Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 08/05/1975 V • JOHN FRANE 1 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, A'UGUST 5, 1975 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor D. W. Osterholt, Joan Meyers, Billy Bye, Wolfgang Penzel and Sidney Pauly COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Roger Ulstad; City Attorney Harlan Perbix; Planner Dick Putnam; Finance Director John Franc; Director of Community Services Marty Jessen; Engineer Carl Juilie: Belinda Vee, Recording Secretary INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL • AGENDA I. MINUTES A. Minutes of the Joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting Page 881 held Tuesday, July 15, 1975. B. Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting held Tuesday, July 22, Page 884 1975. C. Minutes of the Canvassing Board held Tuesday, July 22, 1975. page 894 • II. PUBLIC HEARINGS Ar,ea A of The Preserve Commercial Plan (continued public hearing), Page 746 equest for PUD concept and Development stage approval of office, commercial and multiple uses; and preliminary plat approval. Area A is located west of the Celco Office Building, south of West 78th Street, and north of Anderson Lakes. B. Edes Amoco Station, rezoniT request from Rural to Highway Page 760 Commercial fora service station. (Continued public hearing) The site is located south of Crosstown 62 and between Shady Oak Road and Highway 63. C. Park view Apartments by Edenvale, Inc._,_request for rezoning to Page 761 RM 2.5 from Rural and preliminary plat approval for a 45 acre partmont development located south of Chestnut Apartments and east of Mitchell Road. (Continued public hearing). er 4 , rr" Council Agenda -2 - Tues.,August 5, 1975 D. Petition from Edenvale, Inc., for curb and gutter and final Page 683 bituminous surfacing on the following streets: (Continued public hearing) Project STR 75-3-04 Martin Drive Commerce Way Corporate Way Project STR 75-3-05 Edenvale Blvd. Woodhill Trail Woodland Drive III. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. Request by Eden Development, Inc., for a family recreation Page 895 A�,C canter located at the northeast corner of Mitchell and T.H. 5. Rezoning from I-2 to Community Commercial. B. The Preserve, request to appear on Council agenda for Area G a - concept and preliminary plat approval. IV. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 2nd reading of Ordinance No, 290 as amended, providing for Page 842 custody and disposal of unclaimed property. V. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS A. Report of Planning Director 1. Metropolitan Transportation Panay. Page 897 B. Report of Director of Community Services 1. Awarding of Bids for Picnic Pavilion at Round Lake Park. Page 900 C. Report of City Manager • 4 r t At(© 1 1. 1974 Audit Report (all funds). 117 4., Page 903 D. Report of Finance Director f_TArsaLif-A-*-4a,--4S 1. Clerk's License List. Page 906 VI.NEW BUSINESS. + `�i°C. ' t VII. ADJOURNMENT. tea MINUTES JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING2` ,,Li July 15, 1975 8:00 'M City Hall COUNCIL.flit:^ENT: Mayor Osterholt, Wolfgang Penzel, Billy Bye. PLANNING C'OMMISSION:Chairperson Don Sorensen, Herb Fosnocht, Roger Buerger, Richard Peerick, Richard Lynch STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Roger Ulstad, City Attorney Harlan Perbtx.; Planning Director Richard Putnam; City Engineer Carl jullie,Pianning Intern Dwight Ptcha; and Planning Secretary Jean Egan. I. WET.CO;vIE . Councilman Wolfgang Penaei opened the meeting by welcoming the Council and Planning Commission members. II. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN REVIEW. Mr. Ulstad backgrounded the Guide Plan process of 1968 and said the staff has attempted to illustrate the land uses, transportation,and utility change from 1968 to )975 through graphics and material compiled in the Compre - henslye Guido' Plan Update booklet. • Mr. Putnam reviewed the Comprehensive Guide Plan Update material relating • to development pattern, open space, parks, utility availability and transpor- tation systems within the City. Mayor Osterholt inquired if everyone was familiar with the update proposals by BRW, Brauer & Associates, and Nason Wellman & Chapman. Mr. Ulstad I said that copies had not yet been distributed to members other than the Mayor. On request the planner summarized the 3 proposed approaches to the Guide 1 Plan update as submitted by the consultants : Brauer's -similar to 1968 process, community level meetings, and a heavy emphasis on the seminar approach. Nason,Wehr- ma niche prnare-heavy emphasis on task force approach i ". BRW combination of computer end commuity meetings. Mr. Ulstad informed the Council and Commission that the cost for updating the Guide Plan has been approximated as $ 25,000-30,000 by the 3 consultants. Discussion followed regarding how the update could be financed and the staff was directed to :.a.'estirate means of financing. q,, I Joint Council/Planning Commission Mtg. -3- July 15, 1975 III. MAJOR CENTER ORDINANCE. Ulstad believed zoning for the MCA should bo accomplished in conjunction s have be en held with with the Guide Plan update. He stated that meetings the MICA landowners and they agree with the MCA concept, but desire a method by which they can market their property. Harlan Perbix suggested amending the Zoning Ordinance to include • a MCA Zone and establish necessary criteria to govern development. Mr. Putnam said the regional center was identified in the 1968 Guide Plan and questioned if regional uses will still exclusively be in the MCA. Penzol believed the MCA should have concrete requirements and the Ctty should provide zoning assurances to the property owners without losing control on how the land will be developed. Penzel, Boerger, and Sorensen all voiced concern that an urgent need exists for a MCA Zone. Osterholt suggested Mr. Perbix and Mr. Putnam work together to draft an amendment to Ordinance 135 outlining the MCA zoning district and requirements. IV. METROPOLITAN AIRPORT COMMISSION FLYING CUOUDAIRPORT STUDY. Putnam refer ed to the June 25 th staff report which outlines a suggested response the City could make to the Flying Cloud Airport Interim Master Plan. He stated the staff is suggesting the airport be retained in its present classification - General Utility , and that an operational plan be worked out with MAC, Flying Cloud Airport, and the City. Sorensen inquired as to the advantages of going to a Basic Transport classification because it may benefit the City by reducing safety r lsks as compared to an airport that conducts training maneuvers. Bye suggested 1 response the City could take is to not react. Feerick questioned what improv;emertswould be needed if the airport is retained as a General Utility ;acility. Putnam felt the runways may be enlarged• Ulstad reminded the Council and Commission that a public hearing will be conducted on August 21st. The Council members discussed the possibility of renting the Steelman property to a Vietnamese family and suggested it be placed on their July 22nd agenda. I! { V. ADJOURNM1:NT. Penzel moved, Bye seconded ,,to adjourn the meeting at approximately 11:15 PM. The motion carried. Respectfully Submitted Jean Egan, Planning Secretary UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JULY 22, 1975 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor D. W. Osterholt William Bye Joan Meyers Sidney Pauly Wolfgang Penzel COUNCIL STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Roger Ulstad City Attorney Harlan Perbix Finance Director John Frane Director of Community Services - Marty Jessen Engineer Carl Jullie Recording Secy. - Belinda Vee INVOCATION - Given by City Attorney Harlan Perbix PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL - Mayor Osterholt, Absent I. SWEARING IN CE flONY OF THOI`AS BROWN AS PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER. City Attorney Perbix administered the oath of office. Acting Mayor Meyers pinned on Officer Brown's badge and gave a brief Meyers resume of his background. II. MINUTES A. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on July 1, 1975. Pg. 1, Para. 2, Correct "2975" to "1975". Pg. 3, Para. 4, Correct "proponet" to "proponent". Pg. 3, Para. 7, Delete "they are", insert "the Plan was". Pg. 4, Para. 1, Correct "Daffney" to "Daphne". Pg. 5, Para. 5, Delete "command that price", insert "not meet the City's commercial zoning requirements and no investment in commercial improvements has been made". Pauly moved to approve the minutes as corrected and published, Fenzel seconded. Bye, Pauly, Fenzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. _ - Minutes -2- July 22, 1975 II. MINUTES (Cont'd.) B. Pinutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on Jul r Y.`, 1975. Pg. 1, Para. 3, Add "Mr. Dorsey agreed with the Mayor". Pg. 3, Para. 2, Add "Meyers seconded. Bye, Meyers, Pauly Penzel and Mayor Osterholt voted "aye", motion carried unanimously". Pg. 4, D.2, Add "H.O.A." after "The Preserve" and correct "Aquatennila" to "Aquatennial". pg. 4, Para. 3, Add "H.O.A. as request does not meet guide- lines of City" after "The Preserve". pg. 4, III., Add "B. By common consent, The City Council set a Special Meeting on the MAC for August 21, 1975." Penzel moved to approve the minutes as published and corrected, Bye seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. VII. N,`'d BUSINESS Bye requested permission to submit three motions for Council approval prior to receiving the vote on the Bond Referendum so it could not be construed that the vote prompted the motions. The Council agreed to receive the motions at this time and discuss them with the other New Business. Bye moved that the City Council, in view of a public statement by the Mayor as to the severe financial condition of Eden Prairie, direct the staff to report in the next full and open meeting held by Eden Prairie City Council: A. Does the Mayor have information other Council members do not have? B. For a staff evaluation of the City's present financial condition. C. Consideration of a holding action on all, in all possible ways, expenditures and services until documentation of the City's financial condition is received and acted upon. Bye moved that the City Council of Eden Prairie withdraw its official participation from the Chamber of Commerce Growth Council and that Roger Ulstad, City Manager, be delegated as a liaison between the City Council and Growth Council. • Bye moved that we, as a City Council, commend the Citizens Committee for the Recreational Bond Referendum chaired by Judy Shuck and Richard Feerick for the way the bond issue was presented to the citizens of Eden Prairie and to also recognize the efforts of the EPAA and Hockey Assoc. See Pg. 9 for seconds, discussion and votes cast. Minutes -3- July 22, 1975 III. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 290 providing for custody and di an of unclaimed property. City Manager Ulstad explained the City did not have an Ordinance covering this matter and this prompted the drafting of Ordinance No. 290. Council Members discussed publishing a list of items found, storage, sale, and exclusion of handguns and drug paraphernalia from sale, etc. Penzel moved to approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 290 as corrected and adding the following: (1) all handguns and drug paraphernalia be destroyed - not sold (2) list of items found be published in Eden Prairie "Happenings" Newsletter and (3) there be a 30-day holding period on all firearms sold in which time the sale could be negated for any and all reasons, Bye seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Parkview Apartments{ by Edenvale Inc., a request for rezoning to IIM 2.5 iron Rural ana preliminary plat approval for a 45-acre apartment development located south of Chestnut Apartments and east of Mitchell Road. City Manager Ulstad requested this matter be continued to August 5, 1975 to enable the staff to review various changes requested by the Council with the proponent. Penzel moved to continue matter to August 5, 1975 Council meeting, Bye seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. V. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COIaUNICATIONS A. Request by Rosemount Engineering to appeal the Board of Appeals and Adjustments uecision on a variance request for a messa;e center and art object. Mr. Echols from Rosemount Engineering appeared before the Council to request they be granted a sign variance so they could place a message center and art object on their property visible from the Freeway. He stated the main purpose would be to advertise job openings which is of benefit to Eden Prairie. The message center would not carry the company's name, just the logo. He explained the need for their present signs, size, location, etc. Minutes -4- July 22, 1975 V. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS (Cont'd.) A. Request by Rosemount...(Cont'd.) Council Members questioned Mr. Echols regarding the need for the message center, size, location, number of other signs on property, if message center would replace one of the present signs, etc. Mr. Sanders, Building Inspector, explained the number and size of signs allowed under Sign Ordinance. Pauly moved that we deny request by Rosemount Engineering because they have failed to prove this denial would be an unnecessary hardship and because they are already in violation of sign ordinance in number and size, Bye seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. VI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS A. South Hennepin County Human Services, update on South hennopin Uounty Human Services guidelines by Phil Riveness. Mr. Riveness stated their role is changing and growing. He explained some of their main functions and that they are continuing a sort of needs analysis. Also, he requested the City of Eden Prairie participate in the financial support of the organization. Council members discussed the request for financial support and whether it would set a precedent. Penzel moved that we extend our sincere appreciation and recognition to the South Hennepin County Human Services Council for the valuable services provided on behalf of the City of Eden Prairie and that we support the budget request, however, at this time refuse the request for participation since it does not fall in proper area of responsibility for City of Eden Prairie, Pauly seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. I. B. Report of Director of Community Services 1. Master Plan for "Regional Parks". Mr. Jessen explained the Master Plan as outlined in his memo dated July 18, 1975. Bye moved that Council approve the three Master Plans and direct staff to forward to Metro Council for appropriate action, Penzel seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. Minutes • -5- July 22, 1975 VI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (Cont'd.) I} B. Report of Director of Community Services (Cont'd.) Bye requestedthe Metro Council be advised of the City's concern on the Riley Lake property. C. Report of City Engineer 1. Registered Land Survey for Dorenkemper property along the accrued right-of-way of Crestwood Terrace. City Manager Ulstad stated Mr. Dorenkemper requested the matter be continued to enable him to consult his attorney. Bye moved to continue matter to August 12, 1975 meeting, Penzel seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. Mrs. Dorenkemper asked Attorney Perbix if the City could take their land by deed or easement. Perbix replied they could. Acting Mayor Meyers explained to the Dorenkenpers that this matter was continued and they would be able to appear before the Council at that time to state their objections. 2. Land division for William Dredge property at the end of Snemit Drive adjacent to .ted t ock Lake. • Engineer Jullie explained the land division request as outlined in his memo dated July 17, 1975 and responded to Questions by Council members concern- ing cash donation for park, road dedication and maintenance and why Jullie recommended that Lot D not be built on until sewer and water was installed. Jullie explained he did not think a drainfield would be possible on this lot due to the sharp drop into the lake. Mr. Dredge stated he thought a drainfield could be installed and didn't think it was fair to exclude this lot. • Bye moved to approve the land division as recommended in Engineer's memo dated July 17, 1975 and amend item 1. to read "until either/or municipal sewer and water connections are available or a competent engineer's study of a private system is made.", Penzel seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. it Minutes -6- July 22, 1975 VI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (Cont'd.) C. Report of City Engineer (Cont'd.) 3. Petition for street improvements on Preserve Boulevard bet;•!een i-J Parkway ana the :tiny Rozd, STR 7,-3-03, Resolution l o. 975. Mr. Lee Johnson of The Preserve stated the road was badly needed and has been planned since the CGP was done. Also, it would not just serve The Preserve, but others as well. Mr. Silverman, representing Mr. David Anderson and Mrs. Nancy.Holmes appeared before the Council to state he thinks the road is premature and does not benefit his clients' properties. He also stated they opposed the construction because of the cost that would be assessed to theta and the loss of valuable land. Engineer Jullie explained the need for the road and the alignment. Mr. Silverman did not think the City should pay for the feasibility study for the project, it should be paid for by The Preserve. Mr. Lee Johnson said The Preserve will pay for the study if the project does not go forward. Bye moved to adopt Resolution No. 975 contingent upon The Preserve paying for the feasibility study if the project does not go forward and to strongly urge the property owners to work together to resolve access problem concerning the Ring Road, Penzel seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. 4. Petition for street improvements on Westgate Drive, Westgate 'Terrace, ' estFate Place and ::estgate B1va., STA /2-3-06, Resolution Ho. 1015. Engineer Jullie explained the project and said the petition for the improvement represents, 37% of the property owners. Council members discussed just putting one layer in now and the other after building has been completed in the area so the street will not be ruined. Penzel moved to adopt Resolution No. 1015 contingent on written communication from other property owners that they will not oppose improvement, Bye seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. it Minutes -7- July 22, 1975 VI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (Cont'd.) C. Report of City Engineer (Cont'd.) 5. Petition for street improvements on Birch Island Road south of Co. Ito. b7, ST.I 75-3-12, Resolution No. lOib. Engineer Jullie explained the need for the project and said the study would cost about $500 to $1000. Mr. Jeff Kakach stated that the intersection is very much of a safety hazard and requested the Council to put some impetus behind this project. Mr. Simon stated a school bus crosses that intersection and the driver narrowly escapes at least one accident a day. He said it is a safety problem and he is afraid a school bus full of children will get hit. Pauly moved to adopt Resolution No. 1016 and direct the staff to confer with the County and City of Minnetonka staffs to see if they will support project before any money is expended and report back to Council August 12, 1975, Bye seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. 6. Approve plans and specifications and order advertise- ment for bids on sewer lateral protect for portion of The Cove subdivision, SAA 74-1220, a.c. 51-°z77. eso ution Ito. 1017. Engineer Jullie explained he will request two bids - one including all residents and the other excluding four residents who do not wish to participate and he will obtain the signed easements. Penzel moved to adopt Resolution No. 1017 and correct the date bids will open to Thursday, August 14, 1975, Bye seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Mayor Osterholt voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. 7. Initiate Condemnation for certain easements reouired under .ti. -._U4. (NE Area Trunk Sewer Project, Resolution No. 101S. • City Attorney Perbix explained the easements were very important to obtain and the parties involved, Messrs. Schoenfelder and Swendseen, would not give the easements and would not negotiate. Penzel moved to adopt Resolution No. 101$ calling for condemnation proceedings, Bye seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. Minutes -8- July 22, 1975 VI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (Cont'd.) D. Report of Finance Director 1. Payment of Claims Nos. 7151-7287. Finance Director Frane requested the Council also approve Claim No. 7296, payable to the Eden Prairie Jaycees, for payment. Penzel moved to approve payment of Claims Nos. 7151- ?287 and 7296, Bye seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. 2. Clerk's License List Penzel moved to approve the Clerk's License List, Bye seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. E. Report of City Manager 1. Appointment of 4 members to the Joint City Council c ioo1 Bsera ' as c Force o stu yc y an recommen a er- natives involved with the joint cooperative venture of the swimming pool and arena. No action. 2. Lease of Steelman property to Vietnamese family by Immanuel Lutheran Church. City Attorney Perbix explained the conditions of the lease to Council members. Penzel moved to approve the lease, Pauly seconded. Bye, Pauly, Fenzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. 3. Lease of Park Property to Homart Development Company. Council members discussed the lease City Manager Ulstad presented. Penzel moved to approve the lease under the terms of Park & Rec. Dept. and stipulate a bond or cash to cover removal of sign if not done by Homart at speci- fied time and no concrete piers, Bye seconded. Bye, Pauly, Fenzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. RECESS - A recess was declared at 11:37 PM for the convening of the Canvassing Board. The meeting was called to order at 11:39 PM. Minutes -9- July 22, 1975 VI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (Cont'd.) E. Report of City Manager (Cont'd.) 4. Council Suggestions for Discussion a. Guidelines for Public Hearings. Bye moved to accept the Guidelines and instruct the City Manager to refine as needed, Pauly seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. b. Council adopt policyy to require staff to respond to Council anci(or Commission on development proposals within 45 days of application to the City. IVV Penzel moved to adopt policy, Meyers seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. - VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Bye — Motion concerning Mayor's statement — See Pg. 2. Pauly seconded motion. A discussion followed with the major points as follows: — a "holding action" may be an over—reaction. — person who made statement should explain and present the facts — not the staff. — from information received — Eden Prairie is not in severe financial condition, etc. — against responding to an excessive statement by an excessive reaction. Bye agreed to delete Item "C" concerning a "holding action" on expenditures from his motion. On a vote Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. B. Bye — Motion concerning withdrawal from Growth Council See Pg. 2. Pauly seconded motion. Bye stated the main function of the Growth Coun.i 1 was to lobby outside the City Council to better serve individuals and combined business interests. Also stated it would be a conflict of interest for Council members to serve on the Growth Council and didn't think the City should get in a position of subscribing to concepts, dogmas and procedures that others have put into their organizations. He does support their attempt, but does Minutes -10- July 22, 1975 VII. NE'i B3USINESS (font'd.) B. Bye - Motion...(Cont'd.) not feel City Council should be part of the program, etc. Pauly - could we consider motion in meeting when Mayor is present? Council member discussed motion and Meyers stated it is not supposed to be Chamber of Commerce Growth Council, but a Community Growth Council. Bye stated its major purpose is to lower developmental standards for Eden Prairie. Penzel said — make it easier to get things done. City Manager Ulstad stated the Chamber of Commerce does not want to be the Growth Council and that they are con- cerned that they will be looked upon as a pressure group. He stated he thought we should give it a try and that he looked at it as a wayto continue to educate our entire community. Penzel moved to continue matter to September 23, 1975 Council meeting, Pauly seconded. Pauly, Penzel and Acting mayor Meyers voted "aye", Bye voted "nay", motion carried. C. Bye - lotion concerning Citizens Group for Bond Issue - See Pg. 2. Penzel seconded motion. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. D. Penzel - moved that the City I-Sanager be instructed to review costs of towing and storage of vehicles in the past year to determine if the City should require contract bidding for this service, Bye seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unani- mously. E. Penzel - Progress report on status of civil defense sirens. F. Penzel - Including So. Hennepin Human Services Council in budget. G. Penzel - Moved to direct Mayor to resolve question of Chairman of Bicentennial Commission by second week of August or Council reserve right to make this appointment, • Meyers seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. • I. Meyers - Discussion of audit on August 12, 1975 agenda. J. Bye - Change sign on City Hall to "City", not "Village". VIII. ADJOUIUtM NT Penzel moved to adjourn, Meyers seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 12:27 PM. • MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CANVASSING BOARD TUESDAY, JULY 22, 1975 11:38 PM, CITY HALL CANVAS BOARD MEMBERS: Mayor D. W. Osterholt - Absent William Bye Joan Meyers Sidney Pauly Wolfgang Penzel I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER Acting Mayor Meyers called meeting to order. II. RECEIVAL OF JULY 22, 1975, RECREATIONAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUM) V UT: :{::SLLTS. Bye moved to introduce and adopt Resolution, Penzel seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion • carried unanimously. III. ADJOURNMENT Penzel moved to adjourn, Bye seconded. Bye, Pauly, Penzel and Acting Mayor Meyers voted "aye", motion carried inu ni- mously. Meeting adjourned at 11:39 PM. Unapproved Phonily) Commission Minutes July 29, 1975 D. Eden Prairie FamilvRecreational Center, by Eden Development, Inc., recuesting rezoning from 1-2 Park to Community Commercial for a 21 acre site north of T.H. 5 and east of Edenvale Boulevard. The planner stated the staff is of the opinion the Eden Development — Incorporated's request isforacommunity shopping type use and should be located in a geographical area of the City as illustrated on the 1968 Guide Flan. The planner further stated the proposal is inconsis- tent with the Edenvale PUD and the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan. Sorensen requested the staff submit information on traffic counts for Industrial vs. Community Commercial at the proposed recreational center site. Mr. Peterson said it would be possible to meet the recommendations withinthe staff report regarding construction if the proposal is approved on the requested site. Peterson stated that a strong market exists for recreational uses and traffic flow during peak hours would be less for the recreational center than if the property were developed under industrial. Mr. Peterson felt the property in the MCA is not ready for development at this time because of the unavailability of roads and utilities. Meyers inquired which specialty foods are being considerediand suggested some restaurant uses could better utilize the view of the open space than a bowling alley. Peterson replied restaurants such as; MacDonalds, Popin Fresh, pizza shops, ice cream shop, etc.,are being considered. Sorensen asked if the specialty foods uses could be clustered. Peterson said it could be attempted. lynch asked what the watershed districts response is Iodate. Peterson replied that he has meet with the watershed district representatives and it will be considered at the watershed district's next meeting. Boerger asked if a zoning category other than Community Commercial is possible. The planner said the proposal could also request Regional Service zoning. Feerick suggested the bowling alley use be separated from the other family recreational uses because of the possible Iiquor license. Paterson felt such a redesign would be possible. ?"5 Unapprovc July 28,1975 EdenReirie Family Rec. Center, Cont. Meyers asked what become of Edenvale's petition for the extension of Valley Visw to the Ring Route. Peterson replied that they would like to see Valley View extended and assessed back to the benefitting property owners, but such a decision must wait until the court appeal is handled. Feerick asked if the proposed use would be bad for the MCA. Meyers felt the MCA Concept is viable as a downtown Eden Prairie accessible to all and buffered by natural features, and that granting of regional uses outside of the MCA would mean the City would have to compromise its planning principles. The planner also felt the MCA concept is viable and development is.occurring in the MCA. Motion: Schee moved, Lynch seconded, to recommend to the City Council denial of the rezoning request from I-2 Park to Community Commercial for the Eden Prairie Family Recreational Center by Eden Development, Inc., for the following reasons ; • 1. The proposed land uses at the corner of T.H. 5 and Mitchell Road are not consistent with the Comprehen- sive Guide Plan for the City of Eden Prairie. 2. That the rezoning request from I-2 Park to Community Commercial is inconsistent with the Erlenvale Planned Unit Development. 3. That Eden Development , Inc., consider comparable dies locatedwithin the Eden Prairie Major Center Area along the new extension of Valley View Road adjacent to the Ring Route with access to Highway 5. 4. That the proposal is,actually for Regional Service use, rather than Community Commercial. The motion carried 5:2 with Boerger and Feerick voting nay. r ce'_ ELJ; 't' .._,,.. . . _ ..... ... 22t7 July 29, 1975 Mr. John Boland, Chairman Metropolitan Council 300 Metro Square Building St. Paul, Mn. 55101 Ref: 1975 Proposed Metropolitan Transportation Plan Dear Mr. Boland; Ii The City of Eden Prairie appreciated the opportunity to respond to the proposed Transportation Development Guide Chapter. Mr. Dallum and his staff have been helpful in providing background information and have met with the Eden Prairie staff members. We appreciate the assistance provided by the Metropolitan Transportation staff , although we may not agree with all the recommendations of the 1975 Plan. The City of Eden Prairie has supported the concept of regional planning for the 7 County Metro Area for those systems which clearly are of Metropolitan scope. The update of the Transportation Section of the Development Guide is a necessary and timely planning function of the Metropolitan Council. The Eden Prairie City Council would like the following comments and concerns to be entered in the public record for the Metropolitan Transpor- tation Plan as heard on April 29, 1975; June 25, 1975; and July 16, 1975. 1. Recognition by the Plan that U.S. 169/212 and T.H. 5 .ere Principal or Intermediate Arterials and will continue that function until new 169/212 is complete after 1990 . Appropriate design improvements must be phased to accommodate the safe and efficient movement of State and regional traffic . 2. Reevaluate the assumptions and basic data used to deter- , mine the rating of New U.S. 169/212 in the Analysis of Policy Indicators. Highway. The City believes the rating of 1 out of 7 points is not an accurate statement of the Metro Development Guide policies, nor is the rating score an accurate reflection of need or todays situation. Letter-Mr. John Boland, Metro Council -2- July 29, 197S Pef: 1975 Proposed Metcpolitun Transportation Plan 3. The City Is concerned that the projection methods used, the " Means of Measurement for Policy Indicators, Highways " are heavily weighed to 1970 data for popula - tion, trips, employment, etc. If Metropolitan systems are to be planned using 5 year old base data, Eden Prairie and other developing suburbs will not reflect the current needs, which will be reflected In limited trans- portation system improvements. 4. Eden Prairie is in subregion 4 made up of primarily rural freestanding cities or townships. Today approximately 50% of Eden Prairie is served by municipal sewer and water and about 75% of the City can be served from the existing sewer interceptor and trunk systems consistent with the Urban Service Area of the Development Framework. Eden Prat rie may have little in common with the rural areas in subregion 4, rather the problems and needs will be similar to those of subregion 3. 5. The City supports the subregion transportation concept proposed for transit service. Eden Prairie's Major Center Area (MCA), will provide a commercial, service and employment core for the subregion. The Policy Plan should be modified to reflect the inter- relationships between Eden Prairie's MCA and subregion 3. Many factors contribute to the relationship between OpuslI, • Southdale, 494/100, 494 Strip,and the Eden Prairie MCA . Transit service should be designed to increase opportuni- ties within and between those activity centers which form a Third Downtown for the Metropolitan Area. 6. The Transportation Plan does not recommend extension of Crosstown 62 from its present western terminus at Shady Oak Road to I-494. Hennepin County, Minnetonka, and Eden Prairie have approved the extension to 494 as an intermediate arterial. Extension of 62 west of 494 should be a collector to T.H 101 on the present Townline Road alignment. • • pL> Let er-^,:r. John Roland, RSetio Coon-1 July 29, 1975 Ref: 1975 Proposed Metropolitan Transportation Plan 7. Eden Prairie urges the Metropolitan Council to consider collector and minor arterials that serve regional facilities as systems which require regional assistance in planning and implementation. The Transportation Plan should recognize the high cost of serving regional facilities such as; regional shopping centers, employment centers, regional parks, airports, educational campuses and medical facilities . Local governments many times are repponsible for transportation and other systems needed for these regional facilities. The 1975 Trans- portation Plan shoul d be modified to recommend planning and financial support to local governments which provide transportation facilities that clearly serve regional fac- ilities. Our City Council offers these suggestions in a constructive spirit to the 1975 Transportation Plan. We as a Council or our City staff would be pleased to meet with you or a representative to discuss our concerns further. Respectfully; • gn • Pound vLake Park v Mpls., MN. • Eden Prarie, MN Comm. No. 7505 TO: City Council, Parks and Recreation Commission and H.M. Jeseen Community Service Director FROM: Architectural Offices DATE: 24 July 75 SUBJ: Bid summary and recommendations SUMMARY Enclosed is the bid tabulation form from the bid opening this afternoon, the fact that only four bidders bid on the structure is surprising considering the down economy. Clarification of base bid, and alternate #1 is as follows. The two structures were designed to allow two groups of contractors to bid on the structure. 1. The alternate bid is the structure that the commission and council directed be bid, the structure was designed to allow house contractors to bid, using 8 wooden posts and ptruotural wood beam construction with 2 by 8's and ply-.rood for the roof, asphalt shingles. 2. The base bid was bid to obtain exact cost for a low maintanance higher quality comparison, designed to allow larger construction firms to bid using 4 columns of concrete and glue laminate beam construction l with wood tongue and grove deck, asphalt shingles. ECONOMICS Willard Egan appears to be low qualified bidder in both base bid and alternate bid if the $300 that Mr Eggan included for the building permit is waived (a state Lee of approx. $30 is required). The labor and material performance bond require- ment for 8850 is incorrect, the amount Mr Eggan bid is $17,150 without required bonds. The bond will cost Mr. Eggan approx. $250 making Mr. Eggan's base bid approximately $17,400. . Description Budget per Bid Bid Recommended 24 June 75 23 July 75 23 July 75 Memorandum Post & beam Cono. & laminate (alt) (base) Sun Cover with 10,500-12,00 13,430 17,130 13,436 concrete floor (1500 Sq. ft.) (1600 Sq. ft.) (1600 Sq. ft.) (Post & Beam minimum electric Alt) Alternate to add 1500-2000 +1,020 +1,020 (1,020) cedar shingles (not in 24 June If funds memorandum) available Alternate to add 1000-1500 +1050 +1050 (Future) fireplaoe q xj • 24 July 1975 page 2 continued Alternate to add 3,000-4,000 +2,400 +2,400 (Future) enolosuro panels (Not in 24 June memorandum) Fees, Architectural 1500-2000 1500 1500 1500 and Engineering (Estimated) (Estimated) TOTAL 15,000 $14,930 • (15,700 if alt #2 is taken) Recommendation The budget was based on 1500 Sq. ft. of construction. The Pyramid scheme that was approved for proceeding with contract documents and bidding has a 4' x 4' module which dictated a 36' square for 1296 Sq. ft. or a 40' square with 1600 Sq. ft. The 1600 Sq. ft. scheme was chosen since the smaller scheme wouldn't capacitate future items such as kitchen, toilets, etc. The inorease in size along with only four bidders increased the amount bid over the budget estimate. The structure including fees falls below the 15,000 budget maximum. I feel that the cedar shingles are reasonably priced and should be installed at this time, if additional funds are available. Fireplace and enclosure panels could be added later with no demolition required. In order to legally issue Mr. Eggan the contract the contract will have to be written for; - Mr. Eggan's bid of $18,000 with alternates as decided by the council. The material/ labor bond and permit fee items, then would be deducted by change order # 1. I would recommend that the Council would direct the Architect to prepare a contract with: Willard Eggan Construction Inc. 14303 Valley Veiw Road 16725 Luther Way Apt. 201 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343 (New address Aug. 2nd) For the following oontraot sum of: Fourteen Thousand - Three Hundred 814,300.00 Base Bid 18,000 18,000 Alt. #1(Deduct) (3,700) (3,700) Alt. /{{2(Add) If additional funds 1020 available 14,300 15,320 The following change order #1 for: Deduct of Eight Hundred Seventy Dollars Bond Fee Reduction $600 Waive E.P. Building $270 Fee $ 0 Time Schedule The Contractor states he will commence the work within 15 days, and complete within 3 weeks - end of August/first of September. The city should direct their equipment to • commence the rough grading as soon as possible (next w*eek). j • Park Pavillion and Architectural Offices Picnic Sheltcr for 4941 South France Ave. Round Lake Park Minneapolis, Mn. Eden Prarie )j Comm #7505 23 July 75 a g 10 '+o4 5 U 4 '4 '- P, I-40- m aye mp f�l ® F. tom!a b..Ni •dZ0 General b a, d co ut a v m c M 00P, Contractors m � C Base Bid Alt#1 AIt#2 Alt#3 A1t#4 (inolbond 850) ded add add add Willard Eggan X $18,000 3700 1020 1050 2400 (Lncl3ne,it Midland Nursery • Swanson (inol bond 142) ded add add add Berglund 8: Johnson X $19,000 200 1745 1150 4275. tincl bond 300) X X ded add add add Bud Johnson 817,700 2200 1500 1300 3500 X X (incl. bond 175) ded add add add Cardon Construction $18,941 3900 1365, 805 2386 • • 4)61 • CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST August 5, 1975 PLUMBING Riven Plumbing Company CONTRACTORS (1 & 2 Family) Signature Homes, Inc. CONTRACTORS (Multi-family & Comm.) Scott Construction Corporation FOOD HANDLER LICENSE - CLASS A Sears, Roebuck and Company RETAIL CANDY STORE Sears, Roebuck and Company • These licenses have been approved by the program head responsible for the licensed activity. ecca Quernemoen, Deputy Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council t- FROM: Roger K. Ulstad, City Manager ei r SUBJECT: Council Meeting Agenda for Tuesday, August 5, 1975 DATE: August 1, 1975 I. A. Correct, approve and file minutes of the Joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting held Tuesday, July 15, 1975. I. B. Correct, approve and file minutes of the Regular Council Meeting held Tuesday, July 22, 1975. I. C. Correct, approve and file minutes of the Canvassing Board held Tuesday, July 22, 1975. II. A. The Preserve is requesting that the Council continue Area A public hearing to September 2. They are still working on some legal problems relative to this particular piece of property. II. B. This is a continued Public Hearing from the July 1 meeting and Mr. Edes requested the Council to continue until August 5. The Planning Commission's recommendation for this proposal was unanimous denial. The abutting properties have been notified of the subject hearing. II. C. The Council continued this public hearing and requested the staff to meet with the proponent and review a number of concerns that the Council had relating to this proposal. Attached hereto is a memo of our meeting with Mr. Peterson outlining his amendments to the plan as originally submitted. It is also my understanding in visiting with Mr. Peterson that he will withdraw his request for density commitments on their property located east of the proposed East-West Parkway. Mr. Peterson also has a copy of this memo. II• D. The Council set August 5 as a public hearing date for considering the requested improvements by Edenvale for the installation of curb and gutter and final bituminous surfacing on streets in the residential area and also the commercial section. Notices have been sent to all affected benefited properties in this improvement district. _ 2 _ ' t III. A. Eden Development, Inc. is requesting the Council to set a public hearing date for September 2nd. III. S. The Preserve is requesting the Council to set a public hearing date for September 2nd for Area G. IV. A. 2nd reading of Ordinance No. 290 as amended is in order for your consideration end approval. V. A. 1. I have enclosed for your information in your packet a draft letter that can be sent to the Metropolitan Counpil relative to the City's position on the Transportation Policy. The Transportation Policy has been submitted to the Planning Commission for their review and comments. Our staff has also visited with the staff of the Metropolitan Council. V. S. 1. Enclosed for your review is a tabulation of the bids received. The City has received four bids of which Mr. Pggan is the low bidder in the amount of$14,300.00. You will note in the attachments a tabulation of all bids submitted. Mr. Ovick will be present to explain and answer any questions the Council might have. V. C. 1.Each of the Council members has received the 1974 Audit Report and also a letter of transmittal from the George M. Hansen firm speaking to the 1974 budget report. In addition I am enclosing on page 903 a six months cash position of City funds and also a six months tabulation of revenue and expenses for 1975. A representative from the George M. Hansen firm will be present August 5 to answer any questions the Council may have relative to the 1974 Audit Report. The Council may then receive the report and place it on file. V. D. 1.Recommend approval of the Clerk's License List. I have attached a rough draft of the Procedures for Public Hearings on zoning. I will have these printed up Tuesday evening unless the Council would like to make changes of the procedures herein outlined. RU:jP __ MEMO ff -- I DATE: August 1, 1975 SUBJECT: Parkview Apartment Revisions to Original Submission The City Council directed the staff to meet with the proponent and rework the following elements of the plan dated 6/10 75 . 1. Location of park dedication. 2. Cash in Lieu of land dedication. 3. Location of trail system. • 4. Adjustment of covered parking requirements. 5. Alternative to proposed convenience center. 6. Reduction in number of units by 10%. Mr. Peterson and Mr. Landstrom met with the manager and planner on Monday, July 14, • at which time the revised plan was explained to the city staff. The revised plan was delivered to the city staff on Wednesday, July 16th for our review. The following are the city staff's concerns and views on the 6 items: 1. The park dedication proposed in the 7/16/75 plan is to dedicate 2.7 acres (previous convenience center site ), to the City for park purposes. The 7/16 plan illustrates the facilities which could be installed by the City if desired. The propon- ent would require that the City in accepting the 2.7 acres also pay the Estimated$ 44,000 assessments. 2. Eden Development, Inc. , will not contribute cash in lieu of land because they feel the principal Is unfair and that the 2.7 acres is adequate for the park requirement. The $ 62,000 estimated cash in lieu of land requirement is for the original 424 units using the formula applied to all developments. The 7/16/75 revised plan for 120 units would require ( using the standard formula ), a cash In lieu contribution of about $ 19,000 for the first phase. M erne-R..,sed Parkview Apts. -2- 3. The trail system has been moved to follow the property line and Chestnut Drive . This change has given more room for the path/unit relationship and should be satis- factory. 4. The proponent has added garage spaces to exceed the I enclosed space for 1 unit requirement. The total parking ratio is 2.56 spaces per dwelling unit on the first phase. 5. The convenience center has been changed to public park. The 7/16/75 revised plan illustrates tennis, shuffle board, paddle tennis, and basketball court that could be developed by the-City if desired. The Chestnut Apartments adjacert to the park/convenience center i site will have pool, recreation building & tennis courts, hard surface area and game field space. Tho alternative of moving the parkway west thereby reducing the size of the convenience center site was not proposed by Eden Development Incorporated. The following sketch illustrates the road alignment shift allowing a 75 to 100 foot setback to the existing Chestnut Apartments. • •f 1.. • , • • i k• r-1 i , ! 11•.__.31/ 1 • H. q • u ,tili • . 1 • VsNM :fk-re--t.r r r')t=11 • ...,1,a, .fr.0 {-[ . . • „ It : 11 • , • C ! II 1.,,i > CI,-.r 0.rNi...,1. -1 • M , 0 ( CrAM1.,,,,,,,T ES ---k) n 0 •0 I Ili ii-Ili I nii 1 ti 1 l'I_• _L 1 i._/.- • . 1 1 . 1 ! — — g ''''' - • ,_ - -- _ -,:._--...--------3,- ;31) \ \ :1 _. ,,.___....,-:. __--_,---=.--, _ -•- _!...c.....) ----, /7...„.• - --).3-—--(745)---- - '. ---••••'-', 4‘..-----7•11!Ll1,------1'.1', '-'-.- -f.) TrD-rff 10 "-- '''', .,,t•''''- ""---ii "` "' {G-) --1 • % --- t 3 ,_. -.„,„ ,. • I• i ,-. ?,;1-71,i 1-;-)f_rt.77--;-- --.70 - • 'k'')-----i":7E1-11a--07-1,c)1 f-•_ ,,--,-!_,-._i---4:0:7-;--'(:),:;.,,,, ,• • i. 0 1..-- (7-7--:----' t---•i -:-e•-•)'-'1 ' (75-7•0::-,-D.--r.,ii-l• •,-• V: ' %., 1 --.--,,-.'w,ii•-•-ivo„...1.1,§.- ---,----•---,'-n-- I -- 4•••':. ,4 ' I I 1 '-•2_ 4, _ , r•'-'45). L„.)- •-(1v: •' -' . -,... ! - 1 rl, 0 Mi.:;___'±111., _. •.- teD ....„.,./ "----- ----;) :-.).,.....- t '9.:-: =V-1:-)C1 i 1 1 .:_-_:„.0? ri-r:,--\,' -•-• c•-' • A 1 (..____D 7:—"`'.' _F:t_j__L_ ' ' ----. •s ' '.7-I-,111:" .1]_71 . . 1 , , I •••• . • --• 4,‘ '. ' --As 1 114 -^1 t ' • ' ' I I rA, ? r-_-Thl: L.!, '1 0,i---• ,5117:•;----s*-1 ..t., ! 0,-.111-m '-'71! ' _ _ 1(..•;, .....,-,- , -,-, - r- a r .-- F.--P•D-,p-1. ., -_2 4:*- '')"." •--7-'-.5. -7-., i ', 1 I I 1 5f ' : ! • • • : 4 1 -'1 ET- Is ..,,,,_ . -_ n.-- _...,.. .7_1 ,,... -0 • 0-; ,...,70.5 : 1 .! p -..1,-4-• 7-t :I _:,-.7--•••,. '• •-.:-.2 40.1_,. •-,,-_-,-,,=------. .,:27,7) 4,- ;_z--ii.,-;'' 4.-.:.. -,',,,:. ..1 "Di. ,-,i ri-- .. i - , k. c-.).-t-o 11 113 E3-- 't 1 a LTV •--rt_,_)I tial:.,,- • 1 1 L - -ei t-.-/• e• ,.... ..._______ ,- - • 0,...,....., .;.; .• ra . - (....,, • , - - 11-1:17 rAril F-9 TV:::..., 117;..1- 1,, ,71-7---11 • —r--7-1.L — - _ 1, ,- - r• ---j. ---- • . .:.,.. '• .6. -..„..yr....,' 1—.);„..72._._,--,-....),,-tit.,::.-i „...,),-__rls. c.:0. .,. C. , 1 '1:7 ' •.. . • •. . ....;. . '''''" . ^::: '''. .." .."'7.7 :.'.7. ...''t.- ."''',..7: 7;7'. • .....,. .... ;.. .Z .,a•, . .,,r ,, , ..•. • Memo-Revised Perkview Apartments -3- 6. The total units in the Ist phase has been reduced from 128 to 120 apartment units. The small 8 unit building adjacent to the parkway was eliminated. The proponent has altered the site plan to respect the spring fed pond, the drainage way and the creek. The "Omni-Court" has been moved away from the units to provide more privacy and open space. The units along the south • property line are setback 25 feet with the 275 foot building being moved In between two 180ebuildings. The total units in phases I, II and III has been reduced from 424 units to 399 dwelling units. The 186 apartment units zoned on the western 15 acres (previously part of the Old Farm PUD), brings the total units on the 60 acre site to 585 units. This would be a density of 9.75 units per acre for the 60 acre Old Farm PUD. For comparison purposes, .Basswoods in the Preserve is approximately 75 acres with rental apratments, town- houses, condominiums and single family units at an overall density of about 6.4 units/acre. : • < 11 ) ; ,.- :•-%r, .' r,- ZL, • I • • % f.' d f • - ems•�,c� - • i i 01_ } fif. re � '.i 11 —'—;+ r— �,. i.•, 4,s_ ^ •`it --\ ( •• G' ( f ,,,,,,c7,-..._ 4---„T',-,_., , :,. ._._.. , .. L..:,,-„,...,,.....,... rii .I,: '-:-,.2..(1 : --. . . t i t` fir:' -� 1 s ne j� 1 t 6! o r !i!,- N q.. (1\ (a.,, -_ (-1 /! 3 t- :5';_ r u.�: --, :- k --E%_-Er' }-- _Carr; `. ;'.j i 't .5:1 - Vi:-.!<;','Llii,j. •c-7-\. '0' -'.--I'I? 1:.(Th—'".) CI C, i\ k, . „i„,-,,--1,, rb_ .i_:_),___.; - !_ 1 : ._','.- I .. :ri L__ (rn ..„,, s_.. 5 ,,,L.: .:.„.. . . . .i,...— .,_ ,, , , , . e -r, --: '''.. ' ',.t-\ . (:--- CV. 4, • • t__, 1 1. fir—7,; ^z,,:, 1 4,, t _ ;,:_t_.,1 r--.:f. 1 ' L-- 'a.c r i - ;-:, • . �=",�, r l L,, 1 ,.,,., '. -.'•.;) .1 1,,...u.1 - r`,.._ ci_6-.(4 i-k-,4 ar:--...)c 1,-- -.... i - , . fo q r. d { ! _ " li ZoI \ - �u 5._____.-...--.7..,/-; rj„..,„ \,,),,,, . -, „ (..(...;,,, „„., <,,,C. 1;4%, -•,,,,, r „ / ...,.,/43 ? i •• '(-:—) :-''''C 's/Z.;./...\\ C:A.C7 \ 'fin C. h . C• .' - •t'� 1,; k.eve.Z.!?� ( (.C` !(��S`/ �y /.. r� s , • ., c... (•.':•••-.1.,r,: "-. c� 4� _ J/ ''' '' [41_4' :- •,_•. , (-C;\"%, 4:?." .,.±.j If,-:_,• * j--" 171-1:„. I,C. , .[*- 'rc) - \ ‘, I i bhr", ----z.--\*i_J i . .._ e _I r..i 1 e � j� 'I ,Iz ICE-) ti ff ---i' t=:. -:;ecc.FC ..-: " 1 if Ci• (tru/7-7--‘./ito' ' ,i, ',,Li'),-.'.: . 2 f $ c b ;-: '(---r_;-:,.? ----t—L.,-7---i-,1-7. - Jam' I. • • PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS (ZONING) 1. Call the opening of the Public Hearing. 2. Proponent presentation (10-15 minutes) a. State name and address. • 3. Planning Commission report (5-10 minutes) 4. City Council review or questions. 5. Public questions and comments: a. State name and address. b. If organized opponents are represented by a spokesman, please state name and address and the area represented. 6. City Council review and question proponents and opponents. 7. City Council close the Public Hearing and determine the necessary action. In an effort for your City Council to conduct Public Hearings • orderly and expeditiously, the above procedures are the guidelines to be followed. • • It would also be appreciated if the public would speak to the issue and avoid repetition. Thank you.