a
highly visible major interest point to the Village.
2. It is our strong recommendation that land north and south of
the proposed site of Nine-Mile Creek between 169 and 212
be set aside through easement or direct deed to the Village
of Dien Prairie for use as open space in conjunction with
this project. The limited width of the land and also its
high visibility indicates that the future use should be settled
between the highway department and the Village. The main-
tenance facility proposed provides an excellent opportunity to
secure such an agreement. Our recommendation is to have
this land remain as open space with proper landscaping to
provide a buffer from the freeway.
Minutes
Planning & Zoning
August 1, 1972
Page 9
3. Strongly agree with the concepts of the proposed site plan
indicating earth forms of sufficient heights to screen the storage
and buildings not less than six feet at lowest elevation but
disagree uith the grading plan proposed. Secondly, that the
intent of the landscaping proposed in the site plan be developed
rather than the proposed landscaping plan which is rather re-
petitive.
9. Utilize only the southern entrance.
5. The material storage areas, especially the salt or other
chemicals be housed only by some form containing structure
to insure that the runoff shall not damage the creek. Also,
the material storage areas be properly landscaped with in-
vestigation of bins using earth and retaining walls that are
planted.
6. Landscaping vithin the paved areas be utilized to lessen the
effect of the large asphalt and outside storage areas from a
distance.
7. That the double row parking arrangement be moved to have
perimeter parking along the edge of the site adjacent to the
earth berm rather than at the north entrance for circulation
reasons and also to reduce the visual effect of the parking.
8. The structure utilize material in keeping with its highly
visible location. We recommend that quality exterior materials
that are not gaudy be used to harmonize with the extensive
landscaping proposed.
Action Taken
Brown moved, seconded by Casey to recommend the Council's
approval of the Minnesota Highway Department's Maintenance
Facility between Highway 169 and Interstate 212 north of the
Major Center Area with the parameters in the July 14, 1972,
Staff Report, .vith the needed amendments.
Due to the need of more information, the last three items on the
agenda were reported on, but no action was taken on them.
C. Kemrich. Inc. - Request for RI 13.5 for Single Family Subdivision
Located on Duck Lake Trail. Mr. Putnam stated that Mrs. Marks
had not as yet been contacted due to the fact that she is out of
town. He said the Park and Recreation Commission has reviewed
the plat and has no objections. He added that ICemrich, Inc. is
in the process of submitting some re-draft material to the Village.
DATE : August 22, 1972
SUBJECT: Pedestrian Walkway
Duck Lake Trail, from Ticonderoga Trail to 168th Avenue
County Road /4, from Milwaukee Bridge to Luther May
Duck Lake Trail
The total length of proposed walkway from Ticonderoga Trail to 168th
Avenue is approximately 5,710 feet. By removing the Bru—Mar, Kemrich Inc.
and Church property fronting on Duck Lake Trail the total remaining is
2,260 feet at about $1.50 per foot of 4 foot walkway would cost an
estimated $5,175.00,
County Road #4
The suggested location of a walkway on the east shoulder of County Road /4
from the bridge to Luther Way has been thus far looked upon as being
by the County Highway Department. They are studying the possibility
relgerent location perhaps out nearer the property line and I expect
to hear further word from them by Wednesday or Thursday of this weak. The total length would be approximately 4,240 11$1.50 • $6,360 t.
,
DUO( LAM TRAIL
'Pedestrian Walkway'
900'
800'
170'
780'
690'
380'
680'
1320'
3,450 test 1141.5M. • $5 .1 75.00
2,260' •914 • 3,390.00
$8,565.00
Bel 1 hunt
Keorich Property
L C. Marks
Church Property
Church Property to 175th
175th to Barberry
Bru-Mar
D.L.R. - 168th
BARR ENGINEERING CO.
CONSULTING HYDRAULIC ENGINEERS
DOUGLAS W PReel•WO liaee FRANCE ROUT"
JOHN R. 81101110S1. WISSIWNSWSWe
MIOIMIAPOLIC miNNIIIKITh SUSI
TIMMONS lAURA SIR) 11110401,11
August 22, 1972
Honorable Mayor and Village Council
Village of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed the bids which were received and opened on
August 21, 1972, for the Round Lake Park Storm Sewer. The correct bid
totals are as follows:
Northern Contracting Company $18,425.30
Minn-Kota Excavating, Inc. $21,189.00
Lametti & Sons, Inc. $21,925.00
McDonald & Associates, Inc. $27,494.00
In our opinion, the bids are acceptable for this project. We
recommend that the contract be awarded to Northern Contracting Company.
Sincerely,
BARE ENGINEERING OD.
Dennis Z. Palmer
DIP; pa
LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
AUGUST 22. 1972
PLUMING
Chester Noreen Muting
PLIMBING & SEWER
P & 0 Mechanical Contracting Co. - James R. Dougherty
GAS FITTERS
P & 0 Mechanical Contracting Co. - Robert J. Paulson
CIGARETTE
Eden Prairie Oil Products - Earl Pederson
PLUMING & HEATIM
Progress Pluthing & Heating Co. - David R. Ward