HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 04/03/1979 •
• EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, APRIL 3, 1979 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Dean Edstrom,
Dave Osterholt, Sidney Pauly and •
Paul Redpath
COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager ' •er lstad; City •
Attorney Paul ; Planning Direct,
Chris Er -r; Financ Director Jchn
Fran Director of (oaanunity Services
B. _ambert; Engine, Carl Jul 1ie, and
. yc Provo, Recordl Se Lary
INVOCATION PLEDGE OF A.LLEGIA." E •B L CALL •
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF B ,, ,�
II. MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TId DAB,, MAR 20 1979 Page 676
i I. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk's License List Page 686
•
•
B. Request to set Meadow 'ark Public Hear:ng for May 1, 1979 Page 687
C. Receive 100% petition and order improvements for Hipps"s Mitchell Page 6:'
Heights 4h Addiition. I.C. 51-3 iResolution No. 79-6S
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Super 'iglu Shopzirc Cantor at Coun _Road 191Anderson Lakes Parkway, Page 689
req est tojreliminnary plat and rezone fro_n RcrWto C-Commercial,
l0 acres located in the southwest, quadrant of Anderson Lakes Parkway .
and C.oant Read 1 S Zconfinued.from March 6, i979�Resoolution.No...
79-22 & Ordinance—No. 79-01.
B. United Methodist Church, request to rezone 9 acre from Public to page 597
R1-2�of exit.tinp home at 15150 Scenl-C-ie,ghts oad (Ordinance
No. 79-06)—�
C. Outlot A, Crestwood 73 by Alex Dorenkemper & Richard Wilson, request page 705. ,
to rezone 2.17 acres from Rural to R1-22 and prelimintyr-plat approval
forR lots. Locat-W north of Delr Drive arid-East oT9659 Dell Drive
tkesolution No. 79-62 and Ordinance No. 79-07)
D. Cardinal Cheek by Cardinal Creek Associates, request for PUD Page 721
Development a2proval_rezonin from Rural tARI-13.5 for Sracres,
preliminary E at a rova o o' ots,ana appreve�iif.Environmental •
Assessment Worksheet Resolution No. 79-60, approving preliminary
plat;iffraiice No.79-05', rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5; and
Resolution No. 79-61, Environmental Assessment Worksheet)
V. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
•
Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,April 3, 1979
•
VI. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A Re nest b TimotityGagner for preliminary plat approval of 3 lots Page 764
ions R -22 to Ye caned Alpine Estates 2nd Addition (Resolution
No. 79- )
B. Request for approval of_.Round Lake Estates Second Addition Page 772
Developer's Agreement
VII. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
A. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 79,03, re;oninq 40 acres from Rural to .Page 762'. -..
R1-13.5 for 59 single family lots, Chatham Wood 6y Tana Develeppent,
and developer's agreement
VIII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
B. Report of City Manager
C. Report of City Attorney
1. Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Bill .. Page 790
.D. Report of Director of °immunity Services •
1. Park Dedication Ordinance • page ` ::1
2. Removal of Nesbitt Mouse - Preserve Park - Page 807. '-
3. Bryant Lake and Riley Lake Fees Page BIp
4. Tennis Court Joint Use Agreement p
5. Request for Approval of Resolution on CDBG Funds. . . Page 828
E. Report of City Engineer
1. Final plat approval for Round Lake Estates Second Addition Page 83O
Resolution No. 79-65$ - --
F. Report of Finance Director
1. Payment of Claims Nos. 3675 - 3810 page 833
IX. NEW BUSINESS
X. ADJOURNMENT.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council Q�om�/� JOHN D. FRAME
FROM: City Manager Roger K. Ulstad, '
SUBJECT: Council Agenda for Tuesday, April 3, 1979
DATE: March 30, 1979
II. Correct, approve and file minutes of Council meeting held Tuesday, March 20,
1979.
III. A-C Recommend the Council consider approval of items A - C on the Consent
Calendar.
IV. A. As the Council will recall, this is a continued hearing from March 6. We have
sent notices to the residents in the area as requested. You will also notice
that we have received a petition from a number of people in favor of the project.
We have had recent conversations with Hennepin County and the Bloomington City :
Staff in an attempt to resolve the proposed signal location as outlined by the
County. The County continues to be non-committal and says they will construct
the improvements at any location mutually agreeable to the two communities.
As of this writing, Bloomington still prefers Alternate #2 as shown on the blue-
prints that you have received from The Preserve. However, they are continuing
to review the matter and have not yet given us their final decision. We
believe that Alternate #1 as per Mr. Bale's letter is the best solution.
It could be completed in stages such that the Eden Prairie portion could be
done this year and the Bloomington connection in 1980, assuming the right-of-way if
acquisition in Bloomington will take a number of months to accomplish.
If the Council chooses to consider approval of the Super Valu proposal, it
would then be our recommendation that such approval require that before the
assurance of any building permits an agreement must be completed between the
City of Eden Prairie, Bloomington and Hennepin County for the installation
of these signals, and also that Super Valu be required to contribute up to
$70,000 toward the project cost plus dedication of any necessary right-of-way
for these improvements. These items could be incorporated in the developer's
agreement if the Council so chooses.
IV. B. Proper legal notices have been published and notices sent to the adjacent property
owners. The Planning Commission and the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources
Commission have recommended that the Council consider approval of this request
as it is the Church's desire to sell the parsonage as outlined in Mr. Pierce's
attached communication. Recommend that the Council consider a first reading
to Ordinance No. 79-06.
IV. C. Mr. Dorenkemper is again appearing before the Council requesting your considera-
tion to zone 2 plus acres to R1-22. This is a carry over from the approval that .
the City granted to Mr. Dorenkemper back in 1973. His proposal has been before
the Planning Commission. You will note the Planning Commission recommends
that the Council consider denial of the proponent's request. Basic reasons
are that it is outside of the musa line, the ordinance does require 5 acre
platting where utilities are not available, and I believe it was the intent
back in 1973 when the Council requested that Mr. Dorenkemper commit to not
developing this small acreage that possibly utilities might be available by 1978.
I would also call to the Council's attention that you did approve a 5 acre plat
that was submitted by Mr. Charlson adjacent to Cedar Hills Golf Course, which is
also outside the muse line. This plat was in conformance with platting
- "Mayor and City Council - 2 - March 30, 1979
IV. C. requirements as called for by ordinance. It would be our recommendation that
(Cont'd) the Council consider denial of Mr. Dorenkemper's request.
IV. D. Proper legal notices have been published and notices sent to adjacent property
owners. The proponent has appeared before the Planning Commission and the
Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission. Both commissions have
recommended that the Council consider approval of the proposed request for
R1-13.5 zoning of 53 acres. The proponent agrees to all dedications as are
required by the City. Would recommend that the Council consider approval of
Resolution No. 79-60, approving the preliminary plat, and a 1st Reading to
Ordinance No. 79-05, rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5, and Resolution No.
79-61, approving the EAW.
VI. A. Recommend that the Council consider approving Resolution No. 79-23 as per
the Planning Commission's recommendation of March 7.
VI. B. Recommend that the Council approve Round Lake Estates developer's agreement.
VII. A. All documents are in order. Recommend that the Council consider a and Reading
to Ordinance No. 79-03 and approval of the developer's agreement.
VIII.C.1 Mr. Pauly has included for your review his opinion as to the legal authority
of the MWCC and also his opinion as to any recourse the City may have in refuting
the bill as submitted by the MWCC. Mr. Pauly will be prepared to answer any
questions you may have Tuesday evening.
VIII.D.1 We have included a draft copy of an ordinance for the revision of our present '
park dedication ordinance for your review and comments. If the Council concurs
with the suggested update as recommended by the Parks, Recreation & Natural 4
Resources Commission, the Council could consider directing Staff to provide a
final draft of an ordinance and place it on your next Council agenda.
VIII.D.2 We have one of our older homes in the City previously owned by Mr. & Mrs. Nesbitt
It is necessary that this home be raised. Prior to taking this action we just
wanted to make the Council aware of what we are proposing to do. Apparent y
there is not any desire on the part of the Historical & Cultural Commission
to restore the house for historical purposes.
VIII.D.3 Recommend that the Council consider the recommendations of the Parks, Recreation
& Natural Resources Commission regardinLthe elimination of boat launch fees at
Bryant Lake and Lake Rfley as per Mr.-Lambert's melot
VIII.D.4 Recommend the Council consider entering into an agreement with the School District
as per Mr. Lambert's memo.
VIII.D.5 Recommend the Council consider approving Resolution No. 79-64 as per Mr. Lambert's
memo.
•
VIII.E.1 Recommend the Council consider approving Resolution No. 79-66 as per Mr. Jullie's
memo.
VIII.F.1 Recommend the Council consider approval of the Payment of Claims.
RKU:jp
•
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, MARCH 20, 1979 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel. Dean Edstrom,
Sidney Pauly, Paul Redpath and Dave Osterholt
COUNCIL STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Roger Ulstad; City Attorney:Roger
Pauly; Planning Director Chris Ender; City
Engineer Carl Jullie; and Donna Stanley, Recording
Secretary
INVOCATION: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel '
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Penzel, Edstrom, Pauly and Redpath present; Osterholt absent.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The following items were requested to be added to the Council Agenda: -
VII. A.1. Hazardous Waste Meeting; 2. Communications on Duck Lake
III. G. Set Public Dearing for Olympic 'Hills, 6th_Addition rezoning and
acting for April 17, 1979
MOTION: Redpath moved to approve the Agenda as published and amended, seconded .
by Edstrom. Motion carried unanimously. _ _.
• II. MINUTES OF COUNCIL MEETINGS HELD TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1979, AND
MON 6, 1979
February 20, 1979
g, b, adriTter para. 3 "MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, to
approve the Developer's Agreement." . . ..
Pg. 9, para. 4; sent. 1; correct to read "Edstrom asked how the Staff intended
to proceed. Jullie replied he will go back " •
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pauly, to approve the Minutes of February 20.
1979 as published and amended. Motion carried unanimously.
March 6 , 1979
MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Redpath, to accept the Minutes of March 6,
1979 as published. Motion carried unanimously.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
•
A. Clerk's License List
B. Set hearing date to vacate excess portion of W. 74th Street in
Norseman Industrial Park 2nd aition for April 1979
(Resolution No. 79-50)
•
Council Minutes - 2 - March 20, 1979
•
III. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
C. Final plat approval for Eden Prairie Center 2nd (Resolution No.
79-56
D. Final plat approval for Olympic Hills 5th (Resolution No. 79-57)
E. Set Public Hearing for High Trail Estates rezoning_to R1-13.5 by
Countryside Investment for April-17, 1979.-
F. Set Public Hearing for St. Andrew's Church rezoning to Public for
April 17, 1979
G. Set Public Hearing for Olympic Hills, 6th Addition rezoning and
platting for April 17, 19 9
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pauly, to approve the Consent Calendar
as amended. Motion carried unanimously.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Shady Oak Road PUD by D.H. Gustafson &Associates . Inc. Request
for Pl1D Concept approval for multiple family housing reglone:1 office,
office, and commercial uses. The PUD is located in Section l',
South of Crosstown 62, East of Co. Rd. 61,.and West of U.S. 169/212
(Resolution No. 79-51, approving Shady Oak Road PUD Concept Plan)
Mayor-Penzel stated that a letter from D. H. Gustafson and Associates .
Incorporated was received notifying the City that they have received
written notification by R. L. Johnson Investment Co., of their decision
to terminate the agreement between D. H. Gustafson & Associates, Inc.,
and their company to purchase the north-48 acres of the proposed planned
unit development, and of the subsequent withdrawal by the proponent of
their petition for an amendment to the land use plan Made in connection
with the purchase.
MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Edstrom, to accept the withdrawal of
the D. H. Gustafson & Associates, Inc. of their petition of an amendment
to the present land use plan, as stated in the letter dated March 20, 1979.
Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Edstrom, to close the Public Hearing on
Shady Oak Road PUD. Motion carried unanimously.
A petition was submitted by the residents living near the Shady Oak PUD
Development Area dated March 4, 1979. (attached)
Ms. Phyllis Olson, 6609 Golden Ridge Drive, inquired whether any new pro-
posal would go before the Planning Commission and whether they would re-
ceive notices. Penzel responded that any new proposal would go through
the same process, and residents would be notified before the Planning,
Comnission and the City Council public hearings., He explained that resi-
dents must be registered owners before receiving notification. •
•
Council Minutes - 3 - Tues., March 20, 1979
B. Vacation of drainage easement along Lots 1 and 2, Block 4, Edenvale
Industrial Park (Resolution No. 79-53) •
City Engineer Carl Jullie explained that the McGlynn Bakery Co., located
north of Highway 5, between Mitchell Road and Martin Drive, desires to expand
their operation. They desire to purchase a portion of the parcel to the west
-of their site, however, their existing 20' wide drainage easement is along •
the common property line and have petitioned the City to vacate that easement.
They .propose to re-locate the existing drainage ditch/sewer pipe to adjacent
area, and have submitted a bond to the Engineering Department of $5,000 to .
insure that the re-location would be accomplished.
Penzel inquired whether the parcel was presently zoned for intended use
and whether remaining parcel is adequate to tent the present toning'requireme-nts.
Jullie responded that the property is presently zoned I-2, & does meet the zon-
ing requirements.
Penzel questioned further whether the parcel to the west was vacant.
Dan Peterson, Eden Land Corporation, explained that the land has been sold
and they do have users for both sides.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to close the Public Hearing on
the vacation of draining easement along Lots 1 and 2, Block 4, Edenvale •
Industrial Park. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to approve Resolution No. 79-53
vacating drainage easement along Lots 1 and 2, Block 4, Edenvale Industrial
Park. Motion carried unanimously.-
V. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMLMISSIONS •
A. Request from the Development Commission for a joint meeting with the
Council for April 11, 1070
Penzel spoke to recent joint meeting with the Parks, Recreation and Natural. .
Resource Commission and to the desire to meet with all of the Commissions
at least twice a year.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom; to approve the joint meeting
date requested by the Development Commission requested.for April 11, 1979
at 7:00 A.M. in the Council Chambers; and to approve the date of April 16,
1979 at 7:30 P.M. for the joint meeting requested by the Planning Commission.
Motion carried unanimously. •
•
VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
A. Resolution No. 79-52, approving the Environmental Health Services
Contract with Hennepin County
City Manager spoke to the necessity for cities -to enter each year into a
contract with Hennepin County, and the request that it be done by resolution.
Each year the City provides inspections of facilities under the responsibility
of Hennepin County and is reimbursed accordingly. -.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pauly, adoption of Resolution 79-52,- -.
approving the Environmental Health Services Contract with Hennepin County.
Motion carried unanimously.
•
'k 43 • t
Council Minutes - 4 - Tues., March 20, 1979
VII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council members
1. Report on Hazardous Waste
Edstrom reported on the legislative meeting he had attended on the
problem of solid and hazardous waste. Joint legislation is being con-
sidered to resolve the problem that has suffered a setback from the
last attempt to locate a site for hazardous wastes. He spoke to a copy
of the report which will be left with City Manager Ulstad for further
study if so desired and his continuing monitoring of the problem.
2. Communications on Duck Lake
Penzel spoke to complaint received from Mr. McCuen, Baywood Terrace,
of water problems in the area. The City Engineer was directed to make
an examination of the situation,with an adjustment of the lake level if
that were reasonable. After meeting held by the Riley Purgatory Watershed
District on the possible solution of lowering the lake level, only one
resident spoke in favor of that solution, the rest were opposed.
Edstrom questioned the status of the issue. Penzel explained that the
Watershed District will make their recommendation to the Department of
Natural Resources, who in turn will make their reconmendation, with no
action required by the City Council. He explained further that the City. . .
can choose to veto the DFtR recommendation. therefore, the Citydoes have,
ultimate control over the lake.
B. Report of City Manager
1. Amendment to Personnel Resolution No. 109E (continued from March 6, 1979
Council meeting)
City Manager Ulstad spoke to further inquiry into practices of industries _
in our community and has provided this information as a supplement to
that submitted two weeks ago.
Redpath questioned whether this was severance pay as.,such, or pay back on
sick leave that is accrued. Ulstad responded that when the employee severs
his employment with the City, and at that point in time, a portion of his
accumulated sick leave can be computed and paid.
Pauly questioned whether there was a lilitiot fwdays{u ed�ybyathehemEidenion.
Prairie program. Ulstad responded
Penzel, speaking from a corporate approach, explained that the sick leave
policy was designed to meet the need as it exists, rather than as a com-
'sensation for the employee when they leave.
Redpath felt that accrued sick time benefits by Federal and Municipal em-
ployees. in lieu of salary, was reasonable.
to
4
t,ounci i rnnut.es - r -
1. Amendment to Personnel Resolution No. 1 . (continued)
Penzel suggested the revision of the accruel schedule become fixed at the •
end of 15 years, stopping at the 50% level.
•
Redpath felt the accruel of sick leave was an incentive-for employees over
the long run.
Ulstad.discussed the recommendation in comparison-to.the practice occurring
today, that being up to 50% accrued sick time, and we are now competitive
with other cities.
MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Redpath, approval•of the amendment to the
Personnel Resolution No. 1088 as set forth in the Memorandum of March 2, 1979,
with the two modifications: revision of the accruel schedule to become fixed
at the end of 15 years and clarification of the 100 day accumulation stipulation.
Motion carried unanimously.
2. Amendment to Hennepin County Criminal Justice Coordinating Council
Operational Bylaws
Mr. Keith Wall, Department of Public Safety, explained the former method
used by this body, and spoke to the lack of response from commmiti-es, there-
fore, they are proposing this Amendment to the Operational Bylaws. Nineteen
communities have voted in favor of this amendment.
MOTION: Redpath moved to adopt the proposed Amendment to the Hennepin County
Criminal Justice Coordinating Council Operational Bylaws, seconded by Pauly.
Discussion centered around the purpose and effects of the amendment. It was -
felt that there was a lack of sufficient information and that additional infor-
nation should be provided at a subsequent meeting.
MOTION: Edstrom moved to table the proposed Amendment to the Hennepin County
Criminal Justice Coordinating Council Operational Bylaws until sufficient infoina
tion is provided, seconded by Pauly. Motion carried unanimously. •
3. Building permit fee for Eden Prairie High School building
Ulstad exlained that in the past, the Council has waived the building permit
fees upon request of the School District.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Penzel to waive the building permit fee
for the Eden Prairie High School building. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN:
ALL MEMBERS VOTED "AYE". •
C. Report of City Attorney
None.
D. Report of Director of Conformity Services
1. Senior Citizen Center Plan approval .
Director of Community Service Lambert spoke to the status of the remodeling
plans for the Senior Citizen Center at Staring Lake.
tic
Council Minutes - 6 - Tues., March 20, 1979
1. Senior Citizen Center Plan approval (continued)
Written quotes on the electrical work is now being received to bring the
log building up to state electrical code for a commercial use. He explained
that further remodeling of the structure includes handicapped ramps, men's
and women's bathroom facilities, new doors, additional ceiling insulation,
new interior ceiling, new septic facilities, and new copper water pipes.
Other work that needs to be done is a new roof for the front porch and repair
of the house itself. He felt that some of the landscaping, trails, patios.
etc. may bnding an funds
d labor mita- '
bility ande how commuch eofd tthe materials his summer scan dbeeobtain d through fldonations, etc.
Redpath inquired about the house located on the end of the road and the potential
for vandalism. Lambert responded that the present occupant has had some agree-
ment with the City that he can live in the house for an indefinite time. He
explained further that the road to the Senior Citizen Center will be opened up
each day by a C.E.T.A. employee.
MOTIIOONN: nEddstt o ted oveedd,h sec nded by Redpaonth,
to car todapppprove eotheyproposals discussed
2. Topview Park
Lambert spoke to three possible sites: Miller Site, GravelPit Site,
and
Menard's Site. He recommended the Miller Site as the priority
the Gravel Pit as the second choice.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to direct Staff to contact Mr. Miller
to discuss an option on the "Miller Site". Motion carried unanimously.
E. Report of City Engineer
1. Final plat approval for Hipp's Mitchell Heights 4th Addition (Resolution No. 79-551,.
and approval of developer's agreement
City Engineer spoke to the Final Plat, revised in conformance with the pre-
liminary plat last approved by the Council. Two cul-de-sacs were eliminated
and roads tied together with one short cul-de-sac.
MOTION: Pauly movedprove Resolution No.
as Jullie's Memo,
March seconded15, 1979. Motion by Edstrom, to carried 79-55
carried unanimously.
Mr. Darcy Peterson, 8357 Mitchell Rd., expressed opposition to the change in the
original plan and felt that he had not been notified properly as to the various
meetings.
Penzel suggested Mr. Peterson share his information with the City Manager in
order to locate any discrepancies that may be present in the notification system.
Peterson inquired whether there had been any determination made on the four
houses on Mitchell Road. Penzel explained that the "T" sections on those drive-
ways be pulled back and a certain degree of berming and plantings be placed
screening them from Mitchell Road.
Peterson inquired further about the status of a park. Pantei responded that this
is a commitment made many years ago and it is still the City's intention to .
develop a park there. He suggested that Mr. Peterson share his views with the
Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission.
!at
i
Council Minutes - 7 - Tues., March 20, 1979
1. final Plat approval for Hipp's Mitchell Heights 4th Addition (Res. 79-55)
and approval of developer's agreement
Peterson asked how the priority for the location of the parks was determined.
Penzel explained the policy of the City briefly, that funds be expended, if
possible, within the area in which they have been raised through the cash park
fee required in lieu of development.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, approval of the Developer's ..
Agreement for Hipp's Mitchell Heights 4th Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
2. Final plat approval for Ridgewood'Vest (Resolution No. 79-58)
City Engineer Jullie spoke to the Final Plat and Engineering Report of March 14,
1979.
Mr. Tom Carmody, 8595 Mitchell Rd.; Mr. Duane Pidcock, 8379 Red Rock Rd.; and
Mr. John Houston, Houston Engineering Co.; expressed concern with the access to
the property immediately to the north.
Houston presented graphics of the area, outlining the division of the Carmody pro-
perty and the center property, of which he is planning to purchase a portion of this
land for condominiums. The Carmodys have always planned for a road to come in along
•
the section line, and have based their plans on this road.
Penzel inquired why this question was not addressed at the time of preliminary plat
discussions. Houston explained that he has just become involved with the land re-
cently, and that they had assumed the plan would be as originally proposed.
Carmody spoke to several alternatives that he felt might enable them to provide the -
access.
City Planner Enger discussed the present road.system.asshown in_tbe Guide.Plan. and. . ._ -_
how it related to the Centex and Carmody properties.
Pidcock expressed concern that there was no direct route through to Anderson Lakes
Parkway for residents in the Red Rock area, and felt that the extension of Village
Woods Drive would solve this problem.
Mr. Tim Eller, Centex Homes Midwest, Inc., commented that he has met with Carmody
and Jullie, and that he has come away from the meetings with the impression that no
•
access was desired or needed to the Carmody property. He felt there would be damage
to their plan if the road were now extended as requested.
Redpath asked whether Centex would consider selling lot 8 or 9 to Carmody to aid
Carmody in utilizing his property. Eller responded they had offered to sell one
lot to temporarily remedy their development of the area.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, approval of Ridgewood West Final Plat
Resolution 79-58 as per Mr. Jullie's Memo of March 14, 1979.
•
Redpath suggested that an option be open for the purchase of lots 8 or 9, to provide.
temporary access, which may be of benefit to both Centex and Carmody.
Penzel commented that if Mr. Eller is amenable to making a road available, there should.
•
be at least two viable alternatives to make access possible.
6a
•
Council Minutes - 8 - Tues., March 20, 1979
2. Final plat approval for Ridgewood West (Resolution No. 79-58) {Continued)
There was discussion on the status of Village Woods Drive and its purpose to.
be a route for the neighborhood to go out to Mltehell•Road or Scenic Heights,
rather than as a straight route connecting Co. Rd. 4 and Mitchell Road.
The VOTE was taken and the motion carried unanimously. .
3. Proposed Hennepin County Transportation.System
City Engineer Jullie spoke to Planning Director's Memo of February 22, 1979 !
and briefly summarized the basic discrepancies between the County proposed sys •
-
tem and the road system anticipated by Eden Prairie in its 1979 Guide Plan Update.
Penzel commented on the County recommendation of Co. Rd. 18 to be upgraded to an
intermediate arterial, while Eden Prairie has shown it.as a minor arterial. The
City's case should be stated clearly and strongly as being opposed to this plan
because of the large financial investment by the City into the Anderson( Lakes Park,
Jullie spoke to the status of the Co. Rd. 18 project that being the approval of a
Resolution requesting that an Environmental Impact Statement be submitted, .
Mr. Don Peterson, Eden Land Company, suggested that Valley View Road re-location be ...
shown by, the County as further south of Topview Acres.
MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Edstrom, to approve Staff and Planning Commission
recommendations of the Hennepin County Transportation Plan as per Memo of February 22,
1979 and Planning Commission Minutes of February 26, 1979. Maim-carried-unanimously.- •
44 Connection to Metropolitan Waste Control Commission .interceptor.sewer for PidOeWSod
West Addition (Resolution No. 79-59)
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to approve Resolution No. 79-594 .
authorizing Permit application as per Ju1lie's Memo of March 20, 1979. Motion
carried unanimously.
5. RLS Approval for Golf Vista
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pauly, approval of RLS as per Mr. Julli_e's Memo
•
of February 1, 1979 for Lot 1, Block 1, Golf Vista Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
F. Report of Finance Director
1. Pay ient of claims Nos. 3508 - 3674
3508-
MOTION: Redpath moved to approve, seconded by Pauly. approval of Payment of Claims 3674
dated March 20, 1979. A ROLL CALL VOTE was taken, Edstrah, Redpath and. Penzel voted. -
"aye"; Pauly "abstained"
VIII. NEW BUSINESS - None.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to adjourn at 10:15 PM. -Motion 4arrie4. :
unanimously.
413
. . .
•,.
•
•
.
."• •
. . . .
•
• - .
' . •
; .
• • TO: HIEN PRAIRIE COUNCIL MEMBERS• • • .
PROM: JANET GERECKE •
DATE: MARCH 13, 1979 . . •
_ .
• Please study carefully the attached petition regarding the Shady
Oak PUD. I would like to point out to you that 100% of the
freeholders living on Golden Ridge Drive have signed it. • .
•
•
-•
•
•
•
•
• •
•
• •
. ,
•
.• :
•
•
. . _
•
TO: EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WMaERS .
FROM: RESIDENTS LIVING NEAR THE SHADY OAK HUD DEVWFMENT AREA
DATE: MARCH 4, 1979
We the undersigned residents of Eden Prairie would like to bring to i
your attention that we are concerned about the proposed changes in
the Shady Oak POD plan which has been submitted to the council for
approval by Gustafson and Associates, Inc.
The presentation of this revised plan, as we see it, does not
cicf'orm to the original 1968 Comprehensive Guide Planfor he
City .
of Eden Prairie, nor does it conform to the udpeted
plan
79.
Further, it does not conform to the 1971 POD plan for 71 thisarea. We, .
as neighboring residents, do still support
Since all of us who own homes 3n this area based our purchase, or had
an input in the planning and setting up of the Comprehensive Guide
Plan, we cannot see anything but a personal loss of value and a general
deterioration of the .a beo -of this-nroposed P•
07 3dJ,`11 Day'
,:timel . i; ,
k3
10 ojoi.,qi,j(t.----64;•z-h`j244' .,,,,pr, . ,.
CR' 4 di") z) . 'd-f - ,e,t/- 6°-.% IP' - .
ii,,,,,:ix iV ,,,„i/ ,i .
4 0' .,
le/eaV___ 11:4'-(P``" , .
6G, 'r `,
(i,:t ei ' 61 AA, 7Qc.✓,/'. .0..L..2 ...
piltJei -1411 :
-.IC aV)-
_7,, 4. , ,117.v».l (�, .
-7.41('-4-t'C-df---2, 4--- 2-<1 6-C°C( '3'47 t
• €4�'- . , .
-'
/ .
eiczef‘e,,4 d 71 . ems `' `
Rald' i- PleitiAl.... 49 4p4/g/A‘-'144721,57, ,
Azzedif Ott& . - ' . , ::.,,,. :.,,
. *._ A{q Nv ` sty
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
April 3, 1979 •
CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 Family) CIGARETTES & TOBACCO
Custom Pools Getty Refining (E.P.Skelly)
Lowell R. Prost Prairie Motel
Highlight llamas, Inc.
Narr Construction, Inc. DRIVE IN THEATRE
PLUMBING Flying Cloud Drive In
De-R Plumbing
June Plumbing & Heating _
HEATING S VENTILATING
Sens-Ryan Plumbing & Heating Co.
Narkie Heating & Air Cond., Inc.
PRIVATE KENNEL LICENSE
Charles Gould •
Bertram Lear •
FOOD ESTABLISHMENT - Type A
Mr. Steak
Swiss Colony
FOOD ESTABLISHMENT - Type B
Flying Cloud Drive In_
Viking Pioneer Incorp.
RETAIL CANDY OUTLET
Mr. Steak
•
These licenses have been approved by the department head responsible
for the licensedd activity.
Rebecca Quernemoon, Deputy Clerk
Lrr//
eYrt
•
mil Aft
19119
i '
March 27, 1979
Roger U1etei, City.lianager .-..
Wee Pra.rie C ty Np$ .... - „
•
$95O Camels.Road r, . ..
Prairie, iiinstatata 55144
. .
Dear airs
i.e agent tot the proponent or Mesilass Park esiditiea'I bow:regstc.at .:
a public Iseari,rse before the City d3psitteil at the•eaateat Saari a tide.
Years truly, _
te'
Donald J. flu' .
Realtor Asaor4ate
4i .
e ,.IQAa.gbselArnse: a4: ,:::e+
1
April 3, 1979
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
• HENNEPIN•COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 79-65 .
RESOLUTION RECEIVING 100% PETITION,
ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS & PREPARATION -
OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR •PUB-
LIC IMPROVEMENTS IN HIPP'S MITCHELL
HEIGHTS 4th ADDITION, I.C. 51-353 .
BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council:
1. The owners of 100% pf the real property abutting upon end
to be behefitted from the;pnOPOs f sewer, water ant street
improvements in Hipp's Mitchell Hts. 4th Addition,, I.C. '5t-353,
at an estimated total cost of $250,000 have petitioned the
City Council to construct.said improvements and to as;sess..the
entire cost against tbei;r-:preperty. .
2. Pursuant to M.S.A. 429.031, Sufi: -3;,and upon reEanmendatlea
of the City Engineer, said Improvements are hereby;ordered and -
the City Engineer, with the assistance of A-C.M.. Assoc.,._shall
prepare plans and specifications for said improvements in.
accordance with City Standards.and-advertise.far bids therean.
3. Pursuant to M.S.A. 429.031, 'Subd.. 3, the City Clerk is hereby
directed to pbolish a cspy.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 i-n the -
newspaper. .... . ._
ADOPTED by the City Council of theCity of Eden Prairie
Wolfgang H. 'Pend, Miayor
ATTEST SEAL
John b. Frane, Clerk
t, fit
,
CITY OP EDEN PRAIRIE, MJNNSeU A
100% PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS
TO THE EDEN 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)
1,/ Sanitary Sewer
,/ Watet:ain
!// Storm Sewer
..,.....-Street Paving - . •
Other •
Pursuant to M.S.A. 429.031, Subd. 3, the undersigned hereby waive any
public hearing to be held on said fanprov®mmptsr and further state and
agree that the total cast of said improvements shall be specially as- . ..
sessed against the property described lax.`aw in accordance with the
City's special assessment policies. We further understand that the
preliminary, estimated total cost for the•said improvements is
Street Address or other Legal Names and addresses of Petitioners
Description of Property to be Served (Must be owners of record) -
i-teps ttfcRa .. RTS.. 411 A • ' •- .t., ..
(For City Use)
. Date Received 3104,179
• Project No. Si-•35
• rrnnl1..( lws�__ .'ldn tn. .:
•
MA51OR AND BALE.Ltd.
31s P ovPr P. 1,no
LAW OFFICES 73°see
ondm ' us vo,m
5h Mart rrnes4u.' MAR 2 0 1979
...phone phone 33Q 8446 Area 612
1
March 28, 1979
Mr. Wolfgang Penzel - Mayor
Mr. Paul Redpath
Mr. Dean Edstrom
Mrs. Sidney Pauly
Mr. David Osterholt - Council Members
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
This letter is written on behalf of The Preserve in
connection with the proposal by Super Valu Stores to construct
a shopping center upon approximately ten acres of land at
the intersection of Anderson Lakes Parkway and County Road
18. As you are all aware, this matter has been before the
Council and has been continued for reconsideration to
Tuesday, April 3.
Enclosed you will find four sheets of drawings of the
land in question at the intersection of County Road 18 and
Anderson Lakes Parkway, these four drawings prepared by the
engineering firm of BRW at the request and cost of The
Preserve and titled Short Range Alternate 1, Short Range
Alternate 2, Short Range Alternate 3 and Long Range Plan. A
discussion of the Plans follows, all of this engineering
work and discussion being for the purpose of informing you,
as Council members, prior to the scheduled meeting on Tuesday,
April 3.
SHORT RANGE ALTERNATE 1
This temporary solution is acceptable to Hennepin
County and, we understand, with the staff of the City of
Eden Prairie. It permits the utilization of the site by
Super Valu and requires the agreement of the City of Bloomington
for the connection of the Bloomington Ferry Road to County
Road 18. The work contemplated under this plan involves
lowering the hill to the north of the intersection on County
Road 18, reconstructing the four-way intersections so that
there are four lanes on all roads approaching the intersection,
installing of signals and cul de sacing Amsden Road where it
lies in the City of Bloomington. This solution is the most
Wale,M Batty Roeicro Ann Bute WovneH Olsen BwosJ tbxripson
wmoreG Bole RdrordJ G le jc re B Protean OFODIIM
Crones ABossroW.. Dowd R*veep ,pokARoux% i dhAFolk
9eymJ Bevxnr George Mask), Mono(Sc on Ricowell Wier
/�sl1
4
Mr. Wolfgang Penzel
Mr. Paul Redpath
Mr. Dean Edstrom
Mr. Sidney Pauly
Mr. David Osterholt
Page 2
March 28, 1979
direct but requires the immediate cooperation of the City of
Bloomington to be effected as shown and requires the immediate
taking of the residence known as 9201 County Road 18, which
immediate taking may not be preferred by the City of Bloomington.
SHORT RANGE ALTERNATE 2
This sheet represents what The Preserve and BRW understand
to be Bloomington's preferred temporary solution. It avoids
the necessity of an immediate taking of the residence referred
to above and because of the location of the intersection
south of the existing intersection, may not require the
lowering of the hill referred to above. It should be noted
that the lowering of the hill would not-be the obligation of
either municipality but instead the Obligation of Hennepin
County, which obligation Hennepin County is willing to
assume. The principal disadvantages of this temporary
solution are: (1) it requires the construction of a great
deal of four-lane road whi'th-later would be abandoned, (2)
the construction involves a very tight turn situation in the
City of Eden Prairie thereby reducing the flow of traffic in
what is understood to be a somewhat congested area, (3) it
destroys the usability of The Preserve site during probably
the next ten years, as proposed to be used by Super Valu; _.
and (4) as a consequence to the foregoing, the contribution
to signalling by Super Valu of $70,000 plus would not be
realized by either municipality or Hennepin County. In
conclusion, this is obviously not a cheap temporary solution
from the point of view of increased road construction costs,
loss of signalling funding and loss of development of the
Super Valu site.
SHORT RANGE ALTERNATE 3
This proposal permits the City of Eden Prairie to move
ahead without the immediate cooperation of the City of
Bloomington, without prejudicing the rights of Bloomington .
to move ahead on its own schedule, at the lowest possible
cost, and without in any way prejudicing the upgrading of
County Road 18 should the City of Eden Prairie and the City
of Bloomington so agree to that upgrading in the future.
Mr. Wolfgang Penzel
Mr. Paul Redpath
Mr. Dean Edstrom
Mr. Sidney Pauly
Mr. David Osterholt
Page 3
March 28, 1979
The work involved under this proposal would be to widen
Anderson Lakes Parkway as it intersects with County Road 18,
to widen County Road 18 on the Eden Prairie side so to
permit easy on and easy off at the intersection, and the
installation of signals at this intersection.
Amsden Road (in Bloomington) need not be upgraded or
closed because of the low traffic. The traffic pattern from
the east to west would flow along Veness Road and across the
temporary gravel connection to County Road 18. The intersection
of the temporary gravel connection to County Road 18 would
not require signalization because of its long distance from
the hill to the north of the intersection under consideration,
and in connection with the actual signalization of the
intersection, Super Valu is again prepared to pay $70,000
plus towards the cost of this traffic control.
This proposal has the advantage of permitting the
immediate upgrading of the intersection on the City.of Eden
Prairie side, the signalization of the intersection, the
continuation of the traffic flow in a safe manner from
Bloomington to County Road 18 across the temporary gravel
connection, the development of the Super Valu site, and all
of this at a relatively low cost.
LONG RANGE ALTERNATE PLANS
Assuming the City of Eden Prairie would approve Short
Range Alternate 3, or in cooperation with the City of Bloomington,
Short Range Alternate 1, both such proposals would be consistent,
acceptable to the Hennepin County Highway Department and
permit the expansion of County Road 18 to either arterial or
freeway standards at a later date. No drawing is submitted
with this letter for the arterial alternate plan since it
would be just an extension of the work done as shown on
Short Range Alternate 1 enclosed. The Long Range Plan •
attached shows how a freeway interchange might be constructed
if approved by the•City of Eden Prairie and the City of
Bloomington. The Long Range Plan enclosed would contemplate
signalling at the off ramp in the City of Bloomington and at
the off ramp at the City of Eden Prairie (opposite the Super
691
•
•
d
Mr. Wolfgang Penzel
Mr. Paul Redpath
Mr. Dean Edstrom
Mr. Sidney Pauly
Mr. David Osterholt
Page 4
March 28, 1979
Valu store) and would contemplate that Old County Road 18
would become the service road as shown by the flow of traffic
design next to parking on the Super Valu site.
RESIDENT OPINION POLLS
The City Council has received petitions both for and
against the development of the Super Vain site and the
following information is simply to emphasize those petitions
with which The Preserve is familiar.
The City Manager, Roger Qistad, and members of Eden
Prairie's City Council have received a petition in favor of
the development signed by 27 owners/residents. In addition,
The Preserve took its own opinion poll in the form of a
postcard mailing, a copy of the form attached to this letter.
The Preserve mailed out 700 of these cards and received a
response of 233 Yes to 106 No. This represented a 48%
return on the mailing.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the enclosed engineering studies and an
examination of the problem by The Preserve, Super Valu, the
developer for Super Valu (Ryan Construction Company) meetings
with the staff of the City of Eden Prairie and Hennepin
County, it seems that the following are reasonable conclusions.
1. Alternate 1 is the most direct solution to the development
of the property but will probably be delayed by the
City of Bloomington which is acting on its own schedule
and for its own reasons, all in connection with the •
acquisition of 9201 County Road 18 and its view of the
manner in which County Road 18 should be developed.
2. Alternate 2 is the most expensive, short-term solution
to solving the traffic congestion which now exists at
County Road 18 and Anderson Lakes Parkway, due to the
excessive construction of four-lane roadway, the physical
and economic damage upon the Super Valu site and the
loss of the contribution to the signalling expense.
3
Mr. Wolfgang Fenzel
Mr. Paul Redpath
Mr. Dean Edstrom
Mr. Sidney Pauly
Mr. David Osterholt
Page 5
March 28, 1978
3. Alternate 3 represents the least expensive solution to ..
the problem and probably the mostexpedient 'solution to •
the .problem. It contemplates the use of existing roads
for acce:as to county We&[ IE* the developee,AL of'County~
Road 18 on the Eden Prairie side, the immediate-development
of the Super Vale -site.'as that proposal is now befere
�' of Eden Prairie and the
use of super Valu mmooneysofia'a°0.,ent plea as a eentriblition-
towards the necessary:si l:ling at the intersection.
4. All of the foregoing eli nary conclusions are consistent
with and do not.ruin .tlie 'long range plan for a full
scale interseetiew in.the*faint.that,tlre,:- i y of Ede;
Prairie and the 441P-40-140ostington, in cooperation,. -
with the Hennepin County'Ri heay.:Department, 'tenet! all
agree that upgrading Gt County Road 1-8 should:be accomplished
to that level. It is not'the intention of e'nelr+e's`
material to suggest that at this time either the city ;T•
of Eden Prairie or 'thee-"City of Bloomington should-take -
a position on the Long Range Mae. 'The t4nter ctio
diagram as presented with-thin-material is acceptable
to Hennepin County Highway standards.
On behalf of the developers and Super Valu and consistent •
_- with what The Preserve and developers-understand to be the
consensus of residential opinion as to the necessity for the
proposed Super Valu developmenP, •would request that *.out-
approve the enclosed engineering :data,and the request-for
the rezoning and, building of the shopping tenter + .i.8t' ►s'
with Short Range Alternate 3.
Very truly yours,
MASTOR MD BALE, LTD. -':'
By
William O. Bale
Wen/mel
f
•
Dear Resident, 1
. R commercial convenience center,is proposed for can- !
• . , stru'ction at the.j ton of COY Wigcaa and Anders
• 1 Lakes Parkway. Trio center._ w9li iecd +°a
f .5tlper* Vain grocery, hardware store, • 9 Store and
• ether specialty Shops. We watti•d iike.rynure opiaiiarn en
this proposal since it offers a wide range of needed
services to•nearby residents.
Please indirato your opinion.by cheCki the appro- • -
priate blank, and sign:Yellr..rra1" and a Tess:an the,
,attached stamped, self-addressed card. .
Tharrrk you, . .
iv*•
I ;:a I would like to have thin; a Onvent ce r• , .
apprar�re. .. ••. I ate at the laa loran of rurrt.I►
Rawl tip and O •Lakes Pariaia Y� e t _
that incr�aised.traffic will be•"taken Ie€o cad
. si.deratinn for affecftve•central, . ,
I do not want to:_b ve a ransom t Rp:re till
•
' L.I located at the 3urrct�ian. of coon y ...• ..{
and Anderson Lakes Por ute/. • •
•
ign ore �..
i t•
•
•
•
a ',. -
. - .
. .
Attention: City Manager Roger Ulstad MAR 2 g 1970 47',
Members of Eden Prairie City Council
. .
We, the undersigned, are in favor of building a grocery
store, hardware store, drug store etc at the corner of
Highway 18 and Anderson Lake Road:
?ix/di rl—k/ > -cl'az,/4.ega444.,,..,..{-.?./. c;,,//: .§-44.
czA/5 rifea..L ECAZ filf4/4 I)k''i 3‘ie--,7
;SZIfillA-34.-r-el-Z 6.3-ZAA-ene (4/4'-c__ y,"/(--
pi( N'erOrtetiX ttjte /YI.-(rr C'r:5
, V
1131 ALA g.25-2). 61' 7 ..2t. 99y- 36 0.,/
/ /
7 7
)./ UZ;cet-Ai ' '' -'tf- ??',c`
Cttlajts 414Ake itiki 4110 ail ....
-FA.Lez.‹P....-..._ 9,,..,,
r (frYL k31Z14-.1.1' 4-
31
(76 cob,40,( ,,,/,. --,,,,
4 i a '
(104.1°' /0.2,0 d Cue.< D 'Ile,k 'PAK.3 4101" i 1 1
:-.'l..',..e4 i fc-ie
/:).-:;e41
..er --1 Yet
.(-- 47 9_5
4 , ec.
-"?._. 9 Ar.'•e(e;)----Te.,,,-.. .x,
6/0q— ivli
Q 3 z s, dgabei#4 /1. 4. OW-k c fie
jj'(
ajlAdl.,2r:. 46-, •
• -4.-±.
rbe -7
,.. .,
Ilit • eir.,\,,,,. CLYNO 41,151,.u.k d - 44 ....igo - -:,- .':I-:
, . ...-!,... .' - L..-.::
495 71"4'42 l 'i°14 11V '' '-44e. i-' -kie '7:C::, .:I
.1%,"
.,,-.,-. . ,''-•:.:::'.:-:::,.-.:::,..',,-.... . ..'.'.2.:•..',.. . -. •, ,
'.. ,.. . ''' ..: •'', - ,. ,.. , ,, _ ,., ....... . . ,
•
• . •
-• '.:•-„.:
:,•;,:::
,.....(,
... , .,„
. . "..............• ... ...,
.. ......_.. _
• ., '. : ,
.. _ , ... „.....• •-
'•-4.1,.. , • ..,, ::,'
. .
,.;
‘747 7"
.
/: • , ./'f 'V
V.J 71.44 t(ceiii- 4
93-0 a&tri , ,,,,/ ... ..
,...Alot .447 .etiii „
.. -7-if
\--t- oter2,/,„_. Iveip_ • worifi7i
ea( . ritr.40 -
If I
C006(44(141(44.—:
"'•
fig.i f x _s iSi
• ..,
A _
ceiliot k 9c/47-. ivris-:.
..„„.....„ 9 ).7 , iri.......e... r 1
,d,,,,,—
c.L.t..„4,4,..,0,-‘14d•
..,...
_14 ..../t(r)'-d- .1'44)4
..:-
,,.
ifie,',..
1.__ 04/44164/6/ 4... fYif-.11 ::.,i-.':','.
Ci}104114,11t 1/(47 IC/J .J ' ' „__._._ti ,-,,..,.
d",...eAg,..-rk; :-k•4./.'7',t5;'''".".:u'''.°...,i..T.7c:'
ff-etr.7
i • lii-z-.2V..-:.,1:,....-••H.--;,'....!.,
111..190 IdA ifu . . ...,',...-,2-,: •::....,',',
• d'",?;; ;(es,,,(i) tli-,L4-41
4, - Doi iv.,----
....,..-.......... ,
,.:•,, .:."7'.:.::. . -".'..;...'';;..:':::7'. •:,•,;!::::
•'f:;'''':,'' . '.::::!'
„. . ...
,,.
. ., .
• .,....
'' 2.......
- -'`...: ., ,:7.•
• .., , ...,.,.
' '.::''S.,:.::;. :::::::'"i7 :'''''''' ''''•'.
. .• ,„ ,,,... . „
. .'. ,.:: :..:,',.,'',.::':::::::;,',:Z:'.'3. '''''' ''':•'..."''''', .,;,':.',
01.118; .''::', ,„.-'.;:.2.-1:::':.ici:'7, ':,:::::,1,'':''''.7.;,.K.T,'•:".7.1:h':-:::::.-,'"'"::'''''' :: : '
• ,:.: .-. ,,, -
. . ...,....., . „
.. :..:.
•
•
•
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
• MINUTES Approved
• 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1979
y+IISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Rod Sandstrom, Richard Lynch,
William Bearman, Liz Retterath, George
Bentley, and Matthew Levitt
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Oke Martinson•
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director of Planning;
Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner;
•
• Donna Stanley, Planning Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes - 2 - February 26, 1979
C. United Methodist Church, request to rezone .9 acres from PUBLIC to
'R1-22 for an existing home at 15150 Scenic Heights Road.... A public
meeting.
The Planner referred to the request and to the staff report recomanen- ..
dation for approval, explaining that the area is currently serviceable
by sewer and water.
• Mr. Tim Pierce, of Pierce Associates, introduced Mr. Bob Hogie,
representative of the Methodist Church. He briefly summarized the
reason for the request, explaining that the Eden Prairie United Methodist
Church has decided to give their Pastor a housing allowance for retire-
ment purposes, and that the parsonage will have to be sold. They are
therefore requesting a zoning change and.administrative subdivision on
• the .9 acres, and explained they they are adhering to all city requireme;
• .
•
. .
. „. . . .
_ • •
• •
•
•
. • •
•
• • . -
•
•"
•
• ' • • • Approved
• Planning Commission Minutes ' - 3 - February 26, 1979
•
•
C. United Methodist Church. . .public meeting. (cont'd)
•
' • Beaman inquired why this particular area was chosen as a lot
shape. Pierce explained this parcel shape was chosen in order to
avoid the possible 212 alignment and tu allow a usable background
• . for the home. .
. .
The shared access of the driveway to Scenic Heights Road was dis— • .
• • . cussed, and it was noted that the church:owned half of the drive-
• way, and the other half was owned. by Mr..Kent Barker.
- • Levitt inquired whether this request was-to-be looked at asa
plat. ' The Planner responded that the staff is 0,141.4erins 11, es an
administrative land division, which will be handled through the En-
oiteering Department as part of Ordinance 161, if. there are no object-
tions from surrounding land owners and it is not contrary to any City
ordinances.
•
Lynch questioned item no. 4 of the staff report, regard* the pay-
ment• of cash park fee at time of service hook-up. lbe Planner. el", . .
plained that originally the cash park fee would be paid at the time
of the building permit. In this case, it might be most appropriate
to require it as part of the land division.
Pierce agreed to the cash park fee sum for the land division opinenting
that they did not feel that the City should waive the cash.park fee for
• religious organizations. •
MOTION: Bearman moved to recommend to the City Council approval.of the
rezoning of the .9 acres from PUBLIC to R1-22 as per the material dated
February 6, 1979 and the staff report of February 22, 1979; revisit/
staff recommendation no. 5 to read "That the Owners must remove the propert...
from the Tax Exempt Status it now receives". Lynch seconded.. motion carried
unanimously.
•
Levitt expressed concern that this would.be a burden upon the church.
- - - • Pierce-eiplained that it would not happen in this case because they do • •
have a good buyer.
. •
• -
•
• • , _
. . 6,33
• • • • • •,••• • • •••••••••..• :•';•:;•••••' •-;„ • .••••• ••, • • ..
•
4 • •
•
•
•
. . . . ,
. .
•
•
•
•• •
•
• •
:Er41.!''; • '
•
•
•• • •• • •
REAL ESTATE CONSULTAT4DS
•
•• .
•
February 6, 1979 •
•
. .
...•
•
Mayor and City Council Members
Eden Prairie City Rail
Men Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota
. .
Dear Mayor and Council Meadierat.
The Eden Prairie EmitearEethodist Cher-Ohba* 001104 to • '
give their Paster a housinyt allowance, TM •IPZ•der to accomplish • .• • .'•„•••:•;-:•:•,.:.•,,,:
this the rhnrch parsonage will have to he sold. Approval for the
sale of the parsonage was granted by the members at a duly Pulafehod.
meeting on Deceinhow 14, 1978.
The attached application for oontop change and
is the result of the above decision .the.Curb.alse.requeetetbot an . . •
Adolf histrotivtec"gilatori on the vernal described in Exhibit 'Au,he •
approved concurrent with the resoning,..of said parcel. .
•
It is also requested that any apP6fAt aoseasttrants stay with .•
Plat 56716, Parcel 410. -
• .
Sincerely, . . .
PIERCE.*
•
BY "
, •.
rim Pierce
TP/lp
Ennis.
X ,
• .
• —
• •
•. • •• • •
. •
• .
•644012kAnsi
•
•
-- __..
• r
•
tr 9
e
at Ilittildlas
clk ttpet u six tetth.att et{W.MCMrtd.PO.•.
at iltli7�!itt muter et Unei�m I.'taMxMT*Its orth.U.
1 •ee•ttt *test•en In utlt4M AmRtm of t•
al :. (.' x.1e11pp the Pet.1i+w Ot 1a rOttuo k o.ttt1e'It tt[tln3at
A SHIOtlr.mratttl. tilt.tl ur..�tattn as at,5' Tits
0•9 u tr t.lrort wRt t i+ta�t tt,t Batt men
ti enes.tt of 55..01�s�51I5�511 ttl tttt.ntttnt. �16lrta
aaattt5 at ioftlttnt�asofur 4l05tllttfit/' • .
• ...s.a t LP tM tttt of. ttlteLt:mil:4t£1155-*hltauseuma�stait004tt*011 �•. d 'c sa tot'�°d1.. 0l5xet�lmistettttts et ot�tlttttl�tts•n txtaxs
t it II*tl tit.tr at 8ttetaett. 'Ituath'
+•. rwµt• 'i3 attre r lad 75 a!Ntbt*erect aeon a1 ;,
tit II Altair!tot e/t smatr to tsa s..tn fret etfalulg
i $051l 11 0.ttset at nextttxst aanat sat t *tt*1. Wh
et era the swum d rltrttt1 r.abe susamass lunar *au Wprta••ta Nand at Ott
4'—rya 11:1
bit a Or AIM&amnetirslf w**it54lkit+t1.
; o Scare!
1 i :le
r
W...o i e
.1 e a
4 .3
a
>05
4 y:ar. • .400.0— r —. ... •yw..o.•t..N w.e M1sas•e
Ar,
b `�t�... eat=.�3 — ( :t. _
Hr.t4z. _ems- i
gr 1* / I
/ r 1
../ / V "� 1 Zert;ci ca '—134"'�t vim= ' •
/ / I Alden Peal a /4%1%qd Ali Ca1t1Y
1eW
rmAsalcr.r.�ra j. f"tCX_X. 1t+ .J '.t
t t n ► t t t s t t i t l
Mat Nwa tt.t WY. OOt sum 9lmenn:1t1#* ts,s t17V tit tilt
i- •
• itik3s9. .qq is `:
"it\0 A.4.,....i
.• \
.. p
ifilig 1 —
�f
_ .., ..
...
...
••
..:.
t,. ill if) /( ¢$ .. .
,,,
,J{` .
fL�plT'4 \� 1 _ as
si
y a I
nnaER MS
_ `I
111111 r
r ^-- MR
J Ca
y
1 � \
��. \ W":
P 7^
1ff
________ -. j %
-,i .,...--- _ --_:-';:1;1- - .:_-1-'
�,.,._ j f
;• T�'S - z'- �Y'
'g, '' alp :. _ i�= 4
r
/ ••
4 o 2 St ���Q _
•
•
t..ar
R la
• r ;
T 11
7 • C aru
a . a t�
xX
1 �;
a.g • • VW NV01/131-1F
•
\ t '
M
o$
Ni. E. -
Vik/R3. 8/1/ •off /5 77 . . . •
4.
a_ INCM Y lw
•
\\\\\.. ,I,::',-1• \ , . ,
y. 10 •t It,viii; n fu : .
t } lV r�y* L 4d{% a ,
a 4
''*fit, ."1; 1;31',...4,.'".' / .:" t3
l bar i.?K;; .4 Ilt1p1• 4
�,�- �+
.ifs ..fiv. ,..„i --.
QRp1 .. \•''•4` • ."1..
L� is{s .r
4 :.
1l
a
4
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jean Johnson, Planning Assistant
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Planning Director
DATE: Feb. 22, 1979 q
PROJECT: Rezoning of United Methodist Church Parsonage,1515O Scenic Heights
APPLICANT: United Methodist Church,15O5O Scenic Heights Road
REQUEST: Rezoning of .9 acres from PUBLIC to R1-22 for
an existing home ( division from church property
will be accomplished through an administrative
land division)
BACKGROUND
Land Use
The 1968 Guide Plan depicted the area as a combination of public and
multiple uses.
The home was constructed in 1965 and has been used as a church
parsonage. -- o
The 1979 Draft Guide Plan depicts the area as public(church) and
low density residential.
LOCATION M A P
r 2 i ;17'�. f.4 -1 iOLT
ll9!...A,I
S :1i :::i. / ♦ia1. fAl\- arge
Y-G'rY.? 1;' ... .. - .'I�N7Ekl Parsons P
.. --PRK ', I-5
/ ! � C.P.T. •
P 8 i . 1,,`'G9.16.10
7,, . . - - • . - -ti-,,_-__-. 2- I, t.,. . ..., ..
` crZA
lr\Th
11 loll,,k�-t _ _i \!.69 ...-,..)
103 11s
Staff Report-Onited Methodist Church parsonage page 2
page 2
ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS
R1-22 District
minimum lot size 22,000 square feet
minimum lot depth 180 feet
minimum lot width 100 feet
setbacks: •
front 30 feet
sides 15:30 feet
rear 25
The platting of the parsonage lot from the church property meets all
minimum requirements of Ordinance 135, R1-22 District.
The home is not presently connected to City sewer and water, but services
are available from Scenic Heights Road.
TRANSPORTATION
The home would continue to use its access to Scenic Heights Road which
is shared with one other home. •
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the rezoning of .9acres from--
PUBLIC to R1-22 based upon the'following:
1. The request is consistent with the 1968 and Updated 1979
Guide Plans.
2. The request meets all requirements of Ordinance 136,
R1-22 District.
•
3. City sewer and water is available to the home and connection
will be made when desired by owner or when required by City.
4. That at time of service connection, the owner pay $275
cash park fee, or the amount applicable at time of service
hook-up.
* 5. That the Owners proceed.to remove the property from the Tax
Exempt Status it now receives.
JJ:jj
* Delete "proceed"; add "must" (as per Plan. Com. meet. of 2/26/79)
to item no. 5.
•
January 26, 19 •
City Planner Alex Dorenkemperr
City Of Eden Prairie 18925 Pioneer Trail
S950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Minn. 5534
Eden Prairie, Minn. 55344 •
Re: Accompanyingapplication for zon
ing.and-the 8i:viaSon• of
Outlot A, of my Crestwood 73 Platting.
Dear Sir:
In 2974 I made application for the ring and the division of
Outlet A, Crestwood 73 into three iota. I paid the requested
application and rezoning fees toa 4W8.00 but my:.request was
denied because-.I bad previously-signed previously-signed a Land, .Ho L—Agreement in
1973 Wherein I bad agreed not,to petition.ther ViIla e: air Dim
Prairie for any further platting before September , 1978,
With my current application I have again paid, the.required Saes
and I am.regnesting the rem of Al: etW 73 Tram
RU-:Rural to R1-22 Single Rem y Rewirdea i . lon ;rigoalitt^-astrtte
• diiaton of Outlot A into three
Outlot A has three proposed lOts.tibitli I believe Conform to the
City Ordis„en a Regulations.. The late call.front.on._a.p±sWH .:street.
l`wo a the lots are fry on--a hard surface street: e 0
a cul-de-sac and the third--lot could be seared by that'.nu� 's eaa.
- There is a home on one of the three r4p0.sed Ion.and the location
• of that home would also conform to City Ordinance Regulatinna.
Sincerely,
Alex Dorenkempeer
•
•
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Comnission
FROM: Chris Enger , Planning Director
Jean Johnson, Planning Assistant
DATE: Feb. 22, 1979
PROJECT: Outlot A, Crestwood 73
PROPONENT: Alex Dorenkemper and Richard Wilson
REQUEST: 1. Rezoning of 2.17 acres from Rural to RI-.22
2. Preliminary plat approval of 3 lots
REFER TO: ;Previous staff report of Sept. 6, 1974)
BACKGROUND: (Landhold Agreement)
June,1974 Mr. Dorenkemper applied for platting of Outlot A,
into 3 lots.
August,1974 Mr. Dorenkemper applied for zoning of Outlot A,
in conjunction with the platting.
November, 1974 CITY COUNCIL ACTION, motion to approve the platting
and rezoning of Outlot A was defeated 4:1
The subsequent motion to close the public hearing was
approved uanin,ously.
( A May, 1974 platting request by Mr. Dorenkemper for
other property(2.5-3.5 acre lots in Rural District.);
was recommended for denial by the Engineering
Staff, Planning Staff and Planning Commission. The
City Council on June 25, 1974 moved to deny the request,
the motion passed 3:2, and was based open the l.andhold
Agreement, insufficient lot size for the Rural District,
and other items contained in the Engineering rep•.rrt of 6/18 74)
1963 COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN •
The area in question is depicted as single family residential.
1971 Metropolitan Development Framework
The 1973 Metropolitan Council Development Framework Plan depicted
the parcel outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. This •
plan designated the area-as Rural and the following polities
apply: •
"Rural Service Area •
•
The. Rural Service Area will not receive major urban services
such as sewers, transit, and highways during the.19'75.1990
planning period, but metropolitan investments will be made . . .•
to the extent necessary to maintain rural etaatulards of public
services. This area should not undergo urban development
before 19�t1. the followiruj.r�tegeries of the Rur,:a" ;ieruice
•
Report-Crestwood, Outlot A -2- Feb, ,:Z, 197:'
Use of Metropolitan Sewer Capacity Restricted by Council
•
Policy-Metropolitan Sewer lines that were built to connect
outlying communities to the metropolitan sewage disposal
systems run through these areas. These lines were built
to relieve pollution problems, and Metropolitan Council
policy prohibits their use to serve the intervening open
land. These areas, therefore, are part of the Rural Service
Area and should remain rural until the restrictions are
removed. Restrictions on the use of the metropolitan sewer
may be lifted to accommodate the expansion of freestanding
Growth Centers in accordance with adopted programs for
their logical growth.
Transitional Area- This area contains commercial agricul-
tural operations which are gradually being replaced by
scattered urban land uses such as hobby farms, large lot
residences, park reserves, and some industrial plants.
It also contains extensive areas of wet soils poorly
. suited for agriculture. Commercial farms should be en-
couraged to remain in this area. Low density urban land •
uses will be permitted so long as they do not require
increases in the rural standard of services being provided.
No new regional sewer, highway, or other improvements
will be made before 1990, but the Urban Service Area may
be expanded into the transitional area after that.
Installation and maintenance standards for permanent
on-lot disposal systems should be rigorously enforced."
(page 13)
"The Metropolitan Area should consist of an Urban Service
• Area and a Rural Service Area. Metropolitan Systems and
urban services will be provided only within the Urban
Service Area. Rural service standards will be met in the
Rural Service Area, and persons choosing a rural lifestyle
should not expect to receive a full range of urban services."
(page 16)
In 1975 this Policy was updated to include the following: •
"Rural Service Area •
The Rural Service Area is predominantly agricultural with
an increasing amount of low density development. Prior
to the 19G0's the Rural Area was almost entirely agricul •
-
tural, hit since then urbanization has been spreading . .. -
throuri:cut the + +. This urban expansion includes
recreation areas and park reserves, highways, hobby farms,
and large lot residential developments. The increased
non-agricultural activity and the urban-oriented population
that it has brought to the Rural Area have caused serious
problems for both the agricultural cnanutnity and local
governments. ..191
•
Report-Crestwood 73, Cutlot A -3- Feb. 22, 1079
For agriculture, the spread of urbanization has meant
spiraling land prices, higher property taxes and special
assessments, stricter regulation of farm activities
(nuisances, odors, noise), heavy traffic that interferes
with slow moving farm equipment and increasing incidence
of trespass and vandalism. Scattered residential develop-
ment often prevents economic agricultural use of the •
remaining interspersed farm land,.and large areas are
thus effectively lost for food production. The psychology
of urbanization turns many farmers into land speculators
even though there are clearly not enough buyers to make
all farmers wealthy. Farm investments are postponed in •
the hope of selling the land, and soon the farm operations
deteriorate.
The spreading urbanization is also straining all levels
of government in the Metropolitan Area. Local governments
in the Rural Area are usually not well enough financed
or staffed to provide the urban services desired by the
new residents. Some.of these services must be provided
on the county and metropolitan levels, and development
in the Rural Area has led to several costly sewer projects
• which were needed to stop pollution.
General Rural Use Regions
The General Rural Use Regions are rural lands that are not
the best for large scale agricultural production. This
area includes many uses, including specialized agricultural
uses such as sod farms, truck farms, and nurseries as well
as gravel pits, recreational areas,wild game preserves,
horse farms, unused land, and scattered residences. Some
large crop and dairy farmsiflay be included in this area.
but most of these are marginal rations that are suc-
cumbing to the pressures of urban yawl.
Land in the General Rural Use Region is not needed for
intense urban development before 1990,\and metropolitan
services should not be extended to the area before then.
The population density of the rural area, therefore, must
remain low enough that urban services will not be necessary.
The continuation of existing farm and open space uses is
of high priorityand requires tax assessments based on
the use of the land rather than on its speculative urban
value.
Subdivision of land into 2-1i acre lots is becoming
increasingly common in this area, and platting at this
density constitutes urbanization. Such subdivisions
create demands for increased public and commercial
services, including schools, recreation facilities, road
improvements, utility and cornnunications networks,
drainage improvements. increased road maintenance and
snowplowing, shopping facilities. and greater use of
sheriff and fire department services. While subdivision
platting typically occurs 10 to 20 lots at a time in the
Rural Area, the cuuulative affect of these small Increments
.
Report-Crestwood 73, Outlet A -4- Feb. .22, 1979:
has been sufficient to create financial and service
problems for school districts, communities, and counties.
Strips of residential development-with driveway access
to rural highways impair the farm-to-market and point-
to-point transportation function of rural highway systems.
Subdivision platting in the Rural Area should occur only
where public services are adequate to support it,i.e.,
in rural centers and Freestanding Growth Centers or _.
where services are guaranteed by the county, municipal,
and school districts governments. 1
Rousing subdivisions in the Rural Area destroy the rural'
character of the countryside that people moved out to
enjoy. They also set the pattern and character for future
urbanization before the community has planned for its
future. In order to retain the rural character and avoid
the costs of additional public services, land must remain
in large parcels and there must be.cui iderable open
space between houses. This means that those who choose
to live in the country should twin large parcels of 1an&
A low intensity of land use promotes the conservation o'f.
natural resources and le$Sens Or eliminates-the burden.
on public facilities that would be caused by urbanization.°
( pages 46,47,48 ) .
1979 DRAFT GUIDE PLAN
The area in question is depicted as single family, outside of the
Metropolitan Urban Service Area(MUSA) . •
Zoning
The 2.17 acres is zoned Rural. Ordinance 135 requires a minimum of a acres
for construction of a single family home in the Rural District.
•
, I .
•
Report-Crestwood 73, Outlet A -5- Feb. 22, 1979
•
- ,/ . \_ - .i46-34� _ 34l
ili
.ls r
�, 'I34 i. `` :.b.'‘
page 2
.r>t. 341 \ 145
. s
`/ 1 1P e
c . % . . i, - , r ._,i LOCATION PAP_
Liu 1
r I, FA C =1/ . ...
I_._....,:f. .. .. . _ ... .. •
ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS •
R1-22 District
minimum lot size 22,000 square feet
minimum depth 180 feet
minimum width 100 feet
•
setbacks: •
front 30 feet
sides 15: 30 feet
rear 25 feet
Section 4.1 Purpose, R1-22:
" a. to reserve appropriately located areas for single
family giving at reasonable population densities
consistent with sound standards of public health
and safety'with ut sanitary sewer." (page 3,11rd.135)
•
Report-Crestwood 73, Outlot A -6- Feb. 22, 1979 • ~'
SITE PLAN
• Parcels A,8 and C proposed in the platting of Outlot A meet the
minimum lot depth of 180 feet, and the minimum lot size of 22,000
square feet.
The plat does not conform to the following requirement :
1. The existing house is setback 10 feet instead of •
the required 15 from the side lot line.
•
If the lot line is moved 5 feet to the east to
provide proper setback, then either one or both
parcels -(8 and C)will not meet the required
100 foot minimum width .
Transportation
Presently the existing home accesses to Dell Drive , a hard-surfaced
cul-de-sac constructed below City standards as service to one home.
Parcel 8 could also access to Dell Drive; but parcel C would
require extension of the hard surface of Dell Drive to its easterly
line for proper access, as the hard surface cul-de-sac terminates
mid-way across parcel 8. •
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Planning Staff would recommend denial of the rezoning of 2.17 acres
to R1-22 and the platting of 3 lots for the following reasons:
* 1. Variance on side yard setback, or minimum lot width
would be required.
2. The rezoning to R1-22 without public sanitary sewer
is not in the public's best interest or safety and is
contrary to City policy.
•
3. The rezoning and platting request occurs outside of the
Metropolitan Urban Service Area as outlined by the Metropolitan
Council and contained in the Eden Prairie Guide Plan Update
and cannot be serviced by public sewer and water at this time.
Allowing urbanization in the Rural Area would create unplanned
demands on city, school, county and metropolitan services.
4. Dell Drive is not improved to City street standards
and the cul-de-sac as installed infringes upon
parcel B. •
* 5. Dell Drive is presently in excess of the length of cul-de-sacs
allowed under Ord. 93 if the length is measured along Crestwood
Terrace from Dell Road. ( the gravel road exiting to the west
to Co.Rd. 1 is substandard and not improved to hard-surface)
•
6. Approval of the R1-22 zoning and platting would be contrary •
1 11
to other developments in the southwestern area of the City
including Mr. Dorenkemper's,five acre lot •subdivision to' thww t d
northwest.. •k /,tf�,th/''i'�t"' ��`'� +'.S` ft.4x1�°"1a.r-}: l'n tY�..•,. ,. :r.11�;�°6B
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ADDITIONAL BAC KG ROUND
DORENK E MPEP, wI LSO RE1):,UES I
•
DECLARATION
•
WHEREAS, the undersigned, Alex and Irene Dorenkemper, husband and
'life; represent they are legal owners of real estate lying within the
• following described property situated in the State of Minnesota, County of
•
Hennepin, to-wit:
All. that part of Government Lots 1 and 2, and of the SE 1 _
of the NW k of Section 30, Township 116, Range 22, described
as follows: Beginning at a point in the North and South center •
line of said Section 30, distant ler reds South of the point •
of intersection of said North and South center line with the
center,line of County Road No. 1, said point of beginning being
811 feet South of the North Is;Corner of Said Section 30; thence
South along the North and South center line of said Section to
the center of said Section 30; thence West along the East and
West center line of said section to the Southwest corner of Govern-
ment Let 2 in said Section 30; thence North along the Went line
of Section 30 to the center line of said County Road No. 1; thence
Northeasterly along the center line of said read to,its inter-
section with the center line of the new-right of way-Of the Minn- . _
eapo].is & St. Louis Railroad Company; thence tartly along
the center line of said new railroad right of way- 1383.68
feet Southwesterly, measured along the center line of said right tl
of'way from its intersection with the North line of said Section
30; thence South 620 061 Est 569.43 feet to a point in the
• Southeasterly line of above mentioned County Road No. 1; -thence
Northeasterly along the Southeasterly line of said road 1373.68
feet to the point of intersection of said Southeasterly line with •
a line drawn parallel with and 21 rods West of the North and South
center line of Section 30; thence South along said parallel line
593.35 feet to its intersection with a line drawn westerly from the - • •
point of beginning and at a right angle to the North and.South center
line of said Section 30; thence at a right angle fast 23.rods to the
• point of beginning. Excepting therefrom a strip of land?5 feet wide •
'along the Southeasterly side of the center line.of said railroad . ..
right of way which strip is a part of said right.of way. For purpposec •
of this description, the North line of Government Eat 1, being the. •
North line of Section 30, Township 116, Range 22, is assumed to be •
a due East and West line.
•
WHEREAS, the undersigned are desirous of platting their property into
blocks and lots and outlots, pursuant to the requirements of the Village of.
Eden Prairie; and
•
SAS, the preliminary plat ofeGrestwood 73"has been approved by'.
the Village of Eden Prairie; sikeF"-'� •
•
- ,..,. .. .,,.:.rm..•�.�.........-:ice., �.t',...''
•
1� t•Oitr that
The linage.fir 1400:011.112*0.
YiEuntI ,/3!t ardor aa. p aforoxedionettpropinly id id**.
•
indicated, it is not precti .n .,featible at lb:101.0o to develop;a
•
of the grapoaed iota tberedlit and
' W9a Tr is Atzogo, brtho,onneratgoedthrt.a
landcannot be nerved.by water- - iotr ra +tid e'
services) at this.tine'
theendernignattito2.:baba:!sr 'h nea, their f1'1f
. .ac :gne valeta 10 deas�Stet etnd� t
• aya
, , , $ af �
condition to .:� t
i 2, and4, w , •
�_1, 2, Icy 5, 6 7a ai Syr iOay
and 13, $loa1W'3,"al -dare 93at -
1. That the uneterei +d not.pew o.
prairts for any furt r i or tilw,vArt:
aentioned ttntil mtnaiciia andaelfater lararriaos vai1 ! _,• e a
.. the fdateberate,berate, ah
or luctil a date five.mar a !'om
•
•
2. That t e io dor god 111,00011he and':goingnatlige '• l'a re. •► ,.
•
shall not waive building reguirtmaistat and platting ash eulid# 'r ii�t
aid.ail Other village ordinances.
•
wtriszts , the undera been executad this Tieolaratlen
tbleieti4A day et Ogio "A ^a •
s
•
82112OP
e'a.
001IN E CF
bad'haer es .flarta r.. Asa a[iez es
pares'.knovn, who, -` a eho;,ameoutad t •
egoing lnstran ent+pnd - d t* = :he tint m
their ltwe act and deed.
Nat ' � .
Noi.ay,.64 e.N e bou+ty, =...._..
bib Instrument dratted by
sir Cgomn k.Mo F.pits. c.a:1V6.
J ERBIX, HARVEY & StdaONS, I
P. 0. BOX 190
02 TENTH AVENUE SO4. 1.t
FIOPItINS, MINNESOTA S534..;
•
•
•
•
Fr
•
•
• (� l • . loft
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE .
' ENGINEERING STAFF REPORT
PROJECTS crnstwond "74' •
LOCATION: South of Pioneer Trail - West of Creetw+od "73"
: Alex Dorenkemver
•
ENGINEER/PLR/ MR: Sc)noell, & Madson. Inc.
TO: Planning & Zoning Consn3a3sit n
FROM: Carl Jullie, City Engineer
THROUGH:
DATE: 6/18/74 •
•
PROPOSAL: City acceptance of 1300 t' of street (Crestwood Terrace) and alloy - -
building permits on 11 parcels. •
•
•
LOT DIMENSIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAYS, PARK DFnTCATION:
Lot sizes vary from approximately 2.25 acres to 3.5 acres. The current zoning
of the property is "Rural." City Ordinance 2135, Section 34 SuhdivisiOfl
allows only "single family detached dwellings and accessory structures without .
platting on parcels of not less than 5 acres.".
•
•
•
•
i
•
(.
•
•
•
2of2'
STREETS AND GRADING:
A possible routing of future T. H. 212, now under stpdy by the Minnesota Highway
Department, outs directly through the proposed subdivision. A written statement
should be requested from the Highway Department regarding their intention to
pursue this alignment, and in what time frame.
•
MUNICIPAL UTILITIES: '
Municipal utilities are not available to the site and projections indicate they
will not be available for at least 10 years. The developer has furnished store
sewer in the Crestwood 73 subdivision.
•
•
DECQNMENDATION:
Recommend denial of "Crestwood 74" lot division proposed as submitted in view
of the following considerations:
1. The intent of the previously signed landhold agreement was that Mr. Berenkampwr
agreed to not request further platting until 1978 or earlier only if utilities •
became available.
2. The final alignment of future T. H. 212 has not been resolved in thii area.
3. Section 3, Subdivision 3.2(c), in effect prohibits platting of lots less than
S acres in areas zoned "Rural."
Respectfully submitted,
Carl . .ulF
City Engineer
•
111
•
•
•
•
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSSON
• MINUTES Approved
7:30 PM, CITY HALL
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1979
Chairman Red Sandstrom, Richard Lynch,
CMMMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: William Dearman, Liz Retterath, 'George
Bentley, and 'Matthew Levitt
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Oke Martinson
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director of Planning;
Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner;
• Donna Stanley, Planning Secretary
•
• Approved •
Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - February 26, 1979
•
V. PETITIONSAND REQUESTS
A. Dutlot A, Crestwood 73, by Alex Dorenkemper and Richard Wilson. Request
to rezone 2.17 acres from Rural to RI-22 and preliminary plat approval
for 3 lots. Located North of Dell Drive and east of 9639 Dell Drive.
, A public hearing. ,
The City Planner discussed the request, explaining that the staff has
.recommended denial because this area lies outside of the EL.I'1.S.A.. lire
as given to us by the Metropolitan Council -and is not an area of planned
: urbanization. In addition, the plan being submitted for approval would •
require variances on side yard setbacks, or minimum lot widths.
•
•
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 4 - February 26, 1979
A. Outlot A, Crestwood 73 public hearing (cont'd)
Mr. Alex Dorenkemper, 18925 Pioneer Trail, proponent, presented his
request, explaining that this preliminary plat was approved before there
was a Metropolitan Council and Guide Plan, and the lots have been this
way since 1968. He stated they have used R1-13.5 setback requirements
rather than R1-22. and that homes were set back 10' in the project because
they were all the same and set up according to the City specifications in
order to meet the ordinance regulations.
Dorenkemper questioned item-no.-5 of the staff recommendation regarding
Dell Drive as presently in.excess-of the length of cul-de-sacs allowed by
the ordinance. The Planner explained that the gravel road to the west
is substandard and that there is only one access out to the south. He
felt it was important to question whether it is appropriate for one-half
acre platting without utilities outside of the M.U.S.A. line.
Dorenkemper explained further that when he applied in 1974 for these-
three lots, he signed the landholding agreement, but it cost him more
than he anticipated for the cul-de-sac road improvement. He further
stated that this proposal was recommended for preliminary plat by the
Planning Commission at one time and one lot was sold an this condition.
•
Retterath questioned how the proponent proposed to provide access for
Lot C of the plan, because the cul-de-sac ended at Lot B. Dorenkemper
explained that the cul-de-sac currently ends at lot B and access to it
for Lot C would have to come through the public right-of-way. The cul-de-sac
surfacing currently infringes on lot B and if the cul-de-sac were extended
and the right-of-way left the same, its radius wouldthen infringe on lot C.
Bentley asked for the history of the proposal in terms of the original Crestwn:•
which had been approved. The Planner explained that the M.U.S.A: line was not
in existence at that time and that the City was involved in a new zoning Ordi-
nance and a Guide Plan. There was a final plat approving lots along the south
and west side of the road, and in 1973 the rest of the plat was approved along
the north and east side of the road, and that these three lots were held out
because they did not front onto Dell Drive. The area north and west are par-
celed out in 5 acre lots.
Bearman asked whether the 1973 Metropolitan Development Framework Plan was
•
to be used as guidelines or whether it was mandatory. The Planner responded
that Eden Prairie can choose not to follow the guide lines to a certain extent,
but the Metropolitan Council determines whether Eden Prairie will receive any
revenue back from the Federal government.
Bea rman asked whether Dorenkemper would object to completing the street up
to-City specifications. The Planner explained that if the lotswere approved, •
the staff would suggest 60' right-of-way, and the road would have to be
with all of the lots having full frontage on the street. One of the technic
problems with the plan was the lack of a street to•serve the lots.
Mr. Arthur Cavara, 9617 Crestwood Terrace, pointed out that approval of the
lots would set a precedence, and that he lives on 6 acres bprance•or tbe•pol'iiy
of the City and Metro Council. 11
9
•
M1
•
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 5 - February 26, 1979
(-- !r
A. Outlot A, Crestwood 73. . . .public 'hearing (cont'd)
Mr. Henry Berg, 8744 James Ave. So., Bloomington, owner of the property
to the south of the proposed plan, explained that the condition of the
road entering the area was very mar and needed upgrading.
. Mrs. Richard Wilson, 9659 Dell Drive, second party listed as proponent
of the request, commented that they favored resolution of this problem
because they have been living without a clear deed for 6 years. They are
'living on 1/3 of the parcel, and that as far as the County is concerned
the property has not been divided.
Bentley felt that the project appeared to have already been divided. •
The Planner responded that it has not been properly divided. •
MOTION: Bentley moved to continue the item until the next Planning
Commission meeting, and direct the City Attorney to review and give an
opinion on whether there has already been a subdivision, and bring the
item back for consideration. Retterath seconded.
DISCUSSION: The Planner explained that the City has aot taken action to
subdivide and the County does.not recognize a subdivision because the deed
describes only 1/3 of the parcel. Both parties, Wilson and Dorenkemoer. •
are requesting the rezoning.
Wilson questioned why a building permit was issued if the land wasn't sub-
divided when the house w€s built. The Planner responded that the total par-
cel was entitled to one building permit. The County goes by parcel number. •
Bentley felt the request was not making sense because of the ownership pro-
blem. The Planner suggested that according.to the City, there is one overall
parcel, and the request was to divide into three parcels, as Doreiukemper owns ,,
2/3 and Wilsons own 1/3 of the total parcel.
VOTE: The motion was defeated 2-4-0, with Sundstrom, Bearman, Levitt and
Lynch casting the dissenting votes.
MOTION: Bearman moved to close the public hearing on the platting of
Outlot A, Crestwood 73. Retterath seconded, motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bearman moved to recommend to the Council denial of the rezoning'
from Rural to R1-22 and preliminary platting of 3 lots as per the staff
report of February 22, 1979 eliminating nos. 1, S; eliminating "Metropolitan •
Council" from no. 3; and addition of: Approval of the request would, in
fact, provide the possibility of setting a precedent. Retterath seconded,
motion carried unanimously.
•
720.
1
STAFF REPORT
•
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission -
FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
I
DATE: February 21, 1979
PROPOSAL: Cardinal Creek Development
PROPONENT: Litchfield Corporation •
REQUEST: Rezoning of 53 acres from Rural to R1-13.5 and preliminary
platting for approximately 59 lots
PROJECT
LOCATION: As depicted in the Development brochure this project is
located'in the north central area of the community directly
east of Forest Hills School, and north of Valley View Road,
bordered on the west by Baker Road or County Rd. 60.
BACKGROUND
In 1972 this property was proposed as a part of a larger Planned Unit
Development called The Marsh-Midwest Terminal Site. Included with this report
• is a graphic illustrating the anticipated land use in that Planned Unit Develop-
ment concept approval. Townhouses, patio homes and multiple dwellings, such as
condominiums, were proposed for the 53 acre site, with the road system being very
similar to that now proposed. This Planned Unit Development amended the 196E
Comprehensive Guide Plan for that area, which illustrated the potential for an
elementary school for that site. Forest Hills School, occurring directly west
across Baker Road from the site, of course, is now the site of the elementary
school. The 1968 Guide Plan illustrated the remainder of the land use in the
area as low density,'single family. The proposed draft of the 1977 Guide Plan
Update does not reflect the multiple designation requested in the 1972 Planned
Unit Development in this particular site. Therefore, the single family use now
proposed is consistent with the 1968 and proposed 1977 Guide Plan Update.
196E Guide Plan 1977 Guide Plan Update
,iZ, : ' ,).i I ? Ra.7,4.'! ,7% . 19...... 1 ,
•
ri% f \\ , , , . ....„ ....,
r`L1 ! 5��
, ,
i.
R , .„, _
\,, ..... ,,._ 7,0 „s„,
Ta {ifTby l _ �'*
\ 4 e::. ji‘..3."\st
GRAPHIC 7 `,\ IA (,
LAND USE `x,1. .,..N,
O.
It
itirIN '
,-.--7!--'-4. -- , ..,,,(4 }
s .:
, , ,
i : : ,, ... t...„.
• tom`
7.
I = . r �. • a
Planned Unit ,/„/ i -`<.:�:.. -A
Development {~-ti-.., Yow�nhouse
_, ..1 t'.�d.'
�prairie,ldinc�asota, ..r.y.� �. ���� ��,.»,-. _ r,,.y., i.' ,
` Russell C. Marsh and .a :'",f. - —^, �:�rs
Alliy_we.,�Tctminals Inc. ��`�._!\ ��1 \'� '�`• � i. �
i 1.0.7.. i...... ....... iB,f, .........:, .........: ,,,,,:ti, „...:\... „r-.., s ..... ..‘ : ‘ 1..‘1,.,,,:.,‘
. ; '\ 1` /f , IS;e. 1. ; r
AP
•
i ;; i I J _ ~~ ' .1:, 1 .
• •\� ,i- _ mod.;
1 c
I t , .
t
1 .` I .� .--kbllo /V ; : i1 ‘ti
.� ` 1I
rI.,t ;4V....-;44,,,,..,44 `,...\. .. \\ I T• • • .1/4,• -, .,, .•5‘ . - , vi---.1.,.,
1972 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT lag
.
Page 2 .
Staff Report-Cardinal Creek Development February 21, 1979
•
The underlining zoning on the property is Rural with the requested change
to R1-13.5.
•
Since the proponent is planning to dedicate the majority of the flood plain
area to the public and there are no lots platted to the Creek and the Creek
is designated as a General Development Water, the minimum lot size within
300' of the Creek should be 15,000 sq. ft.. This is what is proposed. There-
fore, the proposal is in conformance with the Shoreland Management Ordinance.
However, the 4 lots proposed on the northern edge of the subdivision will re-
quire a permit for filling within a flood plain area, which will be reviewed
by the Nine-Mile-Creek Watershed District and City Engineering Department.
The U.S.G.S.aerial quadrangle maps supplied to us from the Department of
Natural Resources indicate that there are no public waters other than 9 Mile Creek
within the property:
ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS
tinder the R1-13.5 category, the minimum lot size allowed is 13,500 sq. ft., which
this proposal will meet. The maximum density allowed in the R1-13.5 category
is 2 units/acre figured on a gross acreage basis. The current proposal is for
59 lots on 53 acres, which is a total gross density of 1.11 units per acre. The
setbacks within the R1-13.5 category would be 30' front yard, with a 10' minimum
side yard, 25' two side yards combined, and a 20' rear yard. This project seems
able to meet these setbacks in all cases.
Maximum grades allowed on roads are 74%. which this project does meet. The
northern road in the project will eventually become a through road to service
properties lying to the east of this parcel, therefore the right-of-way proposed
is consistent with the 60' right-of-way requirement of our Subdivision Ordinance.
• The balance of the road systems throughout the project occur within a 50' right-
of-way, which is also consistent with City requirements.
EXISTING SITE CHARACTER
The parcel is the site of a long, existing gravel mining operation and has been
extensively modified over the years in relationship to the original land form
in the area. Therefore, the site is largely devoid of topsoil and will require
extensive restoration to make it desirable for single family lots. The severe
changes in topography occu.ring toward the center of the site are the result of
remnant lard forms left by the graveling operation. As the proposed grading
plan illustrates, the majority of the grading on the sit will occur on the
western portion of the site smoothing out tha severe irregularities caused by
the previous graveling operation.
The only soils problem areas occur on the north portion of the site where lots
are being proposed within the flood plain area. On these lots. soil borings
indicate that between 12 and 15 feet of bad materials will have to be excavated
and replaced with granular fill to allow building to occur. The balance of the
soil on the site is of a gravel nature, very good for footings and drainage
capacity. However, the large absence of topsoil will be a handicap for quality
development of individual lawns.
•
Page 3
Staff Report - Cardinal Creek Feb. 21, 19
.The vegetation on. the site is limited to prairie emergent species of trees such •
as poplar, cottonwood and elm, with alder and willow occurring in low lying areas.
The balance of the property is covered by meadow grasses. There are no existing..
buildings depicted on the site.
SITE PLAN •
Grading on the site will provide for very positive drainage of individual Tots
and water collection on tots and other urban related problems should not occur. -
The homes occuring on the eastern and northern boundary of the site will be
oriented out over wetland and low lying open space areas., but the interior
lots orient . back eq to themselves. tots backine-out onto Baker Road should
be mass graded to provide intdF rupt.ion of sight line distance from the home
to the County road.
Open space proposed in the plat would be the dry lake bed occurring in the
eastern side of the property, shown as'•Outlet B and the-.flood plain area not
being filled in, north of the plat shown as Outlot Out to the size of tire
lots, the amount,of open space avafla'ble lathe arm and the general Iom fignittry'
character of the area, as well as the close proximity to forest Hills Elementary':
School, the planning staff would rrrommind.that no tot loot be re.outred of this
development. However, the cash park fee, applicablyat time of buildiiag Ga it
issuance, should be required to provide recreation libilOpment and acquisition
funds for the general area. Looking at the overall general setting graphic pro
vi-ded in the development brochures t will be possible through Open space:, rridpx
to allow access through-this protect from existing residential area$; 4
Topview, over to Forest Hills Elementary School Park. The proponent should pram
•
vide outlots through the•subdivision. tying into open space areas, tying this
subdivision and others into a informal walk-way system that would give t
access to Forest Hills School, similar to what is illustrated in the aecompanyiaa
graphic.
. '
• _
..... .._,, . „
. . .
. .............../.2 . 111.--,...-..:L.L...-1-%.-,--Iffit3,-(11.z..-..,.-.—,,..---:—......„,,-.-.7.4•••,,--41 i'l , • • .
.. .7i .
:.'''c.i.f.'il.:-'-.•-tt'•': -e•-•-.--•s'-':'•.•......;_f":-7-7!'F.-:::•.:-3:1."..*—1.'773'1.:'--:..7.-.•!-•.:.,:z:-.t.„ 4‘, . • •
• 1
'ilf41" ............... ' •.1 ' ' • .—„.... - 1- : • • •, ',?..,...,'\-.4 .., .
,3,,,„,,,,, . . ...-1-7•:—,--------------- r .. .:•----1--... ..• ,..1,:,1 ....-:' ••i• -
'•3f n ',„",t.':',..."'"..-1 )--::--.•.‘",. I, ; : ,-.'-,.1.".. \- • 71-svA...;.
Ai,. , :••• ,-./....,.... P • : i':i:', " •i-1..„': ...•. :i.1 Z•',Y\,••• .:.1....•' ..Zi‘,.j.‘•ii.q%•,.N..7i.s4',1, .1
r....
/?t C::.; I It,':',.';'•\tr/ ; ://;I l',:1,‘',.„1...,..1.... .;,,L;2..
/ \
. I.
k.,'',".",11 l'.•. '-'.:,•1-1-'\-. l'1--,-iii,171,,•;.y:•, , /.;-::• • ,.•• ,.; , :•: :-.,. ; •i•; -. •i - .-y.,S:'•
,,,,„ •„, , ,) , r,
5*1'..-l• 1",''- ',`:',., Af i i ',',‘.irt. 1 :-.i.,,,,1•;;;:--."-.•-•,-•,... - 1..-1.1•;•.."4.•--:•••,•/;-_-_,,"••• „,•\,,,,,,,\.•,_
13.!,!•...,..•,'",,f,.`1,.,','„k''.•: .!!..../ .7s;.' (•;;i --'s ‘.f -• '` .*:::...::••/• .1.•' 1 ..-7 11 44-4.4i7-:.'"-1(1 li'\ . s-4--,,,.-ii!'p.:''',;:-.---I•"•-:'...,y/i,f: '''''A... --,7—.4.-r-r-7-.,..- - .2:,\--
1 ,....i,. .-..) ,i,......,,. .,,4...,---,.;.,:,.;...,, ••..,.,.....z.---_. .......-t,,,, .. .,,,...,„. ...„...,.4-,,,ii-Th• ...----sNi.... \ / : '
! eq. L• k4 l\ " -,-" ..• -;.' ,_.,..‘-f-lci • ----•; -•-,•'‘.s ..•,,;;;,4,r',, „''....:,,\,,_.
.ct<
- I ei r-: 1-jr:;•.,:\ '...:1;:::.•.':•1::11t;1. I.•-•;':;.:7:-:'•:I.': :41'1... . ...........;`1.,...,.:::i :.;11 \-----...'':•llif..!)•••tl ..::;...*:,
\\
Itl
1 . '..'I \I • ""'-'‘•••. .'4.fi•'f' . 11.. '•,,i,''."27.
r..L1.2.i. 1 )'''::'.._...'.:':-.,3,N, '--•-:-',. ii;-"::;:-...j.....A.,, .' l.„...a_. .,•:..- \:'r.:!•....7.,71.••••V....,......;'1",(....•(:'I j i • ',\\.,/://,,••••'', %,.:i.....:.,,,,,,,,,.....
3. (0lil i 17 ••*'-;". :;:',•V•,:`.... 1 V...1,•'. ;,k1,,,.-...,:-. ..:-.1,,,„,,„,-.....-.--,... .....r. ./;IS\1" ;;'.,';:-. ,• /.,,-.7•,...'
) ''g,,' ( •''•?,,,..'''‘ ,...‘,_ -_ ,=..:•••••••••.-1.- .- -;,.... :-•-l' ! ....I .,c.:77". -. ..:r;,,,, ,17.;•,;;-, ,,-
..... ,... ;,..,,.:,-,s. %)..., ,—,--.---.;----.,--., , ,..--7.77. ..., , ..„\•,,,A;;,, ./,,.., _,, ____--_,-
_ .--:
,•,4 --•,-•,-,\:)...:•-., ‘i,•, ,;::,7.----17.,. •,A ,. A-_-_-,'...-x-7-:-..-',.•;',/,•;i:;; -''St•.'4 ,..\,, :•;,....." i-';. 47,..----.--- --,z-
. if.-›.,.(\:f,1.\."7::•-••1; il .---''''.1'-7::1`...:_•.\': k.-A•;.•,•-•,,,'..,''' l':' ...\\'----';., .',5-i",7"•,`,:,-•-•'
1 -,."'",!:, '4,7-'.:1 •,,,' ,--,--. - ":.:.'"-2•4.,:‘..:-..i.;/ ,-- 4 A%....,-.;,1 i.r......;>,
)••,',`
. -'. ‘ ."',1:::•'y•/.4";-...‘•;: "7*/-1-0,-;t: -------;-'4.4"': ' :-.f.:li",,7Y
7
i . ,
.,"____ ___,..,„,1, ,,,.,\. '1-.-- 1----- / 1V-4 .--4: ./.• .y,./.,,,;;; sj\;..4.‘z„...z.,,,":).,•,,:„..7.4,',-....._,. _ ;::::-'. „,.---....._, .•
L
---).,4-4. ,'","I'•-•of,', I /...1.!'27---14-4 , ,•
, 1
i tr, ;• 1'
. , _ ___,,_
s , L.... ,.
.........-::--.:..._:--.1.-:----,. ..:" ‘ i ,..:.::‘....,!;1. ] ,•!
I E 11'-'„'•'''''.-.--.-
I -7--tl:' 4-,*:••7 / /" f 7 .,/
\ , YOV ..''Isii.i 71: f ' ---- . I ... ,1
„,•,.. • ,
i ..1 '
t .
/
i
, -• ..," ..,'t azz--•,r :':.s.s.'s;•:.•„ \ • 1 , 4 t'•-•
14.4 4 i • .
kitC.•;:;-::•/. • ,-il Is.:f•:.:...i.7.,•1-ttz. -1,'1.2,-•:.,',.:,-. s , ,tik
- .
.•
•
L. ' 1, 1 4)1--• :.tfts _____Jitt.
i •• iv
...........____ .,.,..„.......,.......-.-.,....---.----,-,--•:::-•:.-„-•-..7 ct: ,.--;,,-••••::::7•"`k
-... .----7'.-:.4:-.•'----_;•(..'-:'-'•:•. . .---.,7''' •••r •-•" - -'..e..:4;;;•;41:.7";::,,s'\-.`;-•,.i ., '41.
21( 9 777... *"".'7"'. "7:..'.. ..7'.77:.77' r.-.•" 7..71 I.' h:.-..4.., ''''''..,t:: k N\• ••‘,
.•O.,
::7:-_ili ill .••••••1•-•.,.....t • ;,.,--:',.:I.;...-...-;•-.'• - i';'::-:.1':'f..:' \s-i ,*,
ti,.,7-;.1 ,,,--,,si:,,,,-•--,L.:- -.,-.::-1'.,/.. .-. '1- -,..7-5:-,,.N,.1›,.;
1.,;•' -' ,.:/,,`,.,/it :,/K,,'.:;',..,\,.,(\':.)•,::- --..-4-..-f•-2-:—....L. :_,,1- ,,-41t..•-::,. 4,i;;1, N.N.N.,i, .., • ,
t.. t.-i7, .1•:-,',';'''-.1 ' -/ 'z'!,• 1.,\':•:"1":-.-"--•:,•/:''. ' •," :: '`•T'.. ,•.!• -i)1'7, .---.. ./Z:7:-:I" NZ. i„..,\<\;`, •
11-. ',1 i• '. Ili:1 .,\',A ,, ,,,,,:.;,,,,v,:-..1,7"t"7-`, .-7—....,77.7 .7•17.-..:4.,..:,:st:„„i•,...•'-,',,,,••••••V.. \-,•;.!\..,"- ,
iErti',' i ...-:.M. li,''..',_'•14.-'s-:,,; :fill'' -...t.;--:-•:.S. .-:‹.' :1// /./•''- • .•.:N‘Nri' •'‘-11'./.-....-XN- :•
1 12e 4•••• .. - "^'2,q c11'2,!1.;:.•...fi'-,•••-:"' !•‘i.ti.: ".-/:::::.;.:• ;‘)tr A .1'•:'.:'''• •••:*'''''':)1/•77•Ti -'-::-• 1 <•*
I ,,..,....•10,,,',;. ,‘ , s•se:•-v.:•,,4•1; •;.!...•:: , .•4.•:,• Il.''• ..'..•1:•.,14.17‘.- •‹..,.\!....";•/-1 ... .....4• ••"... ..•\, •
• ,,, , ,',.A.: •0.e. - '• l''•'-•. ... '"•".•••t '"--"- ,'• . '',,.'e • • "; •-•,:.''.*- 2%,
8 Cift i•-•'CsAr.,r:'r• VI.::_:•:,:-‘.::.:A"':'.._ .111/.'...::;:-.::: .,.{,I,,' t "-/ 1.—,'":, .,.,.....y.,,,,: ,/ ‘
-1
• I ''-....:1 ''' ','','::::V\ '-.-..•':.-r..;": '',\-, • . ........;„.-• ‘kci'..----..-.:-...,;;;•;,-.J••••• 1./.."-/•:A.:1 • '..\.//, „,.".,•/•• ; ''""4.-- . ..
.,\NI - •',., •• .--- 1 ' . .-• •,•• •,•'',•1", ....---.;•,.x.''
) " "—.. '' ' ' 1-'-1._1\C ••-•-1 ..--. • ,".,•;is-:` • ,,, .
.,i. cr .,..,......, ....‘..v.\-.. , .• . _h...
; • 1 _ .. .. ,,,,,..,..„,,„;, .. . ........_-..----- •
>
: 3 t• .= I.4; s) ,,.',...';'!-•..... ---;..,r " C" 77:: .. ..... , --!'i,i.''A;I. '`.';Z!';,,i.i:„./.,,,•;%,.;- :1:-..-.4=-_-_T----.-, ...7, ...:
::: :::;,.'‘'.-,/•i's,';',A.-- 'flz•„•!-;:;':Vii,...• V:•7-:1.,-;:..1,,';'.':•;:' ki.t4,t...._:•,2\'?,..,,e,;..r--"
? . , , .2,1--,..,:..,:,;:--•::-.. • •-•,..7. .-•..... , ; ,...-,/, ,;,... ..1,,.yr.t. ,.. .. 1 i
\
i• ',, •
- '-‘.si,•• ;.. , '' •‘•.'' •11:- / 17---r-1./.'Alb ti•..ii'l %f . 4/f . ; .
•'. ....,-:.."::•', •:;&(;--- ." - ::=••• -••:-.1.... -. Ai j4..!..1,; !.•!iiis,„.•.••,61
fi 4 •',.....,-",:::?..:.:--'27..•'::. "."•••••:'• ., •....•-- ••,,,.."
i
, .. ,.,.„ /..../1 I,/ i
•• ,...',-. i 0 /./ '. / i ;.•
.C..,
1 ,,,• .
f.' - ...... . .
• , •/:,, ........, • • , ;
s I ,;•••••,' ,,• .r?----&......t
17." i,t If •- -- "--- -- ' 015- ‘. • •,_,..,,,,... ....„ .. . _ .. ..._.. •. .._ ...... 1-..---.
<\). I
Rag`3ar
Staff Report-Cardinal Creek Febr uaary•21, 1976i .
•
TRARSPORTA1ION •
Hennepin County has commented briefly on the access points proposed-by the dre laps
at Theresa Place-and Raker Road and the•iir'terSs Ction north of Holly Road and Raker
"Road, and feels that the sight line distances will be sufficient anrd'acceptable
However, as Shown in the accompanying phic, the County requests addltiorlal
of-way for the Straightening and eirlradi of:.-.laer Road,• or County Masi iiira ct�
the City proposes in thefir-Compreherrsi i Ruide Plan-Update as uri!in•n 'in l9 h
The right-of way tieing: requested:by the my :is generally 341 fry the easfe `n
right-of-way line of-existing CO.. to.about Holly Road, wbere•idditTi" 1
right-of-Way is required to acreemedl a •deg ee curve necessary to s .
and add safety to the read, the;°ip i ,e-f Raker Road 3s asm rit.ia the aver
all City road system and certainly will..enhance..the access and safety of thi s
ject, and will'"be:able tre de aate1Y eal adiditiOhal traffic ener'at d
subdivision and others .anticipated in t area.. trr ardditiOn., the City:stafi o
. mends as is normal for inapit;r , a-5g';mc3rr r'set b k-from th6 rirlht of-raar�
For these ''reasons., additional stud nae,ic to be done of the p1et to a o afa
right-of-Tray and setback criteria. . .
•
•
•
j i
•
•
• Page4 •
Staff Report-Cardinal Creek February 21, 1979 •
. The local road system, within the subdivision itself, proposes one contemporary
cul-de-sac which should be signed as a temporary dead end and 3 internal cul-
de-sacs. Early in the staff-review process, the planning staff did suggest
strongly to the proponent inclusion of one loop road, rather than 3 dead end
cul-de-sacs. The inclusion of cul-de-sacs within a plat'ahere not abbssoiup utteelly
necessary and where the same function can be served through a
is not desirable from a City maintenance, safety, water serfice standpoint.
Included in this report are two schematic lot layouts•.illustritingCtwotd two iffer nt_.. .
approaches to a looped road, which would accommodate the requ
eright-of-way and setbacks, preserve the original contemplated numberrofm unitsst c ,es,
and provide lots all in access of the 13,500 sq. ft. minimum,
ithpreliminary,plat ttoro respond ltos these aroad gsystem items is staff feels critical re-submissiont
minium fntage to the success
of the plat.
As illustrated in the graphic on trails, the City staff anticipates that a side-
walk could be included with the upgrading of Baker Road, which would not require
the developer to construct this. rather to lead links to it to provide access.
The staff would recommend areas designated be no less than 20' in width and that
the actual pathway surfacing be no less than 6' in width, bituminous,to be placed
by the deelpr.viabilityvofoaepath, rather Placement
paths of f a cutting in sthroue gh tthe yar areas wouldapproach.
the
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Accompanying this submission is an Environmental Assessment-Worksheet required
under the M.E.Q.C. ruling that any subdivision 40 acres or more in size or any
subdivision 50 or more units in number,any part of which is within a shoreline
area, would require an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The. E.A.W. accompany-
• ing this submission illustrates that there are no anticipated significant environ-
mental impacts from this project.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS •
1. The request for rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and the anticipated land
use is consistent with existing City ordinances and Land Use Plan.
2. Additional road right-of-way is required by the County in order to facili-
tate an upgrading of Baker Road which will provide safe access to this
project.
3. With the requirement for additional right-of-way and a 50' setback from
the new right-of-way, the preliminary plat must be altered.
4. The proposed preliminary plat illustrating three intenalic l-de-sacs
is not in conformance with current City policy regarding
shouldsberrevised to of
aincludel unnecesay a� o 1 oproad al rreplac ea and therefore
thecul-de-sacs.
5. Improvement of the northern 4 lots occurring within the flood plain area
will require a flood plains fill permit.
• 1
1
• •
{
1' r;i
-.1...x,.0,,v,.......„:,..,....:.,.:.\-...„.. i.„\.,',\,\\-\‘\w‘\t-'\
+ c
lL '1 1 1
ti1113:11,
1 ..
-era S .: s.l a 3,r ry
WON frAllie *IQ_ .
F 1
(. ,,,\-1.1-k"\ .))/Crl'it, ' !-174-67...gii:•4 . r.liiii:' • ... '
" ' . \ j Tu
— ' i- —'1— — '—' leApr.. '...44.i‘141117g1.P;•
_Jill_ __f__ — .:__i
.::...:,.. !..... .
•
‘ i • ,..
=--rdr r- ---i- — — • egettkiti / -. ''' . 1
IJ
.-....-1----------- - ' ----) NA:1%; /***).k: . ..,
• •
•
•
•
Page 5
Staff Report-Cardinal Creek February 21, 1979
•
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Planning Commission has a number of alternatives regarding this pro-
ject. Some of those alternatives are as follows:
• 1. Approve the plat as submitted. •
2. Approve the rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and the preliminary,
plat subject to modifications outlined in the staff report.
3. Return the request to the proponent in order to allow them time
to revise the preliminary plat submission in conformance with the
following items:
a. Additional road right-of-way required by the County must be
dedicated as a part of this plat. •
* b. The plat should be re-designed to incorporate the loop road
• approach, rather than the 3 independent cul-de-sacs.
c. Additional outlots should be provided within the subdivision
to connect the area around Holly-Road,-easterly across the sub-
division to Outlet Band trail surfacing should be provided by
the developer within those outlot areas.
•
;i.
d. The cash park fee shall be applicable to this project.
e. A 50' setback from the anticipated County road right-of-way
shall be adhered to.
f. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Nine-Mile Creek
Watershed District, particularly in regards to encroachment into
*f. Toecorifaordm at gElifgineer's staff report.
Staff recommends alternate #3. -
CE:ds •
*Eliminate "b"; add "To conform with City Engineer's staff report."(as per
Planning Commission meeting of 2/26/79)
.. , . .. ..
... .. , . . , .. .. ..
. . . ,.. ,.. . . . ..
, •• .
. •• -
• '.•,7:.
'•.. ,.,
, .
, .
. . .
•, ...
. .
. . .•
' . • ...4:
..,
.. .
. . .
• .. . . , _,_
i ,
l,
' l' /0 ' --• • • '
: I ,
• .
, ' i . '• r--- , :. . .„
,'
t
t
I
• \k‘..\k: , ...- ':.
•
k •\..._.z-.,,, 1
. .,. .... .,
\ .•i-..-.,..-:;....„.: :•:•::::..,
. \ '\,--,',...:::,•.,-.,...- .--;..;,'.....
- 6., , ,. ., . ........,,
.,:,,,.......,- :.7,.....-..-:.'J.
. ,
• . ::....•;...., ,.'.,..../.7
____—, ..., .. .. .
. grAtzle. . ..(>>„ • ..s ,. .. ... ,....,.......
. .
.„. . :. ..
'1, .:-Iwer,),-•I , i , i' c '.‘ ,, ........ • .....
:„‘•,.... ...-......,...,-...
s .;,- -.__„t..-:. • - --‘— , I- — •,• -
• . , ...
.\,, . . .i.. ...,..,,,,. ..1,....,..zi.
Li
,. \ --
-t
, . ..,.......„-.: ...........,.:
4
. -----_1_........ec.(1....--,Itc{".. \ 11-1 ---cfr.s.7-711.1_.--k1 I • \
-.-7-J1...\4IN.,.-k•"(,'.,,,-.11,\-'-A-^ri'--r/.i.—ti-I:- -4‘7'1I 1s r4-1.T1-.1 1'Ii',. k\i'-''''''—'.----iI,t,,,iti ... I,--\•\
kir..'_`."."'*•--..,-..,.7...-,.;..'.,::•,:,.,-_..L:.. ,:..f:,.'..-.•-';;
— ._ '.'':-''.'..:„-,:.,::.•:.,.....-":.„7,...:..':'.7.„'...,...':,.....',.."..
\ 1 ',,, . .; •. ..,:. '..:-.....-0.::7::.
. .. .,. ....,
..„ . ...„.
__.. . . . .,
__.— _ .— --.1.:-.:1:1. -ii, r'''',,if''''. .. .,',..','''•.....( .:.'...''''..;;C:i
--— —-f-----..- .
. ,
41 -1 -r------ -. ---. ,.',,.: ..;:'..• . '....i....
IAF:•--je. i - .> ,:: .,..:..,:....-,..,,-::..... . ...,-,-.4
--11 rt)--1, • -t, :.,-•:,-. ..,•,••••,-„,...,
. ) ,•• .......•... . .....-...,
•,•••s•-.••••:"........... ....::,,,,,•.-:
• . '' ..•..'!•:::::....-",;,'•-:','..;':,::.:fi....f.7..7..-2, :-,:.
•
• . . .. . ... . ,... .„,._......
Card. . . .. .. ..._,......,.. ....,..,„.
.... .........._ ,.„._.. ...,.._.............. ,c. ,,, ,. , ...,,,....,. ..,..... ,....,....... .
igiaix,...;,.....,:ri,in ini,iion• ...,..4.i..b...;..„,i- - '".101''"'-'27±.-',,.... .L-, ...A... 101.'.„.....,,,,,.....•4 j,:,,,,-,-:„.,,,,: i:-..,'..114;,-,,,,.4....',„':•!,,,,..7...:3„,,,,,,,,••
-- ...--- -.---- - - .--.-'7-"*.-•-•'''.- -'-'-''''': '''''':::'`'''7".":7","'"?.:,::"':."1..L.F.-1,...7'..c..-...:::...74,:,....,.7!"...f"':.•,.-; ,.
•
Site framer/ft . . .
"1-• • tsr,,,fra„... ' ,, ! , ,i f rs ....1.:,,, •s....,, •,:\,,,, \_--...___---) 1 ..
2, ..e,.."...„,,.pp.:,,,,r,,..,,, •,,,,,sarnms•••••NW* # ; I ....... ... ' 4, I.
''...• '''4' ot•%1
111§1***1
!I, I'4•
, i"n Mad.Writeints,••••=1/""r. ..:7 / ' ‘ 1 4 11
„. 1. I 44 .).1 I.-.
. r' ' ..
k --- *
4_404.......4.. i /4„;• *.,......;,(,s*,..,..,, I1,...,4. .....14-_-.°43. bil-ing7-, .
., ' .,`•. 4',,. -',/, 4 4.1 ' ,,,.. -"'••••... ' j-!. 14' :,-
,- ' ./f li • :,,,\\ ',; • -:Vt' '
,.•, // 4 .e.,-0, N. , Pm,*/4 .„...,06..**
' ' q •• e , os., ‘.. ``ie.A ‘ 1.. -r,o,r.,,
, ‘`•
SU N 4••it a, 44.1
' ••',
t•i•4, ,' '4
.(,, f .---.(„ \ 4L14,,L, ' ; ',..„ " It*''''',4,.* 44t,*.t,',4•,,1, , I‘ --.' -'4,e, ••( -' .
' ..;...,/ • v. ‘ 11 ',
% ) ‘
' ''..( 4/ 0 • \ ns _,.... 414* . , n.
,...,,, .-. _.•:,-:.,,reiHt.„Ntl„ . 4,*4***4.44 40,,,-,:-.-_.;
-- -,: "lore*"4-4W y. ,, .47*••.- <, / # -i
---'' - \ * * *_..V . ,.* •\rt4..,•14'4• ..,' t''''.
---- /....- ill/, ' ",,.. `*t'<.--.:-.'"'•-!.Z...;, ---4--...-17.7.-1--:::•••.. ..m,...."727—- 4.44. ....''''.---,"'. , *,, ". 't11,11.,u,'..•'+' ;:i.• '.. ,-i:'1,. 5"=: :-.-1;::3312A. VZ-ji `'sk -- l.r. .4 ; ;.• ,fx,1 .r ^y
ied,
:1-,44;:±g4*---:',4 ---‘ (-----'-41' ('o7t.4-, P3'4*,,•k,,,,,„7-,
ri HI /,sif;'::5,:,,;'!,?:ig-.;:!1?,,,_i1,k.5- .z` :.41 4-. i___:, :. : ', .":--
I ie.'4 4
k I `''' '1. ,i-'-'s.'r''-rI:.:Ii4.iV:1:Mt"' ':4--...-1,:' \„ ,,,,te,,,..4;iiki;t-,-,e7.i.,,,..,,,-- ,?'.•\- -;,..1.:4:,,,'c'cre I
'\PPI iflf,L.1 ,...tr,„ri4:4-prf ....4,,
::,1 ,. l'1,,q, A,1.--''''''':-,4•=:"•••4 ' '''' (N, tr'''C''''' =.1 •', ';''; :pkit 4.'•'',,,IL.Ng,•''4k4:-..,4.4-!..'.'t4,-,5.t ,
1 ' !':il‘;',';,'4,.1%;.':'y'.4%."4'..ot ks--.1 \t I'S; ':;:tt ,•0 sit4:*. ieurt '4'..,,W401,1i,,i),i,f0AV''' t '
1;: i , , 1\‘ ,',,ssc`,.1's,44, / — ‘`,"-o .1 ‘......"'3,4•4••1-1.,' ',`,' -`4.-4's*41, '4• 17,*".,.., t'',‘,.0,., ' .t4,,,,,,y,-, .
,,, ,,,,,,,,?,,f,),),, ,--,,,e..,,,,ri, \...•,, ,...i,i,,,,4.„ 0
, 1,..., ,,,k-.40.,, ,•=t"11 '. i \'',',..-:•,,/,4":11/ ri \`'‘'`,1 ''‘'' ', N,Atm34 ',:k 4 e ,-,_______ -- -,-,:c.-.,,,,04 '
I ,c
,/.../ \ -- ' *--,- --- ,
*... , .... \ ---
4,-.., V k, •
1 1 I i:,,- ..,... ,'I ,,,_ ‘, •:2,. - ^,'Z.,‘ I'
—"....., ........ ,. ..,,,. ,
1 i t. I I -.1-`°.--- -,-,77.;\‘.‘;--;:-?:...7.c.ri; - „,..• ..it,- , -
r „ ,...- , . , i „...-
, ,, ., 4„,, ..•
47,', --•.,,.._\ .--:_c;;;;;;4..zi,'7%';‘,,,\ + .:. I, I ir \N'''''' •
---I 1 A':`, ,;1',,,,,,,,',"i:":\pg-;, 14,ktie; \1, P:,.,t'ir.1", i.,, , I'
-N-
.'I 1 .1.,•.,,,,''• ,.f,c ,%ir,s,',' iv'1,Dtg,t , /1,t " ,, .t.,N •i• 4,1*', ' unmanaged late
r ' , i,AN, !),..,A,;41 ..ill)•••)i.4:',4 ) I r 4, ,.,_ ,,.;- , -, •4 1 ' i I
.. ., 1 '. ,11.,V, y'„A''.',7:7 ',' ....fr+,', 11 ;,,Itr., =71 'i•Ifoi,,„;0,1,,,,ir 1,--1_01 1 iLC. ,',,;,1,1\'..)",:l ‘, 1 1,,, ,I,, ‘4.4,.'•-i ',I'll,.•4.,s,.v i„..,t-- ..,',,,.„,\ i‘ 1
I1 1' 1 '1'; ' ','1;_.,`" 1, \ ! ' i :f '
,, ? -4-( 7 I
,,,...:-,.,-,.,1/ y 1
,. ,,,i-f- -, , \\ V
i r . -,,...- ,
....._ ,,,,-; 1,. ... , i \,it„ ..v t ,,tz.i.,..„...
-.._--,..,;,,-.„..4:;,),' . „, , ,,*,z,,.... il.,1i4.• ..,;•,,- i
I t.1 I 1'' •-::-' ,. ,•-'. .,' ,1
li
‘V`„' FtNT•it 'er 1,...'N
•
I' • , ',. ,,,,--__----: r--,_..r1,-1:4 / ()) ,,, _: ,,','t..,ii/44.,11,, ,r,' ,, 1
1 I ' ,',- „'sd Ii‘,,,,J k III - ---1,/ •(‘ 1
1 i , i / --, --- l'*--V•VI ii :-';---'*--'s‘ -,:',".*
I 1 '41 o'- --,„ I /4---../^N 11 I -‘' ----- C‘e ;1! - .._'d / - .),;';5%-"c: *7-' .ict,
------ I'sr,1-----7 - -"-- iib--, 4.P-1 t41,,o! 1 I
--:7 — ',/ :4- I t ---- i' --- -- , ..-4-11;•H''
i..,..,.
_..----_-,'); (-- ,/,c):-.,-;.3...,, ':--,1/4-----'1';';) - 'w,r• j
• 1,4 _-_-,:' -.-:-_----i, , t.1--,1 -,./_., , i , it,,,4111 , f
i if 11 I' , ,---- —---',/ i ,VOVT---i /41 Lliv 16, I
1 ' - -- ,----- --43.A;ii,
i
IA ,,.._ ,....,
1 4 1 II T‘ • :,-_-• :,i., , . .::, , ..,;,-,,- /,',<-Th I 1 1 4 le" :
11.I 41.44T•i%li. 6. --qi.. .1* '.'' '2';' S'.:' '‘' '',IC 't/(:4;-'k/'•-4,1c-i ,w''
il
_ii
ette frarnewaic ,
_24v-wo imii;•••••=mrsmirimmearmsme . 1
catranal creek od ;crbruce. ; . ....• , ,. .
a gala=kande
tan construction compare la bkinnatedat.ininininbithg 1 , ... • • . . .
•'•':., -
".... ''''..
• i -
, I ('''..:•••••••••:'',.... 1 \ ... ,-, I
, I 1 0-. ',... \ •••• ...........„,...,
• ,/ 1. i I ,....72,4„.... \ ‘.....
Lk' ,
.,-,,..__V-1
r•\.,_,` \—" ,.
-/ -/ ---,---tri-1 -----r----- ---.%.•• ---• , *"."..1,....;.- - — '
.,„
-4--..-.
4•VY, ,,,.. , , ,",, `s , , , -
_ 0- - ..1,':,.7.412'ff:7.-^ -1-A-t----t •-•,- \ sl.%it-'d _...,__ _ _....-__ ;13.
••• - ,,,,,X...,- \. , ‘,...- .-------
-...,
_`•••-...-1'i'7)1,7,?-1‘‘....7'-'77—` \i , __ ..„„,,_ _ ,
1 /
7-- f/';'":..,'''',..-" --.,-.-1,'S\' ..z-.,'-<••••• •••••':----=•••=t7-•-•-r":::74--••-',,;_:- • ,--,,,,•-••-0,,,,-_,,-k•.--—
,/',4 - 7's.Z‘\, ..,:'-'.;-- '''.•',.'.1'4,---. Z.4.7Z.f,..!•-.1,--e:„-7;-••••••.•••=--i.•'••-, •-•„•^...7 .;'.•'":414,ta.•••••••••'-'::- -:••••' !
-¢..1
IF 4..... ,,;,-::.7.-"').'., W ,-- ;•-•::-,:;-- 4-17‘17i; • :=2:: .•••• __ .L.‘1') ' ,..
II
•;:iii,,,,,,,„%,,,,i,e.,.,,,..„..,,_,..zwr;c:2,.....<::„..,_____,\_(.....:,......v.,. ...:....,...... .._...a.„...„_,.„...,.. .......;;..:.„„„/„.i !
, •, .... .,..,.,,.,...„.„,.....„.....„__,...„:.,,,
!,:,04,„,:.__...,......,:,,_•,„1„......1.,. ,, „ ,....,.... .............,.._„1...„_,.__,._._„__ :,,,;,,,,,,,..„.
- rt,-.1,,•• ,'01--4`'.''..!‘ei-,;4. ,0,, .:'"• 0••• ,••,--- I •-•is•'"•• "?.-1,;:c"'i.::•'''' ,--t-•,/' ill
• ''t: -'-'•'''''',•••••••"4•- -,...•, ,"••• •...".2,--6-y4,4•,:_ _. ._....„0:4..,,,,....as, . a , ........r„
, ... ' 7,, "-•-‘,--1/2 .
-, Ai li,., \ ---,:'",,,,Zaz•4si' ,. - -' „?.1 /. -... .1..,?..----ir'---'
V
0, Tojit-1-01,4 ..,....,..„„, , _. „,..,,,,,. .....: ,Iii.„.:.,..;.-', ...,,q.... --......„:„.,:e.f4:,A4
I"t 1 , ',',.,,,,,,,A,,4,,N,-,':;..1.;,e_..-z.i.,,,,34.47,1.--- .1t4t.,.''.4011.,:itr,........:.-
ii , .,\vok,i„k,1,‘,,...,,,,,,, ,t,s,.,-.,:;4--,-",-",\40, -';',::4,„;), gii-4,,k,-k-t— i--
1
.. -
; ,'' ' 0,‘0,\'.• :',7,1",,••v--,- ,---;---z‘t•'.,,,i, 1‘.-Ni‘ \': ----\
lj'III 1 ',; ,',!•-•'" .,4,':-.`;6'1 ..- I I ti, .1 '‘`‘,.:' 4'..,^')-1,*// k ‘\ „at,.....ikk
.• ,,,, , .1,'".."';,: :JP.,',,,, \ """' \‘,..., N.,..... -,s
,,..1 . ..;:•..,- .,_, .-
"Itof : • 0 ...,44,..-_.,. , ---. 40•-• . ,...
'''' ,1, ,'•':I`rt,.,:"•.•.`'..t`'L'.:••, :1`7,,Fi',7,-"''••,',:• - ' '‘'-'' •-. : 4'441.T.'i ' "'14••••'I t :I . ':00'.,---.1 0.-2:57::•):,;?..L.V'': :'.0:40;',„', 4_____ 1.-".----7 , . _ _ "•'''-, " ' ‘0.0,11114'
, ' ,..;',.. 4 „t‘ r —rrT--77r7
..............
r
i'',.'-' ,. i,V, , i ' .
\ . ;'.‘- ., ',,-i't1; ,,, i ,-..., ,_ ,;, 1 '' ° ••• 1 MI: ;I' 1:1,',,,,,'',;0\",'''4j••tt•ii4--•i•:4"4•1- s it '3,',1-•4":•••A••i•r•L+ ' A
‘' ''' -'?'1 -:-L-) 717-' , ' ' 'i %,;;-,----4-i- • _
-1,.., ,,,,,:. • - - . 7 4 •I• , I ,,.,;:.,,., _?,,,-:--:—',--;, -,,,,,,, - ,— .--,i;--\ ' ‘..,_,__A,
‘‘ _ , ----.....-,--- ,,,, - ,-,vk ,..,.\---- " A 16: • i .
t.,4,,II , - ,'- -- -/z..7.-'7:.;•"•; ‘,4‘477•* .• • • -7t"•••••I '•'• -,-r ',, T.
K r.* 1 -' - • --:.- ',--.-...-`1,•'-4-..t - •‘..-, ,\\i,t-t t. h, k 1 j
1-...\..,\ 1,‘ ''' 0 ' • -
'‘E•i :1..•';'.Z:'••'••••-,,' _ ),,',:', ..‘"\sS:14,0 )..-;;.,*,•.l'-Y'' ''I‘N' \ \r''\ \ 1 I
_
-velv 4,-,,,27 .. 441-I
------..-,_,_,t-i.c_g,,__,-----..,-_,,--„7-7---- -
- ---.--
E.;' . , , ,_____ -- ,_,,..„4,.t...,___;__
- •
, ),-,\_____ r_____;,--- ,, , , •• ,-,..„-\ },' - \,_. , .2..,.,. i ;.. a___
-:-
,i. . q %v,.- ....----/.1 L t.-,-... :,-/ 4' , , 1, --1;I.,i .
.______
- i•.4_4 : 4,-4------,----- -----::,;•;:-.-:-.--?••• , ..:••••'-.17'../ii--f•177.- 2,..,kr-,4.,at: '4' fi,71`t i
--'"---I.......t::1 , ‘... ..J.j:__-2-.7•,,.; 71,77.„.:i'::•:;„7...7 7' - .
1''1 v''i',`m"4a1:-011..-.-.U/i‘,4:1 4i4.o14.';;0;*;;-;7;:h5,i`70$11-v:ri‘•i--1-7-:e u.,•l,i"m-_as.,..1.0-;:,16;;,),.;,,,.,,..i.4,,i,:i,,i--iZ-.,-,-,,-A.H,
G = " -;
L . i:- . :-; L7-07-1_00-,.i-s1o"-:lw14,;":*;;,c"•th'o,:r7o"cr.m'"V*I7'i r,,•,°I ‘. sitiml•Loo.0**0.0......t oumeat
cardincll creek .1% . secbons . . : '. :
Won oral* etrapsola SrCr kr.stirisr otilide jaljiteglgat •-weaken conabuthon company Mc. latoomingpmi"Imilt1
• ..'.
•
A.summary .
:o«k. IT, ' ..`' 1
iROW M2 ens ,C f' 1 If \.`�,� `��\
rteZ block 3 ` _
s i‘l It ,,♦�p'tow ow r II
akde-sec / Y ,i +�• 1 �1 t •«+
:::,,..::1,4/..(:‘,7:...."'7,...--;:: :: ‘N_,41 ik k 1/..... d i ,.. ..., . i
.!, '!S-- '.'A f'' ('-'-::)\ \' 3' 1)'•-- _.
-••••,./ r s • 2 / \\— t \ i I/
1i L e �'-:\r�^,,' - - :a,lkt, V
J `-'* JT♦ ' fII om. t '" 1.(I/.
'' ' " @'.:% i 'J i �` 4:',1 , ..,4!e�;JO list ,`` &tlA\,\ I r 1 ,,, ! !
.":/..
I!+ , -, ;x�$�'/.' #1_^- ,, ; ♦ .
v ' is I cuje:1
9� I. Y !'. !,.. !
'.\ l‘ '`tt 1,
t r. Pa
\\ f\'' ' ! P __ Iy G,a t t I `ilalaeanaeled I e
iiiii
I 'll
i , \ -♦""�.,,— .• I,,-`'•` -..+ `
4 4' _ r DI_ ��_ :rr,Y( �r��� /' ;•t;�Als ,` `')LjI,'„t '�i i
--.I I I ,t ,I. _r L- CyS--/ � �, I."-4 -ij'i:- U+1 ' �p
,f.. \ 1. .q'.\ �6\';�. ''�,`,. '17.. 'R--i'!.,-f'_• �l t hrP4 1 )2//f
t , ,`,l /r ,�,.� J, ,\` A ` .'r d..��:,a t t `°�dill ct l ., t 's�/ ,/
11
:� : ':,\\r I` •"'i _ r:,t... r 1, l_.•.a jj,,,x L.,t' '..`a @ t�'!S 4 IL"";' _ r•.�cC
• C Ct it acreed Pia ,,,ikA ''.:4 '': _..attsan. ' '
/,el�tle aa4eesal. e1,
vantage consbudioes Ixn+pn,tat:
.NHI*OV. lir
ter/ I a• i/ j 'i 4. " c.<' '�_``\` \
,,,74,4 u s
N,t t k %
1110
, ,,,. ,dig, ,,.... „,,,,44,4 e.A.,dimin_kr",- iii, -
P, � deb l.% ft � �r s r sz s ra
c " z
_ � � -r �Cy:tr'r
/ ^ °� W a
1 \! n r - iip r
I\ ,,k� _ 1 t hj l
\ , ir,
il 4 4 i. P. , '4 , ,''.'.',,, itf",-4""i. ''''jkiltilirt4* '.-- '`)',IC' :7r*I'l
tl1 ,1 t4 ',��, vF ,�i $ 'S r� :L-a
l rl�. it X \ �'{.
,„I •, IY r „'", 'S 7 .4 ., aC1i€"i s
t �,l[�� g
n r p.• fk"yr? r } 4
.JII
of 1 °N, , ` •! 1 ' ' t , -" 1 1 "aYneandered take
,n., 0 , , , . .,-1,
' a _-'..l SC' r i
' I, il • / .< ,f*-17i. , tj10 ' , '"` 1;1,14*''' I-:, i
* y;
.
1
� , . * I, 'tit I%f/\��J r .�r '',, Z•',
-, ,,li! r
, ,(::: ,, , ,,„„„ii.
1, ,,,, .,,,
,.0,, ,...
. • ._,
_i-1051„1_.-, • ,,,,,,,.;„..,.
___I
, / :,
„....,,,, ,...„, \,,.,... 1 1
IA .--)1 ,-,,,, ›,, „.,--,,_., --_- _ ,- , . . ,, . ,-„,,, ,
.; :sill , , ( .: ,__ _„....., _1 e,,,, ,--- -, , ,.
-- :"" ----' :----- , _....„-,,..„_.../..-• . ; ; b.,v..„, ... ,
„ ,
N Pffi -is,..:._:.,;,-, ..
';i fY' - y� It .�17, 1 I
Jai , rr, 1 f / �t a�
I ' 1f.+a •F. r, f I as * e!'.i • ; Vl w. h ",F .pa,..
'
cardinal creek 1% ' Aarnima
woste,a coratnwt,on r ba bloombiltOn.nirinelatfilAiliCr
.
1*.
.+—mmmonmmova . 1 rr . - S. .
I `. s 1 ,-IVs■m■a■
Air \I I ''•••,.........
i sum \
_,.../..::,,,,,, ' .**1 0‘. 'sk/
do.
� 1
-,..,.,,, , ,.,,,lk)-4,.‘ \t,,,,,,,,,,itt„,„...........„,..„.. \. _ ,--, ,
t. i
-slo,
\ ,
-::-/,,,,7:•,-, ,„.. , ,,,,, , - ,ii* q -....., ii... .... .....,,
-4 . Aor .- \i,'\i , ,. '''' ,-44‘ t ,
1 -8,, , , e
) 1),,,,--- -- ----- --- -,...-
.�, . ° ` °
`,/kt
'''14,0,', .
i t ,:,N'..-4,;,.,.;.^4;;,;:v-‘,.,;..\.,'.-' i \•\,w n _mot -- f '-• i• .T,,--:•-• '..
.■ter, t h\\ '' ;a
`°' ` i
1 IUninegindered hike
ji f TTT YYY \ i
1 I
Ii' , ,,, , .....1....;:'....::,--.... \ .\\..7 ! ,:‘,„ .....i....:...,...-----------
'1:1, i' ' '':Pk' ..1--- I -L,
I '•1 L /
L.
\ ,,,, ,,, , ,
,,.., , ...„,,,,,,,.,,, „,,,.,,,,,, ,,,... ,,.„. ,,,
,,,:_ , ....„,„ ,„ g s , '\
1 , i %, __
I, 4)1 I r - ,, ,S f -'0 , ; 1
► rr r
1.
rii,
_ ,..., ,..:,,
`-- ,. ,_,,- i i 1- I I i. . f 't,\l 4 t
, ,
•r
' .t I, ,wM14 \! IC 7 r
I it a \, ,i •
„ 1 ` '''C'�.'' i ,.,.r u'tt 1
st
sp
i • ,C._ _.\ - ,', , +►..
4
-
�pyFly\ ...} Cy \.
■
g. gfutilittes
c na r , . ...........:,--.,,.. ...-..... ,.
•
•
•
•
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
• MINUTES
Approved
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1979 7:3O PM, CITY HALL
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman
illi mnBeamod an dLizRetterath, Gm, Richard eorge
Bentley, and Matthew Levitt
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Oke Martinson
STAFF PRESENT. Chris Enger, Director of Planning;
Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner;
Donna Stanley, Planning Secretary�
Planning Commission Minutes - 6_ February 1979
• B. Cardinal Creek by Cardinal Creek Associates. Request for PUD
Development Plan, rezoning of 53 acres from Rural to R1-13.5,
preliminary plat approval of 59 lots, and approval of E.A.W. A
Public Hearing. --
Chairman Sundstrom called for a 5 minute break in the meeting.
Communications were received from Mr. John Westlund and Mr. Don
Opheim in support of the Cardinal Creek project.
The Planner summarized the project and the concerns of the planning staff
with the proposal, explaining that this parcel is part of an originals PUD,
but that it does not hinge upon it in any way. Some of the
are
within the shoreline area of the Nine-Mile Creek, but the staff suggests
there is no environmental impact on the area. He explained further that there
is no adopted policy or ordinance that states there should be no cul-de-sacs,
but through City Council's directives in past meetings,reconnuended the
through roads, rather than independent cul-de-sacs, noting maintenance problems
and public safety concerns with cul-de-sac situations. Prior to application,
he suggested a loop road or through street for the project, but the applicants
chose to submit a cut-dp-car natrnrn
736
, •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Approved a
Planning Commission Minutes- - 6 - February lc 1979 .
Mr. Gregory Gustafson, Attorney fcrr Cardinal Creek Associates; Mr. Billy Bye;
and Mr. Lyle Folkestad,of Bruce Knutson Architects Inc. were present to dis-
cuss the proposal.
Bye sunnerized the history of the site. explaining that they felt the pro- '
ject was compatible with land to the west; they are within the City Ordinance
with no variations at 1.1 units per acre. Me explained further that it will
be developed by a number of contractors, and that Cardinal Creek Associates
will be selling land and lots but will not be a part of the building program
He responded to the alternative suggested of a loop road rather than cul-de4e
and that it was their feeling that it would not be conclusive to their project,
Bye expressed support for the upgrading of Baker Road and agreed to do whatever
they could to accomplish this, noting that the straightening out of the road
has been anticipated since the City was a Village.
Folksestad illustrated area location and explained that the open space aVea gp11
Vine-Mile Creek and includes the flood plain aspect somewhat. The lake has do
surface water, but is all marsh.
Lynch questioned whether hones would be built into the flood plain. The Planner
responded yes, and that the Department of Natural Resources has informed the
City that this area does not fall under public waters , but the project must
be reviewed by the Nine-Mile Creek Watershed District, particularly in regards
• to encroachment the flood plain area.
•
Bye expressed their concern that the Planning Commission, City Council and
City know their toal building plans. noting that an outlet can become somethi .
other than what it was originally designated for.
• ,
•
3'
,
Approved •
Planning Commission Minutes 7 -. ._.. February 26, 1979
C B. Cardinal Creek. . . .public hearing. (cont'd)
Bearman questioned the 4 lots that would lie in the flood plain area, '
noting that there have been 2 years of 100 year rains. Folkestad ex-
plained the soil would have to be excavated and graded.
Bearman asked how the residents would respond to living next to the gra-
vel pit occurring to the south. Gustafson responded that they have contacted
the owners of the gravel pit and were assured that it is just about used up
and they would comply'with the Reclamation Ordinance. He explained further
that they will try to direct their project sn as to end up with 58 lots, and
that they are trying to decrease the original high density PUG in order to
make the project more acceptable to the people to the west.
• Bearman inquired to what extent they were going to landscape. Gustafson
explained that they intended to be very generous with landscaping and will
try to achieve a boulevard concept.
The proponents were not in favor of the trails directly through the residents'
yards and felt it led to problems among neighbors.
The increase of 34' right-of-way was discussed and the proponents expressed "
willingness to work with the County on that issue, although they would have
to lose one lot.
Levitt inquired about the north road, and the•possibility of a problem with
people moving in with the impression that it was a cul-de-sac. Gustafson
explained that north road will be dedicated to the City.
The Planner responded that signs marked "temporary deadend" would be used
to inform the public of the road status.
Mr. Mike Best, 6885 Rosemary Rd., Realtor, expressed support for the plan
submitted. He felt that Eden Prairie was not unique in the use of cul-de-sac.=..
and that he felt the loop road would destroy the nature of the character and
integrity of the area and requested that the Commission aprrove the plan with
the loop road. The Planner responded that the staff does recognize the reason.
for platting with cul-de-sacs, but they did not want to leave the City with air
increased maintenance situation.
•
Mrs. Elaine Renier, 13895 Holly Road, Realtor, expressed support for the
cul-de-sac pattern, commenting that houses on cul-de-sacs are far more saleable
and also feels that taxes will compensate the City for maintenance.
Gustafson explained that they had researched the staff recommendation of tic
loop road extensively, but prefer the cul-de-sac pattern.
Levitt asked whether the proponents would be in agreement with the roan
right-of way recommendation if the County and City require it, Gustafson arc
ponded that at this time, they are in agreement.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Approved
Planning Commission MInites - 8 - February 26, 1979
•
B. Cardinal Creek. . . . public_�tl4t • . tcont'd.) - •
• Levitt inquired whether the proponents had any objections to a s�Ide-
walk along the road. Gustafson responded that a sidewalk would be more
desirable than a pathway. •
'3
MOTION: Lynch moved to close the Public Hearing on the Cardinal creek -
preliminary plat. a'earman seconded, motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Lynch moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the
rezoning of approximately 53 acres from Rural to R1-13.5 for Cardinal Creek :'
based upon the plat dated 2-22-79 and the staff report of Feb. 22, 19•79.
Levitt seconded, motion carried unanimlously.
MOTION: Lynch moved to rec ninend to the Council approval of the prel iininar,
plat as per the staff report of 2/21/79 with the following exceptions
eliminate "b", add "To conform to City/ Engineer's Staff Report". Baarman
seconded, motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Lynch moved to recommend to the Council approval of the draft •
Environmental Assessment Worksheet for Cardinal Creek finding no si•gnifi- •
cant impact. Bentley seconded, motion •carried unanimously.
•
•
•
•
•
Re
UNAPPROVED MINUTES 7 49 •
•
•
•
PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NAIL R 4OUR 04,nT4ISSION .
- MONDAY, MARCH 19, 1979 130 P.M., CITY NAI.i.
pOMMIBSION MMMD .JRESENT* Richard Anderson, Chairpecont David Andersen.
Robert CTilson, Robert Johnson. Hobart Kruelt,
George Tango
COMMISSION PXMBERS ABSENT: 9leve Fifield . .
COMMISSION STQFF PEES NTI : Robert Lambert, Director of Mamantty Servicca
3.. Development Proposals
a.. Cardinal Creek ,y,y '
• Lambert introduced William Bye'and Lyle Folkstad who were •
at the meeting to present and answer questions about the
proposed Cardinal Creek development. •
Lambert pointed out after the presentation that the lvvanwners
had agreed to dedicate property along Nine-Mile Creek far •
trails, and to construct connector trails.
Kruell questioned the flood-plain variance required for four
the lots. Mr. Folkstad explained that they were meeting with
the Nino-Mile Creek Watershed District to get theta' approval.
MOTIONa Tangen moved to recommend to the Council approval of
the Cardinal Creek Project, as per the staff recommendations
in the memorandum of February 28. 19?9t seconded by Dave
Anderson.
• DISCUSSION: - B. Anderson pointed out that the commission has •
in the past drawn a hard line on the filling of.flood-plains,
and they are normally opposed to it.
YQ : Motion passed with Kruell abstaining.
•
- i
•
.. ....• -.: .._ _.......'... , .. _ ... ..:.,....+ew.--...«rs .ro..wo:s�.tiw.ewr...,w +..w+•.rr.. -P- _
•
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission •
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services k-t"
DATE: February 28, 1979
SUBJECT: Development Proposal Chock List
PROJECT: Cardinal Creek
PROPONENT: Litchfield Corporation
REQUEST: Rezoning S3 acres from Rural to.RM-13.5 and preliminary platting for
approximately 59 lots.
LOCATION: East of Forest Hills School, north of Valley View Road
BACKGROUND:See Planning Staff Report of February 21, 1979
•
CHECKLIST: •
•1. Adjacort to parks? (Neighborhood, Community, Regional) Neighborhood Park (for't i
Affect on park: Increase user demand y-
2. Adjacent to public waters? Nine-Mile Creek borders north end,meandering dry lake
• to the east (not now considered public wster's)
Affect on waters: The dry lake may begin to hold water `
3. Adjacent to trails? Borders the trail connection from Forest Hills to Tjview Area,
Type of trails: (bike, multi-use, transportation, etc.)tha'Iti-Use
Construction: (asphalt, concrete, wood chips. aglimepencrete/asphalt
Width: 51J6' Party Responsible for construction? Develapev ..
Landownership: (dedicated, density tradeoff, etc.) catod
Type of Development? (residential, commercial, industrial) Rosideatial
Where will CASH PARK FEE go? (what neighborhood) Cardinal TO1 V* W
Need for a mini park?_ n°
•
.141
•
5. REFERENCE CHECK:
a. Major Center Area Study: N/A
•
b. Neighborhood Facilities Study:Indicates the trail connection will follow
the creek to the NSF easement dedicated area. A mini neighborhood park is
needed to serve the Topview area between Topview and Forest Mills.
c. Purgatory Creek Study: N/A
d. Shoreland Management Ordinance: Minimum lot size within 300' of creek
must be 15,000 sq. ft. - this proposal meets the ordinance.
e. Floodplain Ordinance: The 4 lots proposed on the northern edge of the
subdivision will require a permit for falling within a floodplain.
f. Guide Plan: Consistent with the 1968 and 1977 Undated Guido Plan
•
g.
6. Existing or pending assessments or taxes on proposed park property: WA
7. CASH PARK FEE? Fee applicable at time of building permit should be paid.
8. Adjacent neighborhood type, and any neighborhood opinion voiced in favor or
against proposal: Adjacent neighborhood opinion expressed in favor of this
proposal.
9. Number of units in residential development? 59
Number of acres in the project? 53
Special recreation space requirements: None
10. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Please see attached sheet.
• "
• ,
- '• ' - •
•
•
•
•
-.
Staff recommends approval of this proJect with the following conditicams;
•
a. The developer construct a 5' concrete sidewalk along the south
side of the proposed east/west through sileet.
• b. The developer provide 20' wide =ragouts along the east side of the
development and a ft" lviticeitemus trail connecting the side-
walk with the marsit area to the south, and with the proposed trail
•
along Nine-Wile Creek to the'with.
"•
c. The Cash Park Pee shall be paid at time, of building permit.
d. The project must be reviewed and Rine-Mile creek
approved by the Watershed District, particularly in regards to taes,aouciu.,F,1,4• into the
floodplain area.
The City should construct a sidewalk along *aka'Road when Baker 14 is
upgraded to provide safe pedestrian access to Forest Bills SokeollPstk,...
aLtad • s7`...
. •
•
•
••.
•
• ":".'":
=7:7
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
'Card nii -Crlek'E4:A:,1L•Th
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNisofA •
RESOLUTION 17941
A RESOLUTION FINDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
WORKSHEET FOR CARDINAL CREEK A. PRIVATE ACTION DOES
NOT REQUIRE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STALtnbNr
WHEREAS, the City Council of Eden' Prairie did' hold a pablc hearing
on April 3, 1979 to consider the Cardinal Creek proposal, and:
WHEREAS, said development is located:evappresistately ST acres
of land East of Baker Road and South of Purgatory•Ctk,'ate'
WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie Planning•C nitsi-on did,hold.a publi
hearing on the Cardinal Creek preliminarnpl t regaest end di'd.rece nd
approval of the project and the Enviromrental Asuesslient Works'heet finding
of no significant impact.
• NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by th Edit-Prairie City-Council iToov
an Environmental Impact Statement is not necessary for Cardinal r
because the project is not a smjne action whirh'does not have si'gnificent
environmental effects and is not more than of local significance,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a Negative Decl.arg'tiap.Nottice shall
be officially filed with the Minnesota Environmental Quality Cou cif.
•
ADOPTED, this _ day of , 1''979. •
Wol fgang tl. Frenzel, Mayor
- ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL
x
201,11?
MINNESOTA ENVIMNMEHTAL QUALITY COUNCIL
ENVIROI7MENrAL ASSESSMENT WOIKCSHEET (SAW) •
AND NOTICE OF FINDINGS
.
DO NOT WRITE IN TRIS SPACE
E.R. g
NOTE: The purpose of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is to provide
information on a project so that one can assess rapidly whether or not the
project requires an Environmental Impact Statement. Attach additional
•pages, charts, maps, etc, as needed to answer these questions. Your •
answers should be as specific as possible. Indicate which answers are
estimated.
I. SUMMARY
A. ACTIVITY FINDING BY RESPONSIBLE AGENCY (PERSON) •
®Negative Declaration (No EIS) D EIS Preparation Notice (EIS Required)
$. ACTIVITY IDENTIFICATION
I. Project name or title Cardinal Creek
2. Project proposers) Cardinal Creek Associates
Address 7400 Metro Blvd., Suite 411, Edina, Mn. 55435
Telephone Number and Area Code (612) 835-7277
•
3. Responsible Agency or Person City of Eden Prairie
• Address 8950 Eden Prairie Road, Eden Prairie,Mn. 55344
• Person in Responsible Agency (Person) to contact for further information
on this EAW: Chris Eneer Telephone_612-941-2262
4. This PAW and other supporting documentation are available for public in-
spection and/or copying at: Location 8950 Eden-Prairie Road
Telephone 941-7262 furs Sam-4:30pm
5. Reason for EAW Preparation
cijMandatory Category -cite °Petition 0 Other
�JMEQC Rule number(s) MEQC 24 (uu) -f
(50 or more residential units any part of which is within a shoreland) •
C. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION SUMMARY •
1. Project location
County Hennepin city/w.wuokio►name Eden Prairie •
Township number 116 (North). Range Number Z2 East ore(circle one).
Section numbortetl 3 Street address (if in city) or legal s)uaeEiptiAox.
•
. l `
,
1
2. . Type and scope of proposed project:
Residential development of SO single family lots en 53 acres.
3. Estimated starting date (month/year) Spring 1979
4. Estimated completion date (month/year) December, 1979
5. Estimated construction cost Orat)000
6. List any federal funding involved and known permits or approvals needed
from each unit of government and status of each:
Unit of Government Name or Type of Permit/Approval Status
(federal, state, or Federal Funding
•
regional, local)
E.Q.B. Negative Declaration pending
Nine Mile Creek WD land alteration permit
City of Eden Prairie revised PUD concept, zoning & •
platting approval
• 7. If federal permits, funding or approvals are involved, will a federal EIS
be prepar
ed under the National Environmental Policy Act? NO YES-X- r "
II. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION .
A. Include.the following maps or drawings:
1. A map showing the regional location of the project.
2. An original HI x 11 section of a U.S.G.S. 71/2 minute, 1:24,000 scale map
with the activity or project area boundaries and site layout delineated.
i Indicate quadrangle sheet name. (Original U.S.G.S. sheet must be main-
tained by Responsible Agency; legible copies may be supplied to other
RAW distribution points.)
3. A sketch map of the site showing location of structures and including
•
•
significant natural features (water bodies, roads, etc).
4. Current photos of the site must be maintained by the Responsible Agency.
Photos need not be sent to other distribution points.
B. Present land use.
1. Briefly describe the present use of the site and lands adjacent to the site. .
The site is an area previously gravel mined except for the creek area
along the northern end and the unmeandered lake in the southeast corner.
West, across Baker Road from the site exists single family development on
.i/2 acre and larger lots. Vacant land exists to the south and north.
2. Indicate the approximate acreages of the site that are:
a. Urban developed
0 acres f. Wetlands (Typo III, IV, V) 2 acres •
b. Urban vacant
0 acres q. Shoreland 6 acres
c. Rural developed
0 acres h. 'Floodplain 3 acres'.
d. Rural vacant 53 acre"s i. Cropla:uYPasture land
ii acres
. preen QA
o. Designated Recce- 3 acres j. Forested
. ation/Open Space .
(floodplain) - 2
. . _
. ... - . .-
• $ . eL I
k• 110110610 Palk ,,..?t _ • ,.. ,. .
--,
i 9 1 van, til 4 '
. 9
"IV .
ip ...,...
. 1 o
i 13 , 0,...„. • .HE NEPIN O :46k i i,...... i_ Mil• ._. •
, ands /War.'
• m,..$ .,
. co......... ......1\\,...4
Molina . Ilk 1p ,.. ......,
Wi air'
' /11111112 111:j
i Li,.41•Eamirri_c, 141 ..,%
.....
or ,. ., , (4,... , l ly-..
"a: ',...
,..-‘ • - 1
& t" '‘. IlliateRiMi W V :. ) I
. 1,7
tir!iiMpatgillialrailPt-, '1.! , . .
. .
•e..7" -- "Ir.,- '' .... - ,-.(.1-•-• -‘..." 41%, 1 0 .
, ,- 1 1106 id•I PIC .4„,,
air., 4- - ,,,,_, _.,,,-) 11111111100:111111.`"i a rN- ', . NJ • ,....... .___ .;„ ,..,.. .,..„.4.,,,.. .
...ii (.../
... . lc. . . , 111/Srte ca II AVIIIIIMMAIII!, 1111111/ir))4f•'
ii '7'3' sh...... Air am.,,,,, a 4111150011„kifffigillr, Wit `,--4,141t(.-• -
L,I
i• .
"t11M74-11111111illn r----.... ' '." ......T. ..
? LAKE TCAVN 111° l'hd ch..""/P-d". 14•'° ••• ' ''.14741'1.---.-"i'"': ' 1 ' '
i ••zs. vc3 C). 1 ca, -
_.......
c> ,
. -
ni ::X • itRO _\ A
lill . .
41 ° . . ..
. St .._, p) „1 °ci<. ).3 1111111111111174 11107C1J,
r
/
IMIN ' ..
tu•
JISVILLE 41'r . 4,7 1 I
7
I GC * IV
e 1 .
SAN cis. c 4 air d
fil - .
rill **EDIT RIVER . t , '
.4 111. U CREEK SPRING LAKE .
• 0
scorr . i • 1,,
sAt. ,VRENCE 1
.,4
kl....
ct 1 a.
8E1 LE PLAINE HI (NA CEDAR NEW MARKET cu 1,A
,
.
.., ,.„...- ....
• •
::,..:"..: ..',F1,:l."'' ':;.'L,:,.?'..',,,..•..
- - •..,„...re.... ,.._......i...,,„
f. ------..
9.
`W t. s 'r y rtia ? T' Y �11yY . . i
^.. T+ o matS',.:1: r"'ir-I If%z Tefir ,Sk!tir ..7 1 -rls;
flit ; wk
I.'v % s.k - «r: • ~
!a ir. . " r +L. t4i-, S .11Y 'a .i • •� tvqbe( PPv,J l,�f�. 1 t • a.�Y7 �d • I r '4-nma.. �,•,.,�, r
�' „_ . �tN � q M, - -ra- .. _ - T . ,, IN.- 1N1 ''fi . .. � _ ,.._.-._ :.+ F-t,-,
'. :
!,7•1:...1',.'"4;1-r.."\:,.„'--,`N ''''',-..--J, ''f Nt'-'.•t•,▪ -0..? .• ,▪ 7 ,;,,,tzai.i : . , ,,.._.. •„. .
4 i41, k,:.
Aq • a
t.Lv 1!: y .), ^• t.. '/ `0,I
'.11 ! �"� a sv: M.f rt. Ce+rr' i ,_'
f...tr;,.,,,siy.:, :,r. ,..•I. 4;,,.,.
';',.4,7-.!,,l. •.--'., 4•4' %..- -/4' rit-;',:. ,4.7; :14..__441., . :- '-'f 4 k••••••• , .-....-',.11 1..t, '1,-..--r-,12„--F-11 -- ' '.'":
8(7.\\3
)1\
�d rl.�+.� � � V r 's .cPr n7. '2'x } •:` '�, 1 ,_+ y+J "''`-'t k w,�
i.tS, t 1 `' Y ,`-4\.� 1c� t, I .,.,1 I f9�f a"`K%t'^ M1..� 1'x,.
t \ I „si • n•..t.14. ^,, o ^r 1 f" ..''. 4s tic�s,7•.-y *1rr. 7 r tt 4
..�£ • j4") may, .. � A
11*
1• �, (d �� .tom" ' t4y
- ,,..., I 1 ',--1, '*-1 f
y`.._"� � e'-,.1 3 � r � � �.j"�t t•`�t /_ � � fmx " •.,4"'.. ��ypsf''
..-4-- . z. .r'r% .tas��f'.' a �.--4\ .l i, .t -+li I,. .r. ♦t '"� _,. ,. -
1 ' `1;; — ,„ "a ,� " ` *ttom` r �}}"'�! " 1 (I. .', , 'S
l'`� `i. .rr:Y'u r a Vr• 11 i 1 k'•'4/ I- �q ' _▪ :tq ^1 } . y:r pr -L�
i.
p-- ..-igt ,:uffrik ,-.,-,--: 4
27'30" II .16 t£OEN P'RAIkF£I Os so re M,NN s
7371 v$6.0A s Mf,rosorsosrarc.ma a2`. t 10....n 4'A4:7 J na(!'silt
/:MAJA!
I SCALE 1:24000
t Am
Ion 0 moomoo 3000 • 4050 5000 5003 WO MG
1 S 0 I Boole Em
i was CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET
. DATUM IS MEAN SEA LEVEL
3uaL:,
.nrc YIfr :r'
a '-
t(e Ov SiNO.CEt QUIDaiN!TEECi'IS,C
THIS MAP COMPU£S WIUI RATIONAL NAP ACCURACY STANDARDS .....,.., ,.^.
FOR SALE BY U.S.GEOLOGICAL SURVEY.DENVER,COLORADO 8022S,OIL wASIUNGTt1N,mamma 14.4.44a60.44a44lc , ..
A FOLDER DLSCI1*DING TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS AND SYMDQLS IS AVAILADLE OR INQUEST Liken 2:S22. '21111.81,0r,,.,,.:
.-,
.
ri!e' yily Idiot ��id P{ i�I 4'/ { T+.n" ` \ �`AF�ICJ!A11��C
i it '`
a , ♦ 1 f1 `
i �Y H� �1 11 .' /1.
• r r, / I / .
- ; L•ii .1..\-----tms-",1' \ s• ':.."-•-..(;•.* / /
- j i ri'LAPPrI4417""o'-ril ,
� ,i •;
fJ . •' • \ • ,/ \ •Ma - - i'
---\
\\\./
A x . } ,^°M �F. � /
_,, ,),
•
��i ° 11\? 1�) :, •`• ii. .. y ( ..j('`• sizes'I f
1 ;, " .fit,'l .yl. „•\\ ,/ •y..Mk'1 Y1` ,J�' r^ J' 2 `7\ J
/! �. .r '.t. 4 1 .j:'::I.1."—\.,„:,,,,,,.:""--. -•li...-.•)' '-.:.T---,,, --, . -, --,, ,.‘, _ .- ,. ,
• II'
_....,,,...,.:‘,, :„. -_,,,,, ::-....../. _.....„, _,,,. i , .,,, ‘ ,u / .\,I.
j x .;,� 1 . .� 1 / ` v ,
I 1
I t i F 1•. 1 1 t 1
It... r` ! ; • 9 , ��1
,.\\1 r ! !°`:. `` , ..., •-ice. 1 , \ < I
,\,,
I '1 /t l �• \ \t`rtt 1
III �°'', ,�: - - ZN ';JI r6 �', -` t 1 1
el
!r;i t 1^I 1- Iw-,, 'a .�.'+•'r/'-/ .,! `y 1) ' 1 11, I, ; ° i
•
i•_ . l.w 1 111 ` 7- "...- •q.' ,•.r�.ot 11: i 1
, V fr--;. i/ f - 1 ,
;LI i• ;,.‘.....1''.!; I!:'-:',':•• -......"?;-/i.'1•:-;;;,..,,•`-''• 1;:-.1.,...,E,:k S....„.• ...., ''',.:,7c--% 1 i`,T./!/:4,,,,1 1\ 1 1. •
' 11 ( 1 \
I .if i' ' �•. .1 -1 •...< cr . •\• • •1....
o- .�' . ..
1.
•..�+r••.s.�rw�...:.w.•4a�wrr.. ".W.vr..rN ..s"..,..- .
Po
.c I4c1 ll crk •/ l eYai cwwxu ul2orywnr.ra b mwl naree 31 .,,rAww .u,wwn :e ale,,,..„., , :,4,..,..
•
•
3. List names and sizes of lakes, rivers and streams on or near the site,
particularly lakes within 1,000 feet and rivers and streams within
300 feet.
'
Nine Mile Creek crosses through the northern portion of the property.
C. Activity Description
1. Describe the proposed activity, including staging of development (if any),
operational characteristics, and major types of equipment and/or pro-
cesses to be used. Include data that would indicate the magnitude of
the proposed activity (e.g. rate of production, number of customers, tons •
of raw materials, etc).
•
The entire development is anticipated to be constructed in one
building season. Lots will be graded, roads placed, utilities
installed, etc., by the developer. Lots will then be sold
to builders or buyers.
2. Fill in the following where applicable:
a. Total project area 53 acres g. Size of marina and access NA sq. ft
or channel (water area)
Length NA miles h. Vehicular traffic trips
•
generated per day • 475ADT
b. Number of housing or +`
reereataeaal units 58 i. Nsmhnr of employees .
c. Height of structures 30 ft. j. Water supply needed 17,ddQ gal/da,
Maximum Source:municipal
d. Number of parking
spaces - NA k. Solid waste requiring
disposal 106 tonn, yr '
e. Amount of dredging NA cu. yd.
1. Commercial, retail or
f. Liquid wastes requir- industrial floor space Msg. ft..
ing treatment 17.000 gal/da
III. ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
•
A. SOILS AND TOPOGRAPHY
1. Will the project be built in an area with slopes currently
exceeding 128? __N.o X Yes
2. Are there other geologically unstable areas involved in the project,
such as fault zones, shrink-swell soils, peatlands, or sinkholes?_LSO V1.4
3. If yes on 1 or 2, describe slope conditions or unstable area and any
measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impacts.
See page 3a
•
•E.A,W.- Cardinal Creekr.
•
III. A. SOILS
r '°i 1
�.� • kXyL�ir1'"10ii' tie 1
Building will occur on s":. :� 'psi ,.• ,
• Salida, Biscay,Burns- !1 . ,IN a\`
vine and ieyder Sails. E�to
The depth to water ., •
table ranges from 2 to i lf3t, -ter \'�, s' • ;
10 feet with the ---_ -
majority of buildable
t':<ar •i
area having 10foot � 4'„ ,
depth to seasonal highs '`.
water.table. viP.;ti
"`aw
The Heyder Soil areas ! w,..1.0
will necessitate safe- w.. $''� , * mmit
• guards of drain tiling d " ' ,� U
and extra 0*1 ' `•v ,1gli••i 41,
due to its wide footingsteris- it Nit .. la, •._-=�:•� ,.
tuts of low to moderate.--.—.---- ' �,_ ,� `5 ,•— ---
frost heave potential. r� '' `^ ' �i,.
{�
r " tii7.47,7,14 11i
�. j ` ... r., �, P ?s! •' ass;r; q
.� -i— —— to r ,,
._r�-.— .ter «..aa A
-.--.�._...___ i .. i
_ �e . ,
•
4. Indicate suitability of site soils for foundations, individual septic
systems, and ditching, if these are included in the project.
Soil suitability for building answered on page 3a. No individual
septic systems or ditching involved.
5. Estimate the total amount of grading and filling which will be done:
'7D�et4 cu. yd, grading ' 0ca ca. yd. filling
What percent of the site will be so altered? (to be submitted) 2.5- ♦ .
6. What will be the maximum finished slopes? 30 e
7. What steps will be taken to minimize soil erosion during and
after construction?
Soil erosion tetrhniques, i.e. straw bales and snow fencing, will he used
as recomrended by the Watershed District. On-site inspection will be
conducted by both Watershed District and City staffs.
B. VEGETATION
1. Approximately what percent of the site is in each of the following
vegetative types;
Woodland 34 s Cropland/ 0 s
Pasture
Brush or shrubs 10 s harsh 9 t
Grass or herbaceous 47 % ether 0 s
CSpecify.).
2. How many acres of forest or woodland will be cleared, if any? 2-S acres
3. Are there any rare or endangered plant species or areas of unique
botanical or biological significance on the site? (See DNB publication '
The Uncommon Ones.) *X NO YES
if yes,Tact the species or area and indicate any measures to be used
to reduce potential adverse impact.
•
C. FISH AND WILDLIFE
1. Are there any designated federal, state or local wildlife or fish manage-
ment areas or sanctuaries near or adjacent to the site? X NO !tS
2. Are there any known rare or endangered species of fish and wildlife:
. on or near the site? (See DNR publication The Uncommon j NO Yid
• ones.)
3. Will the project alter or eliminate wildlife or fish _NO
habitat? ..
4. If yes on any of questions 1-3, list the area, species or habitat, and
indicate any measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impact on
them.
Small mammals , birds, and deer will be displaced. The amount of habitat
and food will be reduced, therefore wildlife reproduction will be t•pdaitrtl ...
•The general impact on the local wildlife popul4•Cton lean lad`nplati4 JJ
the increase in noise, changes in mtcroclituaterdedro is�t.9ik:h4b. 'S ,.
presence of man and his environs
4 "��
D. MONOLOG?
1. will the project include any of the following:
If yes, describe type of work and mitigative measures
to reduce adverse. impacts.
a. Drainage or alteration of any :take. pond, marsh, NO ITN
lowland or groundwater supply _�...
see item #3
b. Shore protection works, dams, or dikes.
c. Dredging or filling operations -
see item #3
d. Channel modifications or diversions .'�
e. Appropriation of ground and/or surface water �- ..X_ •
see item #,
f. Other changes in the course, current or cress-
section of water bodies on Or near the site
see item #3
2. What percent of the area will be ueneetted to new impervious surface? %
3. What measures will be taken to reduce the volume of surface water run--
off and/cr treat it to reduce pollutants (sediment, oil, gas, ete.)?
All storm water will be handled by City sturm water system. All
measures will be reviewed by.the Watershed District and recommendations
followed. On-site inspections will be conducted by the City staff and
the Watershed District Staff. :.
d. Will there be encroachment into the regional (100 yearn floodp3r;e
ey new fill or structures? NO X Y
If yes, does it conform to the local floodplain ordinance? NO X YES
Being reviewed by Watershed District and. soh, t t® it approval
S. What is the approximate minimum dept1 to gr ear r
the site? 0-1e feet
. WATER QUALITY
1. Will there be a discharge of process or cooling water, sanitary sewage
or other waste waters to any water body or to groundwater? NO X YES ,
If yes, specify the volume, the concentration of pollutants and the
water body receiving the effluent.
After treatment of taste water at the Blue Lake Treatment Plant,
water will be discharged into the Minnesota River.
2. If discharge of waste water to the municipal treatment system is
planned. identify any toxic, corrosive or,unusual pollutants
•
in the wastewater.
None
3. Will any sludges be generated by the proposed project? XNO YlS
If yes, specify the expected volume, chemical compos4eton and nee
of disposal.
•
•
•
4. What measures will be used to minimize the volumes or impacts identified
in questions 1-3?
answered under #3
•
•
5. If the project is or includes a landfill, attach information on soil profile,
depth to water table, and proposed depth of disposal.
NA
Y. AIR QUALITY AND NOISE
1. Will the activity cause the omission of any gases and/or particulates
into the atmosphere? NO )K YES
If yes, specify the typo and origin of these emissions, indicate any
emission control devices or measures to be used, and specify the approxi-
mate amounts for each emission (at the source) both with and without the
emission control measures er devices.
•
Noise during construction period only during normal working hours,Monday-Friday.
Noise should be dissipated at boundary limits.
Standards for entse__ i{askes d BA Went tint anatee at 4S0 fete
'loaf tova i 1'"L^S
d
toe US. too tfa 16:111— 64.16- •
6OdI -99
NesA SOd1A SSdBA dotz er gimps 3341
rotor trader 3Y 98 6Y61 •
2. Will noise or vibration be generated by construction and/or operation
of the project? NO X YES
If yes, describe the noise source(s)3 specify decibel levels rdD(A)), and
duration (hrs/da) for each and any mitigative measures to reduce the
noise/vibration.
There will be normal exhaust emissions from construction equipment during
construction. Following construction, the project will generate approximately
475 automobile trips per day and emissions from heating and cooling 59 haves.
3. If yes on 1 or 2, specify whether any areas sensitive to noise or
reduced air quality-(hospitals, elderly housing, wilderness, wildlife
areas, residential developments, etc.) are in the affected area and give
distance from source. ,
NA.
G. LAND ngsounCE CONSERVATION, ENERGY
•
1. Is any of the site suitable for agricultural or forestry production
or currently in such use? X NO YES
If yes, specify the acreage involved, type and volume of marketable crop
or wood produced and the quality of the land for such use.
•
2. Are there any known mineral or peat deposits on the site? WO )C Y
If yes, -ecify the typo of depo.:it and the acreage.
The site contains a gravel pit.
4
t
3. Will the project result in an increased energy demand? NO_LEES
Complete the following as applicable:
a. Energy requirements (oil, electricity, gas, coal, solar, etc.)
Estimated Peak Demand
Annual (Hourly or Daily) Anticipated Firm Contract or •
Type Requirement Summer Winter Supplier Internmtible Rasis?
Nat. Gas 6,890 mcf .16mcf/u/c .39 , Minnegasco firm
Electric 34,450 KWH 2.4KWH 1.6 KWH N.S.P. firm •
•
b. Estimate the capacity of all proposed on—site fuel. storage.
None
•
•
c. Estimate annual energy distribution fors •
•
space heating 50 • lighting 10 1
air conditioning 30 i processing 15 • i
ventilation 5 t
d. Specify any major energy conservation systems and/or equipment
incorporated into this project.
All homes will be insulated to meet or exceed Minnesota State Requirements.
Solar heating, heat pumps, etc., may be incorporated into some homes.
e. What secondary energy use effects may result from this project
(e.g. more or longer car trips, induced housing or businesses, ate)'?
•
The project has the potential to reduce auto trips by providing
housing near to Eden Prairie employment centers which will allow
people to live and work in the same community as envisioned in the Guide Plan.
H. OPEN SPACE/RECREATION
1. Are there any designated federal, state, county or local recreation or
open space areas near the site (including wild and scenic rivers, trails,
•
lake accesses)? NO X YES
If yea, list areas by name and explain how each may be affected by the
project. Indicate any measures to be used to reduce adverse impacts.
Nine Mile Creek Corridor as an open space area is being conveyed to
the public.
� 7 - q
- t
•
H. TRANSPORTATI®N
1. Will the project affect any existing or proposed transportation systems
(highway, railroad, water, airport, etc)? NO__LIM
If yes, specify which part(s) of the system(s) will bebe affected. Per
these. specify existing use and capacities, average traffic speed and
percentage of truck traffic (if highway)r and indicate how they will be
affected by the project (e.g. congestion, percentage of truck traffic,
safety, increased traffic (lDT), access requirements).
see page 8a
2. Is mass transit available to the site? X ue YES
1. What measures, including transit and paratransit services, are planned Ur
reduce adverse impacts?
None at this time.
•
•
J. PLANNING, LAND USE, COMMUNITY SERVICES
1. Is the project consistent with local and/or regional comprehensive
plans? NO X yES
If not, explain:
If a zoning change or special use permit
is necessary, indicate existing
zoning and change requested.
A•zoning change is requested from Rural to R1-13.5 to allow construction
of single family detached lots of 13,500 square feet or larger.
2. Will the type or height of the project conflict with the character of the
existing neighborhood? NO YESIf yes, explain and describe any measures to be used to rice conflicts.
irk .
•
P
•
H. TRANSPORTATION
Valley View Road Ba Road
•
55 mph 55 mph
•
6-8% truck traffic 5* truck traffic
2,509-3,000 ADT 00'4 C 4i D
•
The 59 let project as proposed Contains.2 exits ntDaf . . _.._T_._,,
to Baker Road. F mrBaker Road traf i c would.=:ira vel
••
North to Crosstown 6 Y , 4r;: uth to Va11ey`.:ti :...
Road.
The projected averagedai1 Z s wed� to fRll
occupancy of the 5 6i091•r fam3: haswould'be a r' i
mately 4T5 trips dolt,. The Lis ps;, half ustnq
Baker Road north-bound/hair. wsi`n9,.Baker Road south-bound,
are not antic'ipeted to 'result in traffic pr blt m , s
the surrounding roads are planned t handle addi"ti"onal`" i. ,
' • traffic.
s
is ...
•
•
i
•
,1
.. ....,..... dew''' .: 5S, A ME a.. .#:3� >-' .
3. now many employees will mono into the area to be near the project' NA
flow much new housing will be needed? lU1
•
•
4. will the project•induce development nearby--either support services
or similar developments? NO.
If yes,explain type of development and specify any other counties and
municipalities affected.
•
S. Is there sufficient capacity in the following public services to handle
the project and any associated growth?
Amount required
Public Service or oroioct
Sutgie t
water 17.000 gaa/da k�gi
wastewater treatment 17,000 gal/da X
sewer 3,200 feet X
schools. 90 pupils 3
solid waste disposal 9 ton/me X
streets ,61 miles X
other (police, fire, etc) 1.2 officers/1,000 • X
If current major public facilities axe not adequate, do existing local
plans call for expansion, or is expa~++a'ton necessary strictly for this
one project and its associated impacts?
6. Is the project within a proposed or designated Critical Area or part
of a Related Actions EIS or other environmentally sensitive plan or
program reviewed by the EQC? X NO YES
If yes, specify which area or plan.
•
7. will the project involve the use, transportation, storage. release
or disposal of potentially hazardous or toxic liquids, solids on
gaseous substances such as pesticides, radioactive wastes, poisLonS,
etc? 110 TES
If yes, please specify the substance and rate of usage and any measures ,
to be taken to minimize adverse environmental impacts from accilko ts..
•
•
•
•
D. When the project has served its useful iifa, will retirthnant of the
facility require special measures or plans? WO YES
If yes, apecifys
•
•
IC. Rzs onic RESOURCES
1. Are there any structures on the site older than SO years area federal
or state historical registers? J_.wo YES
2. Have any arrowheads. pottery or other evidence of prehistoric or early_
settlement been found on the site? XNO
Night any known archaeologic or paleontological site%•ice effected• by the activity? A gp yes
3. List any site or structure identified in l anti 2 and explain eny
impact on them. -..
Being reviewed by the State Historical Society.
•
IL. OM ER ENVrRORMENTAL CONCERNS
Deecribe any other major environmental effects which may oot have boost•
identified in the previous sections.
III. OTHER MITIGATIVE MEASURES -
Briefly describe mitigative measures prr+pr w4 to reduce or eliminate pcttr,antial
adverse Impacts that have not been described before.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
.
V. FINDINGS '
The project is a private ( ) governmental ( X) action. The Responsible Agvmrq
(Person), after consideration of the information in this MAW, and the factors
in Minn. Reg. MEQC 25, makes the following findings. .
1. The project is ( ) is not ( X ) a major action.
State reasons:
:::::'„'.''':'
2. The project does ( ) does not (x) have the potential for Significant
. environmental effects.
State reasons:
3. (For private actions only.) The project is ,{ ) is not { ) of more than
local significance.
• State Reasons:
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND CERTIFICATION
NDIE: A Negative Declaration or EIS Preparation Notice is not officially filed
until the date of publication of the notice in the EQC Monitor section of
the Minnesota State Register. Sithetttal of the EAR to the EQC constitutes
•
a request for publication of notice in the EQC Monitor.
t. I, the undersigned, am either the authorized representative of the Responsible
Agency or the Responsible Person identified below. Based on the above� ndfindings,
the Responsible Agency (Person) makes the following conclusions. (Comp
either 1 or 2)•
•
1. X NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOTICE
No EIS is needed on this project, because the project is not a
major action and/or does not have the potential for significant
environmental effects and/or, for private actions only, the
project is not of more than, local significance.
- 11 -
I
•
•
2. EIS PREPARATION NOTICE
An EIS will be prepared on this project because the project is a
major action and has the potential for significant environmental
effects. For private actions,-the project is also of more than
local significance.
a. The NEQC Rules provide that physical construction or operation of the
project must stop when an EIS is required. In special circumstances,
the MEQC cat specifically authorize limited construction to begin or
continue. If you feel there are special circumstances in this
project, specify the extent of progress recommended and the reasons. '
b. Date Draft Eis will be submitted:
(month) (day) (year)
(MEQC Rules require that the Draft EIS be .submitted.within.120.daya
• of publication of the Ei5 preparation Notice in the -Monitor. If- - .-.. -- M i
special circumstances prevent compliance with this time limit, a . .- .- -
written request for extension explaining the reasons for the request
must be submitted to the EQC Chairman.) .
c. Me Draft EIS will be prepared by (list Responsible Agency(s) or
Person(s)):
Signature ..
Roger I(, Ulstad, C•tv Manager Title .
Date
B. Attach an affidavit certifying the date that copies of this EAW were mailed
to all points on the official EQC distribdtion list, to the cityand.county
directly impacted, and to adjacent counties or.ununi.cipalities 1ikoly_40. ..._.•-...._-__ .-_..__-
directly impacted by the proposed action (refer to question III..'.4 on page 9
of the EAN). The affidavit need be attached only to the copy of the EAW_
which is sent to the EQC.
C. Billing procedures for EgC Monitor Publication :
State agency Attach to the MN sent to the .EQC a ctssslcted CSR 100 .
ONLY: form (State Register General Order Form--available at Central
Stores). Far instructions, please contact your Agency's
• Liaison Officer to the State Register or the Office of the
State Register--(Gl2) 296-8239.
141 .
•
•
•
1l .,,.•'
ii),, 04,t, . . "_ ... ....'-':'''''L%.'.',,.:-.'-'
°`'`I"1:°‘1 r4sikt r-v ",..iti,l.t..14.,:g .,,,k7;t:i-'!'2.3?..:::::-.'
. u. .
•
1
February 26, 1979
Eden Prairie .Planning Coninission
Eden Prairie City Council .
Eden Prairie, MN
Attention: City Planner
Chris Enger
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I first moved to Eden Prairie in 1963-and:lived in-the KinG�s
Forest area on Kingston Drive-et that tiD - I staved irk:la Eden
Prairie a few years ago after livir� in floritda for:lam eime I
always enjoyed liv1flg in Edea htair1e and pa iculafrly_t aectioa ehi h
is King's Forest and Forest HI Us. I now live at 13730 Theresa Place.
I received a notice of year
hearing •regard .ng proposed
development on Baker Road. I ate very.,pleased:to,endor •this devte,gip-
ment and its plat. I am very pleased that tbi`s single family develop- ''�
meat is going in, and we hope it Will bring fine neighbors`ta our
community. .
It surely is the best plan I have seen -- compared to ether
proposals. . .
Sincerely,
. •
; fl. Westlund
•
14.1
,:s a.
` i
•
, :
•
^ .0 +L1 of �.� -Pr i r i•
�.1J0. -Po r Pr cj i it).4.f..,-Li PI-..,
411)ikt_ (s cs..)kda 47 tr-
I_ tcutid /$Lc p t:,t-ittS..S it it, ci,U I'd t ad-1 1.kit,
44� LL iya.rl3 1 1 rim 1IL1-51. pti...A i it Lctic.k_ Ail prcscist. k+-1 .i ._
� .a. it-c 1, a.rd c IS 10..kd a -It L c .sL:td a.s
'; o )) o ais - if acre cla , `,rL c 4ice tc- . I tx...i1 ' L.
4t,k? 1 Si, lc 44,LI'Li 4r ii-atc. /L1iilLs .
y a ,(I 1ti"j ,.1 ( ss-I-) I J c w 1.-r && lu KJ (.1.. L Wd 1. L 7
i.• 11 4! 1 )
i
i/ LL t I v Ci,,e I I i �: sc.,. L.c_ b.I ti,... t- :sc_,►c:
ist
Lk t-11 S-S (d/Ct ii U. ice.:C.L kks Li,it Et iSI i 1l i),4(t hi)
t 4,1"j:h.
IL i 416 el cct_i t -,,-
LL c JL1 f t,ie & Loxc�l-s Lt 14 I I +L -
� i.t.� ,�1.
IL 4 tt.c 1., -1 - -1-ctir -ft c 11.a ti.:at/ ct.;1.44. t Lt.rit)
ItiLeCot.t--- Lk Ii Ck..IL i�
i r ft_ 4c. r p,,ir., t,:
C Sct'ui Ily Au( Y'LCo f o
lie L, 1- - tc. ; 1 t d tC EICp 7-4.t
s
•
1 .
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner
TIROUGH: Chris Enger, Planning Director
DATE: March 7, 1979 "
PROJECT: Alpine Estates 2nd Addition
APPLICANT: Timothy Gagner
REQUEST: Preliminary plat appro•al for 1 lot with an
existing home and 2 lots for 2 additional homes,
- the property is zoned R1-22
BACKGROUND •
The property is depicted as low density single family in the 1968
Comprehensive Guide Plan and the Guide Plan Update.
ZOni nt�
The entire site was zoned R1-22 as Alpine Estates at time of
Zoning Ordinance 135 adoption in 1969. At that time only the '
first phase of Alpine Estates was platted with the remainder left
in an ou`:lot of 8.5 acres.
LOCATION MAP �/ „�,� }
•• i! 1 - ! �� .: :may" �;#,* ' �; ` •;, /r ✓''
.-\:-,•,:.-,,.<.-;:'-,,"\...'.-.-0--—.',—t,:---=--11,7f.:.,-)-:e-Nx..-7"1,I-I- - ..1: 1 4:1•2'I,;L.”,
.7:*'
., , rta t
•
:: ‘', 1 pilCl 00-1-1 11/^J a
'''‘i'l-:•!-`*...-`: --ra, --Pl!k22 .1 . '4„,,i,..--',),1,.*...-.,:t.t-......,..',#.i ,e-.p - , .
,__, , , ,.; . _, , , .,._, ' ; f5 7 --4, .....--"- .. ." --....-'`,...-..-\\I! ::7: r...,.. .._. , .
L_..,....... .. . . „,,,,...,..:__...,,-„,i ,‘,„,,_.;.„.. i ...,, ,..„... ,..... , ,,, .„, ..,.. .._ . .,,,.,
1___ . s 4„, :::ik:_—::L.4:-.._-----:,t......---,‘,...:..., •,-;.4...,:,.„..e,.......
lam ' -'�"'�47 y"".'r.• .�4 �� ' , .--!--"°'....-_ y yL ,f:
•
•
Staff Report-Alpine Estates 2nd Add. -2- March 7, 1979
EXISTING SITE CHARACTER
•
Lot 1,Block 1
Slopes from the north to the south with a 13% grade. The lowest floor •
• elevation for a home would have to be approximately 910 in order to be
serviced with sanitary sewer.
Lot 1,Block 2
Slopes from the southwest to the northeast with a 32% grade. the lowest
floor elevation for a.home on this lot will have to be approximately
906.5 and the Engineering Department believes it may be difficult to •
achieve . A large amount of fill will he needed even for a walkout . •
The soils in this area are Hayden, and costs for installing utilities,
grading and leveling for home sites and streets can be high. j
•
ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS , Ord 135, Sec. 2 •
•
R1-22 District •
(f
Minimum lot size 22,000 square feet 1 The two lots proposed in Alpine
minimum depth 180 feet 1 Estates 2nd Addition are in
minimum width 100 excess of 22,000 square feet.
Setbacks: 1
front 30 feet
sides 15:30 feet
rear 25 feet
Subd. 2.2 Special Requirements
c. Where 40% or more of a block is developed, the required
setback shall be equal to the average existing setback.
Block 1, setbacks: Block 3 , setbacks:
lot 1 35 feet lot 1 50 feet
lot 2/3 30 feet lot 2 50 feet
•
lot 3/4 40 feet lot 3 50 feet
lot 5 35 feet
Therefore, the frontyard setback for any new homes would have to be a •
minimum of 41 feet from the public street.
The two proposed lots have the required lot width , but do not meet the
required lot depth of 180 feet due to constraints existing in the plat of
Alpine Estates, i.e.,.railroad and lots 5 and 6 of Block 2.
Lots 4 and 5, Block 1, Alpine Estates are platted with a depth of —
150 feet so the two proposed lots will floe be incompatible with existing..
and/or adjacent lots in the Alpine Estates plat.
J •
Staff Report-Alpine Estates 2nd -3-. March 7, 1979
ACCESS_ .
Presently the hard surface of Alpine Trail terminates approximately
35 feet west of the proposed two new lots. The hard surface is 28 feet
wide with a right-of-way of 60 feet and a rolled asphalt•curb.(see fig. 1) -- -
Alpine Trail will have to be extended and improved from its present ..
- termination 100-125 feet in order to serve the two proposed lots.
The Engineering Department suggests that the section be improved
with curb and gutter and a temporary turn around. The turn around will
necessitate 10 fcot easements from both lots in order to construct the
75"foot minimum dia:aeter required for temporary turn arounds.
CASH PARK FEE .
At time of building permit application , the payment of $2751 lot will
. be collected.
•
FIGURE 1
c ;:
Gagner •
? • residence°
' '' .
. •* :. '.; ... .9 A'S..\\4.) „...., ....„. .
�.\ - . drive
cr'
4, \ too,,. f _ . •.:. .
No
. . . 4 i
CH , titY • .
�. owyu d
' 0 il..) ,
. ,
4
•
" ' •
•
•
)
Staff Report-Alpine Estates 2nd -4- March 7. 1979 •
SUMMARY
The platting request occurs upon II1-22 zoned lend served by municipal
sewer and water, meets the minimum lot size requirement ,
but would require
variance from minimum depth similar to other lots in thefirst-subdivision
of Alpine Estates.
RECOMMENDATIONS • •
The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the preliminary plat dated
Feb. 15, 1979 contingent upon the following:
w .
1. Front yard setbacks of 41 ft.or greater be adhered to.
2. Owner shall improve Alpine Trail according to City Engineering
Department's recommendations prier to the issuance of bin
•
permi ts.
3. The two lots shall be subject to-payment of $279ilot cash park -
• fee collectable at time of building permit issuance.
4. Residential single family units on both lots must connect
municipal sewer and water.
5. Watershed District review and approval of land-alteration mu-st be
received by City• prior to issuance of building permits.
*Addition of following modification: Cul-de-sac not to be built, but that • -
the road be widened to a full 28' and dead ended. (As per Plan. Com. mee
ting
of 3/12/79)
JJ:jj •'-•••••
:771,
"I•
. rzsi- •
.„, . .
• -
14t
- -
March 8,1979
•
ENGINEERING COMMENTS
ON
ALPINE ESTATES 2ND ADDITION
I. Lots are not served by existing sewer and water. Main line
extension of 200 feet would be necessary.
II. The lowest floor elevation for a home on Block 2 would have
to be approximately 9416.5 to be served with sanitary sewer..
'III. If the roadway will not be built to City specifications
or dedicated to the City, rubpumObility•for mai ncG
must be by the property owners:
IV. Grading of the extension of Alpine Trail has altered the
grading as shown on the Preliminary Plat,
V. The Developer should be required=to-Commit to a.completion _
date for upgrading and dedicating the roadway.
DO:jj
•
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
•approved
MONDAY, MARCH 12, 1979 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: William Dearman, George Bentley,
Virginia Gartner, Matthew Levitt,
Oke Martinson, Liz Retterath, Hakon •
Torjesen
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: None
•
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director of Planning;
Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner;
Donna Stanley, Planning Secretary
•
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - March 12, 1979
C. Alpine Estates 2nd Addition, request to preliminary plat 2 lots
zoned R1-22. Located at the end of Alpine Trail. A public hearing.
Applicant, Timothy Gagner
Mr. Timothy Gagner, proponent, expressed agreement with the staff re-
port recommendations on the road regarding sewer and water. He explained
that there is existing black top from where the road stops at the lot,
and the neighbors on each side have sodded up to this road. He explained
, . that he would like to avoid putting in the road, and that the neighbors
would like to keep their sod.
Torjesen questioned the existing width of Alpine Trail. Ganer responded his
drive is 12' 1 the street is 28' and that the Engineering Department is
proposing a 28 street and a cul-de-sac.
Torjesen noted that according to the letter submitted, more development
is proposed. Gagner explained that he was planning to develop further in
a year.
The Planner pointed out that according to Engineering Department, there
will probably be no other lots serviceable by sewer, and that
any further development would require a lift station, which is Costly to
both proponent and to the City. He explained further that the City will.
need road right-of-way as part of the plat.
4
•
•
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - March 12, 1979
Levitt questioned the turn-around recommended by the Engineering Department.
The Planner responded the recommendation was for City maintenance.purposes.
Gagner asked whether a temporary cul-de-sac would have to be blacktopped and
gutter put in. The Planner responded that rolled asphalt could be used, .
which would eliminate the expense of concrete.
• Mr. Gerald Prodeohl, 6951 Alpine Trail, City employee in the Maintenance
Department, explained that a dead end road is easier to plow than a cul-
de-sac.
Mr. Dwight S. Harvey, 16190 Alpine Way. pointing-out his lot to the south
of the proposal, inquired whether much fill, will be required on lot 2, and
also questioned the drainage: The Planner explained that considerable fill
may be required on the east side, and that.the further east the.bouse i4 .,.
built, the more fill would be necessary. He explained further that with. the
steep down grade to the east, positive drainage flow should not be a problem.
Harvey questioned whether the front yard setback is taken from the street.
The Planner responded that the setback measurement would be taken from the
road'right-of-way.
Martinson suggested putting in the road at this time, as it will not be
• any less expensive later on, referring to Gagner's plans to develop further. _
He inquired how far in the future was the sewer planned for.
Gagner expressed concern that the road would have to be torn up fn order-to =
put in the sewer and water. The Planner, stated that since sewer would
be extended to the end of the road.that the road would not have to be „,
torn-up for sewer. •
- 1
•
There was further discussion on the need for the turn around.
Mr. Harvey inquired which existing lots were granted variances for let. depth.
• The Planner pointed-out various lots within the existing Alpine Estates plat
which had been platted less than the required 180 foot depth, including
Mr. Harvey's lot 5.
MOTION: Bentley moved to close the Public-Hearing oA Alpine Estates
2nd Addition. Retterath seconded, motion carried unanimously.
MOTION #2: Bentley moved to reconmiend approval of the preliminary plat
dated February 15, 1979 to the City Council, based upon staff report of
March 7, 1979 and Engineering Memo of March 8, 1979 with the following.
modifications: The cul-de-sac not be built-,and the read be widened tO
a full 28' with 50' ROW and dead-ended... Itt tenson seconded,a>ntien carr1ed
unanumously. - . .
•
•
As'dArdum to Invel.ortr's 3r:rermgnt• on (found Lake .Estates. Ind. Add..
I. The developer requestss that item Ill?,be mpdifi to
conform to attached petition:.(to s(0./J' -)-
?_. Reeoa�nizing that he has no legal authority tc,O Onfordt
compliance with item , i), the developer will exercise hie best
efforts to comply with Qa taitent Of i"te*.= ,. .
3. The wordinf, in item 1144 inferrs that the developer -
will install his own utilities. althoughthis was considered,
the developer has petitioned the City .of den Prairie to.
install the improvements,- therefore the developer anticipated
no need for bonding.of line of credit. ..
Thank you,
Js . Eliason, President ...
Eliason Builders, Inc.
Draft 2/27/79
'DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of . 1979
•
by and between ELIASON BUILDERS INC. , a Minnesota corporation.
hereinafter referred to as "Owner", and by the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,
a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City. . .
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Owner has applied to City for preliminary plat approval
for approximately 34 acres zoned RI-13.5 for development of land more
fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof
and hereafter referred to as "the property", and
WHEREAS, Owner desires to plat the property into 69 lots for single
family residences.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the Mayor and Council of the
City adopting Resolution 79-28 approving the preliminary plat, Owner
covenants and agrees to construction upon, development , and maintenance
of said property as follows:
1. Owner shall conform with all planning, architectural,
engineering, landscaping and fee requirements of all
City ordinances.
2. Owner shall plat and develop the property in conformance
with the material dated November 30, 1978, reviewed
and approved by the City Council on Feb. 6. 1979,
and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such
changes and modifications as provided herein.
3. Owner shall submit a development plan prior to approval
of the final plat which shall show proposed grading, storm
water drainage areas and direction of flow, preliminary
utility plans, pending area and floodplain high water levels
for 100 year storm and minimum floor elevations for all
lots. Approval of the final plat shall be subject to approval
of the development plan by the City Engineer.
44.
4. Owner shall submit to the Riley/PurgatoryaCreek iltd Wa ershedaDistri land. .
approval.
nmrn+r ckal l fnllnw all rulers and recommendations of sa'id: .. .-
. . f
•
_ uevetoper•s Agreement-Rouna taxe tstates 'Lnd page 2
•
5. Owner shall pay cash park fees as to all of the property required
by any ordinance in effect as of the day of the issuance of each
building permit for construction on the property.
Presently, the amount of cash park fee applicable to the property f
is $275 per lot. The amount to be paid by Owner shall be increased
or decreased to the extent that City ordinances are ow elided or '
supplemented to require a greater or lesser amount as of the date .
.
of the issuance of any building permit for construction on the
property. .
6. Owner shall convey to City immediately upon approval and filing of
final plat , and prior to issuance of any building permits, a temporary
road easement over Lot 6, Block 5, as shown on Exhibit 8, in such form
. and containing suth provitions as shall be approved by the City Engineer.
7. Owner shall redesign the proposed sewer and water main location to the
east as depicted on Exhibit B, as per the City Engineer's specifications
prior to final plat approval. .
8. Owner shall convey by Warranty Deed that part of the property shown as
park on Exhibit B, outlined in green , to the City immediately upon
filing of plat and prior to issuance of any building permits.
Prior to the dedication, transfer or conveyance of any real property or
interest therein to the City as provided herein, Owner shall deliver to
the City an opinion addressed to the City by an Attorney, and .in a form
acceptable to City, as to the condition of the title of such property or
in lieu of a title opinion , a title insurance policy insuring the
condition of the title of the property or interest therein in the City.
The condition of the title of any real property or any interest therein
to be dedicated, transferred or conveyed as may be provided herein by
Owner to City shall vest in City good and marketable title, therein free
and clear of any mortgages, liens, encumbrances, or assessments.
9. Owner shall construct trails concurrent with street and utility
construction according to the following specifications and in the
following locations: .
A. A sidewalk 5 feet wide and 5 inches deep of concrete within the
right-of-way and north of the driving surface of the "E/W" street
as depicted in red on Exhibit 8.
8. A sidewalk 5 feet wide and 5 inches deep of concrete within the . .
right-of-way and east of the driving surface of Heritage Road as
depicted in red on Exhibit B.
C. A sidewalk 5 feet wide and 5 inches deep of concrete along the .
easterly side and within the right-of-way of cul-de-sac A and
extending southerly along the easterly side and within the
. right-of-way of the N/S Street as depicted in red on Exhibit 8.
.7 q
•
9. continued, •
D. A pathway 6 feet wide and flinches thick of deep strength asphalt
through the park, connecting the cul-de-sac on the north end of
Heritage Road with cul-de-sac A as depicted in red on Exhibit B.
E. A pathway 6 feet wide and 4 inches thick of deep strength asphalt
commencing at the easterly line of the park and extending south-
westerly through the park to Atherton Way and continuing south-
westerly from Atherton. Way within the park to the western
boundary of the property , as depicted in red on Exhibit B.
10. Owner shall remove all diseased trees on the property, including those
within the park, prior to the earlier of the conveyance of that portion of the
property consisting of park to City, or by May 1, 1979.
11. City grants variance from minimum lot frontage and lot size as depicted
on Exhibit B.
12. Owner shall not be entitled to or issued to any building permits until
these streets within the plats of Lake Trail Estates (east of the property}.
and Round Lake Estates 2nd Addition(the property as shown on Exhibit B),
are constructed and in place according to City Engineer's specifications.
13. Owner shall cause all vehicles traveling to and from the property for
purposes of improvement or construction thereon to gain access to the
property by means other than Luther Way and Heritage Road.
14. All sanitary 'sewer, watermain and storm sewer facilities •
concrete curb and gutter and bituuiniods surfacing, whether
to be public or private, shall be designed to city standards
by a Registered Professional engineer and submitted to the
City Engineer for approval. The Owner, through his engineer,
shall provide for competent daily inspection of all street
,utility construction both public and private. As built
drawings with service and valve ties on reproduceable mylar
and certification of completion and compliance with specifi-
cations shall also be delivered to the city engineer. The
Owner, prior to final plat approval, shall provide a bond or
letter of credit in such form as shall be approved by the
City and which guarantees completion of construction and pay-
ment of costs thereof in an amount no less than the estimated
costs of construction plus 20% of all street and/or utility
systems to be owned and maintained by the City. The City
• shall accept such street and/or utility systemssubject to
recommendations of the City Engineer and subject to receipt
by the City of Owner's warranty, guarantying such systems
against any defect or defects therein for a period of at least
two years, together with a bond or letter of credit in the
amount of 25% of the costs for such systems in such form as
shall be acceptable to and containing such further terms as
shall be required by the City.
Owner shall final plat corners at all street intersections '
and cul-de-sac returns having nine(9)foot radii to enable
utility companies to install their lines without crossing
•
uevesoper•s Agreement Round"tate estates 2nd liddition page 4 ...._
15. Owner shall final plat at all strxet intersectlims and cul-de-sac
returns having nine(9) foot radii to enable utility companies to• •
install their lines without crossing pKeate property.
16. Owner shall grade, seed, plant, landscape end construct a..playgrourtd: LL,
structure on the area labeled °park''_.depleted on Exhibit.4, accisrdx�
to the specifications outlis 1tt"' bitrgt ,"atfieched s-tfld !Wig'
a part hereof. The exact location of the structure shall'be
designated hY the Conmunity Services'Staff. the City. ;
17. Owwner, prior to final plat approval .ehai1 provide-.a bond sir letter
of credit in such forte as shall ise'appproved.bY the'Gity and which
guarantees completion of con tructdorr and..payeent ef masts.there:1f.
in an amount no less than.the:.estimated tasty Of eonstrettton plus•.
20% of all pathways, sideaa tS, play abraders , and grading, seeding
and landscaping of all park land to be owned'or maliitai.ned y.titY
18. Owner shall plat a 20 feet..easemed smut that-portion of Lett,;
Block 1, as depicted on Exhibit B
19. Owner shall file this Agremnirat.with tile.
Registrar of Titles and supply the 1 tY with..a copy �of t6'ffi
Agreement with information to Document!Number.and date ono:
time of filing duly certified thereon within'6D e:YA 'frem the'
date of this Agreement.
20. If Owner fails to proceed in eccOrdance with this :Agreement
within 24 months of .the date hereof and provide proof•of
filing in accordance with paragraph herein, -Owner for
itself, its successors, and assigns shell tot oppose
ng
of said property to Rural.
•
21. Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and .
enforceable against Owner, its successors, and assigns
of the property herein described.
22.
Owner represents and warrants it owns fee title to the..prop :
free and clear of mortgages, liens and other encumbrances,
except:
•
J
•
-.-- - --_..--......------2-- ----—.— - !
Developer's Agreement-Round Lakes Estates 2nd page 5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused these
presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal
corporation of the State of Minnesota
BY:
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Its Mayor
BY:
STATE OF MINNESOTAj Roger K. Ulstad, Its Manager
)SS.'
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) ' .
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,
1979 by Wolfgang H. Penzel, the Mayor and Roger K. Ulsta2, the City Manager
of the City of Eden Prairie , a municipal corporation on behalf of the corporation.
Notary Public
ELIASON BUILDERS, INC., a Minnesota
corporation
' ,
BY: /
Its i").;,f.'f -
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thisesday of ,
1979 by .5A € at, .d.e
r .So,t! the Prea ,,, --
of Eliason Builders �nc., on behalf of the corporation.
p mom twxx-rw►usrs Mary Public JJ erg
µi1•.1rt. COMM
W p„y.Jw f44a,,w.lt.lri
•ivawy Mvvw wY‘WMMM s
777
•
•
•
--• o psed Round Lake Estates Se'•On Addition
That .part of the west half.oft *oust quarter:linerthe weir '274-
of the East half of the,Ltiatiat gnartero' i�rrri h �i6,
.. .:Henflepira County,•Mi ngo ta.4 vki-ettAtet,41011t?af.iEtt p `'f I1T r1 1f „
according to the Isitt nn-:ffiiC n rt ad ihf RO ND'iee R 1e
of Titles.' -Hennepin. CtouVe 141.4 - i,aa f,•41OUND
to the platen trioand o :recur '=irr d fTEaa of 1aha r lilie
fiti.u6'If des 1 rLe _ r
and'Svrrthwesi�er�3y it'P' ' .. ...
seginni,ft t the wore
. the-soot& 'Quarter of.; tiot# :k: rat 1�he r t tS:t► ". tr
SoOthwest l oorte+v:-:a distoko--$f- feet, tettc ai0±f` ai
tlis-Un 100 feet 'fit R 1303 waiF` ttai ii 1eft1 ti n
,easterly ."1d Cro 1 1r rs
dim:of R1 ire a # i
awe.of 1'$tdeJ es. 11i liti a'rr
cornpcund curve, hence it maw
and a central. angle oi' :
Q t#e&, a :disinc.
to a point of compound curVi.s t. a<L d e J3:fete 1 it19 d
..radius.of 330 feet and : ntra�l-Atil* d lr�. an i< nca sf 1
._ Vie-.Easterly tanwent,.. tb.the ias't 40.strib�-"oury to the psi ►`
feet: .g.foot 14 the as .tattit t1 oi~i=�e
:�: sect�lon-ra3ttt last 14 .it' d � r�tl1:;�t1ng . .,.. .
Scut est Quarter Of.$ ...
.tom owe'
. . •.,...i.,,•
•
•
•
•
•
:. • . . . ,
•
• It i t 4 .% 9 $ 1 E i • E I I
_ ; if
t 1°t••.R fY - f 1 1 +j 1 ; —
4.
343.
-ar a1r ^n a a OK tae au ifl • et i t` A'f T;' s Y:n
• -"."*...3(v i. !t y4 a pt. . i . :. , �` #%
•
. mg , .,. Al ;�,� .-* i .. .��,‘
t ;'v Btu .
t7�' �^. ti: �.... �
i � 4
N 11
ltillo
.,Volosalic
. y 41 ti • lj"
i( R, (. 1 �`"i. ... .f, i"fir -
• s•,-1.•;- ,.%___.1._.it;e1._!..,-_,__ _ , 7,:„.., c. , - . . ,/,‘Vict rh,, . . , .:.„.
+�Y m $
W 1. y`\ 1.
10 , .,1
•
ROUND LAKE ESTATES SECOND ADD. 1Iii 8 .}�
t t i j1* 1Y�r,�.r'yy4`Y'r'
• x •'• November 30, 197'8 '!b�•*; ' ,I ' 7..1.i t.
• EXHIBIT • B • • i ,; / /� •r•:� t.?' i'.- a-.'.'`
w¢ / / !r 4 .xt�� ;
V --
•
•
SPECIFICATIONS FOR RINI PARKS •
PART I - Turfgrass area
A. The developer shall p►eparw the ground surface area of the mini
supplying at least 4" of topsoilpark
over the finished subgrade. Topsoil
.
shall be of the same quality or better than that of the original site
• and shall be capable of supporting a cultured turfyratrs. Tapslffl,,.shall
be raked out to a smooth finish prior- to seeding. Allrocks of " and
larger shall be removed prior to seeding
B. Turfgrass shall be seeded at a rate of 4-5 Tbs. per. 1,000 sq. ft. Turfgrass
mix shall be as follows:
Park Kentucky Blue Grass 35S
" Aquilla Kentucky Blue Grass 25%
Cannon 85/80 Kentucky Blue Grass
Ruby Creeping.Red Fescue 2li •
Variations in turfgrass mix shall be approved by Community Servites Staff
prior to seeding.
Planting times shall be rilr
Ap Augiust S-$eptipm�ar 15,.late October, or
by approval of Comnunity Services Staff.
PART II - Play Structure
A. Play structure shall be Landscape-Structure Tot Lot F according,tri Catalog.
8 or equivalent. Structure shall include climbing, sliding, and swinging •
devices. All wood components shall be 4"x$" and 6"x6" redwood, free of heart
center. All support posts shall extend below ground surface to a depth
of at least 3'6".
B. Play structure shall be enclosed in a sandlot 20' in all directions from
components of the structure. A barrier shall be Constructed to encircle the
sandlot and play structure. The barrier shall he cbnstructed of r+rlar, red..
wood, penta-treated wood, pressure treated wood or concrete. Barrier shall`.
have a continuous width of at least 4 inches and extend above the ground.
least 12" and not more than 18". barrier-shall extend at least 8'6"`below
ground surface to prevent frost heave. Sand shall be placed.to a deph.
of at least 12" throughout sandlot area.
Srairtereko
•
14/000
MY NSW aslasi i
w.asset•
as EXHIBIT Efir - 'LAU-
a
•
•
•
runt earns :; -"II113/7R'• _•
PART III - Access to Mini Parks
A. All accesses to mini parks will be provided with an ' wide bituminous
fithwei• Pathway shall-be a r .bituminous gnat laid peer a-4"• crushed
limestone base or..4" deep-strength•1splral't•Tail over'+oMpagtpd su'"bg ade#
Mini parks shall have,direct abutment-to a-Cit
y:.atr tar ask•°icarst
side.•
ar►�
PART IV - Tree Plantings
A. Trees shall be planted at the rate of .55 fer acre in greupings throughout . •
the mini park area. Tree planirirtgs.-shli 1 Fb lFar'i
Deciduous ;EVerlireen
tiackberry Scott',line
Ash Austrian.Phis
Sugar Maple ilerl:pir
Norway Maple • Sig HflTs ru
Red Maple • CoTprad4- n Spr,u&e .
Linden bauglas Fir
Thornless Locust
Oak
Birch
•
Deciduous trees shall be at least !>.+- " caliper and evergreens dill bee ,;
least 4-5' in height.
R. Existing desirable overstory tree sue-ties"
ie y be used as Part of the plaiitii
requirements.
•
PART V - Maximum Grade
A. The maximum grade of slope shall-not exceed 6% over 50%;cif the'mite
•
Chatham Wood
jm3
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE 79-05
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO TONING AND AMENDING . .
ORDINANCE 135
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS: .
Section 1. Appendix A of Ordinance 135 is amended as follows: The
following described property, as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto =-
and made a part hereof, shall be and hereby is removed from Rural and shall
be included hereafter in the R1-13.5 District.
Section 2. The above described property shall be subject to the terms
and conditions of that certain Developer'-s.Agreement made as of. .-� _. R
1979 between Tome Development 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 of Eden Prairie'
relating to the R1-13.5 District.
Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective from and after it
passage and publication. .
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of Eden Prairie on
the 6 day of February , 19 , and finally read and adopted and ordered
published at a regular meeting of the City Council on the -day of`_ , 1971
Wolfgang H. Fenzel, Mayor -'
ATTEST:
SEAL
John D. Frane, City Clerk
Published in the Eden Prairie News On the day of . 1$79
•
•
•
•
."• . •• (
•
EXHIBIT "A" -•
•
•
•
That part of -Norttrea5t Qp ,L (NN 1J4) f N'erthwest`
Quarter (NW 1/4), sect on ra.Ve (FL T nship dln
..". 1.elITY'' �2Z)r des;
�L�ted Sixteen t�7.f�� �a�� � '�'!
as follows:• •Neg3:holfsg .at-the cNoxt sast `Ner-rtz s
• Northeast-Quarter N . �
i of W3rth eet•i, trier,.:(NW 1/43
CNN t
thence West along.-the 'F't line . , �seeee
of rive Nnndred.,Thirty+ bt-:.:4-38)4 e thenea Soot
a point oss the °Souttr1.irse:`of• .sue Nortlograwt Qeeter
(NE 1/4) .of ,worthwsst r Derr[ dt to ..1 x .
Nundr°ed Twunty�-Siw awd' 110 20 4- .fed We. !t
tyre Southeast.coiner of:said rt ast ear ;4 Y -
of Northwest Quartet' f» 1,4• :;
South line to t'hse. Southeast...carver+ >e®ud Ncrt aSt..
• Quarter (NE 1/4) of ItottthWtat;Quarter 4NW 1/41•r
North along. the East line,...of id:W,Crtne_44. u5Xte ..:
(NE 1/4? of Northwest Q az`ter: 4 l?. to pout '
beginning: also wett-xalfn -: /2•I Qf ..l t. Quarter
(Niel 1/4) of Northeast ett • (.NE 1/41 r - ct n L°3ve
(5), Township one...Bundad Sixteen, ; 1 aenge- Feu .:
`. 7aacs t22), except the East ' `bt'5.e m d :t 3 "feet -
the North ive Nuu'dree8 € gtxtf.;,end 8/ 45S0-A1J-.facet,: •
thereof, according to the Go'star`rIPle t Sur t e•+ta r
constituting 34 acres, mare or 1es"$.,i
•
•
•
r.-
• DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1979
by and between Toms Development Company, a minnesota corporation, herein-
after referred to as "Owner". and by the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal
corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City",
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Owner has applied to City for changing the zoning from Rural
to R1-13.5 for approximately 34 acres of land more fully described in
Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof and hereafter referred
• to as "the property", and
WHEREAS, Owner desires to develop and plat the property into 59 lets
for single family residences.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the Mayor and Council of the City -
adopting Ordinance 79-03 changing the zoning from Rural to R1-13.5, Owner
covenants and agrees to construction upon, development, and,maintenance
of said property as follows: •
1. Owner shall conform with all planning, architectural, -
engineering, landscaping and fee requirements of all
City ordinances.
2. Owner shall plat and develop the property in conformance
with the material dated December 27; 1978, reviewed and
•
approved by the City Council on February 6, 1979, and
attached hereto as Exhibit 8, subject-to such-changes and _.
modifications as provided herein.
3. Owner shall submit detailed construction and storm sewer
plans to the Riley/Purgatory Creek Watershed District for
review and approval.
Owner shall follow all rules and recommendations of said
Watershed District.
- _ page 2
•
4. Owner shall pay cash park fees as to all of the property required
by any ordinance in effect as of the date of the issuance of each
building permit for construction on the property.
Presently, the amount of cash park fee applicable to the property
is $275 per lot. The amount to be paid by Owner shall be increased
or decreased to the extent that City ordinances are amended or sup-
plemented to require a greater or lesser amount as of the date of
the issuance of any building permit for construction on the property.
•
5. Owner shall construct a concrete sidewalk 5 feet wide, 5 inches deep
within the right-of-way and east of 168th Avenue West as depicted in
red on Exhibit B concurrent with utility construction.
6. Owner shall construct a 6 feet wide , 4 inch deep strength asphalt
pathway within Outlots F and C as depicted in red on Exhibit B.
Owner, prior to final plat approval, shall provide a bond or letter
of credit in such form as shall be approved by City and which guarantees
completion of construction and payment of costs thereof in an amount no
less than the estimated costs of construction plus 20% of all pathway
or sidewalk to be owned.and maintained by the City.
7. Lots .shall be platted having frontages a minimum of 90 feet wide.
8. Owner shall convey by Warranty Deed that part of the property
shown as Outlots A,B,C,E and F on Exhibit B outlined in green to the
City immediately upon filing of the plat and prior to issuance of build-
ing permits.
9. Prior to the dedication, transfer or conveyance of any real property
or interest therein to the City as provided herein. Owner shall deliver
to the City an opinion addressed to the City by an Attorney, and in a
form, acceptable to City as to the condition of the title of such
property or in lieu of a title opinion , a title insurance policy insuring
the condition of the property or interest therein in the City.
10. Owner shall remove all diseased trees an the property by May 1, 1979.
11. Owner shall grant such open space easements and impose such covenants
and restrictions over that portion of Lots 1-3, Block 8 ; Outlot 0;
and Lots 5-12, Block 7;.situated northerly and easterly of the line
depicted in black on Exhibit B, which shall prohibit and restrict the
building of any buildings, erection of any fences or planting of any
non-indigenous vegetation , and containing such other provisions as are
acceptable to the City Planning Staff.
12. All sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer facilities and streets to be
dedicated to the City shall be designed to City standards by a registered •
professional engineer and submitted to the City•Engineer for approval. •
Private sewer, water and street systems shall conform to. the City's building
code requirements. The Owner, through his engineer, shall provide for
. competent daily inspection of all sewer, water.and street imp�rov ts.
As-built drawings with service and valve ties on reproduceable mylar shall .. _
be delivered to.the City Engineerwithin 60 days of completion thereof.
Prior to final plat approval, or issuance of building permits, if no-final ..
plat required, the Owner shall complete the following:
A. Submit a performance/warranty bond or letter of credit which
guarantees completion of all streets, sewer and water systems
to be dedicated to the City as determined by the City Engineer.
The security amount shall be 125% of the estimated construction
cost of said improvements. The Owner's. registered engineer
shall make and submit for approval to the City Engineer a
written estimate of said costs. Said bond or letter of credit
shall specify that Said improvements shall be completed and •
acceptable to the City Engineer not later than a date to be
specified by the City Engineer and.that said improvements shall
be fully guaranteed against any defects in materials or workman•
ship for a period of two years following said completion and
acceptance date. Upon such acceptance, said bond or letter-of -
credit may be reduced 25% of the original amount.
•
B. In lieu of item 12 A above, Owner may submit a 100% petition signed by,
all fee owners of subject property, requesting the City to install
said streets, sewer, and water systems to be dedicated to the City. •
Upon approval by the City Council, the City will cause said improve
ments to be made and special assessments for all costs will be levied
over a five year spread. Owners must have a signed contract with a •
private contractor to rough grade streets to finish subgrade •
elevation prior to award of contract by the City. Performance/
warranty security as described in 12 A above shall be submitted to
cover said grading costs only.
C. Submit to the City Engineer a development plan showing existing •
contours ',proposed grading, finish elevations, streets, sewer,
water and storm sewer preliminary alignment and grades, minimum
floor elevations on each lot, drainage ponds, high water elevations,
• and arrows showing direction of surface drainage, location of-trails,--,. -:-_-»
etc.
O. Receipt of cash fee for first year street lighting public streets)
engineering review fees and street signs.
13. Owner shall file this Agreement vrl tlh the Register of Deeds;.and, supply
City with a copy of this Agreement with-fnfermati:an as to Document
Number and date and time of filing•duly certified.thereon-within
60 tayt from the date of this AgrueuenL.
14. If Owner fails to proceed in accordance with this Agreement-with
24 months of the date hereof and provide.Proof of filing in:aecerdance
with paragraph 13 herein, Owner for itself, its SUCCes!Yu , and'•assi'gns
shall not oppose rezoning of said property to Rural..
IL Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable.
against Owner, its successors, and assigns of the property herein
described.
16. Owner represents and warn ants it ins fee title to:the property
freer
and clear of ea+rt'gages, liiens,.and other en umbra�es•v eacep't.
•
tiy,
•
•
•
- Agreement-Chatham Wooa - _ - _ .... . • - _ -----
page 5 _ _. ....
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused
these presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal
corporation of the State of Minnesota
BY:
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Its Mayor
BY:
STATE OF �SINNESOTA Roger K. Ulstad, its Manager.
SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN •
The foregoing instrument-was acknowledged before me this -day--of-•. __ - -- —
1979 by Wolfgang H. Penzel, the Mayor and Roger K.U1stad,'The City Manager
of the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation on behalf of the
corporation.
Notary Public
Tr; • DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
g. ✓ ! 1G#
i
r p , g, : es ,-/.
homes Selseth, Secretary
STATE OF MINNESOTA
SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 29 day of mAgeN ,
1979 by John Muelhberg , the President and Thomas SeTeth, the
Secretary of Toma Development Company on behalf of the company.
, r ..,- Nary Publi c
.
y
•
•
•
•
•
• SIT "Au
•
•
That part of Northeast :Quark (NE 41, of Northwest
• Quarter . 1/4), Section Five.• t S3.,:Township
Bundred Sixteen (1161, Range Temartr,TWOA.Z23 x 4.11100r411114
as fo11OWS s •.egirn"ing a't the ca corner f Said
'Northeast•Quarter (NE 1--4) Of , Sa hnient krte I ..
thence West-slang,the tforth'linew thhi f , ;
of rive•)Iu ed hint ht t$, e<et n
to a point . the South'!l f a Nort°heaast Quarter
(NE 1/4) of.N e st Qu ter A 4). di*4ftt Pig •
A
Hundred- my t 1X anal 2?1g t32. . :.feet Neat
the Southeastf it allo st r r (NE
of Northwest Quarter (NW /41Ce tint1d.
South line to the Southeast corner. of said Northeast
-.Quarter (NE 1/4) of Northwest.:f ar a tben e
North along the East tine of :said: Northeast . "th''i` .T
• ter 1/4) of Northwest Quarter fNW 4.1:• to r4nt
beginning F also.West Nall t't�:.1/2) of Nor w t :l ar er
• (NW 1/4) of 14ortheast, Quarter lE 1/47 � otike rive
(5) Township one Hundred.Sixteen• (1161,, age•t` 1wtS!—
Two (22), except the East Three than' . LL 1 feet sad
the North Five Hundre► ' Nighty aid :Sf10 ( 8A 8 ..feet
thereof, seconding to the Government SurveI t �
constituting 34 acres, more or less.
•
•
4
I
.....-...-...... .----.--.--- ..-.
,
i
Z.Q614.. .Q.CM
(... -Zerad&ferleel.er.-e1.4,z_ge.:.
atre.cay./..A2Cargee/..t.L.
I .1'4'1.:tr.f......ri-... ,.,....... .....„......_?..,
D n....!... ..„. ..... z_____
, .......„...4....... ,‘ , .
......_.-z,r.......:..7._.........1...;.,,„,
• mi.. . _ :.__. .....__4_ _ -z.„...........4._-_-...;.- , ...
\ ",,',7.7,1 ,..0_j ...—.,"'.-:'.'•:... .._. .. . •'k..=Zrt......!;-..,...:‘,..
IV 1'1171 1111 if,; :.,6.........;'.1- ....e.....,...... `,1 ----, .-- \ ' /........ .....'4..• ,
' •S ....‘Tir\.t-r111 ;tc,. .,.r;" `.t.t ):;..-i.7i\.'-`.. .•••• .' ..- ss'i‘tr :-..--z-•,_--.=---r. .. ,
i A ,..,,..‘, stp,.. ,-. ._e.,.,4-!....1 ---w,1
, ti , rix 4.....,-,•::.••.z.-.-.-....., , ,,,..r,r. • s
• t.: .
.\i'. ' .....1 . . 'ifd ., 1....::::.,.,........;,......z„.., \‘‘.•\\.‘......:..t..._...t , lad.•An.. .
ti If,t;•,. 00— .,/,:/;,:y....4.4fq: :, .. it.....-,...... ' A• \
'• I L.1.1.. ,. 0 pr.....,„.4z„•-,/: ., 4,.• z. ,„,..••• \ I re. ., .
...Y4,. 't . i.;4c.,-i-7,0-..',. ,..: • , VC•A•• 1- .• •-•‘;•\;, -•••• ..• .• I! v.:11, 11 '-'ik 1 .sk '•s.. ''''';4.'.'i'l)k..%Vt. '•..'‘ ;Ift•4 .. ''''...NL% • • .
. :: ';'• 1114 ;: ,, N, , 1 I). •.; . .;. : :,
IN s(C.:11'7 , -; -• •\ Z,' ...-
., 1, :k--•: ''' ,,N•N:'....s.\' ..;,',,•i, ,k!! . '.': . •,'•-... \,•'''. .. • ,.; \, -
) ...0\\A
• . .
- pi ..\ . '',dx\4 "Nk,, '-e!1,1H•—.. '..1 ' \\ •• • ("°;- •,. •si\
.*-2-/7/, ) ' .• -,\.:Ns:).. 1,• •••••,..\1,.5,,htt: •• ,4. .-- - - .. / - - ‘ . •
..: /,!;.• T../),+7,'..‘-.,• •‘-'',.'', A, .' ),.. '! ••• 7. •. . • -- '''.• i•• • \ '
:•/.0),..;..•-• .„,,,,'-i:.Z.-:-4/Lz....,N\\, ."'„,,:,;4.".. : -1 - • '%,, •: ; •••• ! \ • .
,•.;•*.i ,,-.x", ....., :-A•.,- -e7.L., -,-, r.L'\'% , ''.•:•T•1, .1\ ' • - ....,:o t - !IL\ ,
,/ .• L.-- •_____,..1.4''42, , NA, r,..(1„.1,...‘, , ntaa• woo
•
..../i,/ i ,' K-- ___,../':,..',f $.,(,, ••,,A' 1,••‘' I'' '--' 'rr '''- , ; ' • '4.7 LA'°.! ' '1.\ \ ,
i le! i( ,:.:,/=-•"--, ./•••:•,121 4,.,,.,.,.. , - -,:.• ..._,,,,„„,,,, ,....,, ..._• ..„.,A...,,,„,.,. . •
-., 1..‘i..\,,. , •._.f.,„,„....,,,...1,-,1 ),,,y—.:.....4t, ,... .z,•:....._.......-7.—:•,, 41-Z74.*4i' ' 4, 14-..c'zlet..,•;" -
1. , .:z.,,..,,,.. • • -1•1 . i.ft: 74 --,,,,,- -....-......?-,,n-t::-.-.,-... . / _ kb,.:":"::.f • •••• , '
'_\• *\'' --;:i.•0= 17617.-*--' .;V"-'7V.,fit:.• •-eZ•r;Jr•••t-at'4',. ' ' '7,••;7• %...
•••:Z•4'.:2-:: .. * 'If' p 17::::"_r'2••')1:i,'!. .,... ''4:-.-,:.- -A-,;°::._.,_= ,7Y ,,,,g' .'
;%......, • ,.."----.4. . Z.-• "‘.., il...."07-4 ...r/ -.-. I' . ‹..-'1. C'U'7k ' dtp•\ -,,_', ' -
..- `,.. '''...*- . -. I..:'.. I- .r-tZ7..,//,/' .4'4,..li.-i----,,LL ---4,- ....•:,...% •
:Z .._*; •'',.-47t-,. .--''','---#,-,.':',/1''.'...•7( „F.•••744:5;:•-f'-'7-If•j•••,.. i'4',..-^. ..- ..i .4'.% \•"*N-k,
•t:•' '''-':-.--.-.A4c.41-h`s.3•'-'324-."'•&ii'sj 0, 41.,4.-=, .44 1--,:.:.1--,A-i't'-z-.-.- '' .,ti-x•v. . ,
... , ...•:- .•;1-1,2.-'`.---.••••_........z,, ,,...„•%:-..;.1/ .."•(..Q" 4.:-..,... '' '*'"•*:7••••• ' ,,, • '''' . ":"!,%,•;:,..;. '\NIRlili' '
•:i .... .....*•"-{ :7--r: r.-.S.-'•-',TIV'N41-41/,''','//::: iit:.:; ;'•.* ...-- •. ....':...':S... .4..C-"' ---'':•• ' • rA,•''•'•',. '\
' .;. i,4•••• • -4..---,A.1",,,., n11,1•:1,1 ;,,,,,
'ii---71.' !eill./2r.i2•''-• P721":11 t * I'., F •
•••'''-••••• ,,,....---' t 1.' •' -'. lik‘
_., ''.7t:•:-...-•'.--•.;• tYtt-ti.„ ..4",•"--.'"-.;•. lit
..... i . v.'el 1 ,ised,,..,:yi
. '-• 11 Vtt' ,,,;/
)
• i ' ''''''•":...--.-.i'1 I'...• ' zzAc."- :':-` ..
• •::-...-'1 ••;,•,....;,., 7 7 li, • I) , •• - ..
:..i:11: 4,..1/...;;V;,./.7-‘ i . '.- t .. -__;:-......01m,""••.
00..-- -
....) ' ,..,:".".• t, ....I ,1. --.• t •
' ''_0•9'...ir' .-- 8-'.4 • ' •I''‘;" —-- -
.,
_- .5 / K. t\NI
,, ., r . -77 1. ..ifv. •t4,.'' :is:1-t 1.
, .T.. .,-,-:..,-,"t.''„07:11.,1 , "\.1.*\ :.1'‘": . . ,ts137Tri-t-\....i•--•.7\ .',V., !?,•.1 1..1! .
••;:,--•-•-- 0q--:44, -.'..-- ,... •l, _.!% d'°' '.1 ' . il: .?4...0--;• - - • -\\-1 '•21 — .
if -. — • ....s.,,,, ...-.. .-A..\- ,-,,!,,,,..0*. . Ai. .k ,(..4 1 t;!el-....0iii.' - ."se\4.A!,1
, , . ,. A ' `.,..° '114,—.02.___I ; ,1 _A • 1 '•
‘ fir .... . ....v, ,.k, /11--7'..- 1 ti- -,- .v i • i ----11 • i 1 • .
• , . f,c/v •,4•0.3 )),..,•\•\ .‘, ' 3 o r4 -.1r1:7,01 .:. . „,, !gilt 11•: '
te ,4 _
, . . It tz C )"" .di?‹,,,,-‘ '/t.Z)i;li 4'".. It• i---- •=1-1,... -,-- 49 /1" ...;
„ ,,p4 ,.., ,,,,:, ,,, t.,4„, 0.;4-1.-..—.J.•,t-,,..*.__—_t_I — 4- -.-
,..-- 0. ,' .'--:-.1--s-4" ' •'•( .1-7ii,j_ ' ---•‘!•• - ---7.".-^4,-. . '- /iii '' •
t• -.24--LHC;t:',W'•-•XN‘4• •'.:.;.......,-;77.t-nth!-.-,..--_R.-:- ..._,..r,„.....1,,-t...,...›..f."1" .. ,..
I ' 1 . s,.. • t.t,,,.'!'? j,0.."... •*.s.; .,..`-;:.:.:-:-2.- .--r----..7-- . 7-?...y.',. .•
',:`'...-., 4.s.'A'''' ';-1.. •.,- . •Thtil‘ -1-'7 ---..:-.71:- = - -----jrft • ‘-
4••••••• .0 1-: -
1 •.-..„-.7. t4,._.1_,...7.;.....,.. ,„,,zi.)1 I-11 s.,A...1 a—,,,i • 3...'\1 .:.9 ' '. •
ls:.;1 '. ...7. : --....';". ''t•N •4 '''' -...,._ .‘":7•4' it ..1!C,.,••. ..:...,101.- • 467' '
2.:': •••••••"`.''Sy.'\A•..t,'. -"--- ...1,1j,i, • .. l . I,v... •No... It ; • .
_..----..- • . , % . ..4.-..-. • . •. .• .. ,.. ,../,• . , 7.%) / o;- •,',/ -. ..... ;. . •
.....47" •'''•
4, 4
; -- .I,.. :”......j.•‘ t .7.1.,...74' r _I. • .: ! •
—: . • , • 14...i....,........ 1 7...... .}....44.46 ..\. ...s.,
I•4` ...„•\ ..r..... ,t•.., ., ...... .. :,11•,,,41 ,. ,.. .". v ../ ‘ ' •;.: •• • s .
I 1,-.-.1",-F..,'\ ‘,\I, i••,s4.:.:' . A Nz--i•kk-'..,, ,9i}j,.1-4 • i / , .•••,.:i \ .-",'•,'-tl'4,;1' 7:1'..)) . 11 " 11-4-'47;yi i )I
, • ,. ; , . • • •/,, December 27, 1971 •
i a % 1.a..-4......1.r.l..=... .u•L• ivi,ti,e'' ' ' '"l'
ag-.....u.
*EXHIBIT Ir . .
t _ L .._...... , r
-.1.:-.—.::::=..1_!11 i ..
-74- 7-.41. 4.,s' . . . u*....:::•-----
-. ---- ...-.-:-:..-=--:.•. 1 t : 7.on • . • . ....
.. ..
, „ ..
a
TO: Meyer and Council
Thru: Roger litstad. City Manager .
From: John Franc Finance Director
Date: lurch 3O, i979
ate: Met der 1971 and 1972 Charges
The 1971 and 1972 charges as billed:..by the sewer'B'aar8
total Si,Z19.,8O2. Our prapesai.t at for set t' e,il.
of these cha has a value nt s•o 197 and-1972
dollars of $�,3a Mr Pauly will'1`e rt:on the 11a1
aspects the
si YWA;ti na'
.. ._ '�.5wf ..
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor end City Council
THROUGH: Roger K. Ulstad
City Manager
FROM: Roger A. Pauly
City Attorney
DATE: March 29, 1979
RE: Metropolitan Sewer Board
1971-1972 Reserve Capacity Charge Allocations
In 1971 and 1972 the Metropolitan ewa, Board, now
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission ("a.ummission"), allocated
the following charges for reserve capacities against the City
of Eden Prairie:
1971 Interceptor $ &64,220.80
1972 Inim,.uea,Lu,. $ 53:E,307 03
Subtotal $1,182,627.83
{
1972 Treatment Works 27,274.24
TOTAL $1,219,.802.07
(As reflected in Exhibit B attached to the letter of R9rhACd
Dougherty, Chief Administrator, to Roger Ulstad, dated Marais 2,
1976.)
The charges for reserve capacity (oversizing) were
spread among the serveral service areas within the metropolitan
•
sewer system area and, in turn, among the various municipalities
in each service area. The City of Eden Prairie lies within service
area 4.
In his letter of March 2, 1976 Mr. Dougherty, proposed
that the city repay the $1,219,802 to the Commission in equal in.,
stallments of $156,500 in the years 1976 through 1987 end a final
installment of $154,913 in 1988 or en aggregate of $2,0324913.,
These payments include interest of approximately $812,090.,
The Council has been presented,for its consideration
by Mr. Ulstad's memorandum of February 23. 1979. a schedule of
payments to the Commission based upon a surcharge to be added
to the service availability charge ("SAC") ranging from $75.00
per SAC in year one and increasing to $215.00 per SAC in the
26th year. Under this proposal payments to the Commission would
range from $37,500 in the first year to $107,500 in the twenty-
sixth .......'
year or an aggregate of $1,665,000.
At its meeting of March 6, 1979, the Council requested
an opinion as to the legality of the charges made by the Commission
1=-
ti
in 1971 and 1972 for reserve capacity.
The powers and authority of the Commission are delineated
in M.S.SS473.501-4.73.549. M.S.$ 473.517 authorises the Culmaiasion
to allocate certain coats. Saba. 3, authorize*'the'Commiesion
to allocate among local government units the reserve capacity
for treatment works,
"...in proportion to the amounts of such
capacity reserved for each of thee."
Likewise Subd. 4 authorizes the Commission to ,lthoate ;oats
for estimated unused capacity in the
service area interceptors among local
government units in the service area for
which unused capacity therein has been
reserved, in the same manner as that
provided for in subdivision 3."
In addition, Subd. 8 provides that when.the costs established
pursuant to the provisions of Subds. 1-7 result in an increased
cost to a municipality which,
"...is unreasonable or unegeitable.the
Commission is ...authorized and directed
to adopt such other means and methods of
allocating costs, as to each of them,
as may be fair, reasonable and equit
able."
1 _�
10)41
•
•
Subd. 6 which provides for deferral of payments states in part,
"The (Metropolitan) council may by resolution
provide for the deferment of payment of all or
part of the current costs of acquisition, better-
ment, and debt service of estimated unused ca-
pacity which are allocated by the commission
to a local government unit in any year pursuant
to subdivisions 3 and 4, repayable at such time
or times as the council shall specify in the
resolution, with interest at the approximate
average annual rate borne by council bonds out-
standing at the time of the deferment, as deter-
mined by the c-aall. When such deferred
costs are repaid they ebsU be applied in taduvuion
of the total amount of costs thereafter allocated
to aeflh of the local government units to which
such deferred oasts were allocated in the year of
deferment, in proportion to their allocations
thereof that year.`
The question presented is, of course, one of statutory
interpretation. While the Supreme Court of Minnesota has net
passed upon the validity of the method utilised by the Commission
in imposing charges for reserve capacity in 1971 and 1972 it has
approved the SAC method adopted by the Commission for years
ginning after 1972. In doing so,the Court in City of Brooklyn
Center vs. metropolitan Council, mina. t
243 Nw 2nd 102 (19762 clearly recognised the broad discretionary
authority vested in the Commission urnAer the statute when it
stated,
"Given the numerous variables involved in plan-
ning and operating a metropolitan sewer system,
it seems reasmehte taus to conclude that the
legislature intended to vest considerable disc
oration as to the precise method of allocating
-3-
11 ff
reserve capacity costs in those persons charged
with the system's well-being to determine the
precise method of allocating reserve capacity
costs. Certainly the Board's grant of authority
was broad."
In commenting upon the possibility that some units of goveiumwnt
might be required to pay more under the SAC method of cost allnoa.
tion then under the previous method the Court stated,
'That some communitieswill be required to pay
more under SAC in a given year than might have
been the case under the allocation system
employed in 1971 and 1972 is not proof that
SAC is unfair or unreasonable.*
Logically the conversepxopoeition, i.e., that* munici*
pality may be required to pay a greater amount under the 1971.1972
formula than under the SAC forma..4 is not in itself proof that the
1971-1972 formula is unreasonable.
Furthermore, the Court in its opinion appears to have
concluded that the rnmmiosion may act on information then avail-
able to it. In this respect the court stated,
*If the method of cost allocation chosen is one
which will, so far as can now be reasonably an*
ticipated, spread the ultimate cost burden of
establishing and maintaining an unused capacity
as a reserve capacity among the municipalities
in a way proportionate to the benefits which
accrue and which are anticipated, over time,
to accrue because unused capacity is available
when needed, the Board has complied with the
legislative standard.*
The Court exemplified what it views as the broad dis-
cretion given the Commission under the Act in adopting the 1971*
1972 formula, When it stated,
.4-
7944
•our view as to the extensiveness of the Board's
discretion is corroborated, by the fact that the
1971-1972 formula was arrived at after consider-
able staff debate and the exercise of discretion
by both the Board and the oowa..i]. in making
judgments required to produce it. Moreoever, the
Board's assessment of reserve capacity costs
against individual communities has changed from
time to time as the Board exercised its better
judgment in the light of changing factors. The
adoption of the SAC formula, strikes us as a
similar exercise of the Board's considerable
discretion."
In my opinion, the act clearly delegates to the Commission fc
authority to allocate reserve costs among the benefited municipalities
Furthermore, in the light of the Minnesota Supreme Court's interpre
tation of the Act as conferring broad discretion upon the Commission
in allocating reserve costs, it is highly unlikely that s court
would substitute its judgment in place of that of the em m aelon in
its allocation of reserve costs in 1971-1972. Unless a clear,case
can be made that the Comm+ssion was arbitrary and unreasonable and
that the allocation formula used by it in 1971-1972 has no basis
in fact, a court would be most reluctant to reject the expertise
of the Commission in the exercise of its legislative function.
Making such a case is remote at best. Furthermore; a challenge to
the Commission could expose the City to the risk of ultimately
having to pay the full amount of the allocated cost of $1,219,S 2
plus interest from the date of allocation to the date of payment.
It should also be noted that the Commission has been
granted authority to collect amounts determined by the Commission
to be payable by local governmental units. M.S.S 47S-5212rn10.41e4
that the Commission may determine the times during the year$berg s
shall be payable to the Commission. It also requires each goyerumeet
•
•
•
unit to pay to the Commission all BOMB charged to it as prev:dad
in LB. 573.517 at the times and in the Banner.determined by the
Commission. The governing body of each governmental unit is
required to take all action necessary to:›...uaide the 'funds required
for such payments: In the event the governing body of any local
government unit fails to meet any payment to the 'Commission when
•
due the Metropolitan Council may certify to the Cuuuly Auditor
the amount required for payment With interest at fh per MAIM.
The auditor is required to levy such amount as a tax.Fpan all
taxable property in the governmental unit for the.next calendar
Year. The tax is collected in the same manner as the general
taxes imposed by the ;proponent unit.
•
•
73
•
zN • t
t p+.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Roger Ulstad, City Manager
SUBJECT: Metro Waste Control Coamission - 1971 and 1972 Charges
DATE: December 5, 1978
Attached are letters of July 21, 1977 and.May 23,E 1978. The Waste Corttro1
Comrtission is asking the City to adopt a resolution authorizing a revised
repayment schedule as outlined in the letter of May 23, 1978.
The City Council will recall that hack in JUTy Of 1977'You:authorized the
negotiation of a possible settlement-of deemed relating reserve
capacity in the Metro interceptor. I have 1ta a number,of score, i'with • =.'
Staff at Metro Waste,and i fell that the scivedrilst-vutlineti in the cnmintcation
of May 23, 1978 would be recommended by Metro staff`to the gomnissian as an
• acceptable settlement of these Charges.
I would like to place this item on our December 19th Council agenda for
discussion if the Council concurs.
•
RKU:jp
Enc.
•
•
i y
art OF inn/SWEIEDENPRAIS ROSSlEDENPRAWMIMINNESO?a6&91Frrakr"Uek1B12"41''�2
May 23, 197E
Mr, Anthonp finesse
Metropolitan Waste Central Commrisssirm
350 Metro Square Bldg. .
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
•
Mr. Gnerre, •
•
Attached is a repayment ,.1 l,.1a showing the ,effect Cif iauzgdaffTel '
the Sae surcharge in our le# of.11iy. 19.71'by Per unit.
new schedule indicates a eurcalarge rt$ $75 p first
w17 ci Pr i- itigime a fn. the te-
payment year to $215 in the last year ewes Etsral
repayment of $1,665,000.
•
•
Sincerely,
•
•
Roger K.. Ulstad
City Manager
RKU:bq
Encl. _... ...
y L
4
r
•
•
•
T,
LETTER OF JOLT 21, 157 5/21/70 (FRBLXmlra70I f,
Surcharge Yearly Pit Surcharge Yearly Amount
1 $ 45 $ 22,500 $ 75 $ 37,500
2 45 22,500 75 37,5t70 . ,,:`.3...::,,."',..,..,,,,,....,::7;:!,,,....:.........,,,
50 25,000 8o 4a,aoo
3
4 So 25,000 80 40,000' N
•
5 55 27,500 85 42,500
6 60 30,000 90 45,00Gi.,L
7 60 30,000 90 4*r '. 1;
8 65 32,500 95 47,500
9 70 35,000 100 50,000
10 75 37, 00 105 52,500
11 75 37,500 1'
12 $o 40,FSO, ]10' 55,
13 85 42400 its . 57rr50$',
14 90 4'5,000 In
15 95 40,:5aA' d� "
16 105 53,500 1.37r 67,500
17 110 35,.000 . 240 70,E
' 18 115 57,500 145 72r500
19 125 62,500 155 17,E
26 130 65,000 160 80,000
21 140 70,000 170 85,000
• 22 145 72,500 135 87,500
83 155 77,500 185 92,500
24 165 82,500 195 97,500
25 175 87,500 205 10z*r5t10
26 185 92,500 215 107,.50
27 195 97,500
28 2Q5 102,500
29 220 110,000
30 235 117,500
51,702,500 • 51,605.000
CITY OFFICES/11$1 EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD/EDEN PRAIRIE.MINNESOTA SSS13/TELEPHONE(MI I4I.2211 :79...••••
July 21, 1977
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
Attention: Richard Dougherty
350 Metro Square Building
7th and Robert Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Dear Mr. Dougherty:
The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission has assigned to the City
of Eden Prairie a total charge including interest of $1,643,507
for deferred costs relating to reserved capacity in metro interceptor
sewer pipes and treatment works for the years 1971 and 1972. This
amount breaks down as follow6:
Interest
Principal thru 9/1/77 Total
1971 $ 664,221 $ 254,688 $ 918,900
1972 555,501 169:097 724,678
$ 1,219,802 $ 423,785 $ 1,643,587
In 1973 the service availability charge (SAC) became effective, thus
discontinuing the old method of cost allocation. However, the SAC
method was not retroactive to the years 1971 and 1972, and now the MCC
is pressing for an agreement with the City for the debt repayment.
In response to this situation we are proposing what may be a feasible
repayment plan which would be based upon a surcharge added to the
normal SAC payments for future years. The attached repayment schmduie
shows such a surcharge ranging from $45 in 1978 to $235 at the end of
the repayment. The projected total number of SAC units is cmne4tfant
with current Metro Council population forecasts for Eden Prairie.
We trust that this may be a reasonable approach to a most difficult
problem for all concerned.
Sincerely,
Roger K. tasted
City Manager
RIOT:dh
•
cc: Anthony Gnorre .300
-
•
•
•
•
•
• 1978 • $ 45
79 45 .
1880 50
•
81 50
82 55
83 60 •
85 65
86 70
87 75
86 75
89 • 80
1990 85
91 9cc
• 92 •
• 95
93
errs
94 no
95 3,15
96 125
97 130
98 140
99 3•5
2000 155
01 169
02 175
03 185
04 195
A5 205
06 ' 220
07 235
$ 1.702,500
•
•
.... ...... ,..... ,. ... .. a. ... a •aa• f i e-z
}
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
MEMORANDUM
•
Fti: mayor and City Council
TiiRU: Roger K. tilstad. City Manager
FROM;
La
mb rt, Director ofenmcm tar ervices
'
DATE: March 30, 1979
SUBJECT: Park Dedicatiufl Ordinance .,.
Earlier this moult, i seat out a espy ' the'Park d cation kiFdina,iE .Draft
14 the Farm, Recreation and aturatl Reso mission.approved-at their •
•Ittrcit 5th is m°1ng_ T• attached.a meuaa.r udunc anted Chi .. I979 that sommiari d;'
the basic changes the had .a. n oordiRan►ce..
I haverequested that this be @n.the prIl 3rd •agenda•so that metes a€
the council have a chance to provide me with,• any re tided Ch6flgeg'.pri r
to subni€ting tilts to our attorney f rp'a fir stra to t d t is ham:
•
it ready for the April 17th meeting-
. izau''the'i formmtl heading.
• i.:md
•
si'
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
TMRU: Roger K. Ulstad, City Manager
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Seipvtces
DATE: Man.ch 13. 1979
•
SUBJECT: Park Dedication Ordinance -
Attached is a copy of the Park Dedication'Ordinence Draft No. 4. The Parks,
Recreation and,Natural Resources Ccovaissical approved this ardiT1111121 at their
Marth•5th meeting. The basic changt$,tide ordinance takes':to the existing .1
ordinance are:
.1. Increase fees as follows:
ci-stinq Proposed
Single Family - $275/unit • /.unit •
Multiple Family - $2ORlun1t /unit
Commercial/Tnrinctrial $18200, nerve :S1r4> ?acre
2. Specifies the amount of land that-may be.requested•for dedication in
lieu of cash, and limits the type of land that will be accepted for •
land in lieu of cash.
3. Details what the mini-park requireamtits will he when mini*parks are
required.
If you have any comments on this ordinance that you would like me to address,
please submit those to me as soon as possible, as I would like to put this item •
on the agenda in April. .
BL:md •
=`i a
•
2/27/79 ma DRAFT N4
sane changes made 3/13/79
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 78-229
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO AND ESTABLISHING SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS FOR
THE PLATTING AND SUBDIVISION OF LAND AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 332,
AND ORDINANCE NO. 93, SECTION 11, SUBDIVISION 1, RELATING TO PARKS,
PLAYGROUNDS, PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, STORM WATER HOLDING AREAS AND PONDS,
AND ORDINANCE NO. 135, SECTION 2, RELATING TO GROUP USABLE OPEN SPACE.
The Council of the City of Eden Prairie does ordain as follows:
Section 1. Ordinance No. 332 and Section 11 of Ordinance No. 93 are hereby
deleted and the following substituted therefor:
Section 11. Parks, Playgrounds and Public Open Spaces:
Subd. 1. The subdivider shall consult with the Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resaurces1mmission, at the time his sketch plan is under consideration, to secure
its recommendation as to the location of any parks, playgrounds or other public
property. The plan shall show the locations and dimensions of all areas to be
dedicated in this manner.
Subd. 2. Where a proposed drainage way, park, playground, school site or
other pi5Iic site, as shown on the comprehensive development plan, is embraced
in part or in whole by the boundary of a proposed subdivision and such public sites
are not dedicated, such sites shall he reserved and no action taken towards approval
of a plan or plat for a period not to exceed ninety days, to allow the proper •
governmental agency the opportunity to consider and take actions towards the
acquisition of such public ground or park by purchase or other methods.
Subd. 3. The owner or owners of land being subdivided or rezoned for residential.
coamrerciaf,industrial or other uses, or as a planned unit development which includes
residential, commercial and industrial uses, or any combination thereof shall
contribute an amount in cash based on the following schedule:
TYPE OF GLVELOPMENT FEE PER UNIT
Single Family Detached $325 •
All Other Residential Uses $250
Cormnerci al/Off ice/Industrial Use $1,400
Subd. 4. That any money received hereunder shall be placed in a special fund
by the My and used only for the acquisition, assessment abatement, and develop-
ment of land for parks, playgrounds, public open spaces, development of existing
park and playground sites, public open space and debt retirement in connection with
land previously acquired for such public purposes.
Subd. 5. In those instances where the City Council deems it in public
interest to require parkland dedication from residential subdivisions and
developments it may require up to ten percent (lO.) of the undeveloped land
proposed to be subdivided or developed. Such dedicated land shall be reserved for
public use as parks, playgrounds or public open space. If the City requires land
dedication for parks the following commitments shall be required:
•
•
SO
•
•
a. The developer shall assume all assessments of the dedicated parkland
and shall provide the City with a warranty deed free and clear of all
encumbrances at the time of final platting.
b. The dedicated area will consist of suitable land and will, be located so
as to best serve the present and future needs of the neighborhood and the
community for` recreation and park purposes.
Subd. 6. If the City chooses to require land dedication, the City has the
option of determining the location of the land. Land required for storm water
holding, power tine easements, or other undevelopable land will not be included
in the required percentage of dedicated;parkland.
Sebd. 7. Where a subdivider or developer,proVides neighborhood park
amenities such as.but not limited to, tennis caurte, balifiel:ds; open space, or
other recreation facilities the City may MOO the amount Of land to be dedi ated,
or cash contributions in lieu of-such de'diccati-on ..by an amoant equivalent to the
cost of the facilities provided.
Surf, e. Payments required by Subs 3 shall be paid at the, tires the building
permit is Issued for parcels within the subd'iidtiere •
Section 2. Mini-Parks and
Subd. 1. The City Council recognizes that it is essential to the health,`
safety and welfare of the residents of.the City-of Won that mini-parks
The preservation of these small open spaces w_it in.neighbeeheeds,.especia-lly it
areas of high density, is essential to the maintaining;of a healthful and desirable
enviroiment for all of the citizens of the-Cite-
Subd. 2. Subdividers and developers of residential plats containing over
60 units may be required to provide a mini-park in addition to the neighborhood
park fee or land dedication. The mini-park requirement may be required as a density
transfer and snail be a mininumi size of one acre, and increase in sire at a rate
of 1 acre per SO units served.
Subd. 3. Subdividers are enrauraged to provide centrally located:mini•i�ark
in large suubdivisioas, and to preserve exist-tne trees whenever .possible and to ma u
of natural materials such as large boulders when developing these faciliti e•
Subd. 4. The developer shall be responsible for developing the Mil Pa as
per specifications outlined by the City Council.
•
•
•
=3-
Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective upon its
adoption and publication.
•
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Eden Prairie
•
this day of , 1979, and finally read, adopted and ordered
f .
published at a regular meeting of the Council of said City of Eden Prairie on f.
this day of , 1979.
Wolfgang Portal, mayor
ATTEST:
• John D. Frane, City Clerk SEA!.
Published in the Eden Prairie News en the day of •
• ,19
•
•
•
• 1q
, „.; „" ".z.•- •.
• -
: ---
. . „
• . ..
.
•
-•• • •
4
)11.940RIVIDLNI
•
TO: Mayor and City Council 4 Parks, Recreatio
n
Natural ResourcesCommission
TftRU K.
Roger Ulstad, City Manager
PROM: Bob Lambert, Director of CoarminitY Service/
DAl'E: March 29, 1979
• SUBJECT Removal of Old Nesbitt Muse in the Nesbitt Presewe Park
uo,t, pc,x repc,rting cm the
area
'd is a copy of
iseastasdusi fra: Sbitt Preserve Park. This
Attached
condition of the old Nesbitt House
e imegt area
an _e cleaned up as
the park is planned for a pandnC/444 b •
soon as possible.
w itazut,an should be removed the near_ future_
The
woe house is
"n:Ixtishtillat .we-eitelksaYithave toreths_ Tirethillercas splertuilltossrt use tilt* struet •
as a practice facility or deign
Request permission to take some action to remove this structure
as soon
as possible.
•-"••
BL:md
• "
• •
• , .
•-
`••
•
• .
• • •-
4e1 ••• • „
20.
x
•
•
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bob Lambert, Director of Corenunity Services
FROM: Stuart A. Fox, Residence Manager's
DATE: March 22, 1979
SUBJECT: Condition of Old Nesbitt House in Nesbitt Preserve Park
On Friday, March 16, 1979, I inpe,t • the house located inn Nesbitt Preserve
Park. I found the house condition to be as follows:
1. Roof over entry porch saggTrig considerably with nu/serous holes
in it.
F. Floor of porch area unta et to Wank on. tboardl are ratted and
have several holes}3. The majority of windaws are lsrhi e!n anal:the windows on the north and
west sides of the°house haVO'been bostrcied over;:
4. The plaster is falling off the ceiling in many of the rooms.
5. Several of the rooms contain cRheICt-'i`pn debris.. tom. empty <.
boxes, tin fittings)
6.6. The floor has been removed in some areas upstairs.
7. The general condition of the house inside and out would have to be .
described as very poor.
The house is not secured and poses a harard to children that may play around
or in the building. I suggest that the house be aelured in some n ner'until
the City Council determines what should be done with the boil-ding.
SAF:md
••
•
•
•
•
•
• t2�1�.1,,...�� TOOKT H
It ` (pEo�
te
•
0 •
t'4
y,'cp(Awe. p P6�
ilb0
(Rot) •
x 0 .4 ti !wV(RcE
*s , / 0 5,„
'� ) i 0ZI"et:µ
k •W 4 Hi
pep OE 032'tr,,,A
o.1 x eee ., f cep
�
4ML(Oho j�
\ •
\ V G'�t/16F
if
3D"c.,,t r..L'ot 47,/i
3 ' •
• �'a4
:1[
I
t! /, _ 6 a
....' ,..\., , „..t.,..,t1$1,"...„4
ilitiot. .,.....,..„____-,w v,, „VA g,-....,.. ..,\::-..0 iiip"\e,':,.77.r --i , - -',.
r ry
if
iFt'l
�r,�• .R ` x ,.y,. Y l t a . C1 Y.: E-T , Ili
I. f =
1,...,...„
^,�x"',:wn's. �.i•rn��:s1�.• ..:J • c.Y .1 I�. .} .... ...!^..
ire A.ono, 'Mc 'n�����{{TT'...OH tt. 1, 11`
. :am... •W3�( •.•i, 4 , 7 • • f ..•...e.••,..s .. • 4t 8
Minutes--Parks, Recreation & unapproved March 19, 1979
Natural Resources Commission -7-
MOTIONt Kruell moved to recommend to the council approval
of the project as per the staff recommendations in the memo •
-
randum of March 16, 1979, with the exception (under item
three) that the lots owned by the Preserve at the time of the
cririnal PUD approval be exempt from paying the Cash Park Fee.
Carlson seconded the motion.
DISCUSSION: Tangen expressed disappointment with the lack
of representation from Olympic Hills. He felt that approval
of this project may be the beginning of the end of the golf
course, and that development as planned would ruin many of
the natural features of the area.
Kruell stated that he was neither opposing nor defending the
concept of a housing development within the golf club. He
did not feel the Commission could infringe on the rights of
the private owners.
Tangen argued that the golf course was still considered
open space, whether private or public, and be was committed
to maintainjng it as such.
VOTE: Motion carried, with Tangen opposed..
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. Boat Launch Fees
Lambert explained to the commission that the staff would like to
drop fees at Bryant Lake Park and Riley Lake Park for launching
boats, in order to qualify as public access with the D.N.R. There
are several methods of controlling boats; first limit the parking •
area, then possibly consider a water surface management ordinance.
Tangen noted that the additional information in the staff memorandum
• answered his questions, and he was prepared to support dropping
boat launch fees at both facilities. He then suggested charging
a "trailer fee" to help recover the loss of revenue. Canoes or
boats brought in on oar-top would not be affected.
Lambert suggested that by most standards, a lake the size of Bryant
would be at capacity with 12-15 boats, therefore, the staff felt
that parking for 12-15 trailers would be sufficient lot size
when the park is developed.
MOTION: Tangen moved to abolish the boat launch fees on Bryant
Lake and Riley Lake, but to establish a one-dollar trailer fee for
any trailer brought into the park. Kruell seconded the motion.
DISCUSSION: R. Anderson had talked to the D.N.R. and found that the
city could set almost any kind of rules or policies, as long as
they are consistent, and apply to all users. This means a park entry
fee for everyone could be charged, but not a parking foe for non-
residents only.
•
710
•
•
Minutes--Parks, Recreation do unapproved March 19, 1979
Natural Resources Commission .8-
Lambert added that the D.N.R. and the Metropolitan Council are working
on a study of local water use and will have recommendations as Bryant
Lake Park is developed.
lap Motion failed.
Chair was turned over to Tangen.
MOTIONS R. Anderson moved to recommend to the Council approval of
the staff recommendations from the March 13, 1979 memorandum.
Seconded by Tangen, the motion carried unanimously.
The chair was returned to R. Anderson.
B. Joint Use Agreement--Tennis Courts
Lambert presented a rewritten version of the tennis court joint-use
agreement between the city and the school district.
MOTION: Tangen moved to recommend to the Council approval of the
staff recomendation contained in the memorandum of March 16, 1979.
Carlson seconded the motion. •
DISCUSSIONS Kruell stated that he would like to see a otipulation
that would require the high school teams to police the courts after
their practices, since he has seen them left in a mess..
•
R. Anderson suggested that it may be more appropriate for Lambert to
suggest to the high school tennis coaches that their teams could police •
the courts after practice, since he has had a complaint about the
condition the courts were left in the past.
VOTES Motion passed unanimously.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A..Bond Referendum
Lambert outlined the procedure he would recommend that the commission
follow if they adopt a Five Year Capital Improvement Plan with a
deficit at the next meeting. He stressed that the commission should
not try to sell the idea, but rather. present the facts, and gain
support as citizens recognize the needs..
POTION: Kruell moved to recommend to the Council the adoption of a
one mil levy which will be used toward aquisition and development of
parks as outlined in the Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan. Tangen
seconded the motion.
DISCUSSION' Dave Anderson asked if the one-mil levy would be continued
if a bond referendum is passed.
Lambert replied that it is included in the plan for all five years.
•
•
•
U1`
MEMORANDUM
CTO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
DATE: March 13, 1979
SUBJECT: Boat Launch Fees Riley Lake and Bryant Lake Park
At the March 5th Commission meeting, I presented the report from Sandy Werts
dated March 2, 1979 titled "Beach Operations". This report recommended,among
other things, dropping the boat launch fees at Riley Lake Park. Reasons
given were: 1) the average number of weekday launches is 4-5, 2) On Sundays
20-30 boats are launched, with Sunday being the busy day, 3) the $3.00
launch fee on weekends does not discourage weekend users nor does it encourage
the use, 4) boaters have access to a ramp operated by Mrs. Jacques, I believe
she charges $1 for parking, 5) the Department of Natural Resources will
recognize the access as "public" and will stock the lake and remove rough fish,
6) we spend more money trying to collect the launch fee than we make. Our
ach
duringspeakities hoursto andhe makerk thehould be topark a safe and plirect easantgplacerforhusers.
These six statements are all true with the exception that we spend more money
trying to collect the launch fee than we make. This is somewhat misleading
in that we will only save $700 or $800 per year not collecting the launch fees
.ti
because we will still provide someone to direct traffic and to guard the beach.
f At the March 5th meeting, I recommended that we also drop the boat launch fee at
Bryant Lake Park. I sighted the same reasons to drop it at Bryant Lake as we
had listed for Riley Lake. The Commission moved to table this item to the March
19th meeting and requested that the staff provide additional information.
Some of the concerns were: a) how will we control over crowding of the lake,
b) how do the number of boat launches at Lake Riley compare to the number
at Bryant Lake, c) how much in revenue will dropping the fee cost, d) how,
much will we save in expenditures, e) how will we attempt to control boat
trailer parking at both sites, f) can we limit the number of boats launched
on a public access and retain the public access status.
How will we control over crowding of the lake?
I personally don't feel that the $3.00 weekend launch fee has discouraged many,
if any, boaters on either of the lakes, and I don't believe the launch number
statistics will change significantly. I have talked to members of the staffthey
Hennepin Park County Reserve to see if launches increased significantly when
dropped their launch fees and to find out what means they used to control over
crowding of the lakes. Last year was the first year that the launch fees were
dropped. There were increases in launching, however, the Hennepin County staff
contributed the majority of the increase to the lake levels. The previous year
• was a dry year and lake levels were down and launches of boats with motors was
restricted. The Park Reserve staff admits that control of over crowdingeans
difficult, expecialiy on lakes that have other access points. The only ai
the district has used to date to control access has been to turn boaters away
once the parking areas are filled. If this does not solve the problem.
;he next
step is to pass a water surface management ordinance that would limit the hours
of the use for high powered boats and to direct boat traffic so that all high
speed boats travel in one direction around the lake. Of course, once You Pass
Z�a •
Boat Lauch Fees -2- March 13, 1979
•
this type of ordinance we should be prepared to enforce it.
Parking lot sizes have been determined by the Park District after a number of
years of accurate records on the number of launches and crowded conditions.
It is difficult to say that a parking lot with 15 spaces for boats and trailers
will be all that the lake can handle. For instance, Bryant Lake could adequately
handle 40 or more fishing boats, but would probably be over crowded with a half
dozen high powered boats pulling skiers.
How do the number of boat launches at Riley Lake compare with the number at
Bryant Lake?
1977 - Riley 991
Bryant 665 (May to August)
1978 - Riley 639
Bryant 662 (June thru August)
How much revenue will it cost to drop the launch fees?
Total revenue from boat launches at Bryant Lake in 1977 was approximately $1,800
and at Riley Lake approximately $1,650. Therefore, the total revenue lost will be
approximately $3,400.
How much will we save in expenditures?
By not requiring a launch fee, we will be able to eliminate a park aide at both
, parks during the weekends throughout the year. This will save approximately
$1,200. Therefore, dropping the fee will cost the City about $2,200.
How will we control boat trailer parking at both sites?
As I indicated previously, I don't anticipate a significant increase in the number
of launches when the fee is dropped, and recommend that we continue the parking
operation as we have in the past unless we find that there is a significant number
of increase in the number of boat launched. If this increase is sufficient to
cause over crowding on the lakes, I would recommend then that we would construct •
parking barriers and designate parking areas for boats with trailers and limit
the number of spaces to insure that over crowding would not occur.
Can we limit the number of boats launched on a public access and retain the public
access status?
I have talked to Mike Moliter, new Director of Public Accesses for the Department
of Natural Resources, who has indicated that the DNR presently has no rules or
regualtions adopted for controlling over crowding of lakes. However, limiting
parking areas and refusing launches after the parking areas are full would be an
acceptable method for dealing with the problem.
. To date the City has not experienced any over crowding problems at Bryant Lake
since the limit for horsepowers was established for Sundays. During the last
two years the City has operated the access at Riley Lake and has experienced over
crowding about six times each sumner. On each of these occasions, the staff
members directing traffic feel that the road is more of a problem than the over
crowding on the lake. Some of this problem can be corrected by providing a
temporary parking area for cars that have just pulled boats out of the water and
•
•
•
Boat Launch Fees -3- March 13, 1979
l have stopped to tie down the boat. We should also construct a road to the
parking lot on the south end of the City property that would direct traffic
to the parking lot before it gets to the beach, rather then having all of the
traffic directed past the beach and turning to the parking lot directly across
from the boat launch area.
The Department of Community Services staff recommends that the boat launch fees
be dropped at both Riley Lake Park and Bryant Lake Park so the Department of
Natural Resources can recognize the accesses as :public and begin a water management
program that would include stocking the lake and removing rough fish. The benefit
to the community of insuring that these lakes are well managed is well worth
the $2,2Q0 it is costing Eden Prairie residents. The Community Services staff
' is also requesting that the Commission approve the park operations including
season dates, hours, fees, etc. as outlined for Riley Lake, Bryant Lake and.
Round Lake in the March 2, 1979 with the exception of the boat launch fees for
Bryant Lake Park, and the boat launch season pass.
SLand
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
MEMORANDUM -.. •
TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Res ur4 Commission
FROM: Sandy Worts, Recreation S rN
DATE: March 2, 1979
SUBJECT: Beach Operations - Riley, Round and Bryant Lake Parks
LAKE RILEY
Boat Launching
The City has operated the boat launch facilities for two years, 1977 and 1978.
During the summer season a fee has been charged for launching. They wore:
1977: $2 for boats with motors 20 hsp.or greater
• $1.50 for 1-19 hsp.motors
Free for non-motorized or electric motors
1978: Weekdays
$2 for boats with motors 20 hsp.or greater
$1.50 for 1-19 hsp.motors
Free for non-motorized or elecric motors
Weekends
$3 for boats with motors 20 hsp.or greater
$2 for boats with 1-19 hsp. motors ._
The Community Services Department is recommending that the boat launch fees be
dropped at Riley for the following reasons:
1. The average number of weekday launches is 4-5.
2. On Sundays 20-30 boats are launched with Sunday being the busy day.
3. The $3 launch fee on weekends does not discourage weekend users. nor
does it encourage weekday use.
4. Boaters have access through a ramp operated by Mrs. Jacques,
I believe she charges $1 for parking.
5. The Department of Natural Resources will recognize the access as
"public" and will stock the lake.
6. We spend more money trying to collect the launch fee than we make.
Our responsibilities at the park should be to direct parking, guard
the beach during peak hours and make the park a safe and pleasant
place for users. w,
• Actual launches for the two years were:
19 lisp.or loss 20 hsp.or greater non-motorized Total
1977 99 844 48 991
1978 60 631 54 746
I _
Beach Operations -2- 3/2/79
There were 246 fewer launches in 1978 than 1979. Two factors could contribute to this
a. in May 1978 an attendant was on duty weekends only. In 1979 an
attendant was present daily. The difference in recorded launches
was 96 loss in 1978.
b. There was a heavy weed problem in 1978 that blocked a portion of
the lake in front of the ramp. This discouraged many boaters as
they risked getting their props tangled in the weeds. There were
190 fewer boats launched in June and July in 1978 than in 1977.
The $3 weekend launch fee may have discouraged bolters, but the number is probably
negligible.
Park Operations •
Season: Weekends: May 5-6, 12-13, 19-20, 26, 27, 28
„ 7.''':''I
Daily: June 2-September 3
Weekends: September 6 October - weather permitting
Hours: 1-9 p.m. weekdays
10 a.m.-8 p.m. weekends and holidays
10 a.m.-dusk pre $ post season weekend
Pees: $1.50 per car non-resident parking fee
Free: residents with pass
$6.00 non-resident season parking pass
Boating: Propose to drop boat launch fees
Group Reservations accepted with $25 deposit for all groups. Patrons
Reservations: pay regular entry fees. Deposit is returned if no undue maintenance
costs result.
Staff: 1 Park Attendant
1 Park Aide
1 Life Guard (weekends only)
Personnel:
- A Park Aide will be on duty during all operating hours.
- A Park Aide will be scheduled Monday-Friday from approximately
3-8 p.m. and Saturdays, Sundays and Hoildays from 11 a.m.-7 p.m. The
Park Aide is sent home in cases of "poor" weather.
•
- Park will close at 7 p.m. if "poor" weather develops.
•
•
•
•
After reviewing the daily use patterns from 1978, the Community Services
staff is recommending hour and staff changes as reflected in the above
information.
Lake Riley Park is never actually opened or closed as there are no gates.
Operating hours are those times an attendant is on duty.
Changes: On weekends the attendant will report on duty at 10 a.m. instead
of 6 a.m. as relatively few boaters or picnickers come before
10 a.m. The attendants will go off duty at 8 p.m. Park Aide
hours have been reduced. Aides are necessary during peak hours only.
BRYANT LAKE PARK
Season: Daily beginning Saturday, May 5th thru Monday, September 3rd
Weekends: in September thru mid-October - weather permitting
Hours: 1-9 p.m. weekdays . May7«June 8
9 a.m.-9 p.m. weekdays - June 11;-August 31
6 a.m.-9 p.m. weekends/holidays
dawn-dusk - weekends during September 8 October
Fees: $1.50 car non-resident parking fee
Free: to residents with pass
$6.00 non-resident pass
Boating: $2.00 launch fee - boats 20 hsp.or more
$3.00 launch fee - Saturdays - boats 20 hsp.or greater
$1.50 launch fee - boats 1-19 hsp, $2.00 weekends
Free-non-motorized or electric meters
Boat Rental: $1.50 canoe and rowboat rental
$5.00 deposit
Powerboating: Sunday and Holidays designated as a non-power day by the City
Council. Any boat of 20 hsp. or greater may not be launched
on these days.
Groups: Reservations accepted with $25 deposit for all groups. People
pay regular parking fee is non-residents. Deposit is returned
if no undue maintenance costs result. Boat lauch and boat
rentals are extra.
Staff: .1 Park Attendant
1 Park Aide (2-3 weekends and holidays) •
1 Life Guard - weekends only
Personnel:
- A Park Attendant will be on duty all operating hours.
- A Park Aide will be scheduled ,mrh day Monday-Friday, 5-9 p.m. and Saturday
and Sunday 11 a.m.-7 p.m.; 1-9 p.m.
•
-4-
- Park will close at 7 p.m. if "poor" weather develops.
- Aide will be sent home if "poor" weather delvelops.
- A Life Guard will be on duty from 11 a.m.-7 p.m. weekends and holidays.
- Two to three Park Aides are scheduled on weekends to help the concession
along with collecting the parking and boating fees.
BOAT LAUNCH SEASON PASS
j
In 1977 the City Council approved a boat launch season pass. In 1977 3 passes
were sold to Eden Prairie residents. In 1978 7 passes were sold to residents,
2 to non-residents. Most of these boaters used Riley Lake. Two passes that I
know of were bought for Bryant Lake. If the launch fees are dropped at Riley
a season pass could only be used at Bryant Lake. At Bryant Lake large power
boat use is limited to Mondays thru Saturdays.
The Community Services staff recommends that the Commission review the boat
launch season pass policy and consider eliminating the season pass.
Fees Residents Non-Residents
20 hsp. or greater $30.00 $50.00
1-19 hsp. $15.00 $25.00
ROUND LAKE BEACH
Season: June 9-August 19
Hours: Noon to dusk daily
Fees: None
Boating: $1 per hour canoe rental
No motorized boats allowed, except for electric motors
Staff: 3 Life Guards
1 Beach and Concession Aide
Personnel:
- Three guards will be scheduled each day.
- Two guards will be on duty from Noon-dusk.
- Third guard on duty from 1-6 p.m.
• - In case of "poor" weather one guard will be sent home.
- An extra guard will be called in whenever necessary.
- Beach will close completely nt 6 p.m. during "poor" weather.
• - Ono aide scheduled daily but will be sent home if "poor" weather d nrelopy.
•
•
-5-•
Croup Croups may reserve the park building at Round Lake for a picnic
Reservations: or planned activity. The pavilion is not reserved so that an
•
area is loft open for family type picnics. Non-residents must
• pay a $100 non-returnable fee. Residents pay a S10 deposit
returnable if the site is left in order.• •
•
•
•
•
•
•
MEMORANDUM
T0: Mayor and City Council
THRU: Roger K. Ulstad, City Manager
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services t�"•�
DATE: March 30, 1979
SUBJECT: Tennis Court Joint Use Agreement
In April of 1972 the School Board passed a resolution agreeing to cooperate
with the Village constructing tennis courts at the Round Lake Park site.
That resolution also included a sentence that.indiated,,.t4' _y would
be deeded to the School District. The reason for the pro ng deeded
to the School District was to eliminate any legal concern that the School
District was spending money for items constructed on non school property.
For what ever reason, the transfer of title never occurred. The four tennis
courts were contructed at the cost of $35,766.50. The School District paid
one half of it $17,883.25 on May 24, 1973.
In the later part of 1977 the School Board requested that a formal use agreement
be developed so that no one can question the propriety of the School District's
investment in the tennis courts construction.
In February 1978 Merle Gann sent a copy of a proposed Joint Use Agreement to
the City staff to review. That original proposal was quite lengthy and the
City staff was not satisfied with the language. Subsequently, Mr. Ganmi and
I met to draw up an agreement that would satisfy the intent of the original
resolution.
After a number of revisions, I brought a proposed Joint Use Agreement to the
City Council in April of 1977. The members of the City Council had some concern
with Section 5 - Use and Availability. A copy of Section 5 from that original
proposal is attached. The new proposal agrees to make the facilities available
for the District Physical Education Program and for tennis teams after school
supervised practices and regularly scheduled matches.
The rest of the agreement is fairly similar with the exception of Section 4 -
Contributions. The tennis court facility at Prairie View School is new included
in this Joint Use Agreement as that tennis court was constructed by the City on
school property.
The staff recommends that the Council approve the proposed Joint Use Agreement with
.the addition of 6.5 as recommended by our legal counsel.
BL:md
• „, 2.Z.•'"„ ,17
" •
' • • •
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Coamission
•
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services ....PAL--
DATE: March 16, 1979
SUBJECT: Tennis Court Joint Use Agreement
The Ca:mission approved a proposed joint use agreement for tennis courts 1-ate
in 1978, flowever, the Council objected to sane of the language and directed
staff to rewrite the agreement. This is a new*In proPosia 'that has been revifwed •
by our attorney, The only change the attorney has recommended is to add the -----
fol laving:
6.5 Whenever any major vandalism occurs affecting either the four
tennis courts at Round Lake Or the two Warta carts at Prairie -
View, the City and School Dittrtet would split the cost of the
Deductable from existing insurance.
Staff rft-amends Commission approval or this proposed wpeement.
BLand
•
•
. ,
„ •
2:21 • •
_.MitesSW^.`•at�ai'--....... .. ._ _..�.�....+...�...�..�»—..._w �.:.:�.»Y`+-*M-•.aA.M..nyiw..-.n.yyr...
•
•
4 - .
•
THE TOUR 7'EHNIS COURTS IM1.i:DIATELY NORTH AND.ADJACENT
TO THE ROUND LAKE PICNIC PAVILION.
Ownership of the property is and shall remain in the name of the
City.
Section 5. Use and Availability:
5.1 The City and District agree that the District's Physical
Education Curriculum program shall receive priority usage during
the school day of the outdoor tennis court facility covered by
this agreement and the City shall make the facility available
for use of the District whenever so necessary so long as the Dis-
trict provides the City with schedules establishing such a.need
three months in advance of the date needed.
5.2 The City and District agree that the District's tennis
teams shall have priority usage of the outdoor tennis court facil-
ity for practices and watches and the City shall make the facility
'.� available 1..r the use of the tennis :.cams so long as the District
furnishes the- City with schedules establishing such a need at
least three months in advance of the date when the facility is
needed.
5.3 Any additional use or availability by the District may Le
mutually agreed upon by the parties from time to time.
Section 6. Operat.ion of Facilities:
6.1 During 'the term of this agreement the outdoor tennis
court facility shall be operated by the City.
6.2 The City shall be responsible for minor repairs and main-
tenance.
6.3 The City and District agree that the cost of net replace-
ments shall he shared equally and the quality of the netting shall
be reasonahly suited to meet the needs of the District.
•
3
DRAFT
AGREEMENT
This agreement made , 1979, between Independent School
District No. 272, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, and the City of Eden Prairie,
County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota.
RECITALS
1. The District desires outdoor tennis court facilities for its educational
curriculum and extracurricular activities, and the City desires outdoor tennis court
facilities for its community recreation program and for the health, welfare and safety
of its citizenry.
2. Minnesota Statutes 471.15 through 471.19 and 471.59 authorize the District
and the City to enter into this agreement for the purpose of jointly establishing a
program of public recreation and playground, including the acquisition, equipping,
operation and maintenance of land, buildings, or other recreational facilities, and
to expend the funds for the operation of such programs which may be located on the
project Linder the custody of either the District or the City or under the custody of
any other public corporation, body or board, with the consent of such corporations,
bodies or boards.
•
3. Each party desires to enter into a Joint Agreement establishing the respon-
sibilities of each of the parties regarding such a program and each party is willing R
to contribute money to finance the maintenance of outdoor tennis court facilities
and the City is willing to contribute land at Round Lake Park and the School District
•
is willing to contribute land at Prairie View/School Park.
For the reasons recited above, and in consideration of the mutual covenants
contained herein, the parties agree as follows:
ps��
•
Section 1. Definitions: •
1.1 District - Independent School District No. 272.
1.2 City - The City of Eden Prairie
Section 2. Scope of Description:
2.1 By this agreement, the parties create a joint power and use program for
public education and recreation purposes within the boundaries of each political
subdivision.
Section 3. Conduct of Agreement:
3.1 Upon execution of this agreement, the parties agree to the terms and
conditions of this agreement.
3.2 In the event that any controversies regarding this agreement arise, the
City and the District agree to submit the controversy to arbitration in accordance
with the Uniform Arbitration Act, Minnesota Statutes 572.08-572.30 and any amendments
thereto.
Section 4. Contributions:
4.1 The City shall be creditied with the contribution of the land upon which the
tennis court facility is located at Round Lake Park, and with payment of the sum of
$17,883.25 or one-half of the construction cost of the outdoor facility.
4.2 The District shall be credited with a contribution of $17,883.25 representing
the District's payment of one-half of the costs of construction of the outdoor tennis
court facility at Round Lake Park.
4.3 The description of the property upon which the outdoor tennis court facility
is constructed at Round Lake Park is as follows:
Commencing at the instersection of the Westerly R.O.W. of County Road 4 and the
line 187 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast
Quarter, Section 8, Township 116, Range 22, thence West 1,050 foot, thence North 860
feet to the point of beginning, thence 122 feet North parallet to the Westerly R.O.W.
line of County Road 4, thence East 250 feet,thence South 122 feet, thence West 250 feet .
to the point of beginning. .
v 1 -2- .
•
Ownership of the Round Lake Property is and shall remain in the name of the City.
4.4 The City shall be credited with the contribution of the payment of construe-
tier: of the tennis courts at the cost of 522,000, at Prairie View/School Park.
4.5 The District shall be credited with the contribution of the land upon which
thu outdoor court facility is located at Prairie View/School Park.
4.6 The description of the property upon which the outdoor tennis court facility
is constructed at Prairie View/School Park is as follows:
The Westerly 180 feet of the Southerly 170 feet of the following description:
That part of the East 10 16/100 acres of the Northwest Quarter lying South of the
North 60 feet thereof, and that part of the North 60 feet of the East 10 16/100 acres
of North 17 50/100 acres of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter lying
East of the West 114 47/10O feet thereof except road.
Ownership of the Prairie View/School/School Park property is and shall remain in the
name of the District.
Section 5. Use and Availability:
•
• 5.1 The City and District agree that the City shall make the facilities available
for use for the District's Physical Education Curriculum program providing the City
receives schedules establishing such a need three months in advance of the date needed.
5.2 The City and District agree that the District's tennis teams shall have
priority usage of the outdoor tennis court facilities at Round Lake Park and Prairie
View/School Park for after-school supervised practices and regularly scheduled matches,
so long as the District furnishes the City with schedules establishing such a need
three months in advance of date facility is needed.
5.3 The City recognizes that due to inclement weather or unscheduled matches or
tournaments, the District's tennis teams may require additional use on short notice,
and agrees that such use shall be granted unless that use conflicts with a previously
scheduled City tournament or paid lessons.
-3-
•
•
•
/S a •
•
5.4 My additional use or availability by the District may be mutually agreed
upon by the parties from time to time.
Section 6. Operation of Facilities.
6.1 During the term of this agreement the outdoor tennis court facility shall
be operated by the City.
is
6.2 The City shall be responsible for minor repairs and maintenance.
• 6.3 The City and District agree that the cost of net replacement shall be shared
equally.
6.4 The City and District agree that the cost of jointly planned major resurfacing
and major repairs shall be shared equally.
Section 7 Insurance.
7.1 Liability: Liability Insurance. Each party shall be solely responsible for
any loss, damage or injury to any person or property arising out of the use of the
•
outdoor tennis facilities by any person or persons under its jurisdiction or author-
ization; and each party shall hold the other harmless from and defend it against any
claim, demand or cause of action initiated to recover the amount of any such loss,
damage or claim for which it is responsible pursuant to this agreement. Each party
shall carry at its own expense comprehensive liability insurance covering its potential
liability under this section with personal injury limits of not less than one 1lundryd
Thousand ($100,000) Dollars per person and Three Hundred Thousand ($300,000) Doilals
per occurrence and property damage limits of Twenty Five Thousand ($25,000) Dollars
per occurrence and Fifty Thousand ($50,000) Dollars aggregate, or such other limits
as may from time to time be required under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 466.04
and any amendments thereto.
Section 8 Term:
8.1 The term of the agreement shall extend from the date hereof to .tune 30, 1905,
and shall be automatically renewed on an annual basis unless either party elects to
terminate the agreement subject to the provisions of paragraph 8.2.
12;
•
•
rior to June 3O 1998 and thereafter six months prior to each
8.2 Six months p , r
annual renewal date, either party may terminate this agreement by written notice to
the other party.
8.3 Upon termination of this agreement the tennis courts, including netting, at `.
the Round Lake Facility shall remain the pavpezty of the City and the tennis courts,
including netting, at the Prairie View/School Park Facility shall remain the paup�,ty
of the School District. •
This agreement executed the day and year first written above.
INDE( NDENT S FIOOL blb.xRICT NO. 272
8Y:
•
•
Chairman
Clerk
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF EDEN I'RsIglg
By:
tA
•
•
•
•
143KMANDUM
•
TO: Mayor and City Council 6 Parks Recreation & Natural Resources
Commission
TIIRU: Roger K. Ulstad, City Manager
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services k-
DATE: March 30, 1979
SUBJECT: City Council Resolution Allowing Transfer of COO Funds
The City committed CDGB Funds from 1977 and 1978 to the development of
the Preserve Neighborhood Park and Edenvale Neighborhood Park. The
development of Preserve Park proved to be a frustrating process right
from the beginning. The park soils were made up of clay and muck and
development started the day after a seven inch rainfall in the fall of
1977. Much of 1978 was spent in "down time" due heavy rains. Because
•
of the excess grading time needed the Preserve fund rat_ into a deficit
in 1978. Construction at the Preserve was completed in 1978 and grading
and seeding was completed in Edenvale in 1978. The only development left
is constretion of a hockey rink and warming house at Edenvale Neighborhood
Park.
In order to balance the Preserve Community Development Block Grant Fund,
we must transfer some of the Edenvale Funds to the Preserve.
The following demonstrates how the individual CUBG funds should be adjusted
to compensate for cost overruns incurred at the Preserve Park in the 1978
construction season.
$2,023.SS Transfer from Preserve Year 3
5,621.00 Transfer from Disease Tree Reforestation Year 3
1,000.00 Transfer from Edenvale Park Year 3
10,500.00 Transfer from Edenvale Park Year 4
$19,144.58 Total transferred into Preserve Year 4 Fund
-18,305.47 (deficit) Preserve Year 4 Funds
$ 749.11 Net in Preserve Yoar 4 Fund after readjustment
•
$23,815.01 Amount remaining in Edenvale Fund to construct
a lighted hockey rink and a warming house.
(as of expenditures prior to September 30, 1978)
A Council resolution must be passed allowing this readjustment prior to •
billing for 1978 expenditures.
•
SI.:m,l
za.y .
•
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 79-64
A RESOLUTION APPROVING TRANSFER OF CO MUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS TO
YEAR POUR OF 11M PRESERVE PARK FUND
WHEREAS, construction delays caused by inclement weather caused a cost
overrun in construction of the Preserve Park and,
WHEREAS, this project was designated a multi year project using Community
Development funds and,
WHEREAS, this project was beingcompleted in conjunction with development
of Edenvale Neighborhood Park and,
WHEREAS, the Preserve Park project was completed in 1978 and Edenralc
Park can be completed with funds remaining after the erop sed transfer of funds.
NOW TNEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Coun it of the City of Eden Prairie
that the following transfer of funds be made:
$2,023.:8 Transfer from Preserve Park Year 3
5,621.00 Transfer from Disease Tree Roforestaion Year 3
1,000.00 Transfer from Edenvale Park Year 3
10,500.00 Transfer from Edenvale Park Year 4
$19,144.58 Total transferred into Preserve Year 4 Fund
18 395.47 (deficit) Preserve Year 4 Funds
$749.11 Net in Preserve Year 4 Fund after readjustment
ADOPTED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 3rd day of April, 1979.
tol£gang Pen:el, Mayor
ATTEST:
•
John D. Franc, Clerk SEAL
April 3, 1979
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
• RESOLUTION NO. 79-66
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF
ROUND LAKE ESTATES 2ND ADDITION
•
WHEREAS, the plat of Round Lake Estates 2nd Addition has been submitted
in the manner required for platting 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
PRAIRIR:
A. Plat approval request for Round Lake Estates 2nd Addition is approved upon
compliance with the recoamendatton of the City Engineer's Report on
this plat dated March 29, 1979.
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 77.7
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 NSA 462.358, Subd. 3,
together with the "Declaration of Covenants. Conditions and Restric-
tions," dated
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 oftthe City Council upon compliance
with the foregoing provisions.
ADOPTED by the City Council on
'Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
•
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
ENGINEERING RtPUNI ON FINAL PLAT
TO: Mayor Penzel and City Council Members
THROUGH: Roger Ulstad, City Manager
•
FROM: Carl Jullie, City Engineer
DATE: March 29, 1979
SUBJECT: ROUND LAKE ESTATES 2ND ADDITION
PROPOSAL The developer, Eliason Builders, Inc., is requesting City Council
approval of the final plat of Round Lake Estates 2nd Addition. The plat
consists of 69 lots intended for single family residential (R1-13.5) use,
and is located north of Heritage Park and Round Lake Estates and south-
west of Round Lake.
•
HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on August 16,
1977, per Resolution No. 77-112.
The final reading of the Ordinance rezoning the property to R1-13.5 is
scheduled for April 3, 1979.
The Developer's Agreement referred to in this report is scheduled for
approval on April 3, 1979. This agreement must be completed prior to
approval of the final plat.
VARIANCES: Variance from the minimum lot frontage and lot size shall be al-
lowed per item 11 of the Developer's Agreement.
Variance from 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 will be necessary.
UTILITIES AND STREETS: Requirements for the installation of utilities,
streets and walkways are covered in items 9, 14 and 16 of the Developer's
Agreement. The City Council approved, on March 6, 1979, a petition by
the developer for City installation of these improvements.
Items 12 and 13 of the agreement restrict access to the plat during
construction.
The 20' easement over Lot 1, Block 1, required through item 18 of the
agreement, shall be shown on the final plat prior to release of the plat.
Cash deposits will be required for the installation of street signs
• and first year costs of installing and maintaining street lights.
•
•
- 2
PARK DEDICATION: Requirements for park dedication are covered in items S.
and 8 of the Developer's Agreement. The Warranty peed indicated in
item $.shall be filed in conjunction with filing of the fined plat.
A copy of this document will be required prior to release of the final
plat.
BONDING: Requirements for bonding are covered in items 14 and 17 of the
Developer's Agreement and must be fulfilled prior to release of the final.
plat. Improvements installed under the City contract Will not require
the Developer's bond.
RECOMMENDATION:• Recommend approval of the final plat of Round take Estates.
2nd' Addition, subject to the requirements of this report and the followimg.
•
1. Execution of the Developerr's Agreement.
2. Satisfaction of bending .requirements.
3. Receipt of Development.Plan.
4. Receipt of cash deposit for street signs in the amount of $720
5. Receipt of cash deposit for street lighting in the amount of
$984. •
•
•
•
April 3, 1979f
STATE OF MINNESOTA
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The following accounts were audited and allowed as follows:
03-16-79 3647 VOID OUT CHECK (176.53
02-16-79 3242 VOID OUT CHECK (8,625.60)
03-02-79 3410 VOID OUT CHECK ( 23.70)
13-14-79 3675 DIANNE HANSON Supplies for City Hall 51.78
03-15-79 3676 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO. Beer 1,967.60
3677 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. Beer 1,094.50
3678 THORPE DISTRIBUTING Beer 1,323.70
3679 BEER WHOLESALERS Beer 1,273.70
3680 LEDING DISTRIBUTING CO. Beer 1,023.90
3681 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING Beer 118.00
3682 PEPSI COLA COMPANY Mix for Liquor store 165.90
3683 GOLD MEDAL BEVERAGE Mix for Liquor store 26.05
3684 COCA-COLA COMPANY Mix for Liquor store 110.55
3685 ROUILLARD BEVERAGE CO. Beer 910.20
3686 OLD PEORIA CO., INC. Liquor 1,470.45
3687 KIWI KAI IMPORTS Wine 47.35
3688 JOHNSON BROTHERS Liquor 702.11
3689 ED PHILLIPS & SONS Liquor 1,256.00
3690 TWIN CITY WINE CO. Wine 196.76
3691 MINNESOTA WINE MERCHANTS Wine 25.17
03-20-79 3692 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT Employees withheld and employer
ASSN. contribution 3-16 payroll 7,093.62
3693 UNITED FUND Donations withheld 3-16 payroll 30.42
3694 SUBURBAN NATIONAL BANK Bonds withheld 3-16 payroll 375.00
3695 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK Taxes withheld 3-16 payroll 9,015.65
3696 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF
OPERATING ENGINEERS Dues withheld 44.00
3697 DEPT. OF LANDSCAPE-IOWA
STATE UNIVERSITY Conference-Jim Jensen 15.00
3698 C. 0. FIELD COMPANY Ap. No. 8-New fire building 8,625.60
03-23-79 3699 MIDWEST WINE CO. Wine 1,281.54
3700 QUALITY WINE CO. Wine 848.40
37D1 MINNESOTA DISTILLERS, INC. Liquor 1,264.82
3702 ED PHILLIPS & SONS Liquor 594.39
3703 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO. Liquor 1,247.72
3704 OLD PEORIA CO., INC. Liquor 353.29
3705 JOHNSON WINE CO. Wine 546.95
3706 TWIN CITY WINE CO. Wine 232.25
3707 INTERCONTINENTAL PACKAGING Wine 316.78
3708 EAGLE DISTRIBUTING Wine 323.16
3709 SUNWOOD INN. Conference expenses-Robert Lambert 25.50
3710 MINNESOTA COMMUNITY EDUCATION
ASSN. Conference registration-Robert Lambert 37.50
3711 JOHNSON BROTHERS Liquor 901.50
3712 MINNESOTA DEPT. OF PUBLIC
SAFETY Title fees 5.75
83
April 3, 1979
03-26-79 3713 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC SAFETY Title fees 5.75
3714 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC SAFETY Car registration 5.00
3715 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC SAFETY Car registration 5.00
3716 G. L. CONTRACTING CO. Contract Est. no. 6-Well pumphouse
#3 8,227.36
03-27-79 3717 SCIENCE MUSEUM OF MINNESOTA Tickets-Community services dept. 16.25
3718 SUNWOOD INN Conference expenses-Sandy Werts 22.50
3719 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE Postage for parcel-Community Services
dept. 3.19
3720 MINNES0IA COMMUNITY ED
ASSN. Conference registration-Sandy Werts 37.50
03-30-79 3721 ACTION REDDY RENTS Equipment rental-Water dept. 4.16
3722 ALAN SIGNS, INC. Banners-Liquor store 7.80
3723 AMERICAN BANK Service 25.00
3724 EARL ANDERSEN Street signs-Public Works dept. 521.30
3725 ADVANCE AMBULANCE Supplies-Fire dept. 33.36
3726 ASTLEFORD EQUIPMENT CO. Equipment parts 253.54
3727 BLOOMINGTON LOCKSMITH CO. Keys-Public Safety dept. 23.75
3728 BROWN PHOTO Services-Public Safety dept. 21.45
3729 BUREAU OF BUSINESS PRACTICE Books-Water dept. 52.25
3730 8LUM8ERG PHOTO SOUND CO. Projector lamps for Fire dept.$24;
projector $197 222.42
3731 BUSINESS FURNITURE CO. Coat rack for Fire 81dg. $78; File
cabinet for Public Safety $144;
Files and chairs for City Hall $438 659.62
3732 CITY OF EDINA Water samples-Water dept. 59.5D
3733 CARGIL SALT DIVISION Salt-Public Works 633.95
3734 CHANHASSEN AUTO PARTS Equipment parts 335.61
3735 CAPITOL ELECTRONICS, INC. Radio repair-Fire dept. 26.00
3736 CLUTCH AND TRANSMISSION Equipment repair service 184.77
3737 CHANHASSEN LAWN & SPORTS Supplies-Tree disease dept. 77.29
3738 DEPARTMENT OF WEIGHTS AND
MEASURERS Inspection of scales 70.00
3739 WES DUNSMORE Reimbursement for hose for cutting
tourch-City garage 18.00
3740 DALCO Cleaning supplies-New fire bldg. 122.15
3741 DORHOLT PRINTING Service 2,420.37
3742 FIRE MARSHALS ASSN. OF MINN. Dues-Fire dept. 5.00
3743 I.A.A.I. MINNESOTA CHAPTER Dues-Fire dept. 10.00
3744 RICHARD FEERICK Refund on ice follies-Community services 18.75
3745 FRONTIER LUMBER Materials 137.15
3746 G. L. CONTRACTING Repair leak-Water dept. 660.43
3747 GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD Supplies-Fire & Public works bldg. 181.95
3748 GENERAL 8INDING SALES CORP. Binders-Community services admn. 28.00
3749 HENNEPIN COUNTY Radio service 365.31
3750 VIVIAN HIGGINBOTHAM Refund on marcrame class 12.00
3751 JACK HACKING Expenses 12.44
3752 HAYDEN-MURPHY Equipment rental-Weil #3 3,818.00
3753 INTERNATIONAL ASSN. OF
ARSON INVESTIGATORS Dues-Fire dept. 20.00
3754 INTERNATIONAL ASSN. OF
ASSESSING OFFICERS Dues-Robert Martz 45.00 ,
(}
"3 ... J
April 3, 1979 .
03-30-79 3755 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF
OPERATING ENGINEERS April dues withheld 187.00
3756 ITASCA EQUIPMENT CO. Repair parts-Park Maint. 34.20
3757 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS
MACHINES Typewriter-City Hall $715;
Services and supplies $1,436 2,150.78 •
3758 ELIZABETH JOHNSON February services 288.00
3759 GEORGIA JESSEN Services 143.50
3760 KRAEMER'S HARDWARE Supplies-Fire dept. account 217.30
3761 VOID CHECK
3762 LOCAL GOVERNMENT INFORMATION
SYSTEMS ASSN. Service 467.21
3763 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC Service 4.75
3764 MARSHALL AND SWIFT
PUBLICATION Subscription-Assessing dept. 55.00
3765 MINNESOTA TREE, INC. Tree skidder rental-Tree disease dept. 104.50
3766 MERIT PRINTING Office supplies 300.00
3767 MUNICI-PALS ASSN. Dues 5.00
3768 MAC QUEEN EQUIPMENT, INC. Equipment parts 43.32
3769 BEN MEADOWS CO. Forestry handbook-Tree disease 26.30
3770 JACK MCCLARD & ASSOC. Equipment repair service 435.95
3771 MINNESOTA FIRE INC. Repair air mask regulator-Fire dept. 63.50
3772 METRO PRINTING, INC. March and April "Happenings" 478.00
3773 MODERN TIRE CO. Repair service 53.26
3774 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP. Asphalt-Stree Maint. 46.90 •
3775 MINNEGASCO Service 2,733.60
3776 NORTHWEST SERVICE STATION
EQUIPMENT CO. Supplies-Fire dept. 18.84
3777 NORTHERN STATES POWER Underground service installation •
-
Well pumphouse #3 280.00
3778 ANDREA NERHUS Mileage-Assessing dept. 38.30
3779 NORTHWESTERN BELL Service 750.08
3780 NORTHERN STATES POWER Service 4,466.76
3781 PHYCHOLOGICAL CORPORATION New officer test-Public Safety 27.20
3782 PETTY CASH FUND Reimbursement of Public Safety fund 13.38
3783 PARK MAINTENANCE Subscription-Community Services Admn. 14.00
3784 PRIOR LAKE AGGREGATES Rock-Street Maint. 640.56
3785 PINK SUPPLY CORPORATION Towels-City garage 120.00 •
3786 PITNEY BOWES Postage meter 40.50
3787 ROOT-O-MATIC Steamed frozen culvert-Drainage •
control 130.00
3788 RAPID COPY, INC. Liquor ID cards 4.00
3789 R & H ENTERPRISE CO., INC. Trash pump-City garage 830.50
3790 W. E. NEAL SLATE CO. Marker board-New Fire building 216.20
3791 STATE OF MINNESOTA Catalogue-Public Safety dept. 3.a5
3792 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES, INC. Portable restroom-Park dept. 44.50
3793 TAYLOR'S MFG. Push bumpers-Public Safety dept. 163.36
3794 TURNQUIST PAPER CO. Towel dispenser-New Fire building 100.20
3795 TODD CHEVROLET, INC. Two pickups for Public Works dept. 9,793.48
3796 UNITED FIRE FIGHTERS Dues-Fire dept. 25.00 •
3797 ROGER ULSTAD April expenses 100.00
3798 STEPHEN WHITE Tuition for training course 35.00
3799 RICHARD WERPY Service for testing program for new
Public Safety officers 125.00 •
M ..
:9 April 3, 1979 �
03-30-79 3800 XEROX CORPORATION Service and supplies 862.65
3801 SERT PANNING Volleyball official 234.00
3802 PAUL BROWN Volleyball official 426.00
3803 JEAN JOHNSON MfTe*ge-Planning dept. 4.58
3004 JOHN FRAME April expenses 124.34
3805 ANTHONY FIORENTINO Reimbursement for postage-tomnunity
services dept. 7.1
3806 INTERCONTINENTAL PACKAGINE mine 305.39.
3807 CHRIS ENGER March expenses 101_75
3808 DON STREICHER GUNS, INC. Amnunition-Public Safe dept. 82,35
3809 C. 0. FIELD COMPANY App. No. 9,N0W Fire building I.4,600.65
3810 VOID CHECK '
3811 LANG, PAULY & GREGERS0N Legal servicet. 5,086.:01
3812 BOARD OF ASSESSORS License far Robert Hartz and
Laura Thdtlias 6�I10
TOTAL 103,058.22
VVV a