The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCity Council - 05/03/1977 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, MAY 3, 1977 7:00 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL MP1BERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Billy Rye, Joan Meyers, Dave Osterholt and Sidney Pauly • COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Roger Ulstad; City Attorney Harlan Perbix; Planner Dick Putnam; Finance Director John Frane; Director of Community Services Marty Jessen; Engineer Carl Jullie; Joyce Provo, Recording Secretary INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL I. APPROVAL OF AGEPDA A',l" • '„'_R ITEMS OF BUSINESS • • II. MINUTES A. Minutes of the Special Council Meeting held Tuesday, March 29_1977 Page 4473 B. Minutes of the Co-incil Meeting_held Tuesday, April 5, 1977 Page 4476 C. u_i„ of the Special Council Fleeting held Tuesdays 7ril 12, 1977 Page 'i4f" III. PUCLIC HEARINCS A. Fdcnvale Infustrial Park, 2nd Addition, Ouflot r b _Fdenvale, request Page 4158 to yolimt r _ Hat a.:! rezone 1 of the 3 lot., from llflen.ral to 12 Parr. 'he stl.r is 7 acres located north of Martin Drive, east of Corporate Way and west of Commerce Way. (Resolution No. 77-41; Ordir.rnr.e Io. 77-17) Continued Public Hearing from April 5, 1977 u, i/,; h ,l Develepiment Corporation, renuest for PUD Page 4274 f - .i _lt i i acres or s ina?e family and mul t�irle.PUO & 4493 r :ai,l:reivn;nary. gat and rezoning from o , . western 200acr;s or the PUD. The PUD is loclocatedtclocated ;o south r of ., l;a.. tv r,,:ad l bcarreen County Road 18 and Homeward Hills Road. Rcsnlut !on No. 77•47, approving the Bluffs East/West Environmental l=ses h ma worksheet (CAW) and Notice of Findings; Resolution No. r7--4�j. -a.onroving POD concept plan of Bluffs East/West PCJ oi 4C0 acres prr (brochure; Ordinance No. 77-20, rzoning from Rural to Il -I3.5 for the western approximately 200 acres of the Bluffs East/West P120, end direct City Attorney to draft a rezoning agreement; Resolution '(n. 77-4,, approving preliminary plat of 250 lots on aP11rox1nase iy .00 ares, western 200 acres, of the Bluffs East/West pep. (Cool.:nucd Public Hearing from April 12, 1977) :V. REPORTS FRO.' AD 1SPRY V. I'FTITIOi(S, REQUESTS 7, COMLUNiCATIONS A. h ourst 1r ! Willi r I . 'Irnninq President of Titus, Inc:., Page 4515 re.vcr.tirlo n r :r of On Pasolutioni afrnuval which csj iron ,•, rl i . I i1. ;,la ore vear (Icted 4priI 20, 1977) Council Agenda - 2 - Tuesday, May 3, 1977 B. Request for a Public Hearing from Jesse L. Schwartz W. Gordon Page 4516 S Smith Compaiy77tonanunication dated April 25, 1977) VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS • A. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 77-9. Eden Prairie Industrial Park, Page 4517 rezoning from l-2 to I-General the areas designated in the PUD for the southeasterly quadrant of the County Road 4 - TH 5 Intersection. B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 77-21, The Pillsbury Company, rezoning Page 4525 k from Rural to 1-5 Park approximately_25 acres for 1st phase construction of a research and development facility. C. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 77-18, rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 Page 4531 for Phase 1, 58 lots, Woodland Addition by Edenvale and rezoning agreement. D. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 357, Area "G" of The Preserve Page 4539 Commercial Plan, rezoning from Rural to C-Regional Service and rezoning agreement. • VII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. ports of Council members 1. Appointment of one member to the Human Rights Commission for • a three year term 2. Council Goals & Objectives for 1977-78 Page 4423 B. Report of City Manager 1. Status report on existing and proposed highway projects - Page 4541 State of Minnesota C. Report of Planning Director • 1. Community Development Block Grant Housing Assistance Page 4545 discussion D. Resort of Director of Community Services 1.. Boom Truck/Log Loader Bids Page 4550 2. Edenvale & The Preserve Park Plans Page 4551 3. Cash Park Fee Discussion Page 4554 4. Consideration of Boomer Property Page 4559 5. Discussion of Park Bill before State Legislature Page 4560 E. Report of City Engineer 1. Consider bids for utilityimprovements on Heritage Road, Page 4563 I_C. 51-290. (Resolution No. 77-58) Council Agenda - 3 - Tuesday, May 3, 1977 E. Report of City Engineer (continued) 2. Final Platpproval for Olympic Hills 2nd Addition Page 4565 (Resolution No. 77-59) 3. City Hall expansion plans Page 4568 4. Receive 100% petition for City installation of utility and Page 4570 street improvements in the Woodland Addition of the N.W. Edenvale Area, I.C. 51-3037 Resolution No. 77-61) 5. Preliminary report on feasibility_study for utility improvements on Edenview I and Kuchers 1st Addition, I.C. 51-300 6. Receive petition for'vacation of Rieman Road in the Edenvale Page 4572 Industrial Park 2nd Addition (Resolution No. 77-62) F. Report of Finance Director 1. Clerk's License List Page 4576 2. Payment of Claims Nos. 5369 - 5465 Page 4578 VIII. NEW BUSINESS IX. ADJOURNMENT. UNAPPROVED MINUTES SPECIAL EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 29, 1977 7:00 PM, CITY HALL • COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Billy Bye, Joan Meyers, Dave Osterholt and Sidney Pauly COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Roger Ulstad; City Attorney Harlan Perbix; City Planner Dick Putnam; and Recording Secretary Joyce Provo INVOCATION: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE • ROLL CALL: Bye, Osterholt, Pauly & Penzel present; Meyers absent. • NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING • City Manager Ulstad read the Notice of Special Meeting. CLARIFICATION OF THE CITY'S POSITION RELATIVE TO THE WINDSLOPE PROJECT, SPECIFICALLY THE APPLICATION OF EARTH TONE SIDING BASED ON ORIGINAL PROPOSAL City Manager Ulstad explained that on or about March 14, 1977, the application of siding began on the Windslope project and was called to the Council's attention on that date and also to the staff at City Hall. The following day, March 15, the Council did meet and raised concern about the color of the siding that was being applied and did ask that we make every effort to find out the changes that were occurring. Immediately following March 15, Ulstad did call The Preserve and requested to meet with them and a representative of MAIA. City staff met with them and also talked to Mr. John Nelson, President of the Preserve Homeowners Association, and Mr. Nelson informed City Staff that the Board was meeting with The Preserve relative to this matter. As a result of the meeting on March 18 between the Board of Directors of the Homeowners Association and The Preserve, an additional meeting was scheduled for the 21st of March. At that meeting a representative from the National Corporation of Housing Partnerships, Mr. Bob Kerne, was invited to attend the meeting, which consisted of homeowners, The Preserve and City staff. Also on the 21st the City did request the builder to withdraw from applying additional siding but do not know if they completely withdrew on that date. Following the Monday meeting of March 21, the City received a petition from a large number of residents in the area. This petition speaks to four different points signed by approximately 275 residents. Then the Mayor did call this meeting yesterday morning and Mr. Ulstad personally contacted the 2 people whose names were on the petition, those being Mrs. Larry Bell and Dr. & Mrs. Shebuski. STAFF REPORTS City Planner Dick Putnam spoke to his staff report dated March 28, 1977 regarding history of the Windslope Project, and answered questions of Council members. (Report attached as part of minutes). Council Minutes - 2 - Tues.,March 29, 1977 DEVELOPER AND/OR OWNER COMMENTS Don Hess, The Preserve, displayed colors obtained from the Olympic stain company, noting that they went through a procedure trying to determine what the term earth • tones meant. The Preserve feels the colors selected meet the criteria. Hess further explained that the Design Review Committee functions in The Preserve as follows: 1) primary review and 2) secondary review. The primary review committee consists of Mr. Hess, Mr. Gertz, and Ken Person. The projects are brought before this board and are either accepted or told to go back and revise. The Windslope project was unanimously accepted. this was on the basis of a presentation of MAIA speaking through Mr. Winston Close's office. The Preserve did stop the application of the color when the City requested this be done. At a meeting held either on March 24 or March 25, there was an agreement among the owners that changes in the color would not benefit the project and the best thing to do would be to apply additional monies for landscaping of the project, not only in the project area but the areas inmiediately adjacent to the project. The landscape architect representing The Preserve met with the homeowners association, individuals,and the developer to arrange the kind and type of landscaping and where to apply same. Mayor Penzel requested petition dated March 21, 1977 submitted by residents of The Preserve become part of the record. Bye spoke to the definition of the Design Review Committee as he saw it. The Design Review Committee is made up of 3 officials of The Preserve. In this particular case the color choice went through the primary Design Review Committee and that was all. In other cases, it noes to the secondary source which is made up of 1 representative of The Preserve and homeowners. Bye questioned how many members are on the secondary • source. Hess responded it could be 4, 5 or 6 people and their power begins where a change in the project has occurred. Bye further questioned if that means there is no secondary review until a project is up. Hess replied in the affirmative. Pauly questioned what different administrative procedure would The Preserve use in • approving the project today. Hess responded the project would be mounted where it would have public display. PUBLIC COMMENTS The following individuals appeared before the Council and a summary is written below listing their concerns: Max McDermott, 8715 Leeward Circle, John Bergen, 8705 Bentwood Drive, Rodney Kesti, 11320 Windrow Drive, Dave Anderson, 9110 Fox Run Circle, and Jean Shebuska, 8724 Leeward Circle. 1) Question of earth tones, all you have to do is drive around the Preserve and see other contractors did not have any trouble defining _ earth tones; 2) model at The Preserve Center is not to scale - the distance between buildings are less than what is shown on the model and the same with the distance from the road; 3) impression of the Windslope Project when it was approved that it would not stick out as it does now; 4) people in The Preserve were not notified of the colors to be used; 5) number of guidelines have been violated in Construction Guidelines of The Preserve 6) how can berms be constructed when there is only 11 1/2 feet to the garage as those garages start above the level of the street, they do not step down; and 7) in the future that once a City Council approves something that it is necessary to follow through and make sure what they thought they approved is being carried out. I/('')'I, Council Minutes - 3 - Tues.,March 29, 1977 COUNCIL DISCUSSION Bye expressed his sympathy with the McGough Construction Company, and his disappointment in what would seem to be a good neighbor or lack of good neighbor concern. Seems the situation that exists is talking about a neighborhood situation and that if a neighbor were to structure something of an unusual nature, being a good neighbor is communicating and acknowledging this is what is planned to be done. Bye felt a total absence of one person who was in power talking to one person who was not in power. When this project was approved it was quite apparent that the colors were to be brown. Osterholt stated that since he was first aware of this particular problem, he went over to The Preserve and looked at the situation and was quite disturbed with what he saw because it was not the kind of project he understood was originally proposed. The model that was shown was misleading and does a great disservice to future builders. Also impressed with the people in the audience and living in the area and commended them for being able to keep their cool so well based on what the project looks like. Suggested the Council explore every opportunity to see that the color is changed. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Bye, to instruct the City Attorney and Staff to investigate the possibility with The Preserve authorities that the siding be changed to earth colors as originally proposed and rough wood sawn siding, and have City Attorney ready to move toward court action if siding is not changed. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Bye, to set the Council meeting at 6:45 PM for the April 5, 1977 Council meeting to discuss the Windslope Project at that time. Motion carried unanimously. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Osterholt, to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 PM. Motion carried unanimously. UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, APRIL 5, 1977 6:45 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Billy Bye, Joan Meyers, Dave Osterholt and Sidney Pauly COUNCIL STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Roger. Ulstad; City Attorney Harlan Perbix; City Engineer Carl Jullie; Director of Conmiunity Services Marty Jessen; City Planner Dick Putnam, and Joyce Provo, Recording Secretary • INVOCATION: Councilman Dave Osterholt PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLE CALL: All members present. • • I. WINDSLOPE PROJECT DISCUSSION City Manager Ulstad explained that after the Special Council meeting held Tuesday, March 29, a number of calls were made to arrange for a meeting with the proponents. Representatives of the National Housing Corporation of Partnerships were in town April 4 and they met with legal counsel in the Minneapolis area yesterday. City Staff did meet with Mr. Kerne and Mr. Chance and their legal counsel for approximately 2 1/2 hours going over concern about color. Result of discussion was one of being at the same point we were a week ago. Their position at the present tine is still that they have a limited number of dollars and it is impossible for them to make the changes relative to the exterior application of the siding, but did hold fast to their proposal relative to landscaping and to the amount of money set aside for that purpose. • City Attorney Perbix stated there is no way in the proponents judgement the material can be channel, and therefore the color of the project. At the last meeting the Council instructed staff to proceed with investigating the possibility of seeking a legal recourse. if the color was not changed on a voluntary basis. Perbix feels the proponents understand the Councii's remarks of a week ago and understand they could be involved in a lawsuit; however, they don't feel they have any alternative. Their position is the dollars they spend for legal defense will come out of the project because there is no more money. They say on the one hand they want to have good feelings within the community and they are geared to having a good public image. On the other hand, they say there is no way they can do anything. Osterholt questioned the alternatives open to the Council. Perbix outlined the alternatives: 1) do nothing - let the project be completed as it is being constructed, or 2) seek a declaratory judgement - that action gives us the possibility of getting a good result with the least amount of controversy. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Meyers, to direct the City Attorney to seek a declaratory judgement to have the Windslope Project completed as it was originally submitted and approved. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes - 2 - Tues.,April 5, 1977 II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS The following item was requested to be added to the agenda under the "New Business" category: Discussion of study to be done by the Industrial • Commission. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Meyers, to approve the agenda as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously. • III. PUBLIC HEARINGS • A. Walnut Addition by Dirlam Properties, request to preliminary plat and rezone 7.7 acres from k1-22 to RM 6.5 and R1-13.5 for double bungalows and single ta:;?ly Leo Stern, legal counsel for Dirlam Properties, outlined the proposal noting that the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City, and has been recommended for approval by the City Engineer and City Planner. Both Mr. Dirlam and Mr. Stern answered questions of Council members. The following residents spoke in opposition to the proposal: Gordon Carlson, 7352 Franklin Circle; Don Berne, 7332 Franklin Circle; Virgil Steinhoff, 7337 Franklin Circle; Harold Marquardt, 16301 Valley View Road; Cedric Warren, 7324 Franklin Circle; John Martinsen, 7225 Eden Prairie Road; Ron Conley, 7305 Franklin Circle; Gloria Rose, 7336 Franklin Circle; and Mary Upton, 16163 Edenwood Drive. Concerns expressed as follows: 1) people bought homes in the area and it was their impression that this area was going to remain as R1-22 zoning and developed like lots presently around It; 2) drainage problems; 3) questioned why there wouldn't be a market for single family homes as stated by the developer; 4) what would be used for a buffer on Valley View; 5) where are the children going to play that live in that addition. Bye stated that it is his belief that when a person buys a home they have the right to believe the situation in their neighborhood will exist as it is portrayed to them by the City. Don Peterson, 7025 Mariann Drive, spoke in favor of the Walnut Addition proposal as submitted. Mr. Stern requested that the Walnut Addition application be withdrawn. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Pauly, to return the Walnut Addition to the Planning Commission under modified circumstances. Motion carried unanimously. B. Tudor Oaks by Convenant Living Centers of Mn.,Inc., request to rezone from Rural to RM 2.5, Rif 6.5 A Service-Commercial, Area H of The Preserve Commercial Area for en elderly health care retirement development Reverend James Williams, Executive Director of Convenant Living Centers of Mn., Inc., spoke to the proposal and answered questions of Council members. it' 1 City Council Minutes - 3 - Tues.,April 5, 1977 B. Tudor Oaks J2y Covenant Living Centers of Mn.,Inc. (continued) • Planning Director Putnam spoke to the Planning Commission minutes dated February 28, 1977 and Staff Report dated February 25, 1977. • MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Bye, to repeal Ordinance No. 340. • Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Pauly moved to close the Public Hearing and give a 1st reading to Ord.No. 77-15, to rezone from Rural to RN 2.5, RM 6.5 & Service-Commercial, Area H of The Preserve Commercial Area for Tudor Oaks by Covenant Living Centers of Mn., Inc. • • • General discussion took place before a second was made to motion. • John Nelson, President of The Preserve Homeowners Association, spoke in favor the Covenant Living Centers of Mn., Inc. proposal, stating that quality of living is in the highest standards. Mr. Nelson went to Milwaukee to look at the proponent's facilities and was very impressed with their operation. • MOTION TO CALL PREVIOUS QUESTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Bye, to call the previous question. Pauly, Bye, Osterholt & Penzel voted "aye", Meyers voted "nay''. VOTE ON PREVIOUS QUESTION: Fault' moved original motion as stated above, seconded by bye. Motion carries unanimously. MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Osterholt, to direct the City Attorney to draft a rezoning agreement including recommendations of the Planning Commission minutes dated February 28, 1977, that page 8 of the Tudor Oaks brochure dated January 31, 1977 be reviewed by the Planning Commission along with final site design plans, and that the proponents will not request any abatement of taxes to the community. Motion carried unanimously. • C. Prairie East Third Addition by Hustad's, request to preliminary plat and rezone LU acres from Rural to R1-13.5 for 85 single family lots Jim Ostenson, Hustad Development Corporation, spoke to proposal. Mr. Hustad and Mr. Ostenson answered questions of Council members. Planner Putnam spoke to Staff Report dated February 25, 1977, Planning Commission recommendations in minutes dated March 28, 1977, and recommendations of the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission dated March 21, 1977. Pauly requested that a sign be constructed indicating that Nottingham is a temporary deadend and that street names be double checked. City Council Minutes - 4 - Tues.,April 5, 1977 C. Prairie Fast Third Addition by Hustad's, request to preliminary plat and rezone 50 acres irons Rural to R1-13.5 for 85 single family lots (continued) Ken Franz, 9889 Squire Lane, and Helen Bergran, 9515 Risewood, expressed their concerns, i.e., primarily concerned about north - south traffic flow and about now knowing where multiple dwellings are going to go when buying a lot. Steve Reiland, 9695 Lord Court, questioned if this requested zoning is just for single family sites. Putnam responded in for affirmative. MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Bye, to close the Public Hearing and give a 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 77-16, rezoning 50 acres from • Rural to R1-13.5 for 85 single family lots for Prairie East Third Addition.' Motion carried unanimously. Osterholt felt the Council is not serving the community by not requiring the play area within the subdivisions. Also believeS30% variances on the lot size is too much. MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Osterholt, to direct the City Attorney to draft a rezoning agreement incorporating the recommendations of the Planning Commission, the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission allowing the variances in lot size as requested, and also to include Engineer's recommendation of greater setbacks on Nottingham Drive and wider width of Nottingham Drive. Further that a part of approximately six acres in size in the north is to be dedicated as part of the Prairie East 3rd Addition approval, and a tot lot area size of about 2 acres is to be created at the time of the development of Prairie East 4th Addition; and that trails be extended down Linden Drive and Nottingham and that signs be located along Linden Drive indicating • possible multiple development. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Bye, to adopt Resolution No. 77-39, approving the preliminary plat of Prairie East 3rd Addition. Motion carried unanimously. D. Edenvale Industrial Park,2nd Addition, Outlot F by Edenvale, request to preliminary plat and rezone 1 of the 3 lots from I-General to I-2 Park City Manager Ulstad explained that Don Peterson, Edenvale, has requested this Public Hearing to be continued to May 3. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Bye, to continue the Public Hearing for the Edenvale Industrial Park, 2nd Addition, Outlot F by Edenvale, to the May 3, 1977 Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously. E. Woodland Addition bv [denvale, request to preliminary plat and rezone from Rural to RIl 6.5 for Phase 1, 58 lots Don Peterson, Edenvale Development Corporation, spoke to the proposal and answered questions of Council members. I!(r•l�il City Council Minutes - 5 - Tues.,April 5, 1977 E. Woodland Addition by_ Edenvale, request to preliminary plat and rezone from Rural to RN 6,5 for Phase 1, 50 lots (continued) Planner Putnam outlined the Planning Commission's recommendations from minutes dated February 28, 1977 and Staff Report dated February 25, 1977. Pauly requested that this area be signed to indicate multiple development and Meyers directed staff to draw up guidelines as to what type of signs should be used. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Pauly, to close the Public Hearing and approve the 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 77-18, rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5 for Phase 1, consisting of 58 lots for Woodland Addition by Edenvale. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve Resolution No. 77-42, approving the preliminary plat for Woodland Addition by • Edenvale. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Penzel, to direct the City Attorney to draft a rezoning agreement incorporating the recommendations of the Planning Conrnission, Planning Staff and Engineering Staff regarding setbacks, driveways, trails and signing on adjoining properties to the proposed multiple uses. Motion carried unanimously. F. Norseman Industrial Park, 2nd Addition by Helle, request to preliminary plat and rezone 16 acres from Rural to I-2 Park Mr. Helle spoke to his proposal and answered questions of Council members. Planner Putnam su:rmarized staff report dated February 23, 1977,and the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial on February 28, 1977 based upon its inconsistencies with the transportation needs of the Lake Smetana Plan and the February 23, 1977 BRW letter report. Meyers stated she would like some response from the staff as to additional construction costs of alternative locations to the west. Ulstad explained that the staff is concerned about being consistent with • the north/south road plan contained in the Smetana Lake Plan development and land locking adjacent properties. Claudia Bearman, 9955 Valley View Road, said she was in agreement with Mr. Helle of not having a road going through and suggested that whatever happens concerning a road system, there should be further studies done. Mrs. Charles Hillger, 9975 Valley View Road, also stated she would like to know what will happen with the road. Helle questioned the need for more studies as he felt studies have been made in the past over the entire area. MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Osterholt, to continue the Norseman Industrial Park 2nd Addition to the April 19, 1977 Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously. tiii%0 City Council Minutes - 6 - Tues.,April 5, 1977 G. Special Assessment Hearing for removal of Dutch Elm Diseased Trees Director of Conenunity Services Jessen spoke to information distributed to Council members regarding tree removal assessments. Jessen recommended the Council order removal of all trees on list and if the property owner get their trees down by the 15th of April then they will receive the subsidy, otherwise the City will take steps to abate the problem. MOTION: Meyers roved, seconded by Osterholt, to order removal of all dutch elm diseased trees as per proposed list (page 42O2B), and to approve the special assessments against property owners if the trees are not removed by April 15, 1977. Motion carried unanimously. IV. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS • A. Resolution No. 77-36, relating_to the endorsement of State Financing for certain features of 911- Emergency Telephone System Lt. Wall spoke to Resolution No. 77-36 and recommended approval of same. MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pauly, to adopt Resolution No. 77-36, relating to the endorsement of State Financing for certain features of 911 Emergency Telephone System. MOTION TO AMEND: Bye moved, seconded by Osterholt, to amend the previous motion by adding "The Council strongly urges the State Legislature to fund this system out of the General Revenue Fund." Bye, Osterholt, Pauly and Penzel voted "aye", Meyers voted "nay". Motion carried. MOTIDN AS AMENDED: Bye moved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve the Motion as amended. Bye, Osterholt, Pauly and Penzel voted "aye", Meyers voted "nay". Motion carried. B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 77-12, amending Ordinance No. 315, correcting legal description on Minnesota Protective Life MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Bye, to approve the 2nd Reading of Drdinance No. 77-12, amending Ordinance No. 315, correcting legal description on Minnesota Protective Life. Pauly, Bye, Meyers and Penzel voted "aye", Osterholt abstained. Motion carried. C. Resolution No. 7/-41, changing the time limit for removal of dutch elm diseased trees from 7 days to 20 days MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Meyers, to adopt Resolution No. 77-44, changing the time limit for removal of dutch elm diseased trees from 7 days to 2D days. Motion carried unanimously. D. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 323, Crosstown Baptist Church, rezoning approximately 9 acres of_properly at 6500 Baker Road from Rural to Public and rezonine_agreement MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve the 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 323, Crosstown Baptist Church, rezoning approximately 9 acres of property at 6500 Baker Road from Rural to Public and approval of rezoning agreement. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes - 7 - Tues.,April 5, 1977 E. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 77-11, Garrison Forest by The Preserve, rezoning_ the lr, acres. including Outlet A, from Rural to R1-13.5 for the approximacely_t0 family lots Don Hess and Larry Peterson, The Preserve, answered questions of Council members Osterholt explained that his voting in favor of the 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 77-11 would be predicated on The Preserve's agreement to pay the park fee. Larry Peterson assured the Council that The • Preserve has agreed to pay the park fee. Carol Michael, 9495 Leaftop Circle, and Alan Lyng, 9485 Risewood Circle, both spoke in strung opposition to connecting Garrison Way to County Road 18. • MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Pauly, to approve the 2nd Reading of ' ' Ordinance No. 71-11, Garrison Forest by The Preserve, rezoning the 16 acres, including Outlot A, from Rural to R1-13.5 for the approximately 50 family lots. Bye, Pauly, Osterholt and Penzel voted "aye", Meyers voted "nay". Motion carried. Meyers explained that her "nay" vote was not in opposition to rezoning for the single family lots, but against the road system. F. 2ndReadinn of Ordinance No. 77-1, implementing an industrial waste strength sewer charge t,nd execution of a Joint. Powers Agreement with the Metropolitan Waste Control Coxirnssion MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Meyers, to approve the 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 77-1, implementing an industrial waste strength sewer charge and execution of a Joint Powers Agreement with the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. Motion carried unanimously. G. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 338, creatino a Community Based Services Board to , ssist all suocrviscd residential programs or social rehabilitation programs MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Bye, that the Human Rights Commission be appointed to serve as the Community Based Services Board and that this charge he incorporated in the Human Rights Ordinance. Motion carried unanimously. H. 2ndlea:ing_ef Ordinance No. 77-18, rezoning approximately 2 acres from Rural to 1-2 Park for t:he construction of an industrial storage building for Hilcy's_ Sprinilur System and rezoning agreement MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Bye, to approve the 2nd Reading . of Ordinance No. 77-18, rezoning approximately 2 acres from Rural to 1-2 Park for the construction of an industrial storage building for Miley's Sprinkler System and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the rezoning agreement as amended. Meyers, Bye, Pauly and Penzel voted "aye", Osterholt voted "nay". Motion carried. • City Council Minutes - 8 - Tues.,April 5, 1977 V. APPOINTMENTS A. Appointment of 3 members to the Planning & Zoning Commission for 3 year terms • Meyers placed the names of Fred Baumann and Donald Sorensen into nomination. Pauly placed the name of Elizabeth Retterath into nomination. • Osterholt placed the names of John McCulloch and Ron Krueger into nomination. Penzel placed the name of Paul Redpath into nomination. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Bye,that nominations be closed. Motion carried unanimously. Upon tabulation of ballots, the following three people received the highest votes: Elizabeth Retterath, John McCulloch and Paul Redpath. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Meyers, to cast a unanimous ballot for Elizabeth Retterath, John McCulloch and Paul Redpath to serve three year terms on the Planning & Zoning Commission. Motion carried unanimously. B. ppointnient of 3 members to the Historical & Cultural Commission for 3 year terms Pauly placed the names of Helen Anderson, Allene Hookom and Judy Ellingson into nomination. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Bye, to close the nominations and cast a unanimous ballot for Helen Anderson, Allene Hookom and Judy Ellingson to serve three year terms on the Historical & Cultural Commission. Motion carried unanimously. C. Appointment of 7 members to the Industrial Commission Bye placed the names of Roy Terwilliger, Richard Feerick, Clayton Tonnemaker and Mike Pohlen into nomination. Meyers placed the names of Dean Edstrom and Don Flom into nomination. Penzel placed the name of Don Anderson into nomination. Osterholt placed the names of Bill Miller, Don Swanson and Tim Pierce into nomination. • MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Bye, that nominations be closed. Motion carried unanimously. Upon tabulation of ballots, the following 7 people received the highest votes: Dean Edstrom, Richard Feerick, Mike Pohlen, Tim Pierce, William Miller, Roy Terwilliger and Clayton Tonnemaker. iIYJ City Council Minutes - 9 - Tues.,April 5, 1977 C. Appointment of 7 members to the Industrial Commission MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Bye, to cast a unanimous ballot for Dean Edstrom, Richard Feerick and Mike Pohlen for 3 year terms, Tim Pierce and William Miller for 2 year terms, and Roy Terwilliger and Clayton Tornemaker for 1 year terms to serve on the Industrial Commission. Motion carried unanimously. D. Appointment of 7 member to the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commissiontora 3 year term Pauly placed the name of Paul Choiniere into nomination. Penzel placed the name of Dr. George Tangen into nomination. Meyers placed the name of Robert Kruell into nomination. MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Pauly, that nominations be closed. Motion carried unanimously. • Upon tabulation of ballots, Robert Kruell received the highest votes. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Meyers, to cast a unanimous ballot for Robert Kruell to serve a three year term on the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission. Motion carried unanimously. E. Appointment of 5 members to the Building Code Board of Appeals Penzel placed the names of Tony Hirt, Robert Lapic, Gerald Offerman, • Cheri Fischer and Charles DeBono into nomination. MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Osterholt, that nominations be closed. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Pauly, to cast a unanimous ballot for Tony Hirt and Robert Lapic for 3 year terms, Gerald Offerman and Charles DeBono for 2 year terms, and Cheri Fischer for a 1 year term to serve on the Building Code Board of Appeals. Motion carried unanimously. F. Appointment of 5 members to the Board of Appeals & Adjustments Pauly placed the name of Richard Lynch into nomination as the Planning Conanissien representative to the Board of Appeals & Adjustments. Meyers placed the names of James Wedlund, James Cardinal, Roger Sandvick, William Dearman and Donald Sorensen into nomination. Osterholt placed the name of Grant Sutliff into nomination. Penzel placed the names of Ronald Krueger and Ed Leipold, Jr., into nomination. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Meyers, that nominations be closed. Motion carried unanimously. r1/1./! City Council Minutes - 10 - Tues.,April 5, 1977 F. Appointment of 5 members to the Board of Appeals & Adjustments Upon tabluation of ballots, the following 5 people received the highest votes: Richard Lynch, James Wedlund, James Cardinal, Roger Sandvick and Ronald Krueger. MOTION: Osternolt moved, seconded by Meyers, to cast a unanimous ballot for Jauijs Wedlund and James Cardinal for 3 year terms, Roger Sandvick and Ronald Krueger for 2 year terms, and Richard Lynch as the Planning Commission representative for a one year term to serve on the Board of Appeals & Adjustments. Motion carried unanimously. • G. ppointment of 7 members to the Human Rights Commission Osterholt placed the names of Duncan Laidlaw and James Simchuck into • nomination. Bye placed the name-of Barbara O'Brien into nomination. Penzel placed the names of Mari Dragseth, Doug Meyer, Duane Pidcock • and Lorraine Maenke into nomination. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Meyers, that nominations be closed and that a unanimous ballot be cast for Duncan Laidlaw, Doug Meyer and Bii.rhara O'Brien for 3 year terms, Mari Dragseth and Duane Pidcock for 2 year terms, and James Simchuck and Lorraine Maenke for 1 year terns to serve on the Human Rights Commission. Motion carried unanimously. VI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council members Pauly reported on the Planning Commission meeting held Monday, March 28, 1977. Meyers spoke to the Board of Appeals & Adjustments recent meeting. Osterholt reported on the meeting with the Metropolitan Transit Commission held Flarch 17, 1977. B. Reports of Advisory Commissions No reports. C. Report of City Manager City Manager Ulstad announced the resignation of Wayne Sanders, Chief Building Inspector. MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Pauly, to adopt Resolution No. 77-23, commending Wayne Sanders for his service as Chief Building Lispector for the City of Eden Prairie. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes - 11 - Tues.,April 5, 1977 D. Report of City Attorney_ 1. Correction to MIS lease and mortgage for MIDB bond issue Osterholt moved, seconded by Bye, to approve the correction to the PITS lease and mortgage for MIDB bond issue. Motion carried unanimously. E. Report of Director of Community Services • 1. Receive bids for log loader • Director of Community Services Jessen explained that 3 bids were received, however the low bid is irregular. The Council has two choices, one to award to the 2nd lowest bidder, the other option is to throw the bids out and start over. Jessen recommended the latter. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Meyers, to rebid for a log loader on April 27, 1977. Motion carried unanimously. F. Report of City Engineer 1. Consider bids received on 3/24 for TN 169 improvements, I.C. 51-266 • City Engineer Jullie spoke to Resolution No. 77-38 and recommended approval of same. MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Osterholt, to adopt Resolution No. 77-38 subject to approval by the State. Motion carried unanimously. 2. Consider bids received on 3/25 for utility and street improvements on Forest Hill Road, I.C. 51-294 City Engineer Jullie spoke to Resolution No. 77-37 and recommended approval of same. • MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Meyers, to adopt Resolution No. 77-37. Motion carried unanimously. G. Report of finance Director 1. Payment of Claims Nos. 5050 - 5223 MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Osterholt, to adopt Payment of Claims Nos. 5050 - 5223, deleting 5163 until a further explanation can be obtained. Roll Call Vote: Meyers, Osterholt, 8ye, Pauly & Penzel voted "aye Motion carried unanimously. 2. Clerk's License List MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Meyers, to approve the Clerk's License List. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes - 12 - Tues.,April 5, 1977 VVI.NEW BUSINESS Due to the lateness of the hour the item added under "New Business" - Discussion of study to he done by the Industrial Commission, was continued to a future Council meeting. VIII.ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Dsterholt moved, seconded by Meyers, to adjourn the meeting at 1:40 AM. Motion carried unanimously. Nl!Y'l UNAPPROVED MINUTFS EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL HEFTING TUESDAY, :APRIL 12, 1977 7:30 PM, CITY HALL • COUNCIL NC2•BER:3: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel Billy Bye Joan 1 h yers Dave Osterholt • Sidney Pauly COUNCIL STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Roger Ulatad; City Attorney Harlan Porbix; Planner Dick Putnam; City "mincer Carl Jullie; Director of Community Services Marty Jesaen; and Donna Stanley, Recording Secretary • INVOCATION: Council-:an Lave Osterholt PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Fenzel, Meyers, Pauly, and Osterholt present; Bye absent. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Ar,D 01TIER ITi_!S OF BUIIMS Tbo following itch were recuosted to be added to the agenda under the ITZ.1 B1.3I'.,<33' cater,ory: A. Re—scheduling of June 7. 1977 meeting?. B. Attention to rnrn3n for nzxt acetina. MOTI0II: I<.eycrs roved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve the Council Agenda as published and amended. Motion carried unanimously. II. PUPLIC r7P.Rincs A. 1311:ffr. ilat/`;g_t. Eust*.d nnvelor;nent :`orporation, request for P1.1D CCor(;ont r.I _i ) : GC r;i1 12r,milv ;r zUD LDeyo:t.ol.cot _3p`p;Y�1::'.C. T:^C'a:,.i t:'tt':• platar❑ r,.-.oalnp I Uro tO1.1.=-j. .. e 'i'..tern acres of th:2 uO. City Manager Ulstaad spoke to the background of the Purgatory Creek corridor area t.g.d to the resolution passed by tho Council providing guiro lines for the City to follow in consideration of upcoming pre— p:)L:3].u. Wallace Busted, Rusted Development Corporation, introduced consultants Robert Enrstron, ivy trom Associates; diehard Sather, McCombs Knutson; Iarry Griffith; d Jim C.;tson; and spoke to present proposal devised as a conprcniso h e c;.weon the two positions of private or public owner— ship of the Creek Valley. City Planner Dick Putnam explained the Environmental Assessment Process required by the dtato of Minnesota, uitn the use of the Environmental As=3e;:oent Worksheet to provide the necessary information to determine Council Minutes - 2 - Tues., April 12, 1977 ' whether an Environmental Impact Statement is required. Director of Community Services Marty Jensen spoke to the PR and NR Commission mooting of March 7, 1977, and the (Acceptance of the compromise plan after lengthy discussion, and explained briefly the sources of funding discussed. City Planner D:e}: Puttn_e apeke to the outcome of the previous Planning Commission meeting and to the hotiene passed: to recommend that Etdi findings and conclusions are accurate eed that a a,eativo Declaration .notice requiring no EIS he filed with the Environmental Quality Council; to recommend approval of the PUD concept for the 400 acre bluff'fe Last/o.est project; and to recommend approval of rezoning request subject to modifications. Er. Don Pennio expressed the concerns of the Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed District and of Herr Eneincering, regarding the difficult hydraulogical control that will be required along this area. • The Developers and Staff answered questions of the Council members. Councilman Dave Onterholt requested a copy of the Purgatory Creak Study and original scenic easement referred to by Mr. Hunted for the Creek Valley, and also a copy of the revised map of the preliminary plat. Mr. Al Teas, 15824 Pnrk Terrace Dr., questioned why the 400 acres we are talking about is divided into sections, because the original Study is for the entire creek; end if this propo:.aal is approved, will ell of the areas of the creek bo public or private. :Leyor Penzel responded that the Purgatory Creek Study Report is not under diecussion tonielet, but the huctad development proposal, and that the uses suggested in the Steep are used as a guide when these proposals cone be- fore the Council. Mrs. Sally Brouri, 10030 Bennett Place, directed her question to Community Services Director Jessea on recent discussion of the public acquisition area and the connection by brilleo over the crock. Jensen explained that the idea was discussed by the Pia 1, ii Corni.ssion, but that no final recommendation resulted. He continued that the svegestod bridge would be very high, with com- plete control, but to give viewers the "feel of the valley". Mrs. Helen Fowler, 10315 Riverview Rd., spoke to the proposed 252 lots on the Brown property, of which would bounder 13,500 eq. feet, and expressed concern with their sire. See asked whether this was the smallest lot size perr.ittod under PCD conceut, Iiiyor Fenzel responded that this lot size, one- third of an acre, is the smallest according to our Ordinance, with power by the Council to vary from the requirements of the Ordinance. Her. Fouler pointed out additional concerns such as the additional traffic on Riverview Rd. end the leee of the value of the :nailer lots, from a tax basis, to support a child in school. She naked whether lr. Wilkie would be asked to contribute to the park area. Mayor Penzel answered that if and when he chose to develop his property, he would be asked to contribute. Mrs. Fowler asked Mr. Hunted to comment on property value. Rusted responded that some of the homes would be in the ;;G0,000 price range, such as in the . • Council }:ir:ates — 3 — Tues., April 12, 1977 • Prairie Feet developeent, and sore would be higher, with 50 larger lots and 50% smaller lots. He tided that they are not talking about low cost homes, and that the e65,000 1eees aro edcn prairie's "broad and butter", and this is the size that most people are buying. Mr. Dean Lt,i:c, 10450 e ito Tail Crooning, speaking as presidexit of the Creek • • Knells hoecawncra e;:;,_acietion, tee:e sod the opinion that they would like to leave all of ten la::1 es it is, bet know this IRIS not possible, and therefore, spoke in favor of the iivatad proposal. • Mr. Gerald Fees, 9955 Pioneer Trail, :;poke to tho drainage ccros in Area C of the proposal and o::h d .about dykes and berms to control draining into their property. liustad exriaired that tho area east, of the Crock has net had engineer- ing consideration yet, and when thin develapacnt is emincnt, they will be addressed. Mr. Gordon Campbell, 9903 Riverview Rd., inquired whether the interests of some of the nei^,nbors cord be preserved by controlling the sizes of the houses on the lots, th.nn,ioro, olir..inating the possibility of encouraging the smaller houses, l-hyor r,:nzcl responded that tbcrc aro no restrictions accord— ing to the City Crdiaze co. • Mr. Rusted added that r_sny people are looking for mailer homes, but of higher quality, and did not feel that square footage would make any sense. Roy Welter, Jr. Pioneer Trail, a;^rested tekinp lots alone the creek of 1/2 acre and include lard down ;•o tee Creek end divide than up. Rusted explained that the density of the hones v s lej per acre and that no now najor area has been platted with that low of density, He continued that there is access to the Creak Valley • from various ecints, and it could be built doen into the Crock Valley, but it does mean we would have fever lote that could be on this property and would affect the oconcmies of the property. Mrs. Drown asked what the density eeeld be. Busted responded that there were 250 lots on 187 acres and that ie 1.3 hausco per acre, and added that on th© bluff sites overlooking the creek, the density would be two houses per acre. Mrs. Jeanne Beenit, le3e0 Riverview Rd., said her understanding was that Riverview Rd. would end et tee Cl_ eceltr;p property, and asked that if this were the case, how would they pet to to Ar hone. I'.uatad answered that they could use the regular route, and they aro try;.eg to avoid a drag strap on that section by putting up "atop" signs at either end. Mr. Wayne rrotm, 10200 Wild reel Pans, Crook Knolls, wanted to go on record in favor of the project, era aeeed that they lire 100 feet above the creek and have been very e,ne.•reed with Lo creek area,and were very pleased with that has been verece out by tho etni1. la% Welter expressed disapproval with the idea of having trails through the valley. l're lid eahlaepp, Jr., 1.`.':l Riverview Rd., asked about sewer assessments south of Riverview ed., and was ceecerned with the sewer along Riverview Poi. Mayor Fenzel re: ended ib i there salid is no enneenments fur sewer on south side of Riverview Rd., and tint tee Goa:ncia would have to hold another public hearing to decide • thin, and added that in meet canes when a larger area is developed, the developer will put in i.:.provc:aents. (WI() Council Minutes - 4- Tues., April 12, 1977 • lre. Fowler questioned the accuracy of the setback requirements under the zoning classifications in variance as listed. Mayor Peuzel explained that these Lere minimum eetbacks if the house cannot be placed in the center of the lot. Mr. Larry Wilson, 12155 Riverview Rd., requested to go on record in favor of the proposal, and ceeiaincd that ho feels the matter is complex, but that the outlined plan will eebance the area. He added that he was speaking as a home owner, and also hes en interest bocause of his company located in Eden Prairie. Mrs. Brawn asked share the kI:; would come from if it were needed. Mayor Pennel answered that the City Staff would prepare the document if it were determined that a need Old exist for requiring an EIS. MOTICI:: Osterholt moved, seconded by Pauly, to continue the matter to the next regular meeting of iel 3 with further inforr ation on the following: Possible requirc.:.cnts of land dedication for open space; funding sources for Purgatory • Creek Study; complete report from engineering staff regarding storm sewers etc.; estimates of the number of children moving into the project and whether there are further peas for a school; dotailed information on economics of the property for develoeeent from the developer; copy of the changes in the lots and layout not presented to tha Council; determine whether or not an EIS should be required, what was the 'Amine, cost, and who would prepare it; what would bo the impact on the rest of the Purgatory Creek Study, as far as allowing compromise on building on slopes or percentace of slopes, and how proposal is handled; whet would be the additional volu._e of traffic on Riverview and He ueward Hills Roads; and who would he expected ie Hoot thee, coats when they cone up. Lotion carried unanimously. Councilwer:an Pauly requested to go on record as favoring the approach of the plan and co:Tre.sed acorn• ireion for ail cf the yore: dons on the concept, but had reservations on the jot rises, not for the sake of income, but because of the sheer number of people put io adjacent to the most sensitive area in Eden Prairie and the tremendous impact that would make. Mayor Penzel called for a recess at 10:45 PM. III. COtOi]IL GeeI3 e gee ^Iv?i len l077-1971 MOTION: Mayers moved to continue this matter until the April 19, 1977 meeting. Osterholt eeconeed, and the motion carried unanimously. • Iv. lr`rt Pnet e A. i etec'rcd:Lling of teen 7, 1977 reetinr =On Yevers roved, seconded by Osterholt, to re-schedule meeting of June '1, 1971 to June le, 1977. Potion carried unanimously. B. Attention to neetele for reef renting City Reneger Iietnd spoke to following items for Council considerations 1. Minnesota housing and Financing Report on siding application to Windelope. 2. bcvelopnent framework for Area G to be put on Agenda for meeting of April 19. yt„� Council Minutes — 5 — Theo., April 12, 1977 3. Payment of utilities on date of closing or 120 days, whichever come first, rather than at building permit time. C. Rnvelution rD. 77-43, ai thortzifu: removal of di,^.cassd trees. MOTION: Ootcrholt moved, seconded by Pauly, to adopt Resolution No. 77-48, authorizing removal of dioaeed trees. Motion carried unanimously. V. ,IVO1R?.".•Egli' • • NOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Pauly, to adjourn the meeting at 11:15 IN. Motion carried unanimously. 0 (O (O v rn April 27, 1977 �O 0 • M Messrs. Roger Ulstad, Manager and Richard Putnam, Planner Q City of Eden Prairie p 8950 Eden Prairie Road w. Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343 z • RE: Bluffs East/West PUD Review w Messrs. Ulstad and Putnam: In response to the questions raised by the Council at the ncc • public hearing for the Bluffs East/West PUD on April 12, 1977, I offer the following observations and comments: 0 1. Funding Sources for Purgato Creek Open Space. There ui are three factors to be considered in assessing the potential for successful grant applications for open a space resource areas. They are: a 0 a. Availability of Funds. This year would appear. to be the best sinca the early 6O's for total funds v available from both state and federal sources. The LAWCON appropriation for. fiscal '78 is going through Congress with no difficulty at a level ? more than six times the 1976 level and twice as LL high as the currcnt (1977) appropriation. In addition to LAWCON funds for acquisition, every so-called "public works-full employment" bill includes youth corps workers and supporting funds for park and open space resource projects. z At the state level, continued financing of the ai Natural Resources Fund is unquestioned. Although it is not likely to show any significant increase, Q the fund is large enough to provide up to 20% of V the local matching monies required by federal programs. Q • df The Metro Council bill for an additional $ 60,000,000+ in bonds for open space acquisition w and development is currently suffering some political storms. The issue, however, is out- state aQc vs. metro area division of funds, not the 00 need for more open space money. Only the develop- ment portion of the metro area funds has been PLANNERS L7 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS fl ENGINLFRS L7 ARCHITECTS (4 Ih•'.j • Messrs. Roger Ulstad and Richard Putnam -2- April 27, 1977 questioned, and even that is likely to be reinstated before the bill is passed. At least $12,000,000 will be available for acquisition of regional open, space re- source areas. b. Project Area (site) Qualifications and Competitive Ranking. The open space qualifications of the Lower Purgatory Creek area are outstanding. The existing habitat and the poten- tial for continued management after urban development on all sides is excellent. I know of no other resource (including the Anderson Lakes area) in the metropolitan area that is the equal of the Lower Purgatory Creek Valley. In addition to being an outstanding resource area on its own merits, the creek corridor is an important, if not vital, supporting link to the Anderson/Hyland regional open space resource area. It is the only viable "wildlife corridor" connection between the Anderson/Hyland complex and the Minnesota River Valley (proposed National Wildlife Refuge) . Unlike the other potential and proposed "corridors", the Purgatory Creek Valley does, and can continue to provide, adequate cover and protection for deer, fox and other wildlife as they move between these two major open space resource areas. • The Hustad POD proposal will, with the modifications recom- mended by staff, reserve the resource area in a manner which is consistent with our Purgatory Creek study, and permit management of a functioning wildlife corridor as urban development continues. There is no question in my mind that all of the open space resource agencies involved in the grant review and approval process, recognize the Lower Purgatory Creek • Valley as one of the most important resource sites in the entire metropolitan area. Many of the outstanding natural resource areas which would compete with this site for a high priority on grant request lists have already been, or are in the process of being acquired. The competitive ranking of the Purgatory Creek site would be very near the top of any list. c. Experience and skills in the Grant Application Process. Eden Prairie has a remarkable record of success in receiv- ing grant funds for open space resources. While the quality of the resources has been (deliberately) out- standing, the administration and processing of the L/i Messrs. Roger Ulstad and Richard Putnam -3- April 27, 1977 applications has also been expeditious and effective. There arc many qualified projects and project sites every year which cannot be funded because the "paper- work" is not properly or expeditiously performed by the applicant. 2. Necessity for a Full EIS Study. The Council raised some valid questions about their role in determination of need for full E]S study on projects with local responsibility. If a develop- ment project on this site (outstanding natural resource area) doesn't need an EIS, what other project or site would need one? The EIS process is not very simple, and it certainly is not • very clear and concise, even to those of us who work with (or within) it every day, much less to those who come into brief contact with it once or twice a year. • Th^ EIS process is generally considered to provide three things. They are: a. Full and Oren Disclosure of the Existing Social, Cultural and Natural Environmental Resources. The Purgatory Creek study and subsequent staff review of the HUSTAD project has certainly provided full and open disclosure of the nature and extent of the resource base in the Creek Valley. Several "experts" have given opinions, and the matter has been openly and fully discussed at several public hearings. Because of the Purgatory Creek Plan Study and subsequent public hearings, detailed staff review and public hearings on this specific project proposal, in my opinion a full • EIS is not necessary in this case. b. Full and Open Disclosure and Evaluation of the Impacts of the Propnsed Project on Those Resources. Here, again, the City has tne purgatory Creek Plan Study, the various staff review reports, the recommendations of advisory commissions, the watershed District staff and board review and the project proposal report as data, guides and references. Further, the permit process of the watershed will re- quire detailed plans, structures and procedures for handling the runoff, the City will review, approve and inspect all of the public works construction, and every individual Messrs. Roger Ulstad and Richard Putnam -4- April 27, 1977 dwelling, structure as they are designed. The design review/ permit/inspection process will assure compliance with all mitigation measures required by the City, the Watershed District and various state agencies. Here, again, I believe the preparation of a full EIS would not add new or useful information that the ordinary process will not provide. c. Develoumcn t and Evaluation of Alternatives to the Proposed Project. The slaif review and commission consideration process has already resulted in preparation of at least three alternate plans for the area. The various alter- natives range from nearly "complete" development of the creek valley as private residential property, to essen- tially what was proposed as the most ambitious proposal for public control outlined in the Purgatory Creek Study. The only alternative which has not been specifically de- tailed would be an even more dense development involving • more multiple dwellings in place of single family. Current market conditions and the general concensus of most neighbors and the City would indicate that this alternate is out of the question. Even if it was possible, my opinion would be that the physical impacts would be essentially the same as those of the proposed project, as long as total density was about the same. The social inracts would be considerably different, however. I believe that all reasonable alternatives have been put forth and discussed, and that the "no project". alternative is understood to be an unrealistic imposition on the land owners, and, therefore, an EIS would not add new or meaningful data for the decision making or permit process. 3. Cost and Timing For a Full EIS Study. Based on my experience over the past eight years and my knowledge of the area and • this project proposal, I would estimate the cost of a full EIS study to be within the range of $20,000 to $30,000. The time required would be from six to nine months, including all agency reviews and final consideration by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Council. These cost and time estimates are based upon a process which is not contested. If anv interested party, or a petition of 500 or more people, requests a hearing procedure before a State ilj�°j(p Messrs. Roger Ulstad and Richard Putnam -5- April 27, 1977 Hearing Examiner, the costs would double and the time would increase by about 50% in my opinion. In addition, the City would also need to provide legal counsel, and City staff people would have to be available to testify at the hearings. There would also be the cost of outside witnesses and the costs of the State Examiner's office. 4. Project Approval Precedent Setting. The Purgatory Creek Plan Study clearly delineated distinctly separate "reaches" of the stream valley. Because each of these sections of the stream are quite different, different uses, different management proposals and different acquisition and development policies are logical and valid in each different reach. The Bluffs proposal covers over 80% of the Lower Purgatory reach and would establish policy precedents for that reach only, in my opinion. Some of the policies might be equally applicable in other reaches, but the requirement that the specific policies established here be followed elsewhere is not supportable in my opinion. The Council would be free to enforce, or revise any or all of the policies required here when considering developments in other reaches as long as those policies were consistent with the overall Purgatory Plan as adopted by the City. Application of the same policies on the remaining 20%+ of the Lower Purgatory section, would not present any serious problems as far as 1 can see at this time. I believe that these were the Council questions which were specifi- cally directed to me for comment. I would like to add one further comment, however, on the subject of the impact of the proposed project on the value of the existing large area estates in this part of the City. I have watched, studied and been involved in many situations which are comparable (if not nearly identical in some cases) in Edina, Minnetonka, Bloomington and around Lake Minnetonka. The reaction of the current owners is perfectly reasonable and consistently predictable. A dramatic change is viewed as a threat, and there is no way that anycne can alter the basic human, emotional reaction of concern, caution and resistance to that kind of change because it is believed to be harmful. c/tI„) ) • Messrs. Roger Ulstad and Richard Putnam -6- April 27, 1977 The factual situation, however, indicates that rather than caus- ing a decrease in value, exactly the opposite occurs. So long as there are acres and acres of open, undeveloped land around the estates, they are valued intrinsically--that is---on the basis • of exactly what they offer (views, trees, hills, water, etc.). Everyone "knows" that "someday" the open space will be developed, but not "now". In fact, the open space might be developed into more, large estates like this one. Once urban-density development is actually begun, the large estate sites are suddenly a very finite product. No more "someday" and no more possible additional estate sites in this part of the area. At that point the "law of supply and demand" takes charge of the sale or purchase of the estates, and the price inevitably goes up. That supply and demand basis for price continues until the advent of the next phase, that is, subdivision of the estates themselves. Every experience I have had with this situation is the same. Most of the people who located and developed the estates absolutely insist that they will never be divided. A few concede that it is possible when they are ready to sell. Most often it is the former sites which are first divided. The latter are more realistic, and are willing (and able) to hold out much longer. I certainly understand and agree with the estate owners that the proposed development will create a dramatic change in their general environment. I can also understand that it is a change which they (because of their choice to live out in a less populat- ed area) view as undesirable. The conclusion that all (or many) potential purchasers will also view it as undesirable (and, there- fore, lower the price of their property) does not seem to be factual in my opinion. The only time in which this kind of a change can have a negative effect on property values, is during the decision • (or indecision) period itself. The unknown is always a negative influence. The known, understandable and observable, no matter how bad, is seldom as damaging as the unknown. The unknown is always assessed as the worst possibility in an unknown future context, while the existing can be evaluated in real time and real terms. If you or the Council have other questions or concerns to which I can address my experience or views, I would be pleased to do so upon request. BrAUER && ASSOCIATES, INC. ( ! C �"- Donald G. Brauer, P.G. President vaw • -1- MEMORANDUM • TO: Mayor and Members of City Council • TURD: Roger Illstad, City Managor FROM: Marty Jessen, Director of Community Services SUBJECT: Continuation of the Consideration of Uustad'a Development Proposal on the Lower Purgatory Creek Sector and the Purgatory Creek Open Space Corridor Study. DATE: April 29, 1977 At the April 12 special meeting at which this matter was considered the Council adopted a motion containing request for additional information on several points. I've attempted to address those points which I think are pertaining to the Park and Open Space Syste.r: Plan which include the following: I. Possible requirements of land dedication for open space. 2. Funding sources for Purgatory Creek Study (I presume implementation). 3. Possible future school sites in the tree. 4. l'hat would be the impact on the rest of the Purgatory Creek Study as far as alloeing conpremioe on building on slopes er percentage of slopes in how this proposal is handled. TOTAL PURC:'TC'lY CREEK IMPLEMENTATION COSTS AND POSSIBLE FUNDINC SOURCES The Purgatory Creel: Study divides the creek into a number of sectors. Following is a chart indicating the number of acres within the conservancy zone by sector, the amount of that acreage currently owned or committed to public open space, and a comment about the status of development as it affects the implementation of the study by sector. • (I'',,i) Cl, ro to to cn Cl, N P. G rr1 O P m x' tw.. H' N C N o co o 1. y. in C-▪' H e- w , fD r' s< /+ • r•O i co r-Ill G ;o P'< o I-, -ao y O to O O OO r) • M '.,p a rrn '0 (n P r• 0 .1 O O O 1r1 '0 0 Cm.. co 0 o DID >n 1 o C) gD Y.M n nI 001 0 O rt. 0 rt re y rt 0'`!• O 'CD r•0In to O •-",inY` O 1.o .1 P.O o-,,r'7 O'V) V) N O lD P.G ao 0'n P" '. P O 0 :-.1c O Y, Cr >: 7 O N 0 0 M):1 G. 0 G fD H n 0a CD H N P O a o 0, PC f n r•t- rt P r'1 n n ) n H (A r7 rt < P. O H rt 'i 0 0 t C t O 1n I-''i 'i n "± n.Co C t ,--•0 C.:D.'< o H. D D C) P n r-i o. _ - ,-..•O ' rt n rt 1, o n r•,,--•;Y G o Co O ::< I-1 O '<rt t' =,'< n .. r- �. 7 In`< H.r• H C - O D fa.'1 L,.-,•y I•t) r•O H 'r ) ) fD '^w , V. , 1) , o D rc ;'r) 7 P r.rt n w r 'd rt m N 0 0- J :1 J w 1) r ro n H,o.)) )+)In ID O.;j () a o Cl v, w rt•,..... .10..cc)o 0 in r 0 0O ? O Cl. n o :1 Co r• .CyD fD (D •-•r1 P.(7 C.) N )-•• O ••1 O P. 10 <, 0O 1, r"0 0 0 v y 1 O + rt In N O N i O P. C) .-•rD •-'I, D. n J O rC., 3 '7 H,rt 7 rt to 0' O 0 W rt'O O r•H I•1 In C'..,,.n O r. '-' P rt 7 O) '-'I;, 0 'O t lD (D O. C.r) 7 (.)r'7•'• H I) P rt ,✓ 1. I-f) 0 )-' rt :7 O CD H 0.P rt"C H 1) a (D O to r• 0 N O r• O Ct•-• •1 (3 P _••) O'rt'.1 O O O 1) r' C < 1, rt rt C) :1 "GI r• rt o :1 Cl iC .. .0 rt r ; to H n r, ; "1 rt ;< 0- •-•.O r) o O O H-r• rt(ra '<O rt C) •• .i f..q ?' o h1 rt C) r - '1 O •r t N'O J O..... ' n V' P '• O I./3 i 0 O 1i1 P S: - I• 1....O O.n r i P.: I H ) O :r' O o .--.•o 0 1-, r .0 O A :1 LU U O O :: :'7f7 S 0 - r ;•-.- a, W I, :o ,n`; n'i$ 'U 7 M H 7 ''O O.P• 7 • Cn , .•-• i c. J .J O • 0' rt t H C 0 t C5 P ,--•() • P rt H C•1.J 0 ; P n. O C) 0) CD (D r••CI �14 rt .07 rt O to n :P Ill rt ?' 3 ct• 43 I' '3 O r•1,.'c1 0 '1 Vr •-•0 r•C•) v' O I'•:y rD O O ' D P'O "4 ;1 0 r• C- 'c-1 .. 4: )-'rf O is o � :: 9 • :C O rt to C. r•y- fD co N C..;J :Y , r.:, •' o X:1 o P O' ! O G 'o '-0 0'O P P O. (i 0 1.-4 Vo r'. r D, (- ( O CU D t,J N co • 'c1 io t 'J M O.00 CD G H rt H ' O r• •' -)'in 1 .') CD O 0 ;t •--I•: O ti n ;Y Ct rt '1 H,fD W P' •--, (D :r C) :J 0 0 1, CD I'c1 rt'Di 'i 3 5,, rt 0 •h O N CI H.'el.'O 01-4rt ' P,VI 1-•0r.rf ' In I) 0.:'C) Cl. P C', '/. 'CD ' rt 0 CD C) O N co O .. V -0 0' P '1 O rt ID (D O 'O n H r,O'O ;7 O r•re •-' Ct p• I- R r ! r• r•31 53 0 7 51 r• H H 'r rt m 1) CD In r•W C) ii H.0 rt tD ='r• '% n In O ') :1 •'•H O 0 O f) 1) 6 0 45 DI rt 7 O C. d'CO r• C, '1 rt n rt VI • tit H C.. I' 'ti In C` n 0rt H r" P.:.) re co O O CJ e, f' CI.r :r 0) VU r C) O a o • '0 :J IC :X t-' D 1 _ID /D r7 n :J'I-•(D V, •I ') '-'O C) H rD e••.11 to C: . 11 O`•": O N r♦ G sr O .1 O 0e G ,,,_1 •'', i7 7'v H t CC C5 .1I,.H H 0 V. '< � rt .. ,,,• r, • ) :r I_. rt O . Cl. --I O /C 0) •• o N:to'0I�•• Ir) fD (D It r• C) lo r,'l '-• 0. ..Cl Ii H rt J' V. :Y O 0 0. .0 rt h' hi 0 ID rt ;J' O Cl �•' P. r• C) -' %Ci)M fa. am � yya m i C v, or �fD`< rt I••• M 'O--• 1 • W o o O M Y o to.•. 1 1 0 0 G'0a 0 0 0l-• • I` ' 11 • to (n C') (n 1: rt 'pi N• o n$ O P u• ri I-. n LI H o n M •-1 1.1 r• H 7' U . cY O 0 h/ H O9 n rr O (D I-I o r• p • x P r1 x (0 tD P • (0 (D P n N.0 o U) F-•rn G a C H'1- O' (Al w NJQ /.UI 0 lit 0 0 (n ra n o o •G M by o n O vfn w w 0 w H. • • -i O o otrl '0 o rr1 . n 1 V .•. O IV W 0 O (A O N 0 ni 2 Cn Y.-1 ny m ni O M n 6.r. I-•0 0 H H,In r.r'O to n in U H M in O •c1 N••-1 H n -i d a 0 I-::C ^1 H G L 0-0 Hi 7:rO P ,-. O ' 'G O G .7 0' O ,-n C 11 7 I-O 0 G O 5' D •1 0 I, (D l H n (- : n I. 0 O d niDD (1, G O .-'(D H iD`: rt 0 5 (7 rt 1:.O .'J 1-1 G H tr.n H O N r. • H O (D rt. rD N N HI • C, , O .", n • '! C, n n (D 0 0. 5" 0'G.G 7G C) 0 r-.In 0' O O G O .-o H ' I-• 11 H H H H ID H'd :r(D ••O 0C 0. • O 0 n O G rt't G`{ (r 1n t.1 n ; (. O In H 7.- O In G S P) O .0 P, O H G 0' n 0 :r 0 .-;n n N •'J 7 0 1., H W 0 H G LI CA N G 11 H)••; CI ,I 0 7•'n l=.O C' 11 rr H`{ I'•O O O I-•0..O 1 t➢ 03 H H I'• G Ci.b .1 H O 0 " n O G O H O O Pi P1 O O 0 (1 0. b O r P n co .+,n 0'n 'P n O J rD C '• Pn 0 Pc rl n H.O o O 0 J n n O o0 0 .',0 C O 0 C.,i G ,'C w 7 P.p :r O Imo•' H la•:7'O O '0; '1 00 •1 H n F.G -•in .j P= i.O n N n (D O P1 W 'U o ff o tD H to •{ U. .(1".(1" ri.P1 G ,H H H P` 1 H 5 •o 01 H P1 0 N• n .. 0.O P M PVI 1)(--P rt 'I f Cu In I-•CS,aP1.CD O CD 7 ri rr 10 C 0 :1 O.V. 0 41 • n . :Y...,.•O F•' • rJ rn O X In .1 1'• G H a p. -' 41 0 P. • •+e+• c) G.n 0, "(.1 H II H < O'• H• 0'c1 0 r1 7 rt. 0. p ln I'•0 (-I H v' ';•'I r ID rD '0 .'• G w P O P P. O rD nn .-3 In n U • G Cr, 71^1 I. O 0 .-1 O PO 0•1 G 01 1'•.0 O 0. 2' G Ll W ('.0in .r N',a .-(0 P H 0O 0.I-I H •.'7 N O rn r1 lO H. '-7 n n ...rI.1 0' . N n n r. ':) O H N rt :.7 G.O O in y P rr1 n Cl) 'S H H. 11 'V O 0 J, :3 O. 5' ,.'•W 0-• • n '• .0 0.P. 'I 0 (;,.I VI 0 ✓.(' •~ H 'Y1 In (J .'•F••< <D }":J rJ n n (Y 41 CO N in 0 I P ri )., :1 (, (7 n In (D(ri O 0 N ''07 O 0• 0 G r• :J G e-0,) H 0 n•;1 C., (D P, O I-' P, (J n P+ 03 'a o 'co • W p. ro ,._.•. H - '0 N, '-1 :J •-'(. rt. 1.1 c'I 0 tr1,•1•<J ;`7 H n wI'•1'•H O •< t-' C.ton H I I'd P1 r)'t) (D :) o.1 li.1., rD G I-. •d I-.Pr. ;7 :, O "•W W t H n I,.G H ll..l to rD i i n r. F'•C rD LC F'•0'a l= r I H %'n n O`•; O ;1 r 1 0 O FF P, 0 C n (0 0 (0 In O(D H • 0 01 P, (D <D 0 rt. LI i( G 1- I't1 It n H 11 0 0 • N ro 0 09 • 7 r'••(J LI n H ^' 1-, O O •CO . H P) 17 r Cl In C G ;7 In'[1 PI 1i In .1 O n 'J H (I In .11 (I .•••=, • Pr 0 (D 009 (4<D et 41 P W .'.• .1,;.1 W .D re r-•{:1 n N 0 (D I-' (D 'J" "-1 1 ]• O '> ^, 0 r,` '1 11. 01 re fa.<: -•.'•O re n (D I .7' On n V rD :J X Ca.7:O r1 r••N • la. In n (0 •{ rr ID Ill O N rt . H :J•7 H. :.1 W. 0 %(/) n M. II to :7 0In•< H 'J -1,-.1 n1 H O 0 C' G.Co (I) In 'L1 • .Y 0 O { N P,.rn I to I I •"• CI r 0 o 0 0 Cn•f.-1 p•O O C"1'1t)'I o t C C) 0 •.< 1 I O O 0 co II • i;I)`tb r• 0 n ytn H O r• 00 w 0 o . H n r•o n N r•n n.e r• yY, o O < M N hi 2G .[rl N w r• 7 O 0 rn •0 t7 rn� 1 ;n +. f•• o t O t>` b 7 F-1 n� (Cl m 01 ff Kt O rt rt H 'VI w N 0 ty rt ••.) 0"H rt O'0'rt C o H o D H. O 0 0 0 0•P. �C N CC P.N 0 H H H DO r•N n trig ^ H N n H O rt O.0'P O r•W e. 0 0 0 'V`C (D 00 C rt 0 tv rry 7•0 m p.N Ct C.rt to r• .0 t•t t O r•n r• O O h tt 0 Ln `C 0 N 7 r•r• to O 0 0 0 w• CD r•H tom'•n r•ri n Mr•O 0 DC 04 n to to O rt 0 (1 7 H rt•0 O n.0 ID 0 0. C 0 0 CP 1)n 0 t� HC 0 111 m< ` N to rt el. o tt 24 0 N '0 0 a' w 0 H n 0' -1 0 C 0 rt (rt H N n t; ro 0 Cn 'd rt. H rt. N 0 M O H N C (D :T H to In Cl VI S 7 r•lD • CD0 O 0.n 0 0 CD j O rt t • N 1-1H 0 :.1' '1' C H 5 t•t r• co tr. A H to n H O 0 fn t7•j Il 0 t(o O-3 1 UI 'rl H O 0 H y l O 0 trl 0 i G -5- • Various funding methods have been investigated informally and in the preliminary manner. Fcdernl, Si;tic, and/or Metropolitan Council would be peasibiliticr, for the entire creek corridor. Additionally, there is some potentials ter Watershed District Funding under the Cooperative Project process similar to that used for the Lund Property. Two cost sharing options arc; Federal pundits", b0„ Metro FundIi05-100% State Ihmdinp Local Funding 0-25t Local Iupdiup, In no citr,e am I of tin: opinion that the local share of the funding for this entire pro,io t would exceed 25 of the total cost, I believe the likelihood of the fund'iLg either tivanul',h the Federal, State option or the Metro Council option, v.bich ever i:t selected, is very high. The total purchase and implementation siiild of necessity have to he spread out over a number of years and would include i.paratc grant applications each year. A total of about $.'.4 million dollars is going to he available for fiscal year 1978 from the Federal i.1i'l'l?N State Natural Resources Fund if the option in the left hand column were selected. The bill before the State Legislature at this time include.: significant funding for implementation of Regional Parks and Trail Cyst:.is if the option in the right hand column were selected. The Purgatory Creek Study has• been discussed with representatives of the State Pl;:nnint; t,;tom•v who .:de,it;ieter the Federal State Funding option as well as. Mat repelIio,r Council St:tlf who administer the Metro Council Funding option. One of the three projects submitted for 1977 LAhcON Funding was the proposed pu'i'Ie-c or toe ]ocher/Deaver Properties which encentpasses 70 acres in the Eden Farm Sector. You will recall that in the evaluation and rating of all of the grant applications in the metropolitan area for Federal and State ;ending this project placed as high as the hound Lake project, !tot Eden Prairie selected the Round Lake project because of the priority ea the deed-•:.acnt of recreational facilities today. I have no reason to believe tVL the Purgatory Creek Proposal for that property and other lu•cpertirr .clung the crock would net again deserve a very high priority in future rears, and in fact, I would like to believe that it would receive a very high priority. POSSiIMP I.A•'llt Pllllie'.AflJS ldlilhiilIMliNTS I am presaging that the intent of this Item is to lead to a discussion of the petisihility of total land dciie:,lion on the part of•the developer to implement the I'ur;:ator, Ereel. Sit•dy. Currently Ordinance 332 provides for the dedication of reasonahlo anuuutt of land or cash in lieu of land at the City's option. I!,idrr the peel(+)r,al icing considered today, the developer has indicated the witIiugue:.s to stet v .luo nr:nly all of that ;area encompassed by the couservanoy ....ono in the Grauer Study. In audition. he has indicated a willinrncs.s: to sell Ihree parcels along the creel: for lsiblic use nodes along the corridor. The extent of tr.,' nodes is in excess of the conservancy ::one its outlined in lh:• :study and includes areas of the transition 7..one for tecrcalioual endeavors :.itch as: trail use, limited picnicking facilities and contact points with the corridor. • II.)'ii. -6- If we were to assume reasonable in Ordinance 332 to mean 10% of the land the City could cxlwit rt dedication of 40 acres for all public park and recreation pwpoeet. The proposal as currently represented in a compromise plan includes 60_2 acres aad in addition the developer is prepared to pay the CAM PAP!. I'l.f of $175.00 per residential lot which represents a very fair open space commitment to the City. 'I'hc CASH PART: PEP revenue: • estimated at apprtu.im:tticy $27,500 per year over the next 4 years should be used to acquire a neighborhood p:tI: site to service this area. The park site of approxioatler 15-20 acres has been identified as lying west of ilomow:u•tl Hills Road ;aid associated with the large bowl area ajoining the landfill and Plying Cloud Drive Theater area. • As for the east side of the creek, the Parks Recreation and Natural Resources Commission has recc.t audetl a 17 acre site in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Franlo (toad and Co. Road 1 for a neighborhood park site. Again the revenues from the $275.00 per lot CASH PARK PEE would bos utilized to acquire this land. • Because of the difficult development nature of much of the Purgatory Creek Area and the study crtducted calling for conservancy. zone, the recommendation before you at this time is to require both land dedication in the amount of 60.2 acres and the C:,SII PARK PhIE which would provide for respectively a conununity or regional natural resource and trail area and neighborhood parks. POTEN'i'lAi, FHTIIRIj SCHOOL. PLANS The two nciphorhood park sites discussed previously have been planned after the models of the Forest ]tills and Prairie School sites. The general place- ment. of the sites has, been discussed in a preliminary way With School Coatd Staff. The site on the east, at Pran]o and 1, is more suitable for a school site than that on the west along Homeward Hills because of the airport approach zone which is in close proximity. Apparently the State Department of Education has some restrictions on location of schools in "flight patterns." • No specific resolution of site has been reached with the School board. 1MPACI' OS THE REST' (u' Tie I'IICG'.'i'ottl' CREEK AS FAR AS AL1,01STNf CONI'RO"QTSIS ON TI11_Lc)1;1 I: tilil f0!t The study spcals to the very different nature of the different sectors of the creel:. The chart above indicates the extent to which certain sectors of the creek have already 'hart their fate" :u; far as the development process and/or protection th;-uul;h the acquisition of part: areas. While permitting devclopst'nt encroachment into the conservancy zone in the lower se lot• would :.ct a had precedent it would not necessarily wash out the oppcn'ltadty for implementation of the study in the other sectors. The study speal.,. to the creek corridor as a spine for recreation facilities throughout the community in terns of recreational trails both along the creek and with loop routes to other parks '!nd recreation arias in the City. Not providing the public use nodes: in the lower sector would limit rreatley the opportunity for trail;; iu this area. ilowetor, quite obviously the opportunity for trails is wide open at the Staring Lake ;;rotor where the City has already acquired all of the ialtd. 1Ii iti -7- The study speaks to the lower sector as the most unique of all of the sectors along the creek. The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission in discussing the matter has indicated that they feel this is the highest • priority for conservation management because of the very steep banks and the • wild character of the creek. Compromising the studies recommendations further would produce a severe negative impact on the creek corridor and preclude the opportunity for any public utilization of this sector of the creek. The study speaks to rim to rim conservation and management of the lower creek sector and suggested the conservancy zone as a minimum (250 feet on either side of the creek). The transition zone is suggested to be areas • for 1imitiicd residential development and public recreational use; thus the recommendation of the acquisition of the public use nodes. In fact, the • study speaks specifically to treatments for residential development and recreational development in this area as follows: RESIDENTIAL Setback Access Control Fence Planting Earthfoam • 1-4 units/acre 60' yes • yes 4-8 units/acre 100' yes yes yes 8+ units/acre 100'+ yes yes RECREATION Intensive yes yes yes Extensive yes Don Brauer has reviewed the compromise plan and with the exception of a couple very minor modifications feels it is entirely consistent with the recommendations of the study. • ra n CAI Cd .61 07 v°rQoP�,� O4 Q.,(° o • r[��7Cr�OW April 30, 1977 To; Eden Prairie City Council • Re: Bluff Country Financing Dear Members: • In response to questioning at the April 12, 1977 presentation of the above project, I was requested to outline my financial position in the project. The following paragraphs shall attempt to accomplish this. • Creek Knolls is a limited partnership of ten partners. I own 1/10 of the partnership and cm responsible for its management. The Bluffs Company is a Minnesota Corporation in which William M. Baker and myself are shareholders. Mr. Baker has controlling interest and is,locally, a past president of Olympic Hills and a prominent real estate developer and investor. The remaining land is owned by Jim and Bob Brown and their cousins. The Bluffs Company has entered into an agreement with the Browns to purchase their property contained within the approved final plat. The developient loan on the project will be placed with a local bank or savings • and loan. Prairie East and Prairie East Second and Third Additions are being financed by First Feierel Savings and Loan, 77 So. 7th St., Minneapolis, Mn.. In the past we have always posted a letter of credit or bond with the City of Eden Prairie to insure the payment of ell improvements as well as any require— ments of F:A and VA. Certainly this same policy will be continued on this project. Thank you for your }wind consideration of this matter and please feel free to contact myself or Jim 02tenoon if Any additional information is desired. Sincerely, .:;llacc H. Hustad •:.'l ii/e r 12750 PIONEER TRAIL,EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA 55343 (612)941-4383 (Loto iio;:T;.; C'.:'.. , o a'0RAT70:; Pio.;cc:r Trci1 Helen Trairic.•, kinnesota 55343 r i1 25, 1977 To: Eden Prrtrie City C fuscil From: Wallace H. Hustad Hustad Develop..ient CCrporntion Re: Bluffs East/West Dear Council ;:embers: At the April 12, 1977 presentation of the above project and since that tine, I have been es};ed to answer several questions recording the project. The information contained in this letter will attempt to answer those questions. BLUFFS EAST/083T TAX II:PACT Bluffs hest Annual -# of homes Ave. Cost Tows j'?r.en Prairie ;School Dist. Eookups User CIT. Park Fee 100 G $ 60,000 $105,400 $29,664 $03,430 $10,000 $2,900 $27,500 60 0 80,000 158,700 25.392 71,415 6,000 1,740 16,500 • 50 (, 100,00G 171,700 27,672 77,265 5,000 1,450 13,750 • 40 6 120,000 168,000 26,880 75,600 4,000 1,160 11,000 250 $ 02,400 $6 3,800 $109,408 $307,710 $25,000 $7,250 $68,750 Bluffs Feet 81ngle Family Annual • of homes fm's. Cost Tewos 1:Eden Prairie 1School Dist. Hookups User Chc. Park Fee 100 G $ 60,000 $185,400 $29,664 $03,430 $10,000 $2r900 $27,500 80 a 80,000 2.11,600 33,856 95,220 8,000 2,320 22,c00 60 G 100,600 206,160 32,985 92,772 6,000 1,740 16,500 50 G 120,000 210,000 33,600 94,500 5,000 1,450 13,750 290 $ 84,138 $013,160 $130,105 $365,922 $29,000 $8,410 $79,750 flultiiles Annual ,,'UnitsTower 5.23en Prairie ;'School Dist. Hookups User Chr. Park Fee Area F 230 $251,160 $40,1E5 $113,022 $23,000 $6,670 $63,250 Arca 8 20 37,020 5,921 14,832 2,000 580 5,500 l.rca 1 130 135,406 21,665 60,933 13,000 3,770 _35,750 380 $423,648 S67,771 $188,787 $38,000 $11,020 $104,500 Grand Total to 1111.t+'ff, ',2 . /%a st $1,920,608 $307,284 $862,419 $92,000 $26,680 $253,00 o 1/ .u ) • SCHU:L CfliI.X.1,; ;CHo L :;15E • In talking with paul Schc e of the ,den Prairie Sch01.. District, it is my undereta.rr:L that 40 ; of the homes will ;_c:,erate 1.7 children per household that are of school :, In the 250 ho:,cs in Bluffs '.,.rt, this would mean npl,roxirately 170 children. This r:om or will be distributed between elementary, middle and high school. Mr. Schee did indicate that a recent sampling did short this percentage reaching 60;:,. We would like to sug,.est that if a separate school site is found to be necessary in this area, apart from the school Park site being purchased by park fee contributions, that we • immediately rrach on agrce::.ent with School District as to the best location. Because of the numerous land—owners in the area, this is likely to be an agreement between other parties outside of this plat. SCH0OI—PARic ST 1 F3 • Also, I have been asked to give an approximate value of the land that will be purchased es the school park site. It has been by understanding that the appraisal process is to be used to detcrr.nne a fair mr;rket value. I am willing to abide by the results of an appraisal or negotiate an agrgeable amount. It should be noted that only the Franla site is on land that I partially own. The parcel on the vest side of HO;meward Hills Road that have discussed previously as being a possibility is owned by Browning—Ferris, Inc.. Certainly their input is necessary and may differ. Projected Prorarty Fo. of units Park Fees Prairie Bast Area 625 171,875 Bluffs East 670 184,250 Bluffs West 250 68,750 Moore & BFI Property 650 178,750 • Total 2,105 603,625 Note: These figcres do not include any contributions from any of tdjacent properties including the Preserve, 0iynnic Hills, Welter, l7ilhie, etc. The $ ,625 will come from jut hard developed by the Bluffs Company. BRFAKD :+N OF ACT:F ;B Listed below is the broakdoan of land contained within the Bluffs Fast/West plat. Donation 60 Single Family 240 . Multiple 39 P;+rk Acquisition 80 Total i Note: The preliminary plLt in Bluff:: Nest contains a density of 1.3 units/acre. Also, the 80 acres of park acquisition along Purgatory Creek contains 35 rcres owned • by the Browns, 25 acres Dawned by Creek Knolls and 20 acres mined by The Bluffs Copp::: If you have any further questions on any of this information please contact myself or Jim• ()Acuson at 941-4�t-3. Thank you for your hind consideration of this matter. Sincerely, /Le-d ji. Wallace H. hr,;.t.+d April 28, 1977 TO: Dick Putn�..m FROM: Keith Wall r\'e) SUBJECT: Proposed Development - Riverview Road (Hustad) Each year, especially during the summer months, Public Safety problems (unruly groups, vandalism and littering) along Riverview Road have been increasing. It is our feeling that the low population concentration in the area has been, • in some cases, a contributing factor. Additional homes could provide increased natural surveillance which is usually effective in reducing certain types of criminal activity. More highly developed areas provide a better setting for citizen participation in Crime Prevention programs than those where dwellings are isolated. Li )(J1 April 5, 1977 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE . HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 77-46 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE .. PRELIMINARY PLAT OF Bluffs East/West PUD BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of 250 lots on approximately 192 acres of Bluffs Fast/West PU4 dated 4/12/77 , a copy of which is attached hereto and amended as follows: is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and platting ordinances and amendments thereto and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL• John D. Frane, Clerk - 4 - • "Prelim, plans prepared and _submitted to Watershedt,i st. C. Sturt:, C,n;er 1. ,edimunt, , -r,teol plan As required by Riley-Purgatory Creek 1Saterrheee Dist. 2. Skimming t. itrit control for commercial parking lots _- 3. Por:itive nutlet foy c'reinege ponds Required,___ q ti r q. 1,^oid excessive r,iaciing and tree removal _ 5. Arrow. :.Lo:;irr; dr.:i,c,ge Reguired • Accomo3et.e ci:-,:iDego frog, adjacent properties -.13es;tLirPd --- 6. Denote drainage area for individual inlets and projected high water for ponds • Required • 7. Keep dreina e in gutters, not in center of street Rentrire _— 8. Sod draine;;c evalce and steep slopes __ 9. Flood ],];: :: e^c;o:ch:.c•r.t -None proposed---- ----------- • 10. t .tei_-ehed Etstriet approval __Required - — 1i. DNR approval ✓__ _ — — — --- Y-- D. liatu:al Gas E. Telephone __Underground required_ __ ------- n E. Electric (t1:r�crnYr�,1:;d) Re- ---•_— fred--�.—_ 14. Street Lights t On-rite Lighting to be installed ttPon YegPiPSt._frem_developer or property owners 15. Preliminary plz.t to be suhadtted to MttD or Henn. Co. if abutting a tStat( or to.,nty Hey- Hennepin County Highway Dept. (Co. Rd. #1) ----•— -- 16. hut spacial asscrr.ments levied and rending _ None_levied_____ -- ------------ 17. Re-zoning agrcrr �• n „t rnoi:vd Yes --------- i,y„ .,,rt. i„,;.sit c d Yes — ... ]'ills Rl_,'aSict for Attorney'.. rcvi ew _._--- . * 14:commend no final plat approval until grading, drainage and erosion control plan:: are )evicwod and approved by the City ling. staff and the Watershed District. • • • - 3 - • ESA 70 44 Parkway 100 28 divided _ --- - —_�-- Fire Road 12 • Pathways 12 6 — --— --- — -- Street grades-max. 7.57., min. .51 Concrete curt a ,utter required, Deep strength .ar.phlt design _ Required except no curb t_guttcr_required on Riverview Rd. • C. Check City's co iprrhei rive street system. Developer builds 1/2 of parkways at his cost, & R/W dedication D. Street Eames try to conform with existing in the area. Avoid additional names on cul de r..,,cs having eight or less-lots. • Check list of existing street.loumes. Required _City Eng_ staff to review and approve names prior to final platting. • E. Private perking lets--$6-12 cone C&G and full depth asph. design • F. Street tie --Dc.elo_'ts or City installs Developer purchase - City_-install • 12. Forking: (See Ord. Cl41) O.K. through R1-13.5 area • l3. Utility Systems. • A. Sanitary Sewer Trunk system available to most areas - extension hy_ caeveloper required. Lift station required to serve approx. 1. Service D_tail 4" minimum 2. Service to adjoining property Prelim. sewer plan Looks O.K. B. watermein: Extension of l2" City trunk line required along Homeward Hills ---Re ad-to sewer site. 1. Cluck servicm Design (:0 psi at highest fixture) O.K.—__—_--- 2. Hydrant location-Fire Inspector Final design required for review____ 3. Valvinq Final design required for review 4. Compliance with fire cede Fire Inspector to review 5. Service to cl ecc operty, Prelim. water service plan looks O.K. _ • iriuobal of proposal will require special assessments against properties abutting homeward Hills Rd. from Co. Rd. 1 to Bluffs W. i'•lvd. for trunk sewer and water and street improve- ment:,. The n,o:itary sower and wat:esmn.in along Riverview Rd. will be Cite trunk lines. - l.etcrat benefits therefrom would be a:u`c•sed to properties on the south side of Riverview Rd. only upon connection thereto. Also, a bituminous overlay will be needed on Riverview KA. to Co. Rd. 78 at. an es.tioated cost of $2.50 per abutting foot. - • • (/; {,I • r � - 2 - 5. irurr nt 7,unir'i bui_al__- _-.. 6. Propor.o,l 7.oniny _---R1r13..5_re.quest.ed_.at._this__time_for_.1923..acre5___-. consistent with a;,-roved P.U.D. or Comp Plan? ---_.YRS_-_comrzslan__--- List var.i ancr•r rrc;,irc•-i & sc:thacks that apply: ...Stolidard_Pup_.setback-variances Lot size variance, density variance, are requested for areas being rezoned to R1-13.5 7. project Area ± 400 acres total D.ansity 2.02 units/acre (R1-13.5 area) 200-acres 1F1-13 area) -------- ---------- 8. Pul,lic onan s:rur r.r.<'./ur cash dedication Rezoning agreement to specify details of open space acquisition, dedication or scenic easement y Private open space Proposedtotlots(F, and Fl_to be publicly owped_-_privately maintained Trail systems t nicc•r:eikr to he specified in rezoning_agreemont___�,_—_ Barrio of lot sires _8400 Sg: ft:__to3p,poo sq;_ft.__ 9. Preliminary Ruildinn near, Not submitted. Check building-locations in Block I] with respect to interceptor sewer easement. 70. ):ej,rcs ;.,tivc Roil Lorinqu Not submitted. renerally sandy loam 11. St :'yrtem A. Access to Ldjoini;,- pre. irtion fligi field Dr. north of Viewcr.est Dr. to be privately maint.siend until full width_street can be installed _.__. D. Tvo:: R/W Roadway (Pack to R:,c)c of i'L:-b) Private Ori.o,:w.ryr., no 24 piling Post no parking signs Lcculino to Cul do neon 50 28. Required (riot over )000') & �--w--------- -- minor re:;idr nt ial (ul (le sacs • 100 78 (no island) ,:X.'O 98 (with island) Required Tig: ]'.r r.id cnt Iel (oil lectern) I Cut do sere over )000' 60 32 —- ---------- access to ('reekwatc;, Dr. is poor. Recommend no final platting of lots along this road until proper access to the east is available. 111)!3 • /a/77 CITY Or EDEN PRAIRIE CnSCE LIST FOP. REVIEWIMG rhoro:.:ED LAND WA'LLOPMENTS DTP.: DEvEL011-1ENT: Bluffs East/West L.D. 14077-PUD-03.P-09,2,-10 LOCATION: East of Homeward Hills Road, north of Riverview Road, West of Franlo Road and south ofPrTrai REFERFUCU P.U.D. or PRSVIOUS ZONING ACIISLIT: RES. #. DEVELOPER: Hustad Development Corp. • ENGINEKR/PLAER: McCombs KnutsonLpobert Engstrom • DOCUMEI1TS SUBMITTED COP FEVIEW: Bluff Country brochure dated 1/2207 • Preliminary_ site evaluation ty Jiwani, Kennedy Anderson Preliminary grading and utility plans dated 4/12/77. Developer is requesting PUP concept approval for approximately00 acres and Preliminary Plat approval and rezonimg for approximately 192 acres in accordance with Preliminary Plat dated rev. 4/1207 • 1. Land 1,cyclop,,cnt in': ichtion filed and filing fee t deposit paid yes Coy of appliction forrdca to Watershed District Ye5 2. P!ocessing ScheSu)e: a. Planning & Zoning Commission Preliminary 2/14/77 • b. Park & Recreation Commission 3/7/77 c. Hman Rights Commission d. Planning Commission Public Erg. City Council consideration 4/12/77 5/3/77 f. waten,h(0., District 3. Type of Dovelopmcnt residential and commercial 4. Environmental asnes::ment or impact statement required per Environmental Imp,ct Policy Act ot yes Llf • TITUS 1 rC. ApR 2„ 1977 • n art"";ty .44 Wrist 66th&Yutk Edina Mn/55435 April 20, 1977 Ph 612/925 4 494 Mr. Roger Ulstad City Manager City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343 Re: Resolution # 964 Dear Mr. Ulstad: I would like to request an extension of the Planned Unit Development Resolution approved for Titus, Inc., Project # ID-74-TID-10, that expired on April 1, 1977, for one (1) more year. Sincerely, TITUS, INC. William F. Henning President WFH: ld GENERAL CONTRACTORS I LAND DEVELOPERS I PROPERTY MANAGEMENT I LEASING&INVESTMENT ;Ihlt> • /ram THE W. GORDON SMITH CO. 7920 WALLACE ROAD I '' EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55343 a_�-- 941-3717 FUEL OIL SPECIALISTS L ',I,, Over 40 Yems In Eden Prairie it'.'? i r. HIGH COMFORT. . . LOW COST HEATING • April 25, 1977 Mr. Roger Ulstad City Manager 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55343 Dear Mr. Ulstad, Very soon, we will be going before the Planning Commission and P.U.D. for a Country Kitchen Restaurant and Mobil Station. We are requesting a May 9, 1977 Planning and Zoning meeting as per a conversation with Dick Putnam. We feel our changes will be satis— factory to meet City Planning and Zoning requirements, and we are requesting a public hearing at the May 17, 1977 Council meeting. Thank you for your consideration, and should you perceive any problems please contact me at your convenience. Sincer • J se L. hsartz / 1 \ J HEATING OIL FUEL OILS — GASOLINES — OILS — GREASES — BATTERIES — TIRES WHP/azd 4/20/77 ORDINANCE NO. 77-9 • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE • HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 135. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE DOES ORDAIN • AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Appendix A of Ordinance No. 135 is amended by adding: All of Lots 1, 2, 3, except that part of the North 390.98 feet of Lot Three (3) , (as measured at right angles to that part of the North line of said Lot Three (3) having a record dimension of 398.11 feet) which lies Westerly of a line 60.00 feet Northwesterly of, mealtared aL right angles to and parallel with the Southwesterly extension of that part of the Northwesterly line of Lot Two (2) , having a record dimension of 426.00 feet, and that part of Lot 4, lying Easterly of the following described line: Commencing at a point at the Southeasterly corner of Lincolnwood Addition, thence Westerly along the South line of said addition 258.5 feet to the'point of commencement of the line to be described, thence South zero degrees, 9 minutes, 37" , East to the Northwesterly right of way line of the Chicago and Northwestern Railway and there terminating, all in Block 1, Eden Prairie Industrial Park. which property shall be and hereby is removed from I-2 Park and shall be included hereafter in the I-General zone. Section 2. The above described property shall be subject to the terms and conditions of those certain Rezoning Agreements: dated , 1977 entered into between Kibbey Engineering and Construction Co. and the City of Eden Prairie; dated _ , 1977 entered into between Champion Products, Inc. and the City of Eden Prairie; dated April 22 , 1977 entered into between Andrew M. Justus and the City of Eden Prairie; dated , 1977 entered into between Roll Tank Company and the City of Eden Prairie; dated , 1977 entered into between Water Products Company and the City of Eden Prairie; and dated , 1977 entered into between John M. Eide and Marion Eide, husband and wife, and the City of Eden Prairie, which agreements are hereby made a part hereof and shall further be subject to all of the ordinances, rules and regulations of • the City relating to such I-General zone. Section 3. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the-City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the day of , 1977, and finally read and adopted, and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of ,1977. Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Published in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1977. r/,rl _ ? _ • whp/.ih 3/28/77 RE-ZONING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this n day of AO , 1977 by and between WATER PRODUCTS COMPANY, a Minnesota corporation, herein- after referred to as "Owner," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City," WITNESSETH: • WHEREAS, Owner has requested the City to change the designation of a portion of the area designated as PUD 77-19 from I-2 Park to I-General for development of land more fully described as shown on Exhibit A which is attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, it is believed that the rezoning of said area to Industrial (I-General) would be in the public's interest, welfare and convenience of the people of the City of Eden Prairie and in accordance with the development of the Planned Unit Developmental Plan for the area; and WHEREAS, Owner agrees to develop the aforementioned property in con- sideration of the City's changing of the zoning; and Owner further agrees that as a part of said consideration, it will lay out, develop and maintain said project as hereinafter set forth; NOW, THEREFORE, this agreement witnesseth that for and in consideration of the Mayor and the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie adopting an Ordinance changing the designation PUD 77-19 from I-2 Park to I-General the Owner agrees to construct future buildings on said property in accordance with the planning, architectural, engineering and landscaping requirements of all City Ordinances, subject to the following conditions: qy►`•) 1. That It is the sense of the parties that the area delineated in red on Figure I which is made a part hereof and of which owners property is a part shall be "screened" from the single family resident'al area lying to the southeast. The parties agree that such screening can most effectively be done on the back of the single family lots. To that end the owners agree to pay to the City the sum of $ for distribution by the City to compensate the individual property owners for screening done by them and approved by the City. The City shall be the sole judge as to the appropriateness and adequacy of any such screening. Payment of the above sum by the owner to the City shall be construed as fulfilling all requirements under City ordinances for screening for the owners property abutting the railroad tracks. This shall have no effect on other portions of owners property. FURTHER CITY AND PROPERTY OWNERS AGREE: 1. That the property owners shall comply with all applicable rules, regulations, ordinances and laws of the City of Eden Prairie. 2. That the provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against owner, its successors and assigns, and upon all subsequent owners, their respective heirs, successors and assigns of the property herein described. 3. That an executed copy of this Agreement shall be recorded with the Register of Deeds, Hennepin County, Minnesota. IN WITNESSWh EREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused their presents to be executed the day and year aforesaid. WATER PRODUCTS COMPANY, a Minnesota corporation 44)) BY: -i�',,.T, �t'.,nT ._ c. / I (/ CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation BY: Wolfgang Fenzel, Mayor John U. Franc, City Clerk -2- • STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this F4- day.of , 1977 by i, ,, .i, . 1 and if,, :j-i �i � • of Water Products Company, a Minnesota corporation, on j behalf of the corporation. ; /'I. ( Iry ta A+6►r[Ls arrutrt • STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1977 by Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor and by John D. Franc, City Clerk of the city of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public —3- 0,- whp/jh 3/25/77 • RE-ZONING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 2,2, day of /k a , 1977 by and between ANDREW N. JUSTUS, hereinafter referred to as "Owner," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City," WITNESSETLI: WHEREAS, Owner has requested the City to change the designation of a portion of the area designated as PUD 77-19 from 1-2 Park to I-General for and delineated in red development of land more fully described/as showa on Exhibit A which is attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, it is believed that the rezoning of said area to Industrial (I-General) would be in the public's interest, welfare and convenience of the people of the City of Eden Prairie and in accordance with the development of the Planned Unit Developmental Plan for the area; and WHEREAS, Owner agrees to develop the aforementioned property in con- sideration of the City's changing of the zoning; and Owner further agrees that as a part of said consideration, it will lay out, develop and maintain said project as hereinafter set forth; NOW, THEREFORE, this agreement witnesseth that for and in consideration of the Mayor and the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie adopting an Ordinance changing the designation PUD 77-19 from I-2 Park to I-General the Owner agrees to construct future buildings on said property in accordance with the planning, architectural, engineering and landscaping requirements of all City Ordinances, subject to the following conditions: • That it is the sense of the parties that the area delineated in blue on Exhibit A is to be kept and maintained as a buffer between the owner's property and the residential property to the Northwest. This buffer is generally 50 feet in width. It is to be understood and agreed that whatever buffering and'screening is to be done shall be made a condition to any future develop- ment on the subject property and that the buffer strip as so delineated is to be left in its present condition without the express prior approval of the City. FURTHER CITY AND PROPERTY OWNERS AGREE: 1. That the property owners shall comply with all applicable rules, regulations, ordinances and laws of the City of Eden Prairie. 2. That the provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against owner, its successors and assigns, and upon all subsequent owners, their respective heirs, successors and assigns of the property herein described. 3. That an executed copy of this Agreement shall be recorded with the Register of Deeds, Hennepin County, Minnesota. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused their presents to be executed the day and year aforesaid. Andrew N. Justus! 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation BY: Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor John D. Franc, City Clerk -2- ui;a� • • STATE OF MINNESOTA) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) h foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2 1'day of , 1977 by Andrew N. Justus. Notar Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SS. ;r COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) ( , • The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1977 by Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor and by John D. Frane, City Clerk of the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation, on behalf of • the corporation. Notary Public -3- whp/ih 4/26/77 • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEI'IN COUNTY, MINNESOTA • ORDINANCE NO. 77-21 AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 135. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Appendix A of Ordinance No. 135 is amended by adding to Section 13, Township 116, Range 22 as follows: See attached description, which property shall be and hereby is removed from Rural zone and shall be included hereafter in the I-5 Park zone. Section 2. The above described property shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain rezoning agreement dated , 1977, entered into between The Pillsbury Company and the City of Eden Prairie, which agreement is hereby made a part hereof and shall further be subject to all of the ordinances, rules and regulations of the City relating to such I-5 Park zones. • Section 3. This ordinance becomes effective from aid after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this _ day of , 1977 and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of , 1977. ATTEST: Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor John D. Franc, City Clerk Published in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1977. • • • • That part of Government Lot 2, Government Lot 3, and the Southwest • Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, all of Section 13, Township 116, • Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows; • Commencing at the west quarter corner of said Section 13; thence South 01 degrees 31 minutes 26 seconds West, assumed basis for bearings 1312.87 feet, along the west line of said Section 13; thence South 86 degrees 40 minutes 55 seconds East, 678.62 feet; • to the point of beginning of the land herein described; • thence North 41 degrees 31 minutes 26 seconds East, 955.9C feet; • thence South 48 degrees 28 minutes 34 seconds East, 770.00 feet; • thence South 26 degrees 13 minutes 34 seconds East, 450.00 feet; thence South 41 degrees 46 minutes 26 seconds West, 578.42 feet; A`. thence North 68 degrees 48 minutes 41 seconds West, 883.84 feet; thence North 66 degrees 16 minutes 34 seconds West, 373.'03 feet; thence North 41 degrees 31 minutes 26 seconds Last, 214.04 feet, • • to the point of beginning. Containing 1108874 square feet, 25.4562 acres, or 103017.8 square meters. • If slit. whp/jh 4/25/77 REZONI.NG AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into in triplicate this T day of , 1977 by and between THE PILLSBURY COMPANY, a corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Owner", and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City," WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Owner has requested the City to change the zoning from Rural to I-5 Park for development of land more fully described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, it is believed that a rezoning of said area to I-5 Park would be in the public's interest, welfare and convenience of the people of the City of Eden Prairie; and WHEREAS, Owner agrees to develop the aforementioned property in con- sideration of the City's changing of the zoning; and Owner further agrees that as a part of said consideration, it will lay out, develop and maintain said project as hereinafter set forth, NOW, THEREFORE, THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH, that for and in consideration of the Mayor and the City Council of the City adopting an Ordinance changing the zoning from Rural to I-5 Park as set forth in Exhibit A, the owner agrees to develop said property in accordance with the planning, architectural, engineering and landscaping requirements of all City Ordinances and will submit development stage rezoning plans to the City, subject to the following conditions: { ti 1. That concept approval is given to the phase out line specification prepared by the owner dated September 16, 1976 and the master plan report dated September 16, 1976. 2. That Phase 1 and Phase 2 concept approval is granted pur- .. suant to said documents for the construction of a research and development facility. 3. That the certificate of survey site plan, utilities plan, erosion control plan, preliminary grading and landscaping and elevation plan dated March 22, 1977 are approved subject to final review and approval of the plans for landscaping, parking, lighting, and signage by the City Council or its designee. 4. That the owner will convey to the City a conservation easement for the areas delineated on Exhibit B, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. 5. That all sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer facilities, concrete curb and gutter and bituminous surfacing whether to be public or private, shall be designed • to City standards by a Registered Professional Civil Engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. The developer, through his engineer, shall provide for competent daily inspection of all street and utility construction, both public and private. As built drawings with service and valve ties on reproducable mylar and certification of completion and compliance with specifications shall also be delivered to the City Engineer. The developer also agrees to pay all fees for City Engineering and administrative services consistent with current City requirements. FURTHER CITY AND PROPERTY OWNERS AGREE: 1. That the property owners shall comply with all applicable rules, regulations, ordinances and laws of the City of Eden Prairie. 2. That the provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against Owner, its successors and assigns, and all subsequent owners, their respective heirs, successors and assigns, of the property herein described. 3. That an executed copy of this Agreement shall be recorded with the Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles for the County of Hennepin, and State of Minnesota. -2- 4. That if Owner fails to procure a.building permit in accordance with this Agreement within 24 months from the date hereof, Owner will not oppose a rezoning of said property. • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused their presents to be executed the day and year aforesaid. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation BY: Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor • John D. Frane, City Clerk THE PILLSBURY COMPANY, a corporation BY: STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1977 by Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor and John D. Frane, City Clerk of the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation. STATE OF MINNESOTA) Notary Public ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foreging instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1977 by and of The Pillsbury Company, a corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public -3- 11,31°1 • • • • • That part of Government Lot 2, Government Lot 3, and the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, all of Section 13, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: • Commencing at the west quarter corner of said Section 13; thence South 01 degrees 31 minutes 26 seconds West, assumed basis for • bearings 1312.87 feet, along the west line of said Section 13; thence South 86 degrees 40 minutes 55 seconds East, 678.62 feet; • to the point of begind'ing of the land herein described; thence North 41 degrees 31 minutes 26 seconds East, 955.93 feet; • • thence South 48 degrees 28 minutes 34 seconds East, 770.00 feet; thence South 26 degrees 13 minutes 34 seconds East, 450.00 feet; thence South 41 degrees 46 minutes 26 seconds West, 578.42 feet; thence North 68 degrees 48 minutes 41 seconds West, 883.84 feet; thence North 66 degrees 16 minutes 34 seconds West, 373.03 feet; • thence North 41 degrees 31 minutes 26 seconds East, 214.04 feet, • • to the point of beginning. Containing 1108874 square feet, 25.4562 acres, or 103017.8 square meters. • • • • • • • • • EXHIBIT A y;i O whp/jh 4/22/77 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 77-18 AN ORDINANCE RELATItii+G TO ZONIN; AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 135. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Appendix A of Ordinance No. 135 is amended by adding to Section 10, Township 116, Range 22 as follows: A replat of Outlots 0, P, Q, Edenvale 3rd Addition, which property shall be and hereby is removed from Rural zone and shall be included hereafter in the R1-13.5 zone. Section 2. The above described property shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Rezoning Agreement dated day of 1977 entered into between EDENVALE, INC. and the CITY OF ELEN PRAIRIE, which agreement is hereby made a part hereof and shall further be subject to all of the ordinances, rules and regulations of the City relating to such R1-13.5 zones. Section 3. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this day of , 1977 and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of , 1977. ATTEST: Mayor John D. Franc, City Clerk Published i.n the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1977. II, 3' whp/ih 4/22/77 REZONING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into in triplicate this A","'./day of 62„04,:l'•, 1977, by and between EDENVALE, INC., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Owner", and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, under the laws of the State of Minnesota, herein- after referred to as "City"; and WHEREAS, the Owner has requested the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie to change the zoning of atract of land from Rural to R1-13.5 for an area consisting of approximately fifty-eight (58) lots and which is legally described as follows: A replat of Outlots 0, P, Q, Edenvale 3rd Addition; and WHEREAS, it is believed that the rezoning of said area to R1-13.5 will be in the public's interest, welfare and convenience of the people of the City of Eden Prairie; and WHEREAS, the Owner agrees to develop the aforementioned property as a single family residential area in consideration of the City's changing of the zoning to R1-13.5 and the Owner further agrees as a part of said consideration to lay out, plat, develop and maintain the areas so rezoned generally in accordance with the preliminary plat which is shown as Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, this Agreement witnesseth that for and in consideration of the City Council of the City adopting an ordinance changing the zoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and of the mutual benefits to each of the parties hereto, the parties, their respective successors and assigns do hereby covenant and agree as follows: 1. That development should be generally in conformance to the preliminary plat which is shown as Exhibit A and shall con • - sist of approximately single family residential lots. 2. That the planning staff report dated February 25, 1977 is incorporated herein and made a part hereof with particular reference to item A of page 1 of said report. 3. That bituminous right-of-way trails be provided as shown on staff report. That the engineer's staff report and the requirements therein are incorporated herein as if fully set forth. 4. The owner agrees to place appropriate signs on property not being developed and adjoining to the subject property indicating their potential use as future multiple dwellings. 5. That all sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer facilities, concrete curb and gutter and bituminous surfacing whether to be public or private, shall be designed to City standards by a Registered Professional Civil Engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. The developer, through his engineer, shall provide for competent daily inspection of all street and utility construction, both public and private. As built drawings with service and valve ties on reproducable mylar and certification of completion and compliance with specifications shall also be delivered to the City Engineer. The developer also agrees to pay all fees for City Engineering and administrative services consistent with current City requirements. City and property owners agree: 1. That the property owners shall comply with all applicable rules, regulations, ordinances and laws of the City of Eden Prairie. 2. That the provisions of this agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against Owner, its successors and assigns, and all subsejuent owners, their respective heirs, successors and assigns, of the property herein described. 3. That an executed copy of this Agreement shall be recorded with the Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles for the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota. 4. That if Owner fails to procure a building permit in accordance with this Agreement within 24 months from the date hereof, Owner will not oppose a rezoning of said property. -2- 110) • . ,j IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused their presents to be executed the day and year aforesaid. . CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation of the State of Minnesota BY: Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor John D. Franc, City Clerk EDENVALE, INC. �/ Z j BY: / //' � /�GT/W 4. STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1977 by Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor, and John D. Frane, City Clerk of the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this .C+`'i day of [v,._..•. , 1977 b)• .. ..�- _ .'.'. -and of Fdenvale, Inc., a Minnesota corporation on behalf of the corporation. i, / Notary Public LAuAW ut&AAAA AJRea LALAWAW6 Mx e,_ JOANNE JOHNSON �3.. 9 AOTW Y I'UULIC-4UNNLSOTA iItNNEPIN COUNTY 4' '�`' My Commissi, rrnires Ray N,1979 CC wrovirovervvyvvvvrvirrovrrovvvvvvvyn li.'� i • • y: CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CHECK LIST FOR REVIEWING PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT'S • • DATE: 1/13/77 • • DEVELOPMENT: WOODLAND ADDITION L.D. NO. 77-P-Z-05 LOCATION: East of Woodland Drive & West of C & NW Railroad REFERENCE P.U.D. OR PREVIOUS ZONING AGRE MEf:T: Edenvale PUD RES. ff. DEVELOPER: EDENVALE, INC. ENGINEER/PLANNER: DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW: Preliminary Plat, Preliminary grading and utility plans dated 1/13/77 PROPOSAL: The Developer is requesting Prelimianry Plat and rezoning approval of the development. r. 1. Land Development application filed and filing fee t: deposit paid yes Copy of application forwarded to Wr.terohed Dirtrict Yes 2. Processing Schcdnie: . a. Planning a Zoning Commission ^,:oliminary 1/14/77 b. Park F. Rocrcation Commission C. Human Rights Commission • d. Planning Commission Public Nrg. e. City Council consideration f. Watershed District 3. Typo of Development Residential_single family detached .__. 4. Environmental .u:ccr-m.,nt ,.r impact statement required in)_ Environmental Impact Policy Act o1. IJ73: No • In`)1 • - 2 - • 5. • Present Zoning Rural 6. Proposed Zoning RN 6.5 (Planning staff recommends R1-13.5) Consistent with approved P.U.D. or Comp Plan? Yes (PUD) Proposed multiple site List variances required & setbacks that apply: Usual PUD setback variances. • • ' Also, a variance to exceed 2 lots/acre density if zoning is to R1-13.5 • 7. Project Area - 31.5 acres Density 2.4 units per acre 8. Public open space and/or cash dedication Covered through Edenvale PUD Private open space Covered through Edenvale PUD Trail systems & sidewalks Extension of existing system required _ Refer toplanning staff Report of 2/10/77 • X Range of lot sizes 29,250 S.F. to 10,000 (10,800 average) 9. Preliminary Building Plans Not submitted 10. Representative Soil Borings Not submitted 11. Street System A. Access to adjoining properties * • B. Type R/W Roadway (Pack to Pack of Curb) Private driveways, no 24 parking Post no parking signs Leading to Cul de sacs 50 •28. Required (not over 1000') t minor residential Cul de sac; 100 78 (no island) 120 98 (with island) Thru Residential (collectors) • & Cul de sac, over 1000' G0 32 Woodland Drive. *Proposed plat to he revised such that Orchard Lane will provide future • access to the proposed multiple site to the east. Orchard Line can be c cul-de-cased north of Birch Lane as part of Woodland, Phase I. • • ESA 70 44 . Parkway 100 28 divided • Fire Road 12 . Pathways 12 6' • Street grades-max. 7.51, min. .5% Concrete curb c Batter required, ' • peep strength asphalt design Required C. Check City's comprehensive street system. Developer builds 1/2 of parkways at his cost, & R/W dedication N.A. D. Street Names - try to conform with existing in the area. Avoid additional names on cul de sacs having eight or less lots. Check list of exisi:ing street names. Change White Oak to Ironwood, change Birch Lane to Orchard Lane. E. Private parking lots--H6-12 conc CEG and full depth asph. design ' N.A. • P. Street Signs-Dcvelopor or City installs City installs, developer purchase 12. Parking: (See Ord. t141) Conformance to Ord. 0141 required 13. Utility Systems: A. Sanit.^ry Sewer Available from Woodhill Trail & Woodland Drive for 1st Phase. Extension on Edenvale Boulevard required to serve 2nd Phase 1. Service Detail 4" minimum 2. Service to adjoining property Review pending further design_,_ B. Watennain: Available at Woodhill Trail & Woodland Drive, extension on ionvalc Boulevard required to complete loop. • 1. Check Service Dosiyn (20 psi at highest fixture) O.K. 2. Hydrant location-Firs Inspector to review 3. Valving Review pending further design • 4. Compliance with fire code fire inspector to review 5. Service to odj.aceet property Elimination of dead end lines within the development shall be reviewed. • C. Storm Sewer 6 Grading .. _ 1. Sediment control plan . Required for Nator.hod nict Approval 2. Skimming & grit control for commercial parking lots N.A. 3. Positive outlet for drainage ponds Required . 4. Avoid excessive grading add tree removal Required (see Planning staff report) 5. Arrows showing drainage Required Accomodate drainage from adjacent properties Required, Proposes storm sewer east of Orchard Lane shall be extended down the slope. �^ 6. Denote drainage area for individual inlets and projected high water for ponds Required 7. Keep drainage in gutters, not in center of street ge uj ed_ 8. Sod drainage swales and steep slopes Required — 9. Flood plain encroectm nt None • 10. Watershed District approval Required • 11. DNR approval N.A. D. Natural Gas & Telephone Underground Required_ E. Electric (underground) Required • 14. Street Lights & On-Site Lighting Developer to Petition • • 15. Preliminary plat to he suLnitted to NHD or Henn. Co. if abutting a State or County Hwy. N.A. • 16. List special assessments levied and pending Levied: 115658 Trunk sewer-Lwater $46,007.00_#55(4, Lateral sew/water, $467.00; #6732, Edenvale Streets $17,216.21. 17. Re-zoning agreement required Required Developer's Agreement recn,ircd Required • Title Abstract for Attorney's review .None required t\';!is 'Ii7� whp/jh 4/14/77 C1TY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 357 AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 135. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1, Subdivision 1. Appendix A of Ordinance No. 135 is amended • by adding to Section 10, Township 116, Range 22 as follows: See Exhibit A attached hereto andsede a part hereof, which property shall be and hereby is removed from Rural zone and shall be included hereafter in the Regional Office Zone. Subdivision 2. Appendix A of Ordinance No. 135 is amended by adding to Section 10, Township 116, Range 22 as follows: See Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof, which property shall he and hereby is removed from Rural Zone and shall be included hereafter in the C. Regional Service Zone. Section 2. The above described property shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Rezoning Agreement dated , 1977, entered into between The Preserve and the City of Eden Prairie, which agreement is hereby made a part hereof and shall further be subject to all of the ordinances, rules and regulations of the City relating to such C. Regional Service and Regional Office Zones. Section 3. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this day of , 1977 and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on yti `% the clay of , 1977. Wolfgang Fenzel, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Published in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1977. -2- ( ;/,/ win,/ ' 4/8/77 REZONING AGREEMENT _ THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into in triplicate this day of , 1977, by and between THE PRESERVE, a co-partnership consisting of Carter & Gertz, Incorporated, a Minnesota corporation and The Minnesota Gas Company, a Delaware corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Owner", and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a Municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City", WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Owner has requested the City to change zoning from Rural to C. Regional Service and Regional Office for development of land more fully described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof, and WHEREAS, it is believed that a rezoning of said area to C. Regional, Service and Regional Office would be in the public's interest, welfare and convenience of the people of the City of Eden Prairie, and WHEREAS, Owner agrees to develop the aforementioned property in considera- tion of the City's changing of the zoning; and Owner further agrees that as a part of raid consideration, it will lay out, develop and maintain said project as hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH, that for and in consideration of the Mayor and the City Council of the City adopting an Ordinance changing the .Zoning from Rural to C. Regional Service and Regional Office, the Owner agrees to develop said property in accordance with the planning, architectural, engineering and landscaping requirements of all City Ordinances and will submit development-stage rezoning plan; to the City, subject to the following conditions: • 1. That the area involved herein • • shall be developed in accordance with The Preserve Area G•Penign Framework Manual dated April 5, 1977, and consisting of 13 pages and Exhibits A - F inclusive, which is incorporated herein and made a part hereof. See Exhibit B. 2. That the lots along Til 169 (lots F & G) are specially designed and vary from many provisions of the Zoning Ordinance (#135). The DFM restricts signing to retaining wall or wall mounted signs toward TU 169. See Exhibit C. 3. That lots G, F, E, B, C & D be rezoned to C-Regional • Service consistent with the MCA Plan and provisions of the DIM. See Exhibit C. 4. That lot A be zoned Regional Office-OFC with an open space/conservation easement to the City for the slope area. See Exhibit C. 5. That all typical legal documents for easements, etc., be reviewed by the City Attorney before building con- struction begins. 6. That the sketches of typical site plans Figures A-F should be modified to conform with the changes suggested by the City. 7. That the City Engineer's requirements be complied with and that all sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer facilities, concrete curb and gutter and bituminous surfacing whether to be public or private, shall be designed to City Standards by a Registered Professional Civil Engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for approval. The developer, through his engineer, shall provide for com- petent daily inspection of all street and utility con- struction, both public and private. As-built drawings with service and valve ties on reproducible mylar and certificates of completion and compliance with specifications shall also be delivered to the City Engineer. The developer also agrees to pay all fees for City Engineering and administrative services consistent with current City requirements. FURTHER CITY AND PROPERTY OWNERS AGREE: 1. That the property owners shall comply with all applicable rules, regulations, ordinances and laws of the City of Eden Prairie. • 2. That the provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against Owner, its successors and assigns, and upon all subsequent owners, their respective heirs, successors and assigns of the property herein describek. 3. That an executed copy of this Agreement shall be recorded with the Register of Deeds, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 4. That if Owner fails to proceed in accordance with this Agreement within twenty-four (24) months from the date hereof, Owner, for itself, its successors and assigns agrees that it will not oppose the rezoning of said property back to its Rural zoning. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused these presents to be executed the day and year aforesaid. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a Municipal corporation of the State of Minnesota ( S E A L ) By Wolfgang Penzel, Its Mayor Roger Ulstad, Its Manager THE PRESERVE, a copartnership consisting of Carter & Gertz, Incorporated, a Mihnesota corporation, and The Minnesota Gas Company, a Delaware corporation. • CARTER & GERTZ, INCORPORATED, a Minnesot cor ora 'on ,( BY: Its ' i2 �rn4 `a2 ✓, BY:' � / Ij�>+�i) 3 • THE MINNESOTA GAS COMPANY, ate' ^� Delaware c pora--t�io�^n , BY: ..-(L .,i-r—'�7`�J_.•- "_"" It<„,•fi..c:s .:lam 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SS. COUNTY OF IIENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of , 1977 by Wolfgang Penzel, the Mayor and by Roger Ulstad, the City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) SE. COUNTY OP IIENNEPIN) The foregoingjnstrurl'e t •as acknowledged.p ore.mc this a A day of h./ , 1,n7 by Sr.%./, ,,i .- -,V the V. ;I..,.r.�'" and by htif. h_ the �tCarter &�. of Gertz, 11-1 corporated, a 9innesota corporati , on behalf 7joff the corporation. J- If/J I taa-Y.-Puhaic ,. E:'NA H".LFiC.REN /`1 MNUTARY IL'ZI.IC-W.,N:r-SUTA STATE OF MINNESOTA) t„•':�'�'1 FtLN NC^IN COUNTY SS. 1.1V C(' r,'APR.7,tr3 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) "Yw` The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1977 by KENNETH W.P[RSON the Di(t Q(.e ,'(,(li and by N.C.JEPSFN tht cc'y'e4....iy of The Minnesota Gas Company, a Ite'laware corporation, on behalf f f the corporation. 41(11' /.2), (1 Me,(kw e,✓Notary Public %AAAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAApgAAAAAAAAAAAAY' +31 7,14 MAR!LEE J. NE'GER t it 4. NN IILFYIN COON Ir (I_ '4%,l NiY CunuiS:a,n t.pl:r::Ann.zm,1932g krrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrmg 4')l!G 0 • �rD1D 7 ` • PLANNING/lRANSPORJATIQFYENGINEERING/AfICHITECTUfE April 8, 1977 • DESCRIPTION FOR THE PRESERVE WEST PART OF G PLAT FOR REZONING That part of the North Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of said North Half; thence on a bearing of West, assumed basis for bearings, 750.1Z feet, to the point of beginning of the land herein described, which is a pgi,it on a 440.63 foot radius curve, the center of circle of said curve bears South 60 degrees 44 minutes 20 seconds East from said point; thence southerly 217.29 feet along said curve, through a central angle of 28 degrees 15 minutes 16 seconds; thence South 01 degrees 00 minutes 24 seconds West, 33.00 feet; thence southerly, south- westerly, and westerly 239.27 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the northwest, radius 156.65 feet, central angle 87 degrees 30 minutes 57 seconds; thence South 88 degrees 31 minutes 21 seconds West, 137.03 feet; thence westerly and southwesterly 145.40 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the south, radius 240.30 feet, central angle 34 degrees 40 minutes 00 seconds; thence South 53 degrees 51 minutes 21 seconds West, 125.00 feet to a point on a 1041 .71 foot radius curve, the center of circle of said curve bears North 53 degrees 51 minutes 21 seconds East from said point; thence northwesterly 560.49 feet along said curve, through a central angle of 30 degrees 49 minutes 40 seconds, to the north line of said North Half; thence on a bearing of East, 778.80 feet along said north line to the point of beginning. Containing 6.48 acres. To be rezoned Regional Office, Exhibit A RATHI'n,nINGROFa'..WOI S1 F.LI/.INC 7101 vORK AVFMIC SO1111/ EDINA,MINNESOTA 55435 PHONE 612/834.2300 ritTh II PLANNING/IRANSPORTAT NGiNEERING/ARCHITECTURE April 8, 1977 DESCRIPTION FOR THE PRESERVE EAST PART OF G PLAT FOR REZONING That part of the North Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, .Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of said North Half; thence on a bearing of West, assumed basis for bearings, 750.12 feet, to a point on a 440.63 foot radius curve, the center of circle of said curve bears South 60 degrees 44 minutes 20 seconds East from said point; thence southerly 217.29 feet along said curve, through a central angle of 28 degrees 15 minutes 16 seconds; thence South 01 degrees 00 minutes 24 seconds West, 33.00 feet; thence southerly, southwesterly, and westerly 239.27 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the northwest, radius 156.65 feet, central angle 87,degrees 30 minutes 57 seconds; thence South 88 degrees 31 minutes 21 seconds West, 137.03 feet; thence westerly and southwesterly 145.40 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the south, radius 240.30 feet, central angle 34 degrees 40 minutes 00 seconds; thence South 53 degrees 51 minutes 21 seconds West, 125.00 feet to a point on a 1041.71 foot radius curve, the center of circle of said curve bears North 53 degrees 51 minutes 21 seconds East from said point; thence southeasterly 315.82 feet along ,said curve, through a central angle of 17 degrees 22 minutes 14 seconds; thence South 53 degrees 30 minutes 53 seconds East, 494.18 feet, to the northwesterly right-of-way of United States Highway No. 169, as per Minnesota Highway Department location of April , 1973; thence northeasterly 1175.13 feet along said right-of-way line to the east line of said North Half; thence northerly 99.78 feet along said east line to the point of beginning. Containing 15.46 acres. To be rezoned C-Regional Service. Exhibit A nn1 urn.floNGnosr.WOI;1'1 if)ING 7101 YORK AVENUE.SOUTH EDINA.MINNF..SOTA 55435 PHONE 612/831-2300 THE PRESERVE AREA G DESIGN FRAMEWORK MANUAL-April 5, 1977 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTENT II. GOALS/OBJECTIVES III. METHOD IV. SCOPE V. FRAMEWORK A. Planning Criteria • B. Plan Diagrams VI. MATERIAL STANDARDS VII. DESIGN REVIEW. • (i) 115gUG EXHIBIT B • • Area G Design Framework Manual April 5, 1977 • I. INTENT The primary purpose of this "Design Framework Manual" is to provide a basis to coordinate the efforts of various individual owners/developers toward the creation of a totally integrated physical entity in Area G of The Preserve Commercial Development Arca. • It must he emphasized at the outset that to strengthen the image of Area G Development as a whole can oly be assured by organization of it's compon- ent parts. In other works, rather than competing with one another, each building or increment of Area G should complement its neighbors and reinforce the overall effect. To achieve such en entity obviously requires both an understanding of the goals and a spirit of cooperation among each of the participants . Since there may be many separate participants, each with their own design consul- tants, it is the intention of this "Design Framework Manual" to establish . a common guideline for all projects and to provide the method for ongoing coordination and control necessary to assure the environmental as well as the business success of Area G Development. II. GOALS/OBJECTIVES In contrast to typical piecemeal land development Area "G" in The Preserve Commercial Center presents an excellent opportunity to realize a commercial project mutually beneficial to the community and to the developers by creating a strong, recognizable identity or "sense of place" and encouraging high quality design and construction. The physical environment of the proposed Preserve Commercial Center is • conceived to be an inviting, informal and enjoyable business center. It is not intended to compete with Eden Prairie Center, but to supplement its commercial neighbor. Because of the individual land parcels comprising Area G in The Preserve Commercial Center, the basic design goal is simply to "pul] together" and provide an optimum measure of continuity. The Design Frameworl: Manual ( 01I1 ) approach is being tried as an experiment and may or may not be appropriate for other properties in the Major Center Arca. Through the DIM approach The Preserve and city review of each development request will be processed faster and easier with definite standards to guide each project. 1, Area G Design Framework Manual April 5, 1977 III. METHOD The architectural image of The Preserve Commercial Center Area G will not depend upon the implementation of past styles of development, but upon the integrity with which the physcial design reflects its purpose. Therefore, the approach indicated within the "Design Framework Manual" shall be to establish a design review board to assist future building teams to develop within the context of the framework plan, material standards and design review approach. • A. Framework Plans • Each diagram site plan included serves to establish the general relationship of the individual parcels to the whole and to describe basic functional requirements such as pedestrian, vehicular and landscape areas shown in the plan and as further described by planning criteria. B. Material Standards • A range of materials will he selected by the Design Reivew Committee which should provide the common bond necessary to achieve design continuity without limiting creative design opportunity. Material selections shall be governed by limitations of availability and longevity of the source. Reasonable projected costs for the material insulation and its subsequent maintenance will dictate ultimate selections. C. Design Review A design review procedure shall be established to coordinate all projects within Area C of The Preserve Commercial Center. • The procedure shall be administered in a flexible fashion by the Design Review Committee to allow individual interpre- tation while assuring overall quality control and design compatibility. • 2. • • • Area G Design Framework Manual April 5, 1977 • IV. SCOPE The authority for design control derives its basis from the fact that this "Design Framework Manual" is incorporated within the Zoning Agree- ments between The Preserve developer and City of Eden Prairie and which will be included as part of the developer's land purchase agreements. The extent or scope of design control shall be co,tcerned with five • . basic elements or categories as noted below: • 1. Site Planning 2. Exterior Building Materials 3. Outdoor Lighting 4. Landscaping • 5. Grahpics/ Signage • The first item above is discussed in the Framework Plan section of this manual and the others arc outlined in greater detail in the Material Standards section. All arc subject to discussion and approval according to the procedure described in Design Review. • • V. FRAMEWORK PLAN • In addition to the goal of identity and continuity, one of the important objectives of Area C in The Preserve Commercial Center is to control vehicular traffic. Consequently, it is essential to develop circulation systems within the project area that reduce potential conflict between automobiles, pedes- trians, and service vehicles and reinforce the concept of an integrated whole. The diagram site plan serves as a base of reference for individual owners to relate their separate site plans within the context of the whole-- not only in terms of circulation , but design continuity as well. A key element in this Framework Plan is the identification of possible platting alternatives which reinforce a desirable vehicular circulation access and parking system. Individual buildings or common wall building development may be applicable under the DFM concept. An additional element in this Framework Plan is the identification of landscape and conservation areas which establish building and parking set- backs, restrict signage placement and type, and encourage a unified land- scape development. See attached development diagrams. 3. 1, .10 • Area G Design Framework Manual April 5. 1977 • IV. SCOPE • The authority for design control derives its basis from the fact that this "Design Framework Manual" is incorporated within the Zoning Agree- ments between The Preserve developer and City of Eden Prairie and which will be included as part of the developer's land purchase agreements, The extent or scope of design control shall be co,icerned with five . basic elements or categories as noted below: 1. Site Planning 2. Exterior Building Materials • 3. Outdoor Lighting 4. Landscaping 5. Grahpics/ Signage The first item above is discussed in the Framework Plan section of this manual and the others are outlined in greater detail in the Material Standards section. All are subject to discussion and approval according to the procedure described in Design Review. • • V. FRAMEWORK PLAN In addition to the goal of identity and continuity, one of the important objectives of Area G in The Preserve Commercial Center is to control vehicular traffic. Consequently, it is essential to develop circulation systems within the project area that reduce potential conflict between automobiles, pedes- .trians, and service vehicles and reinforce the concept of an integrated whole. The diagram site plan serves as a base of reference for individual owners to relate their separate site plans within the context of the whole-- not only in terms of circulation , but design continuity as well. A key element in this Framework Plan is the identification of possible platting alternatives which reinforce a desirable vehicular' circulation access and parking system. Individual buildings or common wall building development may be applicable tinder the DFM concept. M additional element in this Framework Plan is the identification of landscape and conservation areas which establish building and parking set- backs, restrict signage placement and type, and encourage a unified land- scape development. See attached development diagrams. • 3. II n' it • • • • Area G Design Framework Manual April 5, 1977 V. FRAMEWORK PLAN, continued A. Planning Criteria Landscape areas shall occur adjacent to Highway 169 and Schooner Boulevard arterials as shown on the Area G Plan "A". Within proposed landscape • areas the following design elements shall he treated as indicated. 1. Parking- Parking and automobile circulation are prohibited within the landscape/setback area unless the proponent's pro- posed landscaping, grading or structural screening miti • - gates the adverse visual effects of parked cars and exten- sive paving surfaces when viewed from outside the site • and provides for public safety considerations. 2. Signage- Only temporary freestanding sales signage associated with primary sales of the developer is permitted within the area. Other signage shall be in accord with Section V. Signage. 3. Lighting- An approved fixture and pole shall provide internal lighting. Building facades may be lighted from low ground mounted or building mounted light sources. 4. Plantings- All landscape and grading plans are suhject to approval prior to building permit approval. Shade Trees- A mixture of 2'z-6" caliper specimen sized trees shall be installed on the site in an informal fashion in positions which maintain reasonable business visability, safety and maintenance requirements. Shrubs or Small Ornamentals- When desired in designated landscape areas, shall be limited to foundation planting of the building or screening of adjacent parking or circulation facilities in such a • manner as to preserve safe site distances for pedestrians and auto systems. Ground Cover- All ground cover surface areas must be covered and maintained. Lawn areas shall be created from sod. Other areas not sodded or paved shall he covered with hardy ground covers or accep- table mulch materials. 4. V • Area G Design Framework Manual April 5, 1977 Building Landscape Area- a minimum space of 1O' forming a complete envelope surrounding the proposed structure shall be conceived to be the building landscape area (see exhibits). • Permitted uses shall include--lighting, planting, loading and unloading facilities, pedestrian access and egress facilities, terracing or patio • screening and miscellaneous landscape features-sculpture , fountains, etc. OPTIONAL PARKING G LANDSCAPE. AREAS-See exhibits C-F 1. Parking • Primary parking within these desiganted areas is discouraged. Future parking requirements may be satisfied by the paving of all or some of these areas except adjacent to public streets where landscaped area setbacks are required. 2. Signage • Signage is discouraged in these areas. The CitH,'s Sign Ordinance in effect at the time of the areas building development shall govern. 3. Lighting Committee approved architectural lighting fixtures and poles may be used for parking area lighting. All signage shall be internally illuminated. 4. Planting Hardy, standard varieties of Minnesota trees , shrubs and ground covers shall be used to break up and screen parking facilities. All surface areas not paved shall be landscaped and maintained. SICNAGE Signing for land sales and building identification is permitted in Area G consistent with the City Sign Ordinance and the following special conditions: 1. Building fronting on TH 169 shall use wall mounted or approved retaining wall mounted signs if developed as small individual buildings. ( refer to figure A) 2. Buildings that share a common access may jointly erect a "nameplate listing sign" at each entrance from a public street. 5. (L.Li3 L. • • • Area G Design Framework Manual April 5, 1977 • • 3. Buildings fronting on T11 169 may use wall or pylon signs if the site is developed as two large buildings ( refer to Figure B ). 4. Other sites in Arca C shall use the City Sign Ordinance as a guide in developing their sigaage plans. BUILDING SETBACK STANDARDS 1. TH 169 and Schooner Boulevard all structures shall be setback a • minimum of 30 feet from the street right-of-way. 2. Street a ( 60' right-of-way )-all structures shall be setback a minimum of 25 feet from the street right-of-way. 3. Street b ( 60' right-of-way )(collector 50 feet right-of-way)-':.TT-1'-l'G all structures shall be setback a minimum of 20 feet from the right-of-way. 4. Private access easements 30 feet right-of-way -- all structures shall be setback a minimum of 15 feet from the easement line. SLOPE POLICY In all cases the toe of a slope must occur on a property right-of-way line. A high side owner may elect to construct a retaining wall on his side of the property line to improve the useability of his site. All land areas must be stabilized during and after construction to protect the public from interim and long term effects of soil erosion. RETAINING FEATURES When needed, retaining features must be designed to conform to the materials used in the primary building. All retaining wall designs and locations are subject to approval. MAINTENANCE Owners of afjacent properties arc encouraged to arrange joint or coordinated maintenance agreements with a landscape or nursery contractor to achieve a unified and economically maintained project. 6. I' lit' CO Area G Design Framework Manual April 5, 1977 ' PARKING SETBACK STANDARDS • 1. TH 169 and Schooner Boulevard - parking shall he setback a minimum of 30 feet from the street right-of-way. 2. Street , (60' right-of-way )- parking shall be setback a minimum of 25 feet from the street right-of-way. 3. Street (D ( 60 ' right-of-way )- parking shall be setback a minimum of 20 feet from the street right-of-way. • i) 4. Street c. ( 50 ' right-of-way )- parking shall be setback a minimum of 10 feet from the street right-of-way. S. Access easements of 30 feet shall be separated from parking areas. by islands to provide safe access for the general public and emergency 'c vehicles. SHARED PARKING ' To recA the number of parking spaces within Area G, the concept of shared parking is encouraged between adjacent ownerships. Ramp parking either private or municipal is encouraged for Area G. Each owner must provide adequate parking spaces on his site or have a legal easement for public 'or private parking spaces off his site. Joint parking areas between two or more sites ' is encouraged thereby eliminating side yard setbacks and gaining additional parking area. . PHASED PARKING , At the time of building permit and design review an owner may demonstrate to the committee that only a portion of his final parking spaces are needed. The committee may allow phased development of the parking area if the following criteria are met: 1. That the site has adequate size and layout for the total parking requirements. 2. That any shared access or driveways will allow orderly development of all adjacent parcels. 3. That proper screening and landscaping are provided consis- tent with the DEM. 7. IV;L!0 I. • • Area G Design Framework Manual April 5, 1977 PARKING STANDARDS The guide for parking spaces per land will be the City Parking Ordinance Number 141. The required spaces may be modified by the committee if the change is demonstrated to be appropriate. SHARED ACCESS • • To improve safety and to reduce the amount of surface coverage in the development area, the concept of sharing access points between adjacent ownerships is encouraged. PEDESTRIAN SYSTEMS Consistent with the Major Center Area Plan and city policy bike/pedestrian systems are required of all developments. Two types of sidewalks serve Area G: -area connecting routes -site access The pedestrian routes may follow public streets in the right-of-way or may be located upon private property with appropriate easements. (refer to Exhibit A for area community routes) PUBLIC TREF CONSERVATION AREA-See Exhibits A and B To retain dominant species of existing tree growth in designated areas of the development, the developer will protect'the existing vegetation from direct effect of development. See development plan for location. SELECTION OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS To assure aesthetic quality of the development area, the developer proposes to restrict the type, color and texture of primary building materials.* (See attached specification - Section VI ). * building structures and associated retaining features * paved areas ( parking and walking surfaces) 8. • Area G Design Framework Manual April 5, 1977 SECURITY To protect private investments, all future development within the area will be subject to final approval by Eden Prairie Fire, Police and local • Building Inspections Department. • N.S,P, EASEMENT To guarantee development of the area in accordance with existing property easements, all property shown within the existing 165' N.S.P. power line easement shall be subject to the approval of N.S.P. prior to physical development of a parcel. • DEVELOPMENT PADS To assure quality of standard designed foundation construction a proper • regard for easement restrictions all building locations are to be located on prepared building sites, unless otherwise approved by the review board. See exhibits for pad locations. -9- i�i,yD P • • . . TT\ ; • ( 7"). 0 D 0 . k ) _ [. V ) 1 U J. 0 0 [1] \ r r1 • BOX 66 SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA 55379 PHONE 445-2122 1j1 i March 25, 1977 • City Clerk City of Eden Prairie 7801 Mitchell Rd. Eden Prairie, Einnesota 55343 • Dear Sir: Enclosed pleo:le find several copies of a resolution which we ask you to ,.)i.ss on to the Llayor and council for their consideration. We would apperciate being notified of the date when the council might taLe action. Yours very trul 4 to. - Ed Knoll • • WO RESOLUTION WHEREAS the City Council of the City of at its regular meeting held on the day of , 1977 at its Council chamlw.rs did consider the improvement aspects and impli- cations of the Highway 10 - 169 corridor and determined that a great and urgent aced for such highway improvements remains to be accomplished at the earliest possible date; and WHEREAS this City Council has determined that the Minnesota Department of Transportation (HnDOT) of the State of Minnesota is the appropriate agency to initiate and implement appropriate studies to improve said 18 - 169 corridor and consequently to direct this resolution to the MnDOT Cecr]isaioner James Harrington; NOW TH2a7.7C22 EE IT HEREBY RESOLVED That the undersigned City Council does hereby urge and recommend to Commissioner James Harrington of HnDOT that immediate action be taken in order to insure the commence- vent of appropriate studies of the Highway 13 - 169 corridor along County Highway 1'o. 18 from Interstate 494 to the Minnesota River and the permanent corridor bridge to connect with the State Trunk Higheray Ho. 169 by-pass at Shakopee, Minnesota. • Dated: , 1977. CITY COUi!CIL OF ny Its Mayor ATTEST: City clerk q/5 W, • APR 25 1977 CITY of SAVAGE 12305 QUENTIN AVE.SO. SAVAGE,MINNESOTA 55378 /�'`,Jct CITY HALL 612,8901015 i!!' �PPP)(( MAYOR COUNCIL•I.I 1 M I COUNCIL•WARREN NOROLEY TOM STANG,SR. Ilome„1 La..P nrn HENRY E.WELCH WILFREO A.WILLIAMS • April 22, 1977 We enclose and call to your attention RESOLUTION NO. R-77-12 passed by the City Council on April 14, 1977. • We want you to be aware of the attitude of the Savage City Council on the subject of a river Crossing. Paul H. Haugen City Clerk j • { • • MEMO: TO: Mayor I City Council THROUGH: Roger lllstad, City Manager FROM: Dick Putnam, Planning Director DATE: April 27, 1977 SUBJECT: 1977 Housing Assistance Plan (HAP)-Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) INTRODUCflON: As a requirement of the CDBG program Eden Prairie has submitted a plan for providing housing for low and moderate income families or elderly. The. Hous- ing Assistance Plan (IIAP) is a statement of the cities goals for housing assistance expressed as the number of units approved or built by a specific • date. The Metro Councils requirement fur a communities performance in meeting its HAP goal states that if a community makes a substantial effort to meet its HAP goals, that community has met the Metro Council re- quirements. EDEN PRAIRIE 1977 HAP The cities HAP was submitted to Hennepin County as a part of the 1977 CDBG Application The County CDBG application is currently being reviewed by the Metro Council under the A-95 Review process. Only the Eden Prairie's IIAPhas been found inconsistent with the Metro Councils Housing Allocation Plan. The reason for the negative recommendation from the Metro Council staff is that Eden Prairie has not established a three year numerical goal.The Metro Council housing Allocation Plan assigns 167 new units, 40% elderly and 60% for families, to Eden Prairie by December 31, 1979. Eden Prairie's 1977 HAP (attached) does not have a 3-year goal, rather a narrative, which indicates that the city is updating its Guide Plan and that because of the high concentration of subsidized units in the city (10 7), the city did not establish a numerical goal. Metro Council's policies are not written in such a manner that will per- mit the staff to interpet regional policies as may he approiate in specific circumstances. 'therefore, Eden Prairie is a third priority community, with 10% of its total units subsidized(the highest concentration in the region for family subsidized units) and whose leadership is providing a wide range of housing opportunities: is a mode, conflicts with metropolitan policies. y ,tit) IMPACT OF NEGATIVE A-95 REVIEW The Metro Council staff recommendation will be reviewed by the Human Resource Committee, May 9, and its recommendations presented to the Metropolitan -, Council May 12. The Metro Council findings are submitted to HUD, who may withhold 1977 CDBG funds from Eden Prairie. Ironically, our 1977 CDBG projects are directly benefiting the HUD funded low"moderate income projects, Brairhill and Windslopc. CITY COUNCIL. OPTIONS 1. Do not chants the city HAP and present the city's reasons to the Metro Council and hope they make an exception to their poi;'cies. PROS: *Confronts the issue directly. CONS: *Risk losing 1977 CDBG finds $66.000+ *Create conflict with Metro Council *Might require a good deal of staff/Countil energy and time. 2. Change the city HAP to reflect the 3 year goal of 167 subsidized units by 1979. ' PROS: *Will gain Met'-o Council approval • *Will insure the 1977 CDBG funds to the city *Will not require additional time from City/County. • CONS: *Commits the city to make efforts to meet goal. *Does not reflect what might he a product of City Guide Plan Update. *Avoids the issue of City's existing housing make-up and Metro requirements. 3. Change the city HAP to reflect the Metro Council Goal of 167 units and ask Chairman Boland for a review of Eden Prairies housing allocation requirements. PROS: *Allows approval of the city HAP and CDBG funds for 1977. *Provides reasonable process to resolve the Metro Council re- quirements with our unique situation. *Allows enough time to solve city and Metro issues without funding delays. CONS: *Will require Council/Staff time to prepare presentation of city position STAFF RGCOMMENDAT10N 1 would recommend the City Council consider alternate #3 because the Metro Council policy is not fair in its requirements for Eden Prairie-- a change is needed. Secondly, it would not jeopardize the 1977 CDBG projects. Lastly, filing :a request for consideration is a proper proceedural techniques to resolve differences between the Metro Council and city. yi ;lo HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 1977 ONE YEAR GOALS AND THREE YEAR GOALS • NARRATIVE OF CITY HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN AND METROPOLITAN HOUSING ALLOCATION PLAN Eden Prairie's Housing_Assistance Plan Introduction Eden Prairie began planning for a full range of housing opportunities in 1968 when the city adopted its Comprehensive Guide Plan. Over the past 9 years, the city has implemented its housing goals. Eden Prairie has emphasized the provisions of low and moderate income housing in large scale develo nts consistent with Metropolitan Council policies. Today the City of Eden Prairie has approximately 10% of its 3,0001 housing units available to low and moderate income families in two subsidized housing developments-Briarhill, Apartments ( in Edenvale, 126 units ), and Windslope Apartments ( in The Preserve, 168 units ). Eden Prairie recognizes its responsibility to encourage the provision of specialty housing facilities and has approved housing for retarded, handi- capped and elderly citizens. City policies and ordinances permit and encourage construction 'of moderate cost housing units by allowing flexibility in development/subdivision requirements. 1977 Housing Goal Eden Prairie presented a 2 year goal for no subsidized housing for 1976-1977 in our 1976 Housing Assistance Plan. This goal is based upon the high con- centration of subsidized housing units existing in the community presently. • Housing Assistance Plan ;r page 2 This goal was approved during the Metropolitan Council's A-95 Review process as consistent with metropolitan policies. For 1977, Eden Prairie will not provide additional subsidized housing units. Three Year Housing Goals_ Eden Prairie will consider additional subsidized housing units within the three year timeframe ( 1979 ). The Metro Housing Allocation Plan proposes 167 additional subsidized units for Eden Prairie for 1979. The City currently is • updating its 1968 Comprehensive Guide Plan consistent with the Minnesota Manda- tory Planning Act. The city must consider the existing subsidized housing concentration in the city and the imr•act of an additional 167 units proposed in the Allocation Plan. The pace of residential development over the next 2 years will have an impact upon the number of subsidized units appropriate in Eden Prairie before 1980. Eden Prairie will not increase its percentage of subsidized housing units compared to the total housing units from what exists today of approximately 10%. Summary_ • Tables I & II on the following page were prepared for the 1976 Community Develop- ment Block Grant Application and are acceptable to HUD for the 1977 Application. During 1977 Eden Prairie will provide 294 subsidized housing units or about 10% of the city's total housing units. Eden Prairie proposes no additional assisted units during 1977, but will consider additional Units in its three year goals. 1(>>11 0 O. I • WA NOUSINO ASS U« ft • • • ITANCE PN -' I TABLE 1.S90407 OF NO.37IN4 CONL'ITIONS • - ~_ ,� —__ _ _L_:AO!"!f!SSOIO OfOx411t0u 0r4 j41�1 n04t x41•x.lt l"j�1N1[�CC�xlgylil_�_�-- 1 x.«URBAN It1111:I PIN C(UM I ` ' ` i x`=T i l� L) •'•"""'•"" (IU(N PRl.121l) .,.. •.a,.e.•wx..,«.n VISO. x.rx..WWII POW AO IOW..M AO WI Vol e4 wn +nr , so..... rent n ••e. litio LLLLL..wx' 101 "_1•_•--__- 3 013 269 2,697 240 320 _28 • ! 4.4..1..«I nDp.•..,,,„.......I- 2.948 •-712 7,648 222 700 20 •µ rx«..«•a.u.•,-n.. 25 3 18 2 7 I •........... 2 1 2 1 0 0 L• x«. S.S.. ,.r...«.MI I...•... ...nl 23 2 16 1 _ 7 1 Ix N...„.S„...x,.,.,.l,,.,,.«.r..,..war 3.038 271 2,711 242 327 29 .I, .,«„A,nn..,r.n .8: 1.15 .72 .81 2.1% 3.AT O.DU Irt ISISS.OS Se ISNOC(.."O x MOOS IAa..1.Nrx:."I.....3 •• .. 1 0.0.w..O....aw...f.,d. • ' O O.4«...0"«n.N....M.N4...•'...L S.e..«.....«.a....4....i • - "• HOUSING AS3ISTANCI PLAN-TABLE 11:HOUSING ASSISTANCE NEEDS or COWER INCORE HOUSEHOLDS ' Urban Hennepin County rR i�T� n r IIm • City of Eden prairie """ " ' '""' • _ _.� ,__.—..— - nip—_— _.___.—, -,.- .r--cam----1.— I.,, -- (O—�M... u.iIN•..-,.i 68 16 7N -45 16 3 2 1" _____—._— __,., _ ' 64 11 44 9 . 15 2 11 2 • - A- —441_— gg : i, 272 32 148 42 !4 7 42 _25 •14 1 8 --- - Imo 12 A 54 rI. 4 4• 5 I.041e R05025 IOW nKO SO... ,..�i.•...r • • • 1f 3-tiq MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Roger Ulstad, City Manager FROM: Marty Jesscn, Director of Community Services SUBJECT: Bids on Boom Truck Log Loader DATE: April 29, 1977 Specifications for the Boor. Truck/Log Loader were distributed to suppliers on Monday, April 18, 1977. The following bids were received: ' 1. Stuart's Inc. $9,820.00 2 Landco Equipment Inc. $10,448.00 3. Road Machinery 6 Supplies $13,800.00 We are reviewing for compliance with specifications and will make a final recommendation on 'Tuesday evening. [Ir�6U �.i • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Members of City Council R1Rli: Roger Ulstad, City Manager PROM: Marty Jensen, Director of Community Services' q .J SUBJECT: Edenvaic and Preserve Neighborhood Park Plan DATE: April 29, 1977 The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission has recommended for your consideration the development of neighborhood parks at the Edenvale and Preserve Park Sites. A series of neighborhood meetings have been held and the Commission has considered the outcome of those neighborhood meetings and recommends construction in 1977 of the following aspects of the site plan: EDENVALE 1 softball field and open game combination field 1 lighted hockey rink 1 lighted skating rink 1 warmOg house 1 tot lot. (play equipment) 2 limited (I5-20) Parking Areas PRESLRVP Development in the following order as funds permit grading for: I softball and open game field combination 1 lighted hockey rink 1 lighted free skating rink Restoration of old Earn or construction of warming house 1 limited parking area (1S-20 cars) Funding for this development is to come from the 1977 Community Development Act Craut which Eden Prairie has received. Upon your approval of the site plan, he will proceed to final construction specifications, rent the equipmcut necessary to begin development, and proceed accordingly with construction completion targeted for October of 1977. y�rj� -0.9 h • i , � C /(- ..7-7-) ..,.: .. - . ., . 0.. , < . , a //7/ I: !4p ��. ,,, 1 - 1. F \ ' • \ f ( , • \\� :!� ., ? � .3 j w P . 'y C-I,� r;-�J, L.J I.r ; .'; •' ' , ,.... , i •„„ ! i •:, GlIn . , . • . k. , .. 6) , .. , "C)00.. .. . . . ..... . ,,,,,. „..., . . . . . . •. ..... \4./ .. . . . . . . . , • . . . , . .. . , . . .... . . . .. .• , , \ %/' \ ,...) . .. : . • . . -,"" \ i • 't..._. , . i •.....4 ftj_.., s, I \ '. : ', ' ; • . , % • . , , I ----- : . , . . ; . ' • , ! i MEMORANDUM ' TO: Mayor and City Council TIIRU: Roger K. Ulstad, City Manager FROM: Marty Jessen, Director of Community Services SUBJECT: Park Dedications of Large Scale PUD's DATE: April 29, 1977 • Attached is our analysis assuming: . "A clean slate" - starting over with all 3 proposals. We've not tried to pick a point in time and project from there forward. . Our land values - we've estimated the values of all properties and used the Preserve's figures for their H.O.A. facilities. • 11SSL Vf • 5.: CASH PARK FEE REPORT ti PURPOSE To analyze the Large Scale PUbs (Preserve, Edenvaic and llidden Ponds) Open Space Plans and Facilities to determine the equity of Park Dedication requirement placed on various developments within the City. ORDINANCE NO, 332 Requires of all land development within the City "a reasonable amount of land for park purposes or cash in leiu of land." The ordinance defines reasonable as: • For Residential Development Single Family $275/lot Multiple $200/unit For all other development $1,200/acre • THE PRESERVE PUD as approved by tie City called for Park and Recreation Land as follows: • Neighborhood Park 22 acres • Anderson Lakes Dedication 10 acres Easement 45 acres Purgatory Connector Trail 17 acres Eased on 1976-77 prices, the value lof the public areas and facilities arc: Neighborhood Park ($I0,000/acre including assessments) $220,000 Anderson Lakes 40 acres 0 $1,000/acre $ 40,000 20 acres 0 $30,000/acre $600,000 TOTAL 60,OlRi 3/My Estimate, The Purgatory Connector has not been implemented. i -2- If we were to assess the CASH PARK FEE against the Preserve based on today's projected total development it would generate revenues as follows: RESIDENTIAL: Single Family 700 lots x $275 = $192,500 Multiple 2,400 units x $200 = $480,000 '' OTHER LAND t1SFS: • 403 acres x $1,200 = $483,600 ' TOTAL $1,156,100 ANNEXATIONS: 55 lots x $275 = $ 15,125 (Garrison) 35 lots x $275 = $ 9,625 TOTAL $ 24,750 GRAND TOTAL $1,180,850 In addition to the public requirements of Ordinance No. 332 it provides • that the City may take into consideration private recreation areas and facilities. Assigning values to the Preserve's HOA facilities would include: Neill Lake 95 acres x $1,000/acre = $ 95,000 . Laud = $200,000 Lake Development Preserve Center lunproecmeuts Land 5 acres 0 $20,000 = $100,000 . Swimming Pool (i DaLli House = $500,000 . Tennis Courts = $60,000 . . Social Center $ Support Facilities = $200,000 Preserve Trails . Land 36 acres x $8,000/acre = $288,000 . Surfacing 10 rifle x $25,000/wile = $250,000 Tot Lots & Uini Parks Construction . 3 areas x $5,000/average = $24,000 ' $1,717,000 EDEN1'ALE'S POD approved by the City called for Park 8 Recreation Land aslolIue;, .. . Ncighburhood Incl. 22 acres . Purgatory Creel. Corridor . . East Area Park 11, ❑eyes . Edeuvale (loll' Coor:c. Based on 1976-77 prices the value of the public areas and facilities are: • . Neighborhood Part (510,000/acre inclodiu;; assesrauent;;) = $220,000 . Purgatory Creel. Corridor 33 acres x $1,000/,u)$ 33,000 . Eas1 Area Park (I., Ae. 0 $3,000 Acre) - $ 45,00(1 TOTAL fikf;000 ft -3- • If we were to assess the CASH PARK FEE against Edenvale today it would generate revenues as follows: RESIDENTIAL: Single Family 400 units x $275 $110,000 Multiple 1700 units x $200 = $340,000 OTHER LAND USES: 223 acres x $1,200 = $267,600 TOTAL P717,600 I don't believe we should ascribe a value to the Golf Course as it is a profit oriented daily fee course. The City has not assessed the land for utility improvements which contit.utcs a subsidy to Edenvale of $137,000 In addition Eden Land has offered to sell the course to the City on a couple of occasions most recently in 19 for $1.3 million. Edenvale is however entitled to credit for its internal trail system: • . Land 75 acres x $5,000/acre = $225,000 • . Surfacing 6 mile x $8,000/%rile = $ 48,000 H1DIILN PONDS P110 as approved by the City called for Park 6 Recreation Land for: PUBLIC PAPE AREA • . Land ; acres x $5,000/acre = $ 15,000 INTERNAL 'TRAIL SYSTEM: . Land 17.1 acres x $2,000/acre = $ 34,000 . Surfacing !; mile x $25,000 = $ 12,500 $46,500 . i To assess the CASI1 PARK PEE would generate: 254 Single Family units x $275 = $69,850 • 4» • -4- FINDINGS 1. TIlE PRESERVE: ,{ 5 a. The CASH PARK Mil: would have generated more value than the public park dedications. • b. The Anderson Lakes Dedication value of $640,000 covers only the land from the 840 elevation and is dependent on PILLSBURY complying with the Preserve's coemnittment. e. The Preserve's I1.0.A. facilities have a value far in excess of the value which would have been generated by the CASH PARK FEE. I don't believe "full-credit" should be given for these facilities because of the exclusivity of the use (Preserve residents only at the pool, tennis courts, etc. - except by fee.) 2. EDPN1'ALF: a. Tho CASH PARK FIiF. would have generated 2.4 times the value of the public park dedications. • b. The value of the I1.0.A. facilities is equal to approximately 3P of the CASH PARK FEE. Again, I don't feel "full-credit" should be given. 3. HIDDEN PONDS: • • a. The CASH PARK FILE would have generated approximately 4.6 times the value of the public park dedication. b. The value of the 11.0.A. facilities is equal to approximately 66% of the CASH PARK BEE value. Again "full-credit" should not be given. CONC L,l l E 10>:S 1. We don't have a value to ascribe to 11.0.A. facilities. 2. The PUBLIC PARK SYSTEM would have been better served if the CASH PARK FEE policy were to be applied to Edenvale abd Hidden fonds. 3. Because the Preseeve ''dod cat, 1'' high value property at Anderson Lakes Park to the public park system and invested extensively in ILO.A. facilities the value of open space commitments exceeds the value which would have been generated thin the CASH PARK 1:11i. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Roger Ulstad, City Manager FROM: Marty .lessen, Director of Community ServicesAJ SUBJECT: Consideration of Purchase of the Boomer Property DATE: April 29, 1977 Previously I have indicated to you that I have discussed with Mr. Boomer his desire to sell his property at the end of Edenwood Dr. to the City for park purposes. At that time, I reported that he had indicated that he felt the property had a value of $1,200 per acre. Based on this valuation figure the Park and Recreation Commission recommended that the City not proceed in any way at this point and time. Subsequent to that I have discussed this matter further with Mr. Boomer and he has indicated that he is not asking $1,200 per acre . but would consider any offer to purchase Which the City might • make. I have reported to him that we, in the fall of 1976, acquired the Lund Property for $1).000 for 16.6 acres or $663 an acre. He has indicated that. he wcnuld consider a similar offer for his • property which incompasses 7.9 acres. I have told Mr. Boomer that I would bring this matter to your attention for discussion and consideration. MJ:md • • • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council • TIIRU: Roger Ulstad, City Manager "' FROM: Marty Jessen, Director or Community Services SUBJECT: Park Bill Before The State Legislature DATE: April 29, 1977 The 1977 session of the Minnesota State Legislature is considering a bill to fund parks and recreation areas and facilities throughout • the State of Minnesota. The bill incompassses Metropolitan Parks, Department of Natural Resources State Parks, and the Special Governor's Trail and Recreation Program (see attached summary sheet). • Included in the Metropolitan Regional Park category is the funding for so called Parcel 8, the Bren Property, at Bryant Lake Park. The estimated total cost of this funding is $306,000 which includes: • 1. Purchase of the Bren Property $223,000 (optioned tine 1977) 2. Estimated relocation assistance $ 25,000 3. Reimbursement for City money used to acquire parcel 7 $ 58,000 Additionally Eden Prairie could make application for funding assistance for other parks and rocre^lion areas and facilities under the Special Governor's Trail and Recreation Program. The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission discussed generally this proposal on Monday, April 1S, 1977 and recommended to the City Council that Eden Prairie support this bill and urge our State Senator and Representative to look favorably on such funding proposal. Attached is a draft resolution expressing this support., tic I . • ' ' . . • .. . . . , '.':•:';'- i•• .....................—..-- — ---.-- ..---— — -- -.1' ' • • „":, ,, • t';it f1t-1 n, nn nO •t• ' - ,,, “,-.„ • • • C11, 0 n n(• 4-1 :.. ': l) • 0 0,4 o o (r ts• .i t';',:;': ".ft ', t.; ': Cl w o 7.7:- 0 4 f'?..0-;V;`,..; t.:;.'; f;' t; ': Cr (C . . . U. 4 I: XI C ,, z P•ifi 'it '-i 0 ,,, ••'• 0 /.. , O , • if ? S 'i: L',I-2, •.-'.-', It -( 1 rf.'!--4r! :f,-, ?, , 111 (1: O o c tl/ %.i •J'o;--7•/; t,;.: r., i'i. It' • c , •-• 0 — — c• ,. ..• cr. -) , .-._ .., ...., . 0 , ..• ..,. . o . ) ..I . .,t I--rc .-- U) 0,4 "..Z C / •- 1.1 .... CI ..) 4414. N' , (-') ".'l 7 tt' r) .. Ir:4' C• U. ' . ('' - I,-4S r . . . 0 . i:', ff. -,,.t .,,... 't 7 i', .,•,;r.-••-• •••1 .•••, ' 'i.' •','• 0 •- ' (5 ; :'." - -4 .1..ti' '.''; t''1' .'', '13Fi:!! • i ',. '-...• V.c••r- -,"t:..: , ;.; .t; ''''' i'.r, V :,:', ,,,',,'.9 rr. ni ...-..,;..,.; r:,,.. ,„.....! -,:,...: ;-' ',,-; il 7CJ:,:,:i '''''',-,'..4i, ''•,. :: '',.'..':: i,,!,::7 • ''':1;....;;:.t".; ..3::.., !-.:,', ;',.,' '• tu 1 • _.,. -...) .. . . -.*. i . ...: • , ) t "."-.'..''.L'.'''. "'..''..'.''..' ", ''.. '.':'."..'-'."!.'..`'..".`-'."P ".'..''..."...".`'.''.'. . . . . • lcil ''...;'i::i. .ki"-''i'.,'',1'',... :tr.,''.;',):.., ...-'• il :.:. '''.:i'al i.2'....‘-..i'.;.!' ;-'2,'.,:'...;‘',•.,..t.,'.'4.e...o.r.:. `..i c7, ;i f--; 4 •, . . . . . . 4.441 101 . a..1 a..1 - 0) ,r 11: i a.. ..., ,.. .. ....1 . el. 6 - , 0 . - W " P vr CC . ;• 4 . P .J •;• n; '.. ..1 ::. t Ei z ..,.., c :i :." .• .,,' . La 0 " ' ': 1 "• T : •• o Al •'..i "-•f'.•".''',.;..,;;"..-- . 7 . . '".-.'..,'..., .,, .....,. c, -:„64, • o ...I ". 4 ..,"44' •1: •%kg':'4N.". . „4, . 44 4 4 0 , ,.,,,, ,L b. CCC CC " '' 4 1''.•''' ':", 4 '4v:" ri ' SY' ..''".':,''o ' ." ".A'''o',... '', :4 4'.1 '4...4'',2,''.'':I'.".la:.L"" '1"„.„.•l't h‘4,...'''.......0 2. ....n. ;',. -. !..... ',.".r.'"" ,•- ,."' '',.!:'..,:','f'-" 1, .,, ,r ,., ..,.; ,.. . " • :.;;;'',".,',,':, ''..-:,':i'...t',..,`,r' .I-. -. ,,.., ,,, : ',„; ',-:,'...!I,V', ;:.:' '•:„..,. ,,! I-,.1, ti c. ::: . . ,.•c., c ..•,..,.,ir 10,..441 4. 4.) f... LP"41 ' • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA i, RESOLUTION NO. 77-57 A RESOLUTION SUPPOI:TTNG THE PARKS AND RECREATION BONDING PROGRAM BEFORE TIIL STATE LEGISLATURE • WHEREAS, the provision of parks and recreation areas and facilities is of concern and benefit to the entire state of Minnesota; and • WHEREAS, Eden Prairie has adopted a Park and Recreation Area and Facility System Plan dlich would benefit from the funding proposal being considered by the State Legislature; and WHEREAS, it has been demonstrated that funding for the System of Parks and Recreation Areas and Facilities for the Metropolitan Area is necessary to further the objective of building such a system; and • WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie recognizes an approved, but unfunded, program for final acquisition at Bryant Lake Park and acquisition and development of other parks and recreation areas and facilities in the community to keep pace with the growing needs of the City's population. NOW, THEREFORE, B1: IT RESOLVED, that the Eden Prairie City Council supports the pronused legislation for funding parks and recreation areas and facilities in the State of Minnesota. ADOPTED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie this day of ,1977. Wolfgang Fenzel, Mayor ATTEST: John U. Fran. Clerk SEAT. ti 5 ca CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 77-58 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the following improvements; I.C. 51-290 Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Improvements Heritage Road • bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law. Those bids received are shown on the attached Summary ofIBids; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer recommends award of contract to ' G. L. Contracting, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder. NOII, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with IG. L. Contracting, Inc. in the name of the City of Eden Prairie in the amount of $6O,135.25 in accordance with the plans and specifications thereof approved by the Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 3, 1977 • ATTEST: Woo1fgangli7—Penzel, Mayor SEAL: John D. Frane, Clerk — —� • SUMMARY O:_RID; I.C. 51- 290 DESCRIPTION: SANITARY SEWER & WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS - HERITAGE ROAD BIDS OPENED: APRIL 15, 1977 10:00 A.M. CONSULTING ENGINEER: RIEKE CARROLL MULLER ASSDCIATES, INC. CHECKED BY: R. C. Potz C. Andrews BIDDER BID SECURITY TOTAL AMOUNT G. L. Contracting, Inc. 5% $60,135.25 • • Northern Contracting, Inc. 5% 60,304,00 Fischer Sand & Aggregate, Inc. 5% 61,044.60 Northdale Construction Co. 5% 61;866.00 Gerald Stepaniak, Inc. 5% 62,127.00 De Luxe Construction, Inc. 5% - 69,025.55 • Healy, Inc. 5% 69,870.50 Parrott Construction, Inc. 5% 70,135.42 Alexander Construction Co. 5% 71,905.00 The undersigned recommend award of Contract to G. L. CONTRACTING, INC. as the lowest responsible bidder fot this Improvement Contract. earSALY4 Consulting Engineer Carl J. J{pyie, P.E. Director of bublic Works/City Engineer IP)%f I1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ry.; RESOLUTION NO. 77-59 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF OLYMPIC HILLS SECOND ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Olympic Hills Second Addition has been sub- mitted 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 City Plan and • the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. Plat Approval Request for Olympic Hills Second Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of. the City Engineer's Report on this plat dated April 27, 1977. B. Variance is herein granted from City Ordinance No. 93, Sec. 8, Subd. 1 waiving the six month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat as described in said Engineer's Report. C. That the City 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 MSA 462.358, Subd. 3. D. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this Resolution to the owners and subdividers of the above named plat. E. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to Execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. ADOPTED by the City Council on Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John Franc, Clerk ii);(,S • py' CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE "t ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT OF OLYMPIC HILLS SECOND ADDITION TO: Mayor Penzel and Members of the City Council THROUGH: Roger Ulstad, City Manager FROM: Carl Jullie, City Engineer DATE: April 28, 1977 SUBJECT: Olympic Hills Second Addition PROPOSAL The Olympic Hills Corporation is requesting Final Plat approval of • Olympic Hills Second Addition. This is a residential multiple plat con- sisting of single and double homes. This-addition consists of 34 lots. HISTORY: The Preliminary Plat was approved on June 3, 1975, per Council Resolution No. 996. Zoning to RM 6.5 was finally read and approved by the City Council per Ordinance No. 304 on August 24, 1976. The entrance to the Plat has been moved approximately 300 feet southerly from the location shown on the approved Preliminary Plat. This was done to provide satisfactory sight distance on Franlo Road and was approved by the Planning Commission on February 28, 1977. • VARIANCES: A variance from City Ordinance No. 93, Sec. 8, Subd. 1, waiving the six month maximum time elapse between the approveal date of the Preliminary Plat and filing of the Final Plat will be necessary. Party wall agreements shall be recorded at the time of closing for the duplex units. UTILITIES AND STREETS: Sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer are being installed throughout the Flat by the developer. Construction of roadways and pathways will be completed by the developer in accordance with City standards. Street lighting will be installed upon the request of the developer or homeowners. It is proposed that the cost of such street lighting will he billed to each homeowner in the subdivision in conjunc- tion with the sewer and water billings (est. $1.25 per month). PARK DEDICATION: Pathways will be constructed by the developer through the Plat as specified in Exhibit B of the Rezoning Agreement, dated 8/2/76. Public use of the pathways will be permitted with ownership and main- tenance by the Olympic Hills Golf Course. Outlot A is to be the wild- life corridor, Outlots B and D will be used for pathway purposes. Outlot C is to be a tot-lot. All outlots will be owned and maintained by the (hag • °.4 2 _ the Olympic Hills Golf Course, the use of the Outlots conforms to the • requirements of the Rezoning ogreement dated 8/2/76,, A cash dedication in lieu of land will be required of the Plat in the amount of $6,800. BONDING: A letter of credit has been received in the amount of $90,000 to cover the cost of the utilities and roadway. A two year maintenance bond will be required to cover all utilities and roadways installed. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the Final Plat of Olympic Hills Second Addition, subject to the requirements of this report and the following: 1. Execution of the "Developer's Agreement." 2. Receipt of fee for City Engineering services in the amount of $1,020. CJJ:kh • • 1011 :1 t: MEMO TO; Mayor Pcnzel and Members of the City Council THROUGH: Roger Ulstad, City Manager. FROM: Carl Jullie, City Engineer 4, DATE: April 28, 1977 SUBJECT: City Hall Expansion Plan The attached drawing shows the proposed expansion of the City Hall by the addition of a two-level building extending from the south wall of the ex- isting City Hall. Some renovation of the existing building is also proposed. The existing annex building on the west side of the City Hall will be vacated and used for storage purposes. The new addition would be 72' long and 35' wide. This will provide 5,040 gross square feet of new office space, less 1500' square feet loss by va- cating the annex building. The addition will provide much needed office space, conference rooms, lunch room and toilet facilities. Also, new carpeting, moving partition walls, insulation and some wall paneling are proposed for the existing offices. The City Manager's office, Engineering and Planning Departments will be • located on the upper level of the new addition. Building Inspection and Assessing will occupy the lower level. Park and Recreation will take the upper level of the existing building and the Finance Department the lower level. We propose to finance the expansion within a budget of $125,000. This amount would include 'an allotment of $10,000 for improvements to the existing offices. • Alternate bids would be taken for exterior siding material and interior par- tition walls. Portable partitions and file cabinets will be utilized for partition walls wherever practical to save'costs. The feasibility of solar energy heating will also be checked. The city Finance Director has indicated that financing for the expansion can be made available from the 1976 General Fund balance and 1977 revenues. Other costs to the City would be approximately $10,000 per year for maintenance, heat and utilities. It is requested that the City Council authorize the Staff, with the assistance • of RCM Associates, to prepare plans and specifications for the City Hall ex- pansion program proposed herein. - CJJ:kh attachment (IVA // U'�7 FlIC :. DEL' CITY )h11 7^..,: 17i.^1,-1 --iz it `~ 24 IZ ►z EN`Q.. j SECRETR.2IE,S PVhJ E A CotJF. _ C . _ -{ i 1 COl�.T E fv i In �� 1 �-.-. 1 1,----__1 M Q N Eb'�11.3EER'l0C7 a __ Ii,_...� ,. . t4INA,jaGE12_ 10.0:-.Ei I j F T, `� r W M 24 _ —_ I � i $ r IIL j t - 1 UPrF1 Lt.0 >. ` _.1 1 -_ Z It 12 4 ;g Zo ' `— 11.45PEGors Secs ETARI E 5 — ouw'f&it - ASSESSIL*. t al - r' N a! a 1 , h 1 J I, ''v Ws SET 0cg W M Lou. cz Lev E 1- (4 ir( • May 3, 1977 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 77-61 RESOLUTION RECEIVING 100% PETITION, ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS & PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUB- LIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE WOODLAND ADDITION, I.C. 51-303 BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council: 1. The owners of 100% of the real property abutting upon and to be benefitted from the proposed sewer, water and street improvements in the Woodland Addition, I.C. 51-303, at an estimated total cost of $225,647 have petitioned the City _ Council to construct said improvements.and to assess the entire cost against their property. 2. Pursuant to M.S.A. 429.031, Subd. 3, and upon recommendation of the City Engineer, said improvements are hereby ordered and the City Engineer, with the assistance of RCM Associates, • Inc., shall prepare plans and specifications for said improvements in accordance with City standards and advertise for bids thereon. 3. Pursuant to M.S.A. 429.031, Subd. 3, the City Clerk is hereby directed to publish a copy of this resolution once in the official newspaper, and further a contract for construction of said im- provements shall not be approved by the City Council prior to 30 days following publication of this resolution in the City's official newspaper. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on • Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk 0510 CITY OP I DEH PRAIRIE, 100i. PETITION FOR L0X7.L • TO THE EOEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: The undersigned are all the fee owners of the real property described below and herein petition for the Eden Prairie City Council to proceed with making the following described improvements: (General Location) • X Sanitary Sewer Woodland Addition --- i X Watermain Woodland Addition • X Storm Sewer Woodland Addition • X Street Paving Woodland Addition • Temporary surfacing on the north 35n' of X ,Other Woodland and the northeast 1600' of Edenvale Blvd. Pursuant to I .S.A. 429.031, Subd. 3, the undersigned hereby waive any public hearing to be held on said improvements, and further state and agree that the total cost of said improvements shall be specially as- > sensed against the property described below in accordance with the ' City's special assessment policies. We further understand that the preliminary, estimated total cost for the said improvements is.$225,647 , Street. Addre!,s or other Legal Names and addresses of Petitioners Description of i'ropert' to be Served (Must be owners of record) Outlot 0 and P and the south —Edenvale, Inc. • • 300' of Outlet 0 7766 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55343 i By //.� / ' � Ares. • (For City Use) • Date Received t+/(.I77 Project No. I.C..51 ??c3 Council Consideration 5/3/77 ys7i • MEMO TO: Mayor Penzel and Members of the City Council THROUGH: Roger Ulstad, City Manager FROM: Carl Jullie, City Engineer c; DATE: April 28, 1977 • SUBJECT: Vacation of Rieman Road The attached petition was submitted by Mr. R. Sather who has applied for a permit to construct a machine shop on Lot 16, Block 2 of Edenvale Industrial Park 2nd Addition. The proposed site plan shows some of the required parking to be located within the required setback from Rieman Road, which is a platted public street. If • Rieman Road were vacated, the parking setback would not be a problem. It is recommended that the City Council receive this petition and adopt Reso- lution No. 77-62 ordering a public hearing for June 7, 1977. • Since all the abutting property owners involved have signed the petition and_ there are no inplace utilities, the proponent has asked for permission to begin construction on his building prior to the formal vacation. We in- formed Mr. Peterson from Edenvale, Inc., we would bring this to the Council's attention. CJJ:kh Attachment May 3, 1977 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 77-62 BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: • 1. Whereas a petition has been received, a public hearing shall be held on the 7th of June, 1977, at 7:00 P.M. at the Eden Prairie City Hall • to consider the vacation of Rieman Road from Commerce Way to Martin • Drive. 2. The Clerk shall give proper legal notice of such hearing as required by law. (Two weeks published and posted notice). • ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on . Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk Li', w • u5 t�� C a• • , °, N r o I N v u. ti ff �3S PO m a w �S'i U o • o :o v• „baec , 1 N'S8'»`.. 4,lb"G5 ,c4". ' 35'35 • 753 a3.^o .- u 9.2 1 =03.1 N 2°32.53-E is8 O {°.S E�� °.G 5 3jpal- 4 :J .'IS.JI 160 93� 13;$$ ),may / q'4i+• u, kl J i r a"� .- a, N' A N NP36`al-fe tiara °�`; J�J�J�ft J `.° o . o o _ OI N N V' ati ,,2 .n°iO N 4)j: -oil 75 ,-.5 50:002: 16a2i �M y�� f; E °j3£ . 4•SO -{ Yr qo•° 6�J 55;° •glsr•Bg �� v.', 5158G^W 3°2.4� Z . u 7` ' 2St�o, „lo w o 3 Co Co' �t .,I - Z - w O,m` --' 1 - • z °: ' �, �� w ! N; N I W D A b I tau• .. ., m 4' V U 4 o x a t n wu 51,?G7V `382.23_ m 1 - o o ri p I a I ro e d ni � _ 1 u o N A 6•aJ °i" I N51553F goJ' 1$954•:.. . 18343 4•20: . ti SI'S84'a Ys, .+� �` 3!r£ c: 15 500002= p d .F-. l 3,y r Q p . I DT w a. �.,.t �.' 1L °U W , N nW.' . � $ in `� N O •; 02 f a, $i..r° 30 SD0002E ..e v .� y. . 23 °w it • Id .Vr)eps,,, ` N O --11 . J T PETITION March 29, 1977 We, the undersigned, constituting 100% of the effected and abutting property owners abutting Rieman Road hereby declare that such road is not needed for access to such property and therefore does not benefit such property. We hereby petition the City of Eden Prairie to vacate the street right of way of Rieman Road in its entirety. Property Owner Legal Description Edenvale, Inc. Lot 1 and 2, Block 1, Edenvale / ,— J Industrial Park 2nd Addition • Edenvale, Inc. Lot 9, 10, 11 and 12, Block 2, Edenvale Industrial Park 2nd Addition By , . • -General-Electric-?1ed4eai-Systems Lot 13 and 14, Block 2, Edenvale /1 L. 1 -I 'u ' Industrial Park 2nd Addition By .„1 _is %�. Richard Sather Lot 15 and 16, Block 2, Edenvale Industrial Park 2nd Addition By (V '15 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST May 3, 1977 CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY) PRIVATE KENNEL LICENSE ! Carr Properties, Inc. Lewis & Bodine - See attached memo Cedar Crest Building Corp. from Keith Wall Crest Investment Corp. Economy Builders 3.2 BEER OFF SALE John Mahoney Construction Walter E. Wittman Lyons Tap* Willard Eggan Const. 3.2 BEER ON SALE CONTRACTOR (Multi-family & Comm.) Lyons Tap* Willard Eggan Construction CIGARETTE & TOBACCO James Construction Lyons Tap* PLUMBING Norman & Smith Co., Inc. • Application by Donald R. Gilbert Westman Plumbing who would be the new owner. Axel Newman Heating & Plumbing Horwitz Mechanical, Inc. HEATING & VENTILATING Horwitz,Mechanical, Inc. GAS FITTER Horwitz Mechanical, Inc. Del Air Conditioning Inc. TEMPORARY BEER PERMIT • Eden Prairie Lions - Schooner Days May 20 to 22 These licenses have been approved by the department head_responsible for the licensed activity. Rebecca Querncmoen,bcputy Clerk April 15, 1977 TO: Becki Quernemoen FROM: Keith Wall SUBJECT: Lewis & Bodine Kennel License Application Because of repeated violations of Ordinance 134 and attacks on neighbors by their dogs, we would recommend the denial of their license. Problems were so severe that Chief Hacking and I met with these applicants to convince them of their responsibilities as dog owners. They agreed to take positive action, however, a short time later one of their dogs bit a passer-by and complaints from our residents continued. if Jj 1? • May 3, 1977 < STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The following accounts were audited and allowed as follows: 04-18-77 5369 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT Employees withheld and employer ASSOCIATION contributions 4-15 payroll 4,551.9( 5370 UNITED WAY Donations withheld 4-15 payroll 22.01 5371 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK Taxes withheld 4-15 payroll 5,767.4( 5372 VOID CHECK. 5373 INSTY-PRINTS Neighborhood letters on safe driving-Public Safety dept. 31 51 ' 5374 STATE OF MINNESOTA First quarter report on FICA taxes . withheld and employer portion 14,400.9, 04-19-77 5375 SUBURBAN NATIONAL BANK Bond deduction on 4-18 payroll 393.7' 5376 POSTMASTER Postage for meter 1,000.0' 04-29-77 5377 ADVANCE AMBULANCE & EQUIP. Resusci-Anne-Public Safety dept. 350.0( 5378 EARL ANDERSEN Parts for Traffic Control counters 24.0 5379 BROWN PHOTO Film and finishing-Public Safety dept. 68.41 5380 BRAUER & ASSOCIATES, INC. Guide Plan workbook preparation 854.0, 5381 BATTERY WAREHOUSE SERVICE Filters, plugs and batteries for equipment 201.91 ;' 5382 CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN Subscription - Engineering dept. 25.0; 'i 5383 MINNESOTA CITY MANAGERS' . ASSOCIATION Dues 15.0' 5384 CITY OF EDINA Water sample testing 22.0( .. 5385 CROWN RUBBER STAMP CO. Desk signs and inserts-Public Safety 21.21 `: 5386 CHANHASSEN LAWN & SPORTS Chain saw, repairs and safety hard hats-Tree desease program 343.9' . 5387 DORHOLT PRINTING Office supplies and printed forms 462.0 5388 DANIELS STUDIO Pictures of officers for display at Eden Prairie Center-Public Safety 44.01 % 5389 ESS BROTHERS Sewer cover -Sewer dept. 36.01 5390 E. W. STROE Refund on overpayment of utility bill 2.91 5391 ROBERT FLINT Consultation and test on new Public Safety Officers 210.0( 5392 FREEWAY FORD Three new police cars 14,849.0r 5393 GROUP HEALTH PLAN, INC. Employees health insurance for May 577.5( - 5394 GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. Batteries for Fire unit and repair on radios 52.9( 5395 HOME INDEMNITY COMPANY Deductable amount on auto repair claim 100.0( 5396 HENNEPIN COUNTY VO-TECIINICAL Food service charges for MTC & EDEN SCHOOL PRAIRIE workshop 7.06 5397 HENNEPIN COUNTY DIRECTOR OF One half taxes due for park property 954.2: 5398 HARRIS MACHINERY CO. Chains and hooks for Park Maint. 85.9b 5399 DIANNE HANSON Mileage 14.6i. 5400 JUSTUS LUMBER CO. Materials-Public Safety dept. 21.66 5401 JEAN JOHNSON Mileage 9.5'3 5402 JAMES JENSEN Mileage 34.4;' 5403 ROBERT KERN Mileage 38.50 5404 GEORGE LILLIE Macrame instructions 28.4E 5405 LOCAL GOVIRNIIENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS March services 867.07 `i';' ) May 3, 1977 04-29-77 5406 JOHN LATZKE Mileage 20.91 5407 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC Services-Park dept. 3.75 •`,` 5408 MINNEAPOLIS STAR Employment ads-Bldg. Inspector& Life Guards 126.75 ` 5409 MEDICAL OXYGEN Oxygen-Public Safety dept. 21.45 5410 3M BUSINESS PRODUCTS Copy machine-Public Safety dept. 188.10 5411 METRO PRINTING, INC. Business cards-New Public Safety `.;: Officer 45.00 5412 METROPOLITAN FIRE EXTINGUISHER Recharge units-Fire dept. 45.00 5413 ROBERT MMARTZ April expenses 110.95 `t° 5414 MINNESOTA TREE, INC. Pick up debris-Tree desease program 232.00 ••' ' 5415 MINNESOTA DEPT. OF EMPLOYMENT SERVICES Unemployment compensation 2.071•17 5416 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT Gutter broom and couplings-Equip. Maint. 171.80 5417 MINNESOTA WANNER CO. Pressure hose fittings and adaptors for Fire dept. 35.34 i 5418 MINNEGASCO GAS CO. Service 567.9C 5419 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION Street maintenance materials 304.38 -' 5420 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION Film rental for Fire Prevention ASSOC. unit 201.8E ;' 5421 NORTHERN STATES POWER Services-Public Information dept. 2.92 5422 NORTHERN STATES POWER Services 3,315.8CC 5423 NORTHWESTERN BELL Services 298.42 :i 5424 PETTY CASH Reimburse Public Safety fund 9.25 `. 5425 BECKI QUERNEMOEN Mileage 5.50 ' 5426 DALE REDPATH Art work for Crime Prevention display 30.0E 5427 ROBERTS DRUG Shoe polish-Public Safety dept. 15.0E ''' 5428 RAINBOW SIGNS, INC. Supplies-Public Safety 8.44 ..+ 5429 R. C. PRINTING CO. ID card printing for Liquor Servers permits 11.25 ;;: 5430 STATE OF MINNESOTA Computer CRT charge-Public Safety 119.16 5431 SCHERER BROTHERS LUMBER CO. Materials for Round Lake beach 155.6E ' 5432 SUBURBAN AUTO ELECTRIC Equipment repair service 7.70 5433 DON STREICHER GUNS Ammunition-Public Safety 141.0C 5434 SPECIALTY SCREENING Decals for new Public Safety cars 114.16 5435 STATE BUILDING INSPECTOR 1st quarter report of bldg. permit surcharges collected 3,184.3c ,' 5436 TOWN'S EDGE FORD Parts and repair transmission 318.45 ' ' 5437 VALLEY EQUIPMENT Equipment parts and new tractor for Park Maint. dept.($8,090.00) 8,092.10 , 5438 XEROX CORPDRATION Duplicating supplies for Community Services dept. 11.06 5439 BECKI DAILY Refund softball fee 3.00 5440 HEIDI REITHERMAN Refund gymnastics fee 10.00 5441 DARREN CATTNACH Refund on magic lessons 8.00 5442 BERT LIBKE Refund on magic lessons 8.00 5443 CHAD ROGER Refund on magic lessons 8.00 5444 JUDY HARVEY Refund on macrame lessons 3.25 5445 ALANA LARSON Refund on callegraphy lessons 12.00 5446 MARILYN CRAIG Refund on exercise lessons 20.00 5447 LAVERNE JOHNSON Refund on karate lessons 6.50 5448 THERESA BROWN Refund on magic lessons 8.00 5449 CAROL EVENSON Refund on golf lessons 18.00 5450 JAW BOTHUN Refund on golf lessons 18.00 tyro) pay 3, 1977 04-29-77 5451 ED SORENSON Mileage 41.9! ; 5452 SANDY WERTS April expenses 50.45 5453 LANCE WOODRUFF Change funds for Riley and Bryant Lake parks 50.00 - 5454 MARTY JESSEN ApriI expenses 121.53 5455 JEAN HUSSEY Refund on exercise class 1.5C` 5456 HARRY JOHNSON COMPANIES Service- Testament Church 863.20 5457 CARL JULLIE April expenses 108.9.' 5458 CHAPIN PUBLISHING COMPANY Bid ad-Forest Knolls 56.24 5459 FEED-RITE CONTROLS, INC. Polyphosphate-Water dept. 552.0C 5460 BOB ANDERSON one pair police pants for reserve unit 32.9! . 5461 MINNESOTA CRIME PREVENTION OFFICERS ASSOC. Six officers for Crime Prevention school 30.00 5462 BLOOMINGTON LOCKSMITH COMPANY Keys-Public Safety dept. 19.54 5463 INSTY-PRINTS House number cards and motocycle information and ordinance sheets 93.9!. 5464 MENARD'S LUMBER 20 rolls snowfence for ballparks 297.6' 5465 WILLARD MCNAUGHTON Temporary building inspector 304.0'.: TOTAL 69,224.4,'