City Council - 09/11/1973 2,40,_
r ..1
EDEN PRAIRIE VILLAGE COUNCIL
4 TUESDAY, SEPTEMB ER 11, 1973 7:30 p.m.,Village Hall
Cr ti'(( INVOCATION - - — PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - - — ROLL CALL
14) COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Paul Redpath, Joan Meyers, John McCulloch,
_ cle)
Wolfgang Penzel, Roger Boerger
COUNCIL STAFF: Village Manager Robert P. Heinrich, Village Attorney
Harlan Perbix, Clerk John Frame
AGENDA
I. MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING HELD AUGUST 28, 1973.
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Masters Condominiums by Weis Builders in Edenvale, request to rezone
to RM-2.5 for the construction of two 6-story condominium buildings
totaling 99 units at 13.4 dwelling units per acre. (Report attached)
Action: First reading, Ordinance No. 234 granting rezoning to RM-2. 5 of
approximately 7 acres for Masters Condominiums, or deny.
B. Presentation of 1974 Annual Budget.
4
Action:
III. PETITIONS,REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Petition from area residents requesting change of speed zone on Co.
Rd. 4 north of State Highway 5. (Letters attached)
Action: Motion to receive and file.
B. petition from Gelco requesting extension of utilities to the Gelco
Anderson Lakes site. (Attached)
Action: Motion requesting the Village Engineer to prepare a feasibility
report for the extension of utilities to the Gelco Anderson Lakes
site.
IV. RESOLUTIONS &ORDINANCES
A. Second reading, Ordinance No. 229, for Basswoods Forest rezoning
from Rural to R1-13.5.
Action: Motion approving Second Reading of Ordinance No. 229.
B. Second reading,Ordinance No, 230 permitting cash contributions in lieu
of land for public park use and open space consistent with the pro-
- visions of 1973 State Statutes.
Action: Motion approving Second Reading of Ordinance No. 230.
Council Agenda -2- September 13, 1973
N. RSOLUTIONS & ORDINANCES (Cont.)
C. Second reading, Ordinance No. 231 for Prairie East Planned Unit
Development reclassifying approximately 21 acres from Rural to
R1-13.5 for 41 single family lots.
Action: Motion approving Second Reading of Ordinance No. 233.
D. Second reading, Ordinance No. 232 changing street name of Atherton
Road within Atherton 2nd Addn. to Chestnut Drive.
Action: Motion approving Second Reading of Ordinance No. 232.
E. Second reading, Ordinance No. 233 amending the ordinances estab-
lishing the Planning Commission, Park and Recreation Commission,
and Human Rights Commission.
Action: Motion approving second Reading of Ordinance No. 233.
F. Resolutions for Special Assessment Hearing: (available 9/11/73)
Action: 1. Motion adopting Resolution No.764 declaring costs to be
assessed and ordering preparation of Proposed Assessments.
2. Motion adopting Resolution No.765 calling for a Special
Assessment Hearing on Monday, October 3, 1973, at
7:30 p.m. at the Village Hall.
V- REPORTS OF OFFICERS. BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Village Engineer:
3 . Approve final plat of Atherton 3rd Addition. (Engr. Report & Ras.at.)
Action: Motion adopting Resolution No.766 approving final plat of
Atherton 3rd Addition.
2. Approve final payment to American Contracting Corp.
Action: Motion approving final payment to American Contracting Co'r.
for Improvement Contract 51-246, Sanitary Sewer Project
72-1-12 (Nine Mile lA Project)in the amount of$52,58130
less previous payments and subject to receipt of lien wnivr.r:;
from all materials suppliers and subcontractors plus one Ire,
maintenance warranty bond commencing September 13, .
3. Approve Change Order No. 2 and final payment to Peter Lang-'!?
Construction Co. for Improvement Contract 53-245, sanit ; c'
and watermain laterals for the 'Westgate area, Fuller Roar.
Lincoln Lane. (Copy of Change Order No. 2 attached)
Action: Motion approving Change Order No. 2 and final payment to
Peter Lametti Construction Co. for I.C. 51-245 in t".' +�r„•:*.t
of $310,838.70 leas previous payments and subject to receipt
• of lien waiver from all materials suppliers and subcontractor's+
one year maintenance warranty bond oommenctng 9/11/73.
V, D
Council Agenda
-3- September 1], 1973
V. REPORTS OF OFFICERS,BOARDS &COMMISSIONS (Cont.)
A. Reports of Village Engineer (cont.)
4. Approve final payments to Orfei & Sons, Inc. for Improvement
Contracts 51-242 and 51-243, sanitary sewer and waterrnain
laterals for Section II (Franklin Circle, Edenwood Drive, North &
South Hillcreat and Alpine Way)and for Section III (Rainbow Drive,
Park Terrace Drive, North and South Lund and Oak Ridge Road.)
Action: Motion approving final payments to Orfei & Sons, Inc. for
I.C. 51-242 (Section II) in the amount of $713,442 .69 and for
C.C. 51-243 (Section III) in the amount of $494,692.71, less
previous payments and subject to receipt of lien waivers from
all materials suppliers and subcontractors plus one year
maintenance warranty bond commencing September 11, 1973.
5. Request from Carl Bolander S Sons Co.,grading contractors, for
variance from the grading permit for the Eden Prairie Center allowing
work between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight rather than
7:00 a.ml to 10:00 p.m. (Letter attached)
Action: Motion approving amendment to the grading permit for the Eden
Prairie Center allowing working hours of 6:00 a.m. to 12:00
midnight as requested in letter from Carl Bolander &Sons Co.
dated September 6, 1973, subject to reconsideration if there
are serious complaints about noise as determined by Village
Manager.
B. Reports of Village Manager:
1. Retention of George M. Hansen Company to conduct 1973 Audit.
(Letter attached)
Action: Motion authorizing George M. Hansen Company to conduct
1973 Audit.
2. Request for authorization to rent cottage on Staring Lake to Mr.
Brian Wilhelm at the monthly rate of $140.
Action: Motion authorizing the Village Manager to rent cottage on
Staring Lake to Mr. Brian Wilhelm at monthly rate of$140.
3. Consideration of Bryant Lake Water C'uaiity Analysts.
Action: Motion authorizing the Village of Eden Prairie to enter into a
Joint Agreement with the Nine Mile Creek Watershed Dt tr:.c
for water quality analysis of Bryant Lake to be fincur-
jointly over a three fiscal year period at the rate o f t,0110
per agency per year.
4. Letter from Eden Prairie_(lons Club dated 9/5/73 enclosing check
to purchase signs for protection of children. (Attached)
Action: Motion to receive and file.
Council Agenda -4- September 11, 1973
V. REPORTS OF OFFICERS,BOARDS& COMMISSIONS (Cont.)
B. Jiecorts of Village Manager(cont.)
5. Notice of Government Operations Committee Hearing at Normandale
State Junior College on September 17, 1 973. (Letter attached)
Action:
C. Jteoort of Village Clerk; }--
1, Village Clerk's Recommended License Application List dated
9/11/73. (Attached)
Action: Motion approving License Application List.
VI. FINANCES;
•
A. Payment of Claims No. 2557- 2632. (Attached)
Action: Motion approving payment of Claims No.2557 - 2632.
B. Cash and Investment Report. (Attached)
Action: Motion accepting Cash and Investment Report dated 9/11/73.
VII. /DIOURNMEN$.
II
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE VILLAGE COUNCIL
TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 1973 7:30 P.M. VILLAGE HALL
Counci 1 Members: Mayor Paul Redpath, Councilwoman Joan Meyers,
Councilmen John lIcCulloch, Wolfgang Penzel, and
Roger Boerger.
Counci 1 Staff: Vi llage Manager Robert P. Heinri ch
At torney Keith Simons
I. MINUTES OF REGULAR h1EETIMG HELD AUGUST 14, 1973.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers, seconded by Fir. Penzel. to
approve the minutes of August 14, 1973 as published. All voted
aye; motion carried.
II. PRESENTATION TO MAYOR PAUL REDPATH.
firs. Meyers presented Mayor Redpath with the Certi ficate of
Commendation on behalf of the League of i1innesota Municipalities.
The certificate reads as follows: "The Certificate of Commenda-
tion is presented to Paul R. Redpath as a nominee for the C. C.
Ludwig award for distinguished munic ipal service."
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Proj ect STN 73-4-17, Storm Sewer Improvements for the Neill
Lake Drainage Basin.
Hr. Jullie pointed out the area to be included in the project
as shown in the feasibility report of August 8, 1973. He ex-
plat ned that the purpose of the project was to replace and
expand the county system of drain tiles and ditches. The
proj ect, he stated, has been divided into four systems--Eden
Lake, Olympic Hill s, Neil 1 Lake, and Outlet.
Tota 1 cost of the project is estimated to be $723,534 which
woul d be assessed within the boundary limits. The assessment
rates would be computed in proportion to the amount of rainfall
fall runoff from the properties involved which can be consider-.
ed a function of 1 and use. Runoff, for instance, would be
2 times greater off commercial than residential ; 1-1/2 times
grea ter off multiple family residential and school sites; the
same off golf course properties. Therefore the estimated
assessment rates would be:
$ 600/acre for single family detached residential and
golf course properties.
$ 900/acre for multiple family residential and school
sites.
$1200/acre for commercial property.
If approved, the staff would proceed immediately' with the
preparation of plans and specs; bids obtained in October;
Council Meeting —2- August 28, 1973
and anticipated completion by the summer of 1974. The project
assessment hearing would be held about a year from now. It
would be the staff's recommendation that owners of homes
built prior to June 22, 1971, be given special consideration.
Hr. Heinrich replied to the questions stated in a letter from
The Preserve dated August 23, 1973.
Mr. 8ob Schumacher, representing Olympic Hills, referred to
his letter which is on file in the engineer's office. It
was their feeling, he said, that golf courses should not be
assessed the same as single family residential and that
some credit should be received since a dike type structure
with pump was built near Neill Lake.
Mr. Gil Darkenwald, owner of 10-1/2 acres of land on Eden
Lake, was assured that no public access would be granted
through his property to the perhaps 20' public area next to
the lake.
A motion was made by Mr. Penzel seconded by fir. Boerger clos-
ing the hea ring and adopting Resolution No. 756 ordering
improvement and preparation of plans and specifications for
Project STM 73-4-17. Motion carried unanimously.
8. Vacation of Franlo Road between the Ring Road and U.S. 169/ j
212. Requested by The Preserve.
A motion was made by Hr. Boerger seconded by Mr. Penzel to
adopt Resolution No. 757 vacating Franl o Road between the
Ring Road and U.S. 169/212. Motion carried unanimously.
C. Briarhill, F.H.A. 236 multi-family development, Shelter
Development Corporation.
Mr. Heinrich stated that because the feasibility was approved
by HUD at S21,700 less than the mortgage requested and chang-
ing site evaluations, a better site plan resulted. The
August 21 Planning Commission report on Briarhill was ex-
plained.
Mr. Tom LaSalle of Shelter introduced Mr. Nick Talaia, an
architect, who compared the two site pl ans and explained the
changes.
Mr. McCulloch expressed concern about the financial stability
of Shelter and Mr. LaSalle replied that Shelter is as stable
as other land developers, and that there would be no problems
with this development.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers seconded by Mr. Penzel approv-
ing the revised site plan required on the basis of the F.H.A.
approval. Motion carried with Mayor Redpath, Councilwoman
Meyers, Councilmen Penzel and Boerger voting eye; Councilman
McCulloch voting nay.
_ I
Council Meeting -3- August 28, 1973
C. 8riarhil 1 (continued)
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers seconded by Mr. Penzel ac-
cepting the site plan rev isions presented in the report
dated August 3, 1973, by Shelter Development Corporati on.
Motion carried with Mayor Redpath, Councilwoman Meyers
Councilmen Penzel and Boerger voting aye; Councilman
McCulloch voting nay.
_ —D. Olympic Hills Planned Unit Development, 32 acre residential
devel opment.
Mr. Putnam, Village Planner, explained the soil and slope
problems on the wooded hillside which would be developed
with single family dwe-lings and on the peninsula which
would be developed with six duplexes. Also explained were
the recommendations of the Staff and Planning Commission.
Mr. Jim Morris, architect for Olympic Hills, explained the
site plan with its varied uses--single family residential,
townhouses and duplexes.
A motion was made by Mr. Boerger seconded by Mr. Penzel to
adopt Resolution Ho. 761 approving concept plan approval of
Olympic Hills PUD, 32 acre residential development in accor-
dance with the Planning Staff Report dated July 23, 1973.
Motion carried unanimously.
E. Prairie East Planned Unit Development, 95 acre mixed residen-
tial, Hustad Development Corporation.
Mr. Bill Bonner showed slides of the area and expal fined the
site plan with its 41 single family lots , 76 townhouse units,
and 6-8 terrace aprtment buildings or condominiums.
Mr. Redpath expressed concern that low to moderate income
housing was not present i n Hustad devel opment. Mr. Hustad
said that the sector study was an adequate expression of
what they anticipate the 1 and uses to be. They are looking
for a spot where this type of housing might logically happen
but it can't be found in their area; possibly might have
to be designed.
A motion was made by Mr. Penzel seconded by Mrs. Meyers to
adopting Resolution No. 762 granting PUD concept approval
for Prairie East PUD for 95 acres of mixed residential.
Motion carried unanimously.
A motion was made by Mr. .Penzel seconded by Mr. Boerger
approving the first reading of Ordinance No. 231, amending
Zoning Ordinance reclassifying approximately 21 acres from
Rural to R1-13.5 for 41 single family lots. Motion carried
unanimous ly.
r
Council Meeting -4- August 28, 1973
E. Prairie East (continued)
A motion was made by Mr. Penzel seconded by Mrs. Meyers
adopting Resolution No. 753 granting preliminary plat approv-
al for the 21 acre signle family plat, R1-13.5 subject to the
Engineer's Report of August 23, 1973. Motion carried unani-
mously.
F. Basswoods Forest, single family subdivison located in The
Preserve. Requesting rezoni rig from Rural in approved PUD t-
70-3 to R1-13.5 for 20 acres and 36 single family detached
lots.
The Preserve's 1 etter of August 28, 1973, requesting a blanket
variance from the side yard requirements was discussed. Mr.
Jullie stated that this type of variance is consistent with
what has been done in other areas. These variances give
flexibility to the builder to save trees, build larger homes.
Mr. Penzel felt that individual variances should be granted
and requested that the staff investigate the variance situ-
ation.
A motion was made by Mr. Boerger seconded by Mr. Penzel to
approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 229 to zone Bass-
woods Forest to R1-13.5. Mo tion carried unanimously.
A motion was made by Mr. Boerger seconded by Mr. Penzel to
adopt Resolution No. 758 approving the final plat of Basswoods
Forest including the variance as requested in The Preserve's
letter of August 28, 1973, which stated the side yard require-
ments in the second paragraph. Motion carried with Mayor
Redpath, Council woman Meyers , Councilmen Boerger and Penzel
voting aye; Councilman McCul loch voting nay.
IV. PET I TIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNI CATIONS:
A. Letter dated August 9, 1973. from Riley-Purgatory Creek Water- I
shed District.
A motion was made by Mr. Penzel seconded by Mr. Boerger to
receive and file the Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed District
letter of August 9, 1973. Notion carried unanimously.
B. Petition dated August 15, 1973, from property owners near the
intersection of T.H. #b and witchell Road.
A motion was made by Mr. Pen zel seconded by Mr. Boerger to re-
ceive and file the August 15 . 1973 petition and instructed
the manager to convey to District 5 Highway Department the
Village's concern about the hazards of, turning lanes and .
1 ights on T.H. 05. Motion carried unanimously.
Council iteeting -5- August 28, 1973
C. Petition dated August 15 1973, from Eden Land Corporation
for extension of Mitchell Road.
A motion was made by tor. Penzel seconded by Mrs. Meyers to
receive and file Eden Land Corp's petition of August 15,
1973. Motion carried unanimously.
V. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES:
A. Second reading, Ordinance No. 227, for Creative Housing, Inc
District Rural to R1-13.5 for 14 acres.
A motion was made by Mr. Penzel seconded by Mrs. Meyers to
approve the second reading of Ordinance No. 227 but to with-
hold publication until a settlement of $7500 in lieu of
park land dedication is reached. Motion carried unanimously..
B. Second reading, Ordinance No. 186, Tree Disease Ordi nance.
A motion was made by tlr. McCulloch seconded by Mr. Penzel
to approve the second reading of Ordinance No. 186. Motion
carried unanimously.
C. First reading, Ordinance No. 230, permitting cash contribu-
tions i n lieu of land for public park use and open space con-
sistent with the provisions of 1973 State Statutes.
A motion was made by Mr. Penzel seconded by Mr. Boerger to
approve the first read ing of Ordinance No. 230. Motion
carried unanimously.
D. First reading Ordinance Mo. 232, an ordinance changing the
street name of Atherton Road within Atherton 2nd Addition to
Chestnut Drive.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers seconded by Hr. McCulloch
approving the first reading of Ordinance No. 232. Motion
carried unanimously.
E. Resolut ion No. 760, commenting on the Comprehensive Phase
III, a Community Devel opment Guide for Minnetonka. Minnesota,
as it affects Eden Prairie.
A motion was made by iirs. Meyers seconded by Mr. McCulloch
to adopt Resolution No. 760, commenting on Minnetonka's
Comprehensive Phase III Development Guide. Motion carried
unanimously.
The staff was requested to send the resolution to the Metro
Council and neighboring villages for their review.
Council Meeting -7- August 28, 1973
VI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS:
A. Village Attorney Report:
1. Consideration of ordinance amending the ordinances es-
tabl fishing the Planning Commission, Park & Recreation
Commission, and Human Rights Commission, modifying the
membership and required quorum.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers seconded by Mr. Penzel
approving the first reading of Ordinance No. 233 amend-
, ing Ordinance Iio.30 establishing the Planning Commission,
Ordi nance No.112 e stablishing the Park & Recreation
Comm ission and Ord finance No. 111 establishing the Human
Rights Commission. Motion carried unanimously -
2. Summons from Brooklyn Center.
A motion was made by Mrs. i•Ieyers seconded by Mr. McCulloch
authorizing the Vi llage Attorney to respond supporting the
Metro Council and sewer board. Motion carried unanimously.
B. Village Engineer Reports:
1. Final Plat of Crestwood 73, Alex Dorenkemper.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers seconded by Mr. McCulloch
adopting Resolution No. 759 approving Final P1 at of Crest-
wood 73. Motion carried unanimou sly.
The ilanager was instructed to submit to the Council a copy
of the land hold agreement or progress report.
2. Cons ideration of agreement with Barr Engineeri ny Company
for engineering services on Project STM 73-4-17.
A motion was made by Iir. Penzel seconded by Mr . Boerger to
approve the agreement with Barr Engineering for services
on Project STii 73-4-17. Motion carried unanimously.
C. Village (tanager Reports:
1. Award bid on backhoe-tractor-high lift combinat ion.
A motion was made by Ors. Meyers seconded by lir. Boerger
adopting Resolution No. 755 accepting the low bid of Val-
ley Equipment Co. in the amount of 512,586 for a John
Deere Backhoe-Trac tor-Highlift Combination. 0n roll call,
all voted aye. d tion carried.
2. Reaffirming Federal LAMCON assistance for open space ac-
quisition for Fiscal Year 1974.
A motion was made by lir. Penzel seconded by Mr . Boerger to
adopt Resolution 754 submitting preliminary application
for Fiscal Year 1974 Federal LANCON assistance . Motion
carried unanimousl y.
Council Meeting -8- August 28, 1973
3. Consideration of riotorcycle Patrol.
sir. Hacking explaining his report of August 21, 1973,
stated why a motorcycle patrol would be valuable to the
community...hiking and biking trails would be accessible,
undeveloped areas , parks, playgrounds, neighborhoods, tot
lots and parking areas in townhouse complexes would be
more easily patrolled.
A motion was made by Mr. McCulloch seconded by Mrs. Meyers
authorizing the Village Manager to implement a Motorcycle
Patrol and to receive with appreciation the anonymous
gift of a fully radio-equipped motorcycle for this Patrol
from an Eden Prairie resident. Notion carried unanimously.
4. Consideration of membership in the seven-county Suburban
League of 1unicipalities and/or membership in the Metro-
po1 itan League of Municipalities.
A motion was made by Mr. Boerger seconded by h1r. Penzel
endorsing membership in the Metropolitan League of
Municipalities wi th dues of ;696. Motion carried unani-
mou sly.
5. Bryant Lake Cooperative Study.
Hr. Heinrich reported that Minnetonka turned down with
regret participation in the Cooperative study.
6. Request from Eden Land Corporation for a meeting.
Mr- Peterson has requested a meeting with the Council
to discuss their economic picture. This meeting was set
for September 6 at 7:30 after which the budget will be
discussed.
D. Mayor's Report:
1. Announcement - Joint Council/School Board meeting on
Thursday, August 30, 1973, in Industrial Conference Room
at Suburban Hennepin Vocational -Technical School at 7:30.
2. Zip Code Application for Eden Prairie.
A motion was made by fir. Penzel seconded by fir. McCulloch
adopting Resolution No. 763 requesting assignment of a
zip code number to the village of Eden Prairie by the
U. S. Postal Service. Motion carried unanimously.
E. Village Clerk's Report:
1. Village Clerk's Recommended License Application List
dated August 28, 1973.
Hr. Douglas stated that the four dogs are in a fenced
f
Council Meeting -9— August 28. 1913
1. Applicati on List (continued)
area and are only outside the home for several hours.
The next door neighbors--Chermack and Franchuk have no
objections to the dogs . Complaints from other resi dents
of the neighborhood have been receiv ed, however, and
have been investigated by the Manager and Public Safety
Director.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers seconded by Mr. Penzel
approving the License Application Li st of August 28, 1973
with the private kennel license to expire December 31,
1913 and the situation to receive cl ose observation.
Motion carried unanimously.
VII. FINANCES:
A. Payment of Claims No. 2338 - 2556.
A motion was made by Mr. Penzel seconded by Mrs. Meyers to
approve payment of Claims No. 2338-2556. On roll call , all
voted aye. Motion carried.
B. Cash and Investment Report.
A motion was made by Mrs. Meyers seconded by Mr. Boerger to
accept the Cash and Investment Report dated August 1, 1973.
Motion carried unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 12:50 a.m.
Suzanne K. Lane, Deputy Clerk
STAFF PLANNING REPORT
DATE: August 15, 1973
PROJECT: Masters Condominiums
LOCATION: West of the first hole north of Valley View Road, bounded on
the west by Golf View Boulevard within Edenvale's
northeast area
DEVELOPER: Weis Builders, Inc., Rochester, Minn.
REQUEST: Rezoning to RM-2.5 for the construction of two 6-story
condominium buildings totaling 99 units at 13.4 dwelling
units per acre
FROM: Richard Putnam, Village Planner
THRU: Robert P. Heinrich, Village Manager
Report Outline:
A. Conformance with Edenva le P.U.D.
B. Community Precedent.
C. Visual Impact on Surrounding Area.
D. Location and Structural Concept.
E. Alternate Land Use Type.
F. Building Plan Analysis.
G. Site Plan Analysis.
H. Summary & Recommendations.
A. Conformance with Edenvale P.U.D.
The approved Planned Unit Development indicates a site of 7.4 acres to be
13.4 units per acre maximum density with a total of 99 units. The size
listed in the category of M-2 corresponds with units such as Fairway
Woods, Mark Jones' Shadow Green, and Shelter's 236 project. 'The building
type in all of these projects is of a 3-story wood framed unit. The numbers
are in direct conformance with the approved Edenvale Planned Unit Develop-
ment. However, it seems fair to say that the intent of the M-2 district
was not for the medium rise building, as proposed in this development. This
is not to say that the medium rise is not a good or valid solution on this
site, but merely that the density range of 13 units per acre and the comparable
projects built indicate this is a different structural treatment.
Conformance with the pathways, roads, and golf course orientation seems to
be excellent and do not present any conflicts with the approved P.U.D.
B. Community Reaction and Precedence:
In a letter from a resident, it was noted that there should be careful
evaluation by the Commission of building types of this nature and where
they are placed within the community, and suggested that approval of
such a medium rise project may set a precedent for many developments within
the community that may not be desirable. This concern has been raised by
Staff Planning Report
Masters Condominiums
Page 2
many of the Planning Commission and Council members in that the high
rise building syndrome would spread like a cancer throughout the
community and totally change the residential, natural skyline that we all
enjoy today.
To answer this concern, we must look to some of the ordinances which
are today controlling development. Outside of Planned Unit Development
areas, the normal ZoningOrdinance controls all development, allowing for
a maximum of 30 ft. in height, which would be approximately a three story
structure. The maximum building height combined with the densities allowed
which would be the maximum of about 17 units per acre under the RM-2.5
category would effectively limit medium rise buildings without obtaining
variances. The reasons for variances are spelled out and would probably
not,under normal circumstances,qualify a building for a variance outside of
a Planned Unit Development. Therefore, the ZoningOrdinance would seem
to protect the normal residential areas, such as the Duck Lake area, Kings
Forest, Scenic Heights, or other developed residential areas from any
construction of medium and high rise buildings, unless they are part of an
extremely large Planned Unit Development such as Edenvale or The Preserve.
However, the Planned Unit Development as stated in Section 11.1 of the
Zoning Ordinance states: "The Planned Unit Development (PUD) provision
of this ordinance to allow variation from the provisions of this ordinance
including setbacks, height, lot area, width, and depth, yards, etc. in
order to(a) encourage more creative design and development of land,
(b) promote variety in the physical development pattern of the Village,
(c)concentrate open space in more usable areas or to preserve unique
natural resources of the site, (d)preserve and provide a more desirable
environment than would be possible under strict interpretation of the Zoning
Ordinance or Subdivision Regulations." It seems clear from this section of
the Zoning Ordinance that within a Planned Unit Development of significant
size where the purposes of the P.U.D. are met,that consideration for medium
and high rise buildings would be reasonable. To date, I believe that within
our Village, the Planned Unit Development process has been well received,
both by the existing residential areas and by land owners and developers.
It seems one of the primary reasons is that all concerned know basic ground
rules related to quality, appropriateness of structure design, provision of
usable public and homeowner open spaces with a provision for joint use by
the existing residential areas and the new residents. P.U.D. has allowed
this community, much different from others, to blend the existing develop-
ment more successfully with the new housing types and variety of life styles
into the community.
The precedent that would be set by approving this development within the
Edenvale P.U. D. on this specific 7 acre site is that the use of a medium
rise building type within a large scale Planned Unit Development, buffered
• Staff Planning Report
Masters Condominiums
Page 3
from existing areas both visually and physically, would be appropriate if
certain conditions are present, such as;the preservation of the site,
proximity to significant amenities such as a golf course, and the reduction
of building scale by the surrounding land forms and mature vegetation to
more clo rely blend the upper levels of the building with the existing horizon
tine. The +ateit o_`evaluating Ellis project is not to indicate the use of
medium rise or high rise building types throughout the Village of Eden Prairie
but rather to evalu ate the Masters condominium project on the basis of its
appropriateness to the site and the impact on surrounding areas through
transportation, visual, open space, and units provided.
The question would be raised that the Major Center Planned Unit Develop-
ment states that the higher density housing for the community should be
located within this area, and within this area only, just as the regional
commercial uses would be located exclusively in the Major Center Area.
The Masters condominiums proposed at a little over 13 units an acre falls
under our existing Zoning Ordinance and merely utilizes a different building
type because of certain site considerations to provide density under our
RM•2.5 Zoning which allows a maximum of 17 units per acre..
Major Center densities and housing types will be varied but will be
significantly higher than the densities allowed under the RM-2.5 category.
The Major Center Area Task Force discussed this at length and felt that the
higher density housing necessary to reduce housing costs for elderly
housing, for example, or for the higher density housing in close relationship
to office/commercial uses should be located only in this area and not allowed
at other freeway intersections throughout the community, etc. It should be
noted that the building type proposed in the Masters is not typical, in fact,
an extreme example of the type of building normally found at the 13 unit per
acre densities. The cost of the units and its location on the golf course
indicate that the extra construction costs can be absorbed in the unit cost
because of the unique site. Evaluation of this project is not in any way
being compared with those projects in the Major Center Area, and hence,
there will not be a spread of that hou sing type nor density.
C. Visual Impact on Surrounding Area:
Two 6-story buildings with a first floor elevation of approximately 895
would have the top floors at approximately 950. The current site's maximum
elevation is at 904 on the crest of the hill. With the addition of the
semi-mature oak on the hill of approximately 35-40 ft. in height. Today
the horizon line is at approximately 940. The hill form with the major
vegetation makes t'iis site rather prominent as viewed from other areas.
Views from the northwest area of Edenvale,
the commercial, church, and multiple center in the south part
of Edenvale's northwest area will be lower than the railroad embankment
and would not have any visual contact with the site. The Shelter project
in northwest Edenvale and the areas north would have limited contact with
the site but would primarily orient to the west and south rather than east.
Staff Planning Report
Masters Condominiums
Page 4
The most visual impact will be experienced by the units proposed directly
west of Golf View Drive and adjacent to the railroad tracks. Most of the
land in this area will orient to the golf course or east, and the site just
sort:1.fir tale iit -,y View Roil arid Gulf View Drive intersection will 7e
dramatically aft acted by the construction of these units. The units in
this area will most certainly orient directly south since the site slopes
from a high point to the north of 920 to the golf course across Valley View
Road with an elevation of approximately 850. The Masters project as well
as the railroad tracks will certainly be the most undesirable views and the
units would attempt to face directly south or north of the Masters
site overlooking the first fairway and green.
The golf clubhouse1recently constructed in Edenvale and the first tee will
also experience some visual contact with the Masters proposal. Due to
the hill where the existing Eden Land offices are today and the m ajor oak
trees, the buildings will be softened and not completely visible from the
golf clubhouse vantage point. The building massing should be visible
above the trees and through openings in the trees but should not be
undesirable as a view from the clubhouse and first tee.
The revised proposal submitted July 25th moved the eastern building back
from the golf course a distance of about 40 or 50 feet. To reduce the
confined feeling while playing the course at that point, perhaps greater
distance from the course could be achieved in detailed site planning work.
Also, the orient ation of a narrow part of the building to the course and
clubhouse will be helpful in reducing the mass of the structures as viewed
from the east.
The Masters project as viewed from the newly developed Golf View single
family area and a few lots in Kings Forest will be greatly softened through
the distance of over a quarter of a mile to the closest lots within Prairie
View and in Kings Forest area. The land forms and structures to be built
within the Golf View area, the Mark Z. Jones Shadow Green area, will also
greatly influence the visual impact from the adjacent single family areas
as well as the newly constructed units within Edenvale. From the Mark
Jones project In Shadow Green, the closest building would be approximately
800 ft. from the site, looking across the driving range and two golf holes, 1
and 9, to the site of the Masters. The distances combined with the variety
of natural terrain and open space as well as structural developments to the
east of the Mas tors should provide adequate visual buffer for all existing
and proposed units.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the exact roof elevation and their
relationship to the rem ainina trees and land forms should be graphically
s
Staff Planning Report
Masters Condominiums
Page 5
depicted to the Village Staff, and if additional plantings of significant
height or alteration of building elevations is required to more carefully
blend the buildings into the natural horizon line. The intent of the proposal
is to site the buildings so the vegetation that exists and proposed will
'i_:hoi:1:IIa`... the top at ilciiceted ❑ the sec tion it le,at:U1
sub::ittad July 25, 1973. The elevation shown will be used to evaluate
the final development plan prior to the issuance of any building permits.
D. Proposed Land Use and Structural Type:
The amenities of the site which primarily relate to the golf course,which
runs to the east of this site with the first fairway,seems to be ideal open
space use related to a luxury or semi-luxury condominium building. The
golf clientele and the good recreational opportunity for middle aged and
older people would be well suited to many of the owners of the Masters'
units. The prestige and views over golf courses seem ideally suited for
the Masters condominium resident interests.
The terrain with its hilly nature and major oak vegetation on the south and
east slopes was a great determinant in the building pad areas as well as the
possible site coverage. This dictated a much higher density building type
rather than putting units in many areas of the site. Most certainly other
types of units, such as three story apartments or townhouses , could be
built on this site, but at the expense of more extensive grading and land
alteration in many more areas. The oak vegetation is rather sensitive and
can not be d isturbed nearly as much as other types; therefore, building on
the south and east slopes would most certainly eliminate a great number of
the mature oaks present today.
The site with the 99 units proposed has excellent transportation access to
regional road systems and Hwy. 5 and the Village Ring Route via Valley
View Road and Mitchell Road. Access to the site is off of the Golf View
collector with two access points. The vast majority of trips to and from
the Masters would utilize Golf View Drive going south to Valley View Road
and east and west on Valley View. Very few trips would go north on Golf
View, thereby driving through the single family areas of the Golf View
subdivision and north into Kings Forest.
Important to the location of the Masters condominiums at this point are
marketing concerns and recent housing types proposed in Edenvale today.
Fairway Woods condominiums offer condominium units with many of the
same features that the Masters would offer, with the exception of the
building type and conveniences of the underground parking/elevator type
of structure. Greater security, less stair climbing, and more expansive
views plus totally fireproof building are advantages of the Ma sters
condominiums, Also the rental projects proposed in Shadow Green by
Staff Planning Report '
Masters Condominiums
Page 6
Mark Z. Jones are compatible with the condominium use proposed_ The
proximity to commercial facilities, such as the Shadow Green convenience
center and the community shopping center at Valley View and Mitchell
CG lthln d 4vit7In c'lurcl 3i ttlo .:,`d _!:,:oz Ie. for th.
coaciorninium market. Vf:ry important from the marketing standpoint is tee —
Masters project is not located in the middle of nowhere, but rather adjacent
to a major golf course clubhouse teeoff site as well as the necessary
commercial, recreational, and institutional needs of the residents.
E. Alternate Land Use Types:
The townhouse and apartment use of the 7.4 acre site could produce 99 units
as indicated. However, the destruction of the major vegetation, which on
this site Is significant and worthy of preservation, would be the result. One
only has to look at the many projects of townhouse single family or
apartment that are built in wooded areas to realize that significant amounts
of trees will be lost during construction. Within a forest with a variety of
tree species and sizes, this is not as critical as on a site such as the Masters,
where each tree is a mature specimen, rather scattered in groves,
The option discussed at our last meeting of providing singlefamily housing
on this site is certainly possible to correspond with the existing structure,
which is the office of Eden Land today. One alternate of the single family
layout is enclosed to indicate the difficulties with placing single family homes
on this site. The traffic from Golf View Drive as well as Valley View Road •
puts severe constraints upon the appropriateness of this area as a single
family subdivision; also, potential conflict with the golf course as single
family lots back up to the first fairway where a hooked drive would
stray is less than ideal. Significant site alteration and major tree
removals would result from the single family use of this site if it is to be
economically feasible.
There is little doubt that a few single family homes or a reduced number of
townhouses or three story apartments could be placed on this site- However,
the approved P.U.D. plan for 99 units does indicate a commitment between
the Village and Eden Land Corp. as to development. If the Masters project
was found to be incompatible with the site and Planned Unit Development
objectives, then the lower density building type would be required. It
appears, in looking at alternate building types, that the Masters units
proposed would do as little damage to the south and eastern areas of the
site as any units proposed and still make the project economically. feasible.
-w
r
'-
•
: \
w: I
\
s
- _
112 11. ,3: .
4,,,
M ' ..
-2\\ ovitst44"4. 46taid.,
I. - _ , \ / .. "46111444111
---. " \
, it-4 I * '.r ,; ' •111 ;, .
i ,
1 .:::: ........\*
•
r VOW
Jr I
Staff Planning Report
Masters Condominium
Page 7
F. Building Plan Analysis:
The Masters condominiums are fire resistant, five and six story, double
loaded corridor apartment style buildings. The structures utilized recessed
bilc::rlies as well as cantilevered balcony areas. A majority of the parking
is uro•rideri underground on two levels. 'il:s buildings will proviaa on3, :wo,
and three bedroom units of a large square footage, high quality construction.
The proposal incorporates stand pipe system, required under State Building
Code for fire protection, and does not propose sprinkler protection for the
buildings. The recommendation from the Building Department and
consul tants,such as Chet Shermer from Shermer Engineering representing
Homart, was that the health safety provided with sprinklered buildings
of residential, commercial, or office type is many, many times that provided
by conventional stand pipe systems. Combining that fact with the limited
equipment for the Village Fire Departmentiwhich would be unable at the
present time to reach the upper floors of the Masters project, the recommen—
dation from the Building Department,with which I would concur, would be
•
• that sprinklers be included within each building. The question of the esthetics
of sprinklered buildings, I believe, is invalid if decorative sprinkler heads
as well as suspended ceilings are used within the units. Also, the marketing
of such a building with the safety of sprinklers built in should be an asset
rather than a detriment for the individuals purchasing units, who would be of
an upper income level and value good security systems as well as protection
from fire. The extra investment in sprinklering, which may vary from $500
to$1,400 per unit, depending upon building costs and systems used, would
seem a worthwhile investment.
The Masters project also proposes a rather extensive plaza treatment over
the parking garage which would incorporate swimming pool gathering areas
and other developed recreational options. The utilization of the existing
structure as an office and storage immediately with conversion to other
recreational uses would seem worthwhile. The use as a single family
detached home in the future could create many problems and would seriously
limit the use of the site by other residents of the condominium structures.
The masonry buildings proposed with elevator service offer an excellent
living unit for those wishing fireproof construction, sweeping views,
excell ent security systems, and what amounts to as luxury golf course
living
G. Site Plan Analysis:
The use of the two level underground parking garages has freed up a great
amount of the site as open space and natural uses. The pool, tennis
court, recreation building, and general open wooded knoll will provide a
variety of open space uses to residents of the Masters site. Combined
with the golf course and other Edenvale open space systems, many oppor-
Staff Planning Report
Masters Condominiums
Page S
tunities exist to the Masters residents. The parking that is propos ed as
exterior will be kept to a minimum and should be extensively screened from
view from off the site, since units west of Golf View Drive will have direct
tt, the paridng ar^as. Firth barns and extendinn londsc 2inq, more
`non propos=u, will be nec?ssaryto -ccuriplish this.
No grading plan was submitted with a revised site plan indicating a new
location and style of buildings. However, the intent of the first si to plan
is basically the same, to preserve a majority of major oak trees and the
hill form to the east and south of the site. The high point and the second
knoll will be cut to set the building into these areas,with major site grading
occurring only north and east of the site.
Access and parking seem very workable, with approximately Iz spaces per
unit enclosed.
As required by the Fire Inspector and Building Department, paved access to
all sides of the building may be required for fire protection, and certain
pedestrian pathways indicated may be required to be built to a 10-12 ft.
standard rather than the 6-8 ft. to accommodate rescue vehicles, if felt
necessary. The rescue access as well as sprinkler protection would provide
one of the highest degrees of life safety of any structure within the Village
of Eden Prairie. The recommendations of the Building Department should
govern the access to the structure to accommodate rescue vehicles .
•
The location of the tennis courts In the revised plan adjacent to Valley View
Road and Golf View Drive offer some visual problems if the building is viewed
from Valley View. With the 8 ft. chain link fence that surrounds the tennis
court combined with the rather inaccessible location of the tennis court,
movement of this facility to the north into its original location may be more
desirable to tie it in with the pathway system and the golf course as a
recreational area. Also, by extending the parking area into the tennis court
location with extensive screening and landscaping, the effect of that lot
would be far less than the tennis court as proposed. More detailed plans
in the development of the plaza space will certainly provide excellent
adult recreational facilities. if the sales and marketing indicate purchases
by families with young children , appropriate totlot recreational facilities
shall be provided by the developer during the second phase of construction.
H. Summary & Recommendations:
The Masters Condominiums is a proposal providing unique life style, not
currently found within the Village of Eden Prairie. Due to the site features
and adjacent open space uses, the residents of the Masters have numerous
recreational opportunities available. Of extreme importance is the ability
to fit the six story structures into the site without drastically altering the
skyline and view from all directions. Preservation of the significant trees
r LI
Staff Planning Report
Masters Condominiums
Page 9
and hill form as well as additional plantings and proper siting can
achieve this objective. With the provision of sprinkler systems
well es i'_.,qulta ac_ess around the structures, the Ilia s f�ty
tlue r scants of the":asters will be vsry ziccaptabie, even with tna
equipment available to the Fire Department today. 'Through the choice
of soft-toned bricks or textured concrete, the visual appearance of the t--
structure can be diminished. Stark, precast concrete exterior finish
would tend to accentuate the height and mass of the structures and
would most likely not fulfill our obj ective to blend with existing
surroundings. Further detail as to grading, structural treatment, and
site plan modifications will be required and must be reviewed by the
Planning Department prior to issuance of any building permits.
Recommendations:
1. That approval of the Masters Condominium project in Edenvale is
based upon the specific site plan, site features, and building proposals
and is not to be interpreted as a normal building type allowed under
the RM-2.5 zoning.
2. Pri
or to the issuance of building pe
rmits, the exact roof elevation and
its relationship to the remaining trees and land forms should be carefully
examined by the Village Staff, and if additional plantings of sufficient
height or alteration of the building elevation ae required to more carefully
blend the structures with the existing horizon
3. Recommend granting of the variance for the construction of the Nesters
Condominiums over the 30 ft. height limitation within the Village Zoning
Ordinance for the RM-2.5 category.
4. Since the structure will be approximately two times the existing height
limitation, all setback requirements for the structures shall be increased
proportionately, or other projects to be constructed shall be set back
proportionate distances.
5. Require fire and life safety equipment as prescribed by the Eden Prairie
Public Safety and Building Inspection Departments to be installed by the
developer.
6. Require site and construction work to begin within the calendar year of
1974 or to seek an extension for the rezoning from the Village, or the
rezoning reverts to rural under the Planned Unit Development 70-4.
r
Staff Pl 9 nnin Report
• Matters Condominiums
Page 10
7. Recommend approval of rezoning of Edenvale Lot 1, Block 4, and
Outlot F of Edenvale Second Addition to RM-2.5 for the construction
exclusively of the Masters Condominium project with a revised
generalized site plan submitted July 2 5, 1973, for 9 9 ownersaip
condominium units.
DP
•
8/21/73 Planning Commission
D. "The Rasters", condominiums located west of the 1st fairway in
Edenvale. Revised site and building plan submitted will be ex-
plained by develop er. Staff report and recommendation.
Mr. Putnam highlighted his staff report of August 15 and showed
slides of the site and location of the proposed buildings. Dur-
ing this slide presentation Mr. Peterson of Eden Land Corp.
stated that the bu ildings would project about 10 feet above the
tree elevation.
In answer to Mrs. Schee's question regarding a sprinkler sys—
ter, 1,1r. Cooperman stated that if the Commission and Council
required such a system it would be included; however, if the
inclusion made the project economically unfeasible, the project
may have to be abandoned.
Mrs. Meyers commended Edenvale for being good developers and
concerned community supporters, but voiced opposition to the
six—story condominium project. Realizing that it was an awk—
ward piece of land , Mrs. Meyers based her opposition on the
precedent which might be set as a result of the granting of the
il2 zoning variance and on the lack of coincidence between this
project and the efforts of the MC Task Force and Housing Task
Force to preserve the integrity of rural neighborhoods.
Mr. Peterson showed the relationship of this project to sur-
rounding Edenvale projects and stated that rural areas were not
planned for the Edenvale PhD. He stressed that the proposed
project, they felt , was the best type of development for the
site; and that if the project were turned down, the site would
not be brought before the Commission for some time. Single fam-
ily units are not suitable since extensive grading would be
necessary. Letters were read by ilr. Cooperman from other de—
velopers in the PUD which were receptive to the project.
Pir. Sorensen, agreeing with hirs. Meyers, stated that given the
particular site, the structures were inappropriate and should
be limited to the I4CA. hir. Teslow, also, felt that the build-
ings would not be screened by the trees.
Action Taken:
A motion was made by Mr. Brown seconded by Plrs. Schee to recom-
mend to the Counci 1 approval of The Masters 2 s ix-story con-
domi nium project with rezoning to RPI 2.5--
a. As outl ined i n the August 15, 1973, planni ng report with
its recommendations,
b. pith the understanding that the existent home will be used
for a sales office during the construction of the first
building after which approval for the use or deletion of
the home as a unit will have to be sought from the
Commission and Council.
On roll call, Mrs. Schee and lir. Brown voted aye; Messrs. Soren-
sen, Lynch, Teslow and ilrs. iieyers voted nay. f'lotion defeated.
. 7/17/73 Planning Commission
D. Masters Condominiums located in Edenvale west of the first fairway
on the site of the existing Edenvale offices. Proposal for two 6-story
"8 story"condominiums totaling 99 units.
Mr. is, president oZ vicis Builders, Inc., introduced a development
team of Mr.A.T. Hanson and Mr. Forrest Russell, the site planners, .--
and Mr_ James Cooperman, architect, and Mr. Jim Barnes, attorney and
partner in the project. Mr. Russell and Hanson presented the natural
inventory of the site, stressing the importance of preserving the
southerly hill where the Edenvale office is today with its natural oak
vegetation. They indicated they tried many alternate solutions for land
use on that site from single family to modular housing to cluster to
town house to conventional apartments and that the only way to utilize
that site to get 99 units was through the medium rise structures being
proposed. The developer indicated that the cost of building the medium
rise buildings was not as advantageous as those of low rise construction
but that the site dictated a special design type. The building type
would be of pre-cast concrete panels with poured in place masonry
concrete sonstruction and fireproof. The developer was asked about
the provision of life safety features, such as sprinkler into the entire
building. He responded that the cost would be $196,000 more to do
that rather than to put in the standpipe system. He then noted that the
standpipe was included in that and that the differential between
sprinkler and no sprinkler would be approximately$150,000 from his
best estimate. Mr. Barnes pointed out that from a marketing standpoint
the sprinklers would detract possibly $500 from what theycould sell
the units for rather than add on in cost. Therefore, their feeling was
that sprinkler inclusion in this building was not feasible . The provision
of fire lane or access around the structure on what were identified as
pedestrian trails would seem to be possible If a 10 or 12 ft. pathway
of suitable sub-grade was constructed.
The Commission members asked about the inclusion of the existing
single family home now used as Edenvale's office as a single resi-
dential unit and if this was appropriate. Mr. Don Peterson and Mr. Bill
Simes from Eden Land indicated that it was a basically economic
decision and that the value of that structure on that site would be too
•
great to tear out. Also, to move the structure would require tree cutting
•and extensive regrwwding. The developer indicated that us ing that structure
as a recreation building would be unfeasible in that it was not connected
to the condominium units and would receive use approximately only
half of the year due to the weather and its location. Therefore, con-
sidering the economics of it as well as its relationship to the site,the
most logical use would be as esingle fern ily unit es a member of tha
condominiurn association. Certain questions were not ans.vared related
to the maintenance and ground care of that unit but would be addressed
at a later date.
Mr. Putnam asked that if it were truly an economic reason for leaving
the house in constructing the 99 units, he wondered if at a price of
approximately$2,000 per unit for 100 units that the land cost would be
approximately$200,000 to the developer or profit for Eden Land Corpo-
ration. If the property was used for single family detached homes of
the expensive nature, would lot values of S15-$20,000 and 14 or 15
homes may be built on that site, that the profit to Eden Land Corporation
would be between $200-$300,000 for the development of that land.He
indicated the seeming inconsistency between the building type of 6-story-
or 8-story medium rise approximately 80 ft. from that of a single family
residential unit, and that perhaps the alternate use of the site would be
for other than 99 unit account. As he pointed out, the change in concept
plan can be readily accommodated in that other sites in Edenvale have
been converted from multiple to commercial and from town house to
single family with little difficulty.
Mr. Peterson did not feel that single family would be appropriate on
this site for two reasons: 1)it would destroy the site by requiring
extensive grading and would probably permit only four single family
homes to be built on the site;2) the holding time for development of
those units would not be consistent with the economic model for Eden
Land Corporation.
There was concern about the basic height of the structure in that in some
areas it would be 8 or 9 stories tall and that this located outside of the
Major Center Area may not be consistent with the development goals for
Eden Prairie or Eden Land Corporation. The density of this site at
approximately 13 units per acre would not normally be considered a
medium or high rise density, rather a 2 and 3 story building type scale.
There was great concern by the Commission members about the advis-
ability of locating high rise structures, medium rise structures through-
out the community and not confining them to the Major C enter Area.
Others on the Commission felt that the ability to develop with respect
to the site was very important and that they were not sure of the posi-
tive or negative points to developing higher buildings outside of the
Major Center Area. The project was referred to the Staff for a report with
special emphasis on the fire safety provisions and alternate land use
options.
7/d//3 ?fanning Uo emission
G. aiasters Condominium project located in Edenvale, south of
Valley View Road ant. east of new Golf View Drive. Request re-
zoning to RN 2.5 with a variance on building height to permit
structures over 4 stories.
fir. Jim Barnes, representing the developer, lir. tleis, stated
that the two six story buildings would be situated adjacent
to the number one fairway. There would be 99 units in the two
phase project with units ranging from $25,000 to $75,000.
A slide presentation was given by landscape architects Messrs.
A. Hanson and F. Russell showing the grading, site plan, topo,
and utilities layout. lir. James Cooperman, architect, outlined
the plans for the precast structure--exterior wall panels,
generally white exterior with bronzed colored windows. Under-
ground parking with recreati onal storage will be provided.
Hhen the Commission members expressed their concern over the
buildings' height, lir. Peterson, Eden Land Corp., stated that
various plans had been discussed and anything but what is pro-
posed would tear up the site. It was explained that the Vil-
1 age Fire Department has expressed concern about any projects
with buildings over three stories since their equipment can
service only three stories. ilr. Cooperman mentioned that a new
fire code is expected soon and that the buildings would adhere •
to those regula tions. A spr inkier system was urged by the
Commission.
Action Taken:
'The proposal was referred to the Staff for review and recon-
emendati ons.
•
EDEN LAND CORP. 14300 Valley View Rod-Eden Prairie. Flinn.55343-Tel.612 /941.5300
September 6, 1973
Mr. Paul Redpath, Mayor
Ms. Joan Meyers, Village Councilwoman
Mr. Roger Boerger, Village Councilman
Mr. John McCulloch, Village Council nan
Mr. Wolfgang Penzel, Village Councilman
Mr. Bob Heinrich, Vil lage Manager
Ladi es and Gentlemen:
On Tuesday, August 21 , 1973 the Eden Prairie planning commission considered a
proposal by Weis Builders, Inc. of Rochester, Minnesota for the construction
of two five to six story condominium buildings consist ing of 99 units on
the site directly adjacent to Valley View Road and west of Edenvale golf
course's no. 1 fairway. This project is in direct conformance with the
Eder-ovate land use plan which allows 99 units on this site.
The plan has been rev ised from three story wood frame construction to five
story precast fireproof construction to better preserve the major oak trees,
enhance the sales potential and provi de for a better project. This has been
done with the consultation and support of your Village planner. In the
planning report submi tted by Mr. Putnam he does, in our opinion, present
a fair unbiased account of the project assets and 1 iab i Ii ties. He has
recommended approval of the project subject to certain provisions stated
in the report.
At the planning commi ssion meeting on August 21, the commission voted to
deny the request for rezoning and construction of the proposed units. In
trying to determine the reasons for denial it was hard for me to determine
why they chose this action. The reasons given ranged from the building
did not fit the site, too many units on site, and it will destroy the
rural and suburban character of Eden Prairie.
Eder Land Corporation has made a major commitment to Ede.,, Prairie and li'ce-
raise I feel that Eden Prairie has made a corrn'tment to Eden Land Corporation.
We have invested over 7 million dollars in your community and we are paying
for substantially all improvements in Edenvale as well 'as a large portion
of overall community improvements. Your assessment rolls have us presently
obl ii gated to close to two million dol tars in assessments and we are one
of the largest if not the largest tax payers in Eden Prairie.
Page 2,
We have invested over one mi pion dot lars in our golf course to provide an
amen ity which will serve the communi ty and will enhance the value of the
adjacent property. Our economic plans require us to recoup these substantial
investments out of land sales and it is absolutely imperative to our success
to build at or near the approved densities to come out. Comments from
the planning commission such as build single family homes, townhouses or
apartments at lower densities are economically questi onable if not unfeasible
at the price we are forced to sell our land at because of the cost of
creating our communi ty and the cost of doing business in Eden Prairie.
We have been actively seeking quality builders to bui Id in Edenvale to our
plan which was approved by you in 1970. Mr. Weis is one of these and the
luxury condominium project which he is proposing to build will undoubtedly,
In my mind, be one of the finest if not the finest building in Eden Prairie
or the entire S.W. metro area. Mr. Putnam has made many positive suggestions
and the architects and builder should be complimented on their reaction to
these. Mr. Weis is willing to venture over four mill ion dollars in the
future of Edenvale and Eden Prairie on a building whi . would be an asset
in any community. As reflected in your planner's report, the site has
been well done and the project is well planned. All adjacent property
owners have expressed support for the project and no objections have been
raised by any member of the community with the exception of Jerry Ringray
of King's Forest who cannot possibly see the site from his home.
This building will pay well over $100,000.00 per year taxes opposed to
1973 taxes of less than $2,000.00 on raw land. This will certainly contribute
far more in benefit to the Village and school district than the services
which will be required by these units. The property improvements are charged
back to the site. A question of fire equipment necessary to service this
building has been brought up. The taxes paid by this project alone will
be able to purchase your necessary f i re equipment whi ch will be requi red
whether this project is constructed or not.
In the event the Village turns down this project this site in which we have
a commitment from you wili be very di fficul t to market. It will surely have
to go for a three story frame non-fireproof project at a higher cost per
unit if density is reduced. This seems inconsistent with what the Village
and we have stated that we want. That is quality construction at the
lowest cost.
There seems to be a feeling by some people in the Vil lage that Edenva le and
other large developments are super flush with cash and that we really do not
need all that was promised and are thereby able to pay more than our share
of cost and still make abnormally high profits. Let me assure you that
our investment of over seven mill ion doliars in your town carries an
extremely high risk and the money that is generated from sales carries
this project. The extremely high interest costs, tremendous load of
municipal improvements, delays in sales because of lack of mortgage avail-
abi i i ty and the lack of confidence in builders relying on our approved
Page 3 '
densities, make it imperative to market land at or very near to our densities
to come out. This is the first project where we are asking the maximum
density approved by you which for five story bui idings at 13.4 units par
acre is extreme ly low. Statements such as we are destroying the rural
character of Eden Prat rle and too many units for the site are inconsistent
with the firm commitments which you as a communi ty made before Edenvale
In ordering major uti 1 i ty programs and in 1969 and 1970 when you approved
our plans and embarked on a program of assessing us for these improvements.
The idea that because the Village has obligated the land owners to close to
10 mill ion dollars for payment of the ring route does not, in any opinion,
change your commitment to allow us to build according to our plan. If
because the major center area is committed we must reduce dens sties In other
• areas then please cancel the tremendous assessment which you plan on
levying against Edenvale for the ring route. Wi thout the support of
the Village on our shopping center, or the Master's condominium project and
other projects which we will be bringing before you these assessments cannot
be paid.
We will continua to try to present quality const ruction projects to you and
I hope the Village will consider themselves fortunate to have people like
Edenvale and Thee Preserve to help pay the way.
Yours truly,
EDEN LAND CORPORATION
onald R. Peterson
Pres i dent
DRP/po
r
T.V. Y�9�Ci., V1 �1., NIS o...II Kyv.L C��..� � rpk.
e-) No4`9 efl�A
IN&G)M\46- ‘-‘k \ gaiV). 0%/-1/4Ccar ")
`cM UN.�,... Ne., v..-4..,
� sC O��o Jvu�A Cao r Ci i. 1
QIIV1
- A IJ c 0. Goyv.?aAtt\rlka CN.N
\,,j-OckN Ns‘-%kkcs,-& 11, Nsh. kl\t• L Vt-t- 1\14.Vcs
1/44 \ VSiW ���.. WL,--).T � b. %
\tprN4A 4•A Cod 1
v-' tk Aug @Q;4
AL:b�
te\:: cvN\v„k
& Q 14\
(\.%\$k\N)q)-'1 ki ‘k\r .\iNv-wislIsNALG,, \tlf•
.%4Stk-- sk).)%k-a‘ i`ke*IV \J•s4 K‘f17?`"Ns2'
VV .'\ \\C)\\ .
..��, .. ..w..
f
e
Public Works Phone 935-3381 320 Washington Av.South,Hopkins,Minnesota 55343
HGNN@PIN COUNTY
September 6, 1973
Mr. Robert P. Heinrich, Village Manager
Village of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prai rie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Re: Speed Zoning on CSAH 4
Dear Mr. Heinrich:
The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners, by resolution, requested the State
Highway Commissioner to conduct a speed study on CSAH 4 for purposes of determining
the safe and reasonable speed limit.
This traffic i nvestigation has been completed, and we are submitting a copy of the
report for your information. The analysis indicates that the present speed zoning
is reasonable and proper.
We have recently received copies of accident reports from Mr. Jack Hacking, Director
of Public Safety. These are being analyzed whether they relate to the posted speeds
on CSAH 4. The results of this accident study will be submitted to the Minnesota
Highway Department.
Sincerely,
Sarhuel Fisher. C e
Traffic Engineering Section
SF:pj
Encl.
cc: Herbert O. Klossner
Richard Sullivan, MHD
Dennis Hansen
"^"• 1,�., * riamb•
,STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
ST. PAUL, MINN.:U'a1 55155
August 15, 1973
Mr. Herbert O. Klossner
Hennepin County Engineer
320 Washington Avenue South
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
•
In reply refer to: 370
Speed Zoning
CSAH 4(Eden Prairie Road)
CSAH 13 (Dayton and French Lake Road)
Hennepin County
Dear Mr. l0.ossner:
We have completed an engineering and traffic investigation on the above—
referenced county roads as requested in resolution 73-6-30 adopted by the
Board of County Comaissionere on June 19, 1973 and have determined the
reasonable and safe speed as follows:
County State Aid Highway 4
35 miles per hour from the me feets south with h County
oun lane.
Sate Aid Highway 3
to a point approximately 5
40 miles per hour from the Last above-mentioned point to a point approxi-
mately 350 feet south of Park Terrace Drive.
50 miles per hour from the Last above-mentioned point to the intersection
of Trunk Highway 5.
County State Aid Highway 13
60 miles per hour daytime, 50 miles per hour nighttime, from the inter—
section with Trunk Highway L52 northerly to the south corporate limits
of Dayton.
30 miles per hour from the Last above-mentioned point to the intersection
with County State Aid Highway 12.
•
Mr. Herbert O. Klossner
August 15, 1973
p. 2
The establishment of the above limits, therefore, is approved, and this
will authorize the installation of proper speed-limit signs which shall •
be in accordance with the N.innesota Manual can Uniform Traffic Control
Devices.
"11/
Traffic er
•
Approved: �/
PP 1
Go Liss finer Highways
v cc:
S. Fisher
•
•
•
01'
trocz
2 N!AUG �131c
P'".'f4 trot, 1wj
ry•p.5.:4d�.pp
Nir 4
'11. .r
1
•
( . r ,
OELUO CORPORATION
80X 16040 ELMW00D BRANCH • MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55416
SIC-370-0220
CMc11IION P.ONUNIt G
VI..MtideM.AdminisbMn•Sotvicet
August 28, 1973
Mr. Robert P. Heinrich, Village Manager
Village of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
i
Dear Mr. Heinrich:
It will be necessary for us to have sewer and water brought
to the Gelco Anderson Lakes site as per our recent conversation.
It will be necessary for these utilities to be ready for use
no later than June 1 , 1974.
Thank you for your help.
Very truly yours,
Eme on P. reenberg `
EPG:pr
cc: Mr. Ray Geiger
Parker Klein
430 Oak Grove
Minneapolis, Mi nnesota 55403
r
VILLAGE OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL
PLAT OF ATHERTON 3RD ADDITION
WHEREAS, the plat of Atherton 3rd Addition has been submitted in
the manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and
under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly
had thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the Village
plan and the regulations and requirements of the lams of the State of Minnesota
and ordinances of the Village of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE
OF EDEN PRAIRIE:
A. Plat Approval Request for Atherton 3rd Addition is approved upon
compliance with the requirements of the Engineering Report dated
September 7, 1973.
B. Variance is herein granted from the requirements of Village
Ordinance No. 93 waiving the maximum time elapse of 6 months
between approval of the preliminary plat and filing of the
final plat.
C. That the Village Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified
copy of this Resolution in the office of the Register of Deeds
and/or Registrar of Titles for their use as required by ASA
462.358, Subd. 3.
D. That the Village Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified
copy of this Resolution to the owners and subdividers of the
above named plat.
E. That the Mayor and Village Manager are hereby authorised to Execute
the certificate of approval on behalf of the Village Council upon
compliance with the foregoing provisions.
ADOPTED by the Village Council on September 11, 1973.
Paul R. Redpath, Mayor
ATTEST:
SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
w.
rt
_ _;s ... .
•
VILLAGE OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNVESOTA
• ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT
TO: Mayor and Village Council
FROM: Carl Jullie, Village Engineer
THROUGH: Robert Heinrich, Village Manager
DATED: September 7, 1973
SUBJECT: ATHERTON 3RD ADDITION
GENERAL: Them developers, Atherton Townhouses and Newtown Development, Inc
are requesting Village Council approval of the final plat of
Atherton 3rd Addition. This is a townhouse development located
north of Chestnut Drive between Mitchell Road and E-W Parkway.
HISTORY: Zoning to RM 6.5 was finally read and adopted on April 11, 1972,
per Ordinance No. 170.
The preliminary plat of Atherton 3rd was approved by the Village
Council on July 25, 1972 per Resolution No. 548.
The final plat now submitted for approval is in essential confor—
mance with the approved preliminary plat. There will be 29 units
in this 3rd Addition, making a total of 86 units as approved by
the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Additions combined.
VARIANCES: A variance will be necessary from the requirements of Village
Ordinance No. 93 waiving the maximum allowable time elapse of
6 months between approval of the preliminary plat and filing of
the final plat. This variance is justified because the developer
has proceeded with construction on a reasonable schedule.
LTfILITIES AND STREETS:
All units will be served by municipal sanitary sewer, watermain
and storm sewer. Chestnut Drive will have bituminous surfacing
with concrete curb and gutter.
PARK DEDICATION:
The overall requirements for park dedication within the Mitchell
Heights P.U.D. have been properly planned per the Village Parks and
Recreation Director.
BONDING: All streets and utilities within the plat will be privately owned
and maintained. Therefore, no bonding for these improvements will
be necessary.
ATHERTON 3RD ADDITION
FINAL PLAT REPORT PAGE 2
RECOMENDATIONS:
Recommend approval of Atherton 3rd Addition subject to the
following:
1. Conformance by the developers with all requirements of
this report.
2. Council approval of variance from Ordinance 93 waiving
the maximum 6 month time elapse between approval of
the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat.
3. Review and approval of the Tillage Attorney of the Rams-
, owners Association covenants for this report.
4. Receipt of fee for Village services in the amount of
$1,450.00.
5. All utility construction shall be completed according to approved
plane and specifications prior to release of the signed hardshella
and enabling resolution.
Respectfully submitted,
Carl J. Jull e, P.E.
Village Engineer
CJJ s jr
......._______._7 \,\
\ \•,17:7\ C_} ii
\ ':( II: 1,i1
.....,
.% • • \ I. N ,11!::;)
\
f•-i•.-' I .-,\!._.:::i!
( 1
.,.
../
\ / it
I 0
\\
----" ,,,-7r---1-7.-
• ( .., -.0 r
_
•,--__ ___--- - :LiLl
vicx5Q, 6
• "--1 Oliqiiiii
Ai
• ggi N 11 • VIalli 1
1
•SUN 1111 ise li)11, i 11.;'1/11 '''.. I 'l'.. 111)11h
)).- • 1
. ,
.•Cii..; t.1 •
1 I
Rise c‘.
, .
ft' 1
. •tr..4,40
Ihai; iAll • 'My '
... 4. ILI. •••
1 ST•41461.• KAMER ' ). Mt ;i..., i
NE.
s•••.Rirc..1,, ....
00 •
50 II i 1 .• Tartril-N.
. /
I)'
0 -- r-----, N.•,...„.
, ,.:..„-,-
, .... t
4.,
A Q 1
,• V . // :4-
r
n tij y, m. 0
. . / .0'
-Ay ....7
. V
1 CS ,
1 lc 1 111 ll 1 .•,'° .4 r
,,
el -'• /,'
t . -
.... ,
, -
-1. plialo
.
I I:
L'<:..................„.... i 0 1 4 4, :...3.4 DR
-....,.. 0
......-,
. ,..>. i .... I.
.e, •. .. 11 1 le
oe
,/ 11,rtHis
.
.
...,, ,,, r
-41 , 1
:I / -'-- ---'--------
I r ti
EDEN PRAIRIE, M•1INNESOTA
Change Order No. 2
Date 9/6/73
Project: Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Improvements
Contractor: Peter Lametti Construction Company
•
f Completion: Date November 1. 973 (final1 Sam
(Previous) (Revised)
Description: - ADD (See Attached sheet for Description) • .-
Item 1 • .
„ 2 • . .
0 3 . .
11 4 •
„
„ 6 _5
TOTAL ADD - 62,754.69
DEDUCT •
General under_-run of all items - • 16,495.6D
1
DIET DEDUCT /13,740.91
It is mutually agreed that this Change Order is in accordance with the above •
Contract dated September 26, 1972 and that the change in the
work described herein will be accomplished in accordance with the provisions
•
of the Contract and that the Contract amount will be (AiltrOd0E1) (decreased) in
•
the amount of Thirteen thousand seven hundred forty and 91/100ths Dollars • i
($ 13,740.91 ) as full compensation for all work under this Change Order
and that the Contract completion date will be extended 0 calendar
days/ herefore.//2/
_
Consulting Engineer✓ Date —Village Engineer Date
/ s— 9 -7'- r (77
6 Village Manager Date
Contractor • ate
/r
COST ESTIMATE
CHANGE ORDER #2
PART A
Item 1 - Extra Services (Trunk System) •
Lower 6" San. swr. service on Westgate Blvd.- $242.39 •
•
Locate and clean ex. valve box on TH 5 - 100.00
Repair water service on Westgate Blvd. - 250.00
Total Item 1 -Add . . . . . . . .• . . . $ 592.39
•
Item 2 - Extra Services (Lateral System)
Install 30" Hydrant Extension-Co. Rd. #4 - 126.55 •
•
• Cut gas service whereastreet lowered 27.50 •
Total Item 2 -Add . . . . . . 154.05
PART B
Item 3 - Subgrade Correction Material on Fuller
Road ..38-7 T on . . . . . . . . . . 135.45
Item 4 - Crushed Rock on Loncoln Lane
206.4 Tons @$5.30/Ton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1,093.92
Item 5 - Spillways on Lincoln Lane , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129.40
Item 6 - Extra Services '
Install 48' S.D. on Lincoln Lane, adjust one
manhole and 2 valve boxes - 357.84
Locate extra deep watertnain - 291.64 •
Total Item 6 -Add 649.48
TOTAL ADD . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,754.69
Telephone.825-6851
' CARL BOLANDER & SONS CO.
EXCAVATING AND ROAD CONTRACTOR
2933 PLEASANT AVENUE
MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55408
OfCI+�
September 6, 1973
Mr. Carl jullie
Village Engineer
village of Eden prairie
8950 County Road. No.4
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Res Request for Overtime Work
Romart Site, Eden prairie center
Dear Sirs
We have been awarded a contract by Homart Development Company for Site
Grading the proposed Eden prairie shopping center site. Plans for this
center have been approved hr the W 11yge_Council and a proper permit for
the work has beers issued by the village. Terms of the contract and plans
requires compliance of Watershed. Dietricte and the Department of Natural
Resources regulations as well as laws and ordinances of political_ sub-
divisions in authority. It is our desire to carry on our work lawfully
and with the least disruption possible to the immediate neighborhood.
Job requirements laid down by Homart call for partial completion
schedules in September and October of this year that will be impossible
for us to meet without double-shifting of the grading equipment. This
will require a variance from the 'working hours specified in the permit.
We hereby request that working hours be extended to a limitation from
6s 00 am to midnight daily except Sundays with no second shift on Saturday
night either. At the end of the fall construction season we will_no longer
need extended working hours..
This job is Sor site grading only with no materials leaving the work
site. Tractors and mobile scrapers are the basic machines involved. Top-
no it will be stockpiled as a noise barrier at the northeast corner of the
site. Choice of remote filling areas during the late shift will minimizes
disturbance. Other steps will be taken as situations arise where we can
improve the operation.
it is our hope that this variance can be granted so that we can fulfill
our obligation to the Developer and also double the workmen on the job during [!
this fall season that is so critical in this type of operation.
7f4urs tru
f nald G. Olmstead
cos Kr. James SPinkse Homart Development Co. r',
Mr. Dale Hamilton, Suburban Engineering Co.
We are an Equal Opportunity Employer
74)2
•
GEGR GE M. HANSEN COMPANY
Cer•Ii/ice Pali Arnrnfswu •
17a SOUTH PLAZA BUILDING WAYZATA IOULSVARD AT HIONWAY 100
MINN[APOUs.NINIHIIOTA 55411 P+f(oy"IT
114e41214e II•'_,
Mr. Robert Heinrich, Village Manager
Village of Eden Prairie
8950 County Road 4
Eden Prair ie, Minnesota 55343
Dear Mr. Heinrich:
Under the terms of our professional liability insurance coverage, CPA's are
nos, required to indicate the scope of their engagement in a letter to their
client.
CPA's are also required to indicate that the CPA's examination of financial
statements, ordinarily for the purpose of indicating that the statements are
fairly presented, will not necessarily discover fraud or defalcation. although
the application of generally accepted auditing procedures may uncover such
situations.
Accordingly, we are now required to send you the enclosed letter and ask that
one copy be signed and returned to us. We believe it serves a good purpose
in better acquainting you with the scope of the work performed by your auditors.
Vary truly yours,
277414—
•
i I
GEORGE M. HANSEN COMPANY
• Grti/ia!Public Acc mN.n
I TO MOUTH►LAZA BUILDING WAYLITA DOUL*VAIID AT HIGHWAY 100
MINNEAPOLIS.MINNBUOTA 0041 B
140.200e
•
The Village Council
Village of Eden Prairie
8950 County Road 4
Eden Prairie,Minnesota 55343
•
Gentlemen:
We are currently planning our fall and winter work program and wou ld appreciate
an indication that we may be invited to conduct the 1973 audit of the Village as
we have in past years.
We propose to conduct a limited general audit and issue our opinion on the basis
of such an audit. A limited general audit is an examination which consists of a
review of internal cons 1, .cwuutiva procedures end of the details of all
records, including subsidiary records and supporting data as to ma thematical ac-
curacy, propriety and completeness of all transactions on a test basis. The test
examination presumes that the items selected are representative of all the
transactions. •
_
Although a United general audit is the one most frequently used today, it will
not necessarily discover fraud or defalcation. However, should fraud or defal-
cation exist, it may be uncovered as the result of one or more of the procedures
applied on a test basis.
As in previous years, we plan to do as much work before the year end as poasible
so that we may present our report at an early date.
We have enjoyed our relationship with the Village during the past years and hope
that we may be allowed to conduct the 1973 audit.
Very truly yours,
JGM:jla J. Gregory Murphy, Partner i
•
Accepted by the Villege of Eden Prairie
� I
Title Date
•
EDEN PRAIRIE LIONS CLUB
y�+T1
EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA 33343 rU
6761 Tartan Curve
• Eden Prairie, Minn.
Sept. 5, 1973
•
Mr. Robert Heinrich, Village Manager
Alen• Prairie Village Hall
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Mimi..
Dear Mr. Heinrich,
heck from the Eden Prairie
•
Lions Club for the amount of $200.00. This amount has been
designated by our club for the purchase of 40 signs which
read, "Caution, Children at Play - Eden Prairie Lions
Club."
We are happy to be of service to the conmunity in
providing these signs to help protect the children of
Eden Prairie.
Sincerely,
The Eden Prairie Lions Club
Robert J. Nielsen, Secretary
�aY
-A7:744(.1_aiwty--
r..
•
'13-169 CORRIDOR CO?F iTTEE"
503!Past 98th Street
rlocatrltcz, d..na. 55420
TO: Friends of the:linuaesota Valley
IS: Government Operntio3e Ccanittee Hearing Septaber 17, 1973,
iloraancale State J..=ior College
Dear Friends:
We will. host the House and Senate Govern-rent Operations Committee*for
a tour and dinner on :•ionday, September 17, 1973. They will hold their
joint hearing at 7:30 P./I. in the Concert Auditorium, doraradals State
Junior College, 98th & Prance. Please try to be there that night. We
need to demonstrate our support for the llennepin-Scott Toll Authority
bills, S.P. 1944, H.F. 2243.
Sincerely,
Halter Uarbeck
Guinean
fit`t bt. *WI awl;
uNt -cM M� -t' e.A
,
I
CLERIC'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
September 11, 1 973
FLUt iL I tIG
CONTRACTOR (tiULTI-FNiILY "Rt.)
Wayne Plumbing &Heating August Cederstrand Co.
Hopkins Plumbing& Heating
Beaudry Plumbing& Heating Co., Inc.
Stant Plumbing &Heating
Dale Johnson Plumbing
Peterson
Plumbing & Heating
GAS FITTERS
Cl ima to Engi neering Co.
Domes tic heating Co., Inc.
UTILITY SERVICE
Hopkins Plumbing& Heating
Spring Plumbing Co., Inc.
Stant Plumbing&Heating
Wenzel Plumbing & Heating Inc.
Metro Sewer L Hater Co.
REFUSE& GARBAGE COLLECTION
Able Sanitation Inc.
SCAV IIIGER
Roto-Rooter Sewer Service Co.
Root-O-Vatic Sewer Service Co.
HEATING & VENTILATIOtI
Thomas G. Shandley i
Domestic Heating Co., Inc.
SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSTALLER
1
Del ano Excavating, Inc.
COi1TRACTOR'S (l&2 FAMILY
uncres omes o winnesota, Inc.
Donald 0. Getz,Duilder
Peter 11. Loscheider,Inc.
These licenses have been approved by the program head responsible
for the licensed activity.
v- nne w tf—�erk
}
•
VILLAGE OF EDEN PRAIRIE
FINANCIAL REPORT
September 1, 1973
Cash Balances:
General and Special Revenue Funds $ 370,036
Capital Projects (Improvements) 248,014
Park Acquisition and Development 203,818
Debt Service Funds 1,567,585
Utility Funds 99,952
As of 8/31/73 $2,489,405
Disposition of Cash:
Repurchase Agreements $ 350,000
Certificates of Deposit 1,990,000
Cash in Bank (per Book) (500)
Government Securities 149,905
As of 8/31/73 $2,489,405
Expenditures presented for approval at the Council meeting of September
11.1973 total $462,025.17. These expenditures will be met by the following
sources of funds:
Cash in Bank 9/7/73 $3 ,500
15,500
5
Certificate of Deposit 146,525
Repurchase Agreement
$462,025
VI8