HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 11/06/1979 ,
•
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
•
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1979 - 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Dean Edstrom, Dave 1`
Osterholt, Sidney Pauly and Paul Redpath
COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Roger Ulstad; City Attorney
Roger Pauly; Planning Director Chris Enger;
Finance Director John Frane; Director of
Community Services Bob Lambert; Engineer
Carl Jullie; and Joyce Provo, Recording
Secretary
INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS it
II. MINUTES
A. Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, September 13, 1979 Page 3198
B. Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, October 2, 1979 Page 3199
C. Special Joint Meeting of City Council and Parks, Recreation & Page 3214
Natural Resources Commission held Wednesday, October 10, 1979
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Resolution No. 79-201, authorizing permit application to MWCC Page 3220
for sewer connection at Bryant Lake Stables, I.C. 51-357A
B. Receive l00%etition for improvements-in Bryant Lake Estates, Page 3221
I. C. 51-361 (Resolution No. 79-204)
•
C. Receive 1001 etition for improvements in Village Woods II, Page 3225
I. C. 51-362 Resolution No. 79-205)
D. Receive petition for sewer and water trunk extensions in the Page 3227
MRS-1 Service Area, I.C. 51-363 (Resolution No. 79-206)
E. Change Order No. 1, T.H. 5/W. 78th Street and Mitchell Roaa, Page 3231
I. C. 51-337 )
F. Final plat approval for Old Farm Addition (Resolution No. 79-202) Page 3233
G. Final lat a royal for Alpine Estates 2nd Addition (Resolution Page 3235
No. 79-203
H. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 79-28, rezoning OLD FARM and Page 3237
approval of developer's agreement
I. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 79-31, rezoning from Rural to 1-2 Page 3249
for LeParc by Jay Kohlrusch and developer's agreement
J.) Payment of Claims Nos. 6052 - 6235 Page 3261
Page 3265
K. Request to set Public Hearing for Sutton First for December 4, 1979
•
Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,November 6, 1979
III. CONSENT CALENDAR (continued)
L. Request to set a Public Hearing for Douglas and Roy Olson/Eagle Page 3266
Drug for MIDB approval in the amount of $1,200,000.00 for I"',
December 4, 1979 {:
M. Rescheduling Public Hearing for MIDB approval for Cooperative Page 3275
Power Association in the amount of $8,000,000.00 for December •
4, 1979 -
IV. KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATIONS FOR THERESA ELLIOTT AND ROGER FARBER
(continued from October 16, 1979)
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
• A. Overlook Place by Hustad Development Corporation. Request to Page 3276
rezone 10 acres from Rural to R1-13.5 and preliminary plat single
family lots. Located north of Pioneer Trail and east of Yorkshire
Place (Ordinance No. 79-32 and Resolution No. 79-196) Continued
from 9/18/79
B. Creekview Estates by Heinen & Burnett. Request to rezone from Page 3291
Rural to R1-13.5 and preliminary plat 25.5 acres into 29 single
family lots. Located at 9840 and 9940 Bennett Place.(Ordinance
No. 79-39 and Resolution No. 79-197)
C. Menard Second Addition by Menard, Inc. Request to rezone from Page 3306
Rural to C-Reg-Ser and preliminary plat 1.06 acres for a Crown
IL Auto Store with outside stora.e. Located north of TH 5 and
west of proposed Menard Store lOrdinance No. 79-40) •
D. Hidden Glen PUD, request by Zachman Homes, Inc. Request for PUD Page 3314 •
concept approval for single family detached lots (some without •
garages) on approximately 125 acres. Located east of TH 101 and south
of Townline Road (Resolution No. 79-198)
E. Michelangelo PUD by Rembrandt Enterprises. Request for PUD Concept Page 3348
approval for medium-high density residential on 36 acres located
east of 169-212 and north of Nine Mile Creek.(Resolution No.
79-199)
V. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
A. Resolution No. 79-179, agreement with Logis & Optimum Systems Page 3373
(continued from 10/2/79)
B. Resolution No. 79-207, recommending_the County Board approve the Page 3377
final "911VVlan for Hennepin County' as submitted by HECO
VII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS •
A. Reports of Council Members
B. Report of City Attorney
e __......_.�.
Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,November 6, 1979
C. Report of City Manager
1 I)Authorization to advertise for bids for compressor for Fire Page 3379
'3
Department
D. Report of Planning Director
1 Valley Knolls 2nd, request to preliminary plat 4 acres zoned Page 3380
R1-13.5 into 13 lots. (Resolution No. 79-200)
Report of Director of Community Services
Request to hire appraiser for Miller Park Parcel #2 Page 3387
2. Petition for Lowering Floodplain - Purgatory Creek and Page 3389 '
Proposal for Land Planning Services
F. Report of Finance Director
1. Setting of date for Canvassing Board to meet to canvass the Jit/V7 M,
results of the Bond Referendum to be held November 15, 1979 S'N P
VIII. NEW BUSINESS rc�""/,w.�� '
IX. ADJOURNMENT.
0 s
•
•
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
t . SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1979 8:00 PM, CITY HALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Dean Edstrom, Dave
Osterholt, Sidney Pauly and Paul Redpath
•
COUNCIL STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Roger Ulstad and Finance Director
John Frane
I. Meeting was called to order at 8:00 PM. Roll Call was taken - Penzel, Edstrom,
Pauly and Redpath present; Osterholt absent. "•
II. Preliminary discussion regarding the future need of additional City facilities
for the next ten years and location of same tooKplace. Council directed Staff
to develop a preliminary report as to the number and types of buildings and their
proposed location. •
III. Proposed 1980 Budget -
The Mayor suggested that a page-by-page review be the process for Council
comments. Council agreed to this approach.
The Council questioned the increase in the Corporate Council program. The
City Manager explained that there was a large amount of litigation from previous
years that was billed by the previous City's legal firm.
The Mayor informed the Council that the County would be funding the Public Health
program. This amount was removed from the budget for 1980.
The Logis budget increase was indicated by the Finance Director to be the result
of a new and added special assessment system. •
City Manager Ulstad indicated the change in the Engineering program as being
commensurate with the cost to be offset by charges to improvement projects.
The Police program was discussed and Ulstad reported that the department's
request for 2 additional men should be provided for. Council concurred with
this request.
The Council instructed staff to develop a fire prevention program for their
review prior to the end of calendar year 1979.
Mr. Frane explained the changes in the levy limit law allowing for a one time
inclusion in the per capita levy limit of the cost of implementing a road •
maintenance and/or refuse collection program and the impact of seal coating j :.
costs as a general fund item.
The staff was directed to recheck the amount budgeted for gasoline in light of the
expected rapid costs of gasoline.
It Ulstad presented a program for the Historical and Cultural Commission which was
agreeable to the Council.
•
Ulstad indicated he would submit a report on the fire department's request for
an auto prior to the Council accepting the 1980 budget.
•
Meeting adjourned at 11:15 PM. •
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESOAY, OCTOBER 2, 1979 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
® COUNCIL MEMBERS: 4. Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Dean Edstrom, Dave
Osterholt, Sidney Pauly and Paul Redpath
COUNCIL STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Roger Ulstad; City Attorney
Roger Pauly; Planning Director Chris Enger;
Director of Community Services Bob Lambert;
Finance Director John Frane; City Engineer
Carl Jullie; and Joyce Provo, Recording
Secretary
INVOCATION: Councilman Dave Osterholt .
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: All members present.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The following items were moved from the regular agenda to the Consent Calendar:
VIII. A. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 79-33, rezoning Shady Oak Industrial Park
4th Addition to I-2 and developer's agreement; IX. B. 1. Authorization to hire
codifier; IX. E. 2. Final Plat approval for Shady Oak Industrial 4th Addition
(Resolution No. 79-1B0); IX. E. 3. Final plat approval for Meadow Park (Resolution
No. 79-181); IX. E. 4. Approval of Mitchell Heights Townhouses agreement; and
IX. F. 1. Payment of Claims Nos. 5750 - 5889.
•
Additional item to be added to the agenda as item I. B. Receipt of petition
from residents opposed to the Valley View Extension as proposed by City Council
on September 4, 1979.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve the agenda as amended
and published. Motion carried unanimously.
B. Receipt of petition from residents opposed to the Valley View Extension as
proposed by the City Council on September 4. 1979
Bill McKewan, 16730 Baywood Terrace, presented and read from a petition
consisting of approximately 1.050 signatures signed by residents opposed to the
plans proposed by the City Council on September 4, 1979, for the Valley View
Extension. (Page 1 of petition attached as part of minutes - the complete
•
petition is on file in the City Engineer's office).
Mayor Penzel thanked Mr. McKewan on behalf of the City Council for his efforts.
City Manager Ulstad read from position paper, which is going to the Eden Prairie .
News, received and signed by approximately 200 residents in the Heritage Park
and Round Lake Estates area supporting the direct route of Valley View Road.
(Page 1 of petition attached as part of minutes - the complete petition is on
file in the City Engineer's office). Ulstad referred to letter received from
,: Stephen Longman supporting the direct route (letter attached as part of minutes).
Ken Geason, 7621 Atherton Way, who presented the petition to Mrs. Pauly from
the Heritage Estates and Round Lake Estates residents, reiterated their position
as outlined in petition read by Mr. Ulstad.
3199 •
Council Minutes - 2 - Tues.,October 2, 1979
B. Receipt of petition from residents opposed to the Valley View Extension as
proposed by the City Council on September 4, 1979 (continued)
11/
Bob Cole, 7160 Parkview Lane, explained the petition circulated by Mr. McKewan
in no way implies that they do not want to see an exit through Valley View
Road. The point they want to make in the petition is to strongly recommend
that the road not run between the lake and the high school.
II. MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 1979
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to approve the minutes of the City
Council meeting held Tuesday, September 4, 1979, as published. Motion carried
unanimously.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Request to set Public Hearing for Michelangelo Gardens PUD for November 6,
1979
B. Request to set Public Hearing for Hidden Glen PUD for November 6.
1979
C. Request to set Public Hearing for Menard 2nd Addition (Crown Auto Store) for
November 6, 1979
D. Request to set Public Hearing for Creekview Estates for November 6, 1979
0 E. Clerk's License List
F. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 79-33, rezoning Shady Oak Industrial Park 4th
Addition to I-2 and developer's agreement (formerly item VIII. A.)
G. Authorization to hire codifier (formerly item IX. B. 1.)
H. Final plat approval for Shady Oak Industrial 4th Addition (Resolution No.
79-180) (formerly item IX. E. 2)
I. Final plat approval for Meadow Park (Resolution No. 79-181) (formerly item
IX. E. 3)
J. Approval of Mitchell Heights Townhouses agreement (formerly item IX. E. 4)
. K. Payment of Claims Nos. 5750 - 58B9 (formerly item IX. F. 1)
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve items A - K on the
Consent Calendar. Roll Call Vote: Osterholt, Redpath, Edstrom and Penzel
voted "aye"; Pauly "abstained". Motion carried.
IV. ORDINANCE NO. 79-34, REGULATING THE MOVING OF BUILDINGS INTO OR WITHIN EDEN
PRAIRIE
City Attorney Pauly outlined the proposed changes in the ordinance regulating
IL the moving of buildings into or within Eden Prairie as detailed in his memo
dated September 27, 1979, which have been incorporated into the preliminary
revised draft dated 9/27/79.
3260
Council Minutes - 3 - Tues.,October 2, 1979
IV. ORDINANCE NO. 79-34, REGULATING THE MOVING OF BUILDINGS INTO OR WITHIN EDEN
PRAIRIE (continued)
411 City Attorney Pauly referred to the two alternates on page 3 of the draft
for Council's consideration. Pauly further explained he contacted several
citizens who have been interested in this ordinance and reviewed the suggested F.
changes with them and received back additional suggestions; however, they were
not received until the packet last Friday night and he has not had a chance
to incorporate them into the ordinance.
Richard Fischer, 18830 Partridge Circle, commented on various aspects of the
proposed ordinance, i.e., if the moving of the building is not affecting the
surrounding property they shouldn't have to be notified and involved in the
process. City Attorney Pauly responded to suggestions made by Mr. Fischer.
Jeff Hutting, 18825 Partridge Circle, suggested posting the land for 30 days �.
where the house is going to be moved in.
MOTION: 'Osterholt moved, seconded by Penzel, to include Alternate 1 on page 3
of the proposed ordinance in the final draft of the ordinance. Osterholt and
Penzel voted "aye"; Edstrom, Pauly and Redpath voted "nay". Motion failed.
Bev Crank, 18895 Pheasant Circle, stated she would be more than willing to
take Alternate 2 over Alternate 1 on page 3 of the proposed ordinance.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, not to accept Alternate 2 as part
of the ordinance as proposed. Redpath, Edstrom and Pauly voted "aye"; Osterholt
1111 and Penzel voted "nay". Motion carried. •
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to give a 1st Reading to Ordinance
No. 79-34, regulating the moving of buildings into or within Eden Prairie with
changes outlined by the City Attorney.
MOTION TO AMEND: Osterholt moved, seconded by Penzel, to amend Ordinance No.
79-34 by having the hearing process held before the City Council and not at the
Board of Appeals & Adjustments. Osterholt voted "aye"; Edstrom, Pauly, Penzel
and Redpath voted "nay". Motion failed.
MOTION TO AMEND: Edstrom moved, seconded by Redpath, to amend Ordinance No.
79-34 by putting in Section 10 "No person shall move any building on any public
street or highway within the City at any time other than during the hours of 1 A.M.
and 5 AM", and Section 11 to read "Any person moving a building through the
City for which a permit shall not be required shall move such building through
the City within a period of no more.than 7 days". Also that language be included
as to the protection ofthe excavation site. Further that the City Attorney
be directed to discuss the 4/5 majority vote prior the 2nd Reading of the Ordinance.
Motion carried unanimously.
•
Redpath called the previous question.
VOTE ON PREVIOUS QUESTION: (1st Reading of Ordinance No. 79-34 as amended)
Edstrom, Osterholt, Pauly and Redpath voted "aye", Penzel voted "nay".. Motion
carried.
V. METRO PARKS & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION - REGIONAL RECREATION OPEN SPACE - MAJOR POLICY
CHANGES
Elliott Perovich, Chairman of the Metropolitan Parks & Open Space Commission, stated
he is appearing before the Council to answer questions and to receive input so
Council Minutes - 4 - Tues.,October 2, 1979
V. METRO PARKS & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION - REGIONAL RECREATION OPEN SPACE - MAJOR
POLICY CHANGES (continued)
the Commission can try to put together some recommendations for the hearing
which hopefully will come up the latter part of November) with recommendations
to the Metropolitan Council by the first part of January. The process will be
open for a few weeks and they plan to start putting together some semblance
of information for that public hearing process the latter part of October.
Robert Nethercut, Program Director for the Parks & Open Space Division, gave
a brief background on the Metropolitan Parks Act passed in 1974.
Marty Jessen, Chief Park Planner, spoke to the 1974 System Plan which the
Metropolitan Council adopted.
General discussion took place and questions were answered by Mr. Jessen and
Mr. Perovich.
Osterholt suggested a presentation be made before the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Commission. Jessen replied they would be more than willing to do so.
No action necessary.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Bluff's West 3rd Addition by Hustad Development Corporation, Request to
rezone from Rural to R1-13.5 and preliminary plat 169 single family homes on
84 acres. Located west of Homeward Hills Road, north of Bluff's West 2nd
and East of B.F.I. Landfill and "A" and "B" zones of Flying Cloud Airport.
(Ordinance No. 79-14 - rezoning, and Resolution No. 79-96 - preliminary plat)
Continued Public Hearing fran September 4, 1979.
Edstrom restated his conflict with Hustad Development Corporation has been
resolved with the removal of any Hustad business from his law firm.
Jim Ostenson, Hustad Development Corporation, commented at the last Council
meeting there were basically two areas of concern, one was the proximity of
the property to the airport and lots that were bordering on the flight zone,
and also the number of lots that were requiring a variance, Ostenson referred
to the new revised plat which took into consideration both of those concerns,
Initially when Hustad proposed the plat they were requesting side yard variances
for about 60 - 65% of the lots, at the last meeting they reduced that number
to 40%, and have now reduced it further to 25%. In addition, Ostenson stated,
they have done some slight modifications of street alignment which has allowed
them to pull the lots further back from the flight zone and in doing so have
1) dropped a lot that was adjacent to the flight zone increasing the size of
the lots, and 2) increased the park size from 16 acres to 19,1 acres. The
proposal is at 169 lots and none of those lots are less than 10,000 square feet,
Ostenson displayed a map showing the revised plat with the changes in the street
alignment and 3 phases of the project.
Osterholt asked Mr. Ostenson if the developer would have any objection to the
placement of signs in the area with notice that the land is adjacent to or
somewhat affected by the flight zone at Flying Cloud Airport and for further
information to call Eden Prairie City Hall. Ostenson stated he would be
willing to sit down and work something out as suggested by Mr, Osterholt,
Council Minutes - 5 - Tues.,October 2, 1979
A. Bluff's West 3rd Addition (continued)
® f .
Penzel questioned if the developer would be amendable to having a qualified
archaeologist present during grading operations to insure that no signficant
finds were inadvertently destroyed. Ostenson responded he has no problems with
someone being on the site at the time of grading,but does have some concerns
regarding the liability in case somebody is injured.
Penzel further asked if Hustad were to uncover something would the contractor
agree to the request from the archaeologist to cease further action until the is
question has been resolved? Ostenson replied in the affirmative.
Mrs. Koshenina, 10541 East Riverview Drive, commented she is pleased to see
the proposal as a single family addition, and Mr. Ostenson spoke to the phasing i
of the project as requested by Mrs. Koshenina.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and
give a 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 79-14, rezoning Bluff's West 3rd Addition
by Hustad Development Corporation from Rural to R1-13.5. Motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Osterholt, to adopt Resolution No. 79-96,
approving the preliminary plat of 169 single family homes on 84 acres in
Bluff's West 3rd Addition by Hustad Development Corporation. Motion carried
unanimously.
S MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, to direct Staff to draft a
developer's agreement incorporating the recommendations of the Planning
Commission, that an archaeologist be present at least for the preliminary
test, and that signage of the area regarding the proximity to Flying Cloud
Airport be included. Motion carried unanimously.
B. Request for Municipal Industrial Development Bond approval in the amount of
S1,500,000.00 for Eden Prairie Partners (Resolution No. 79-173) Continued
from September 18, 1979
City Manager Ulstad explained the City has not received any further information
on this request.
Malcolm Reid, one of the owners of the buildings, stated at the September 18th
Council meeting one of the concerns of the Council had was that they had a 30-
year mortgage commitment and the tenant was only taking the lease for
approximately 3 years. The mortgage commitment in fact is a 15-year mortgage
commitment, and since the Council meeting he has spoken with Fabri-Tek and
has discussed new and revised lease terms,and the most major term is the fact
that they would be willing to take the space on the duration of the mortgage {?
for 15 years. Fabri-Tek itself will be investing anywhere from $50,000 to
$100,000 in specialized improvements to the building. Fabri-Tek will also have
an option to lease any additional space in the project which comes up on the
terms which will be the same as in their lease. One of the major functions
of the building will be to serve as Febri-Tek's corporation headquarters, and
also the manufacturing of memory products for the computer industry and will
be employing 150 - 200 people.
Reid further spoke to another concern expressed by Council members as to the
condition of the tenant. At the outset Reid stated the mortgage company
that would'be lending the money has reviewed the project and its financial
capabilities along with the tenant, and it is their opinion that first of all
v„�f?a0
Council Minutes - 6 - Tues.,0ctober 2, 1979
B. Request for MIDB's for Eden Prairie Partners (continued)
they wouldn't want to finance a project that was a spec type project. They
made a thorcugh examination of Fabri-Tek and feel that they would be more than
happy to have us rent to Fabri-Tek and to finance the project.
Last year Fabri-Tek posted a loss of approximately 2 million dollars on about
30 million in revenues and 20 million in assets. That loss was primarily
made up of non-recurring losses. The projections are for the balance of the
year and beyond that Fabri-Tek will be in-a profit mode.
Reid commented public offering would be a nice way to go, but it makes
this project infeasible because the cost of public offering is approximately
$100,000.00,which makes it a negative cash flow project and no one investor
wants to be involved.
Mr. Reid answered questions of Council members.
City Attorney Pauly spoke to the amended page 4 to be substituted in the `!
resolution, which contains the change in Section 3.3 that provides that
"the City retains the right in its sole discretion to withdraw from its {'
participation should it feel inclined to do so" as opposed to the previous it
language.
Penzel explained he will abstain from voting on this proposal as his employer,
Honeywell, has an interest in the present building Fabri-Tek is now leasing.
MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Nearing
and adopt Resolution No. 79-173, granting the request for Municipal Industrial If
Development Bonds in the amount of $1,500,000.00 for Eden Prairie Partners.
Edstrom, Redpath and Pauly voted "aye"; Osterholt voted "nay"; and Penzel
"abstained". Motion carried.
C. Public Hearing for 1979 Special Assessments (I. C. 51-319 and I. C. 51-334)
Resolution No. 79-174A (Continued from September 18, 1979)
City Manager Ulstad stated that at the Council meeting on September 18,
1979, Resolution No. 79-174 relating to Special Assessments was adopted
excluding therefrom item 2, I.C. 51-319, Street Improvements in Norseman
Industrial Park 2nd Addition (West 74th Street), and item 6, I.C. 51-334,
Drainage and Street Improvements on Singletree Lane, and the Public Hearing
with respect to items 2 and 6 was continued to the October 2, 1979 Council
meeting. Mr. Ulstad stated that item 6 has now been resolved inasmuch as
Amoco is going to construct the outlet for the storm sewer. With respect
to item 2, the City engaged the services of Russell Smith Associates, Inc.,
Real Estate Appraisers and Counselors, to consult with the City as to the
benefits to the abutting property owners resulting from the improvements
to West 74th Street. Russell C. Smith of the firm investigated the matter
and prepared a written report of his findings and conclusions dated
October 1, 1979 which were presented to the meeting and made a part of the
record thereof. At the previous meeting of the Council held on
September 18, 1979, City Engineer Jullie stated that property owned by
Condor Corporation Parcel (1310) proposed to be assessed in the amount of
$34,955.62, to which Condor objected, was benefited, inasmuch as the
improvement abutts Condors property and its representatives indicated a
desire to have a driveway access to West 74th Street, which is being provided
for in the improvement. Mayor Penzel stated his recollection that when
the Condor proposal was before the Council in the past, it was anticipated
that Condor's land would have access to West 74th Street. Parcel (1310)
is approximately 650 feet by 742 feet and contains approximately 11 acres,
its northerly line line abuts West 74th Street approximately 742 feet, and
its easterly line abuts Washington Avenue approximately 650 feet.
•
Council Minutes - 7 - Tues.,October 2, 1979
C. Public Hearing for 1979 Special Assessments (I.C, 51-319 and I.C. 51.334)
Resolution No. 79-174A (Continued from September 18, 1979) Continued
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pauly, to close the Public Hearing with
reference to item 2, I.C. 51-319, Street Improvements in Norseman Industrial
Park Second Addition (West 74th Street), and item 6, I.C. 51-334, Improvements
on Singletree Lane, 1979 Special Assessments and adopt Resolution No. 79-174A
approving the 1979 Special Assessments relative to those items. Motion
carried unanimously. -
D. Request for Municipal Industrial Development Bond approval in the amount of
$1,200,000.00 for Fred Falk & Robert Murray (Resolution No. 79-176)
Stanley Dobrin, Highland Financial Group, representing Mr. Falk, stated they
will be acting as the mortgage broker for the financing being requested and
proceeded to describe the project. Mr. Dobrin explained Mr. Falk owns
Reliable Automotive, and Reliable Automotive will be the sole tenants of the
building. Mr. Murray for tax reasons will stay in the ownership and there will
be a partnership created initially. Mr. Murray will be a partner in that
partnership for 13 montns and then will be taken out in total which is
being done for tax reasons for Mr. Murray's benefit. The building will be
master leased to Reliable Automotive and as they don't need the full building
at this time, but anticipate using it within the next three to five years,
20,000 square feet will be sublet on a short term basis. Marvin Inger,
bond counsel for the proponents, also was in attendance and available to
answer questions of Council members.
•
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to adopt Resolution No. 79-176,
approving the request for Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount
of $1,200,000.00 for Fred Falk & Robert Murray. Redpath and Edstrom voted
"aye"; Osterholt, Pauly and Penzel voted "nay". Motion failed.
E. Certification of 1980 City Budget (Resolution No. 79-162)
Mayor Penzei referred to the revisions the Council received in their
packet which the Council requested Staff to make. Penzei asked for any
additions or changes.
Penzei asked if there is any possibility of making available vehicles which
are taken out of police services for the Fire Department to use to drive
to and from their training site in St. Bonifacius. Ulstad replied he has
reviewed this approach with the Public Safety Director and it is reasonable
that there may be one of two vehicles that would be available towards the
end of the year for this purpose.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, to add an additional 1/2 mill
levy to the contingency fund of the 1980 City budget. Motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pauly, to adopt Resolution No. 79-179,
approving the 1980 City budget as amended and instructing the City Clerk
to certify the 1980 ad valorem tax levy. Roll Call Vote: Redpath; Pauly,
Edstrom, Osterholt and Penzel voted "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
VII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
A. Park Bond Referendum Committee Report
Jerry Kingrey, member of the Park Bond Referendum Coamittee, introduced
other committee members present - Mary Lee, Sharon Levitt, Gloria Pond,
Council Minutes - 8 - Tues.,October 2, 1979 F
A. Park Bond Referendum Committee Report (continued)
Marie Cornett, Ed King, Jerry Wigen, and spoke to Section I of the Report
dated September 25, 1979, which the Council had received. Jerry Wigen
spoke to Section II of the Report.
Mr. Kingrey and Mr. Wigen answered questions of Council members.
Osterholt asked in terms of information that is going to be presented to the
public, are the sites going to be identified'and more specifics as to what the
public is being asked to support. Kingrey replied they have to identify the
neighborhood sites, but would like to pose that in the way of an area rather than
a site. Doesn't want to tie themselves to a site except where those sites are
acquired.
Osterholt felt the proposal would sell better if the people could identify
with it. �.
Wigen explained the School Board has met and has come up with a recommendation
which they voted on stating something to the effect they will approve this type
of facility, a community recreation center via a swimming,pool complex,
on their property under certain stipulations from a distance of zero up to 100
feet. The advantage we may have if this can be worked out between the
School Board and City Council would be the fact that if such a facility could be
attached physically to the exterior of the High School gymnasium, costs will •
be cut down on the building of the building. The other advantage to that
would be the operational costs,in the fact that one exterior wall would be
I. eliminated. �.
Osterholt questioned if the people who live in the Hopkins or Minnetonka
School District would be interested in supporting a bond referendum where the
facility would be located on the Eden Prairie School District #272 property.
Wigen stated he talked to maybe four people randomly from the Sun Directory
who were generally not supportive of any bond referendum in Eden Prairie,
as their children play with kids from other areas and go to school with kids
from other areas. Not only were they not supportive of this type of facility,
but generally were not supportive of any bond referendum at all.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Pauly, to continue the Council meeting past the
11:30 PM scheduled adjournment time. Motion carried unanimously.
Don Redinius, 9524 Woodridge Circle, commented the Creekwood residents have a
concern on the park referendum and that is the use of the funds if the
referendum is passed. The concern being that none of this money will be used
for the acquisition of new parkland as they feel there is a need for parks in the
Creekwood area. Redinius stated having worked with the Parks, Recreation &
Natural Resources Commission on this issue, one of the obstacles they have run
into all the time is that there isn't any money. It seems if there is some
money coming up in a referendum, it is possible some of their needs in that
area could be satisfied. Mr. Redinius suggested in the upcoming referendum a
line item be placed in that referendum that would dedicate some funds to the
acquisition and development of a park in the Creekwood area in the neighborhood
of five to six acres. Something that would allow some open space for the people
to organize such games as football, softball, etc., a skating rink, and also
slides and maybe a swing set for the smaller children. They are not looking
for an exotic type park system that is very expensive, Mr. Redinius noted.
Council Minutes - 9 - Tues.,0ctober 2, 1979 .
A. Park Bond Referendum Committee Report (continued)
Director of Community Services Lambert explained he has met with the residents 1;
4r of the Creekwond area regarding their concern about a park and indicated to
them that he agrees with their need for a park and felt the area to look for as
a site is the area east of them. Lambert stated he has talked to Lee Johnson
of The Preserve as they own the acreage in question. Lambert indicated to
Mr. Johnson we are looking at about 5 acres of fairly flat useable, developable
land for an active use area. The Preserve indicated they would look at that
and see if it is reasonable as far as making that kind of commitment in coming
through the PUD process within the next few months. As it stands now, The
Preserve is looking at that and will come in with a concept idea and talk to
staff about it within about 30 days.
Council suggested that the Creekwood park site to the east be included on the
map as a potential acquisition site within the framework of the proposal.'
Penzel asked if the Council were to proceed with the report, what time frame
would be permitted under state law under which a proposal could be put forth
before the voters. City Attorney Pauly responded the process includes the
appointment of election judges, which is a 25-day requirement, and two weeks
publication of notice of election and ten days posting of it.
Osterholt stated he would like more details on the operating costs for the ice
arena and the swimming pool, and asked what if we were to have a bond referendum
and sell the bonds and when we go to build the facility there is a million
dollars short - then where are we? City Attorney Pauly replied you either have
to find some more funds through an additional authorization or cut down
on the scope of the project.
Dick Anderson, Chairman of the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission,
commented it would be difficult to find out what the operating costs would
be of such facilities as there are very few facilities of this'nature.
Pauly asked what happened to the funds which were previously collected for an
ice facility? Wigen replied that has been discussed on numerous occasions at the
Hockey Association meetings and what they have determined is that the balance
of the funds, which are now in the bank, in the event a bond referendum is
successful that everyone who has contributed to that financially at this point
in time will be given the option of receiving their money back on so many cents
per dollar - because there have been expenses which have occurred as well,
or the fact that money will be donated to that facility to purchase scoreboard
facilities, ice marking equipment, etc. A plaque of recognition would hang
in the building with those people's names on it. The actual cash at this
time is about $11,000 to $12,000.
Osterholt felt the referendum should be in the form of two questions -
one on park acquisition and one on the facilities essentially at the high
school site.
Kingrey suggested the question might be "shall the City of Eden Prairie issue
its general obligation bond in an amount not to exceed 3.5 million dollars to
provide funds for the acquisition and betterment of lands, buildings and
facilities for a program of public recreational development".
John Reedy, Topview, addressed the issue of a single issue bond referendum,
stating the priorities are to develop the land we have, to acquire the additional
needed lands in the community, to develop our hike/bike trail system, and to
fix up the'facilities that are already being very actively used. Those summed
) ' up would form the highest priority. Then, according to Mr. Reedy, we have some
secondary priorities from that. Unfortunately those secondary priorities are
t.Vuut.,, rnnut.rn - iu - Iues.,Uctober 2, 1979
A. Park Bond Referendum Committee Report (continued
a whale of a lot more expensive and more importantly than that, they are
nebulous at this point. Reedy stated by tying our shirttails to one issue, by
having nebulous issues that cost us a whale of a lot of money, we may be find-
ing ourselves regreting tonight's decision if we put it all into one item, and
thereby may lose all the things that we recognize to be high priority items.
Reedy commented the Council has an important decision to make and that is perhaps
one of postponing this issue for just a relatively short period of time and
authorizing some funds to help the people accomplish a very important mission -
that is let's get a handle on the costs so we can tell the people in a very
informed fashion exactly what the costs of this facility will be. Given
that, he believes we could then put it on as 1, 2 or 3 issues, all the facts
would be on the table and we would have at least a good hope of having an
informed citizenry make an informed vote. �.
Kingrey explained the committee finding was that if it is placed as one
question they will not vote against something that they definitely need in
order to vote against something that they don't necessarily want or don't know
about. A single question is by far the best way of passing a referendum and
the committee is for one question.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to continue this item to the
Special Council meeting on October 10, 1979, however, authorizing Mr. Frane
to start the election judge selection process, and authorizing Mr. Lambert
to undertake whatever research is necessary to provide the Council with some
operational costs. Motion carried unanimously.
VIII. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
A. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 79-33, rezoning Shady Oak Industiral Park 4th
Addition to I-2 and developer's agreement
This item was moved to the Consent Calendar (III. F.).
B. Resolution No. 79-178, granting final approval for Municipal Industrial
Development Bonds in the amount of $2,250,000.00 for United Properties/
Northland Mortgage
Boyd Stofer, Vice President for United Properties, spoke to the project
and answered questions of Council members.
Finance Director Frane explained the City Attorney's office has reviewed
the proceedings and has determined everything is in order.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pauly, to adopt Resolution No. 79-178,
granting final approval for Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the
amount of $2,250,000.00 for United Properties/Northland Mortgage. Motion
carried unanimously.
Redpath was excused from the Council meeting at 12:45 AM. •
C. Resolution No. 79-179, agreement with Logis and Optimum Systems, Inc.
Finance Director Frane explained this is a reaffirmation. The Council never
passed a Resolution but it was agreed to by the Logis organization and
Optimum Systems who sold us that we wouldn't give away their system to
anybody else. We are not entitled to give it to anybody who is not a member
of Logis.
).,)rjb MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Edstrom, to table this item and
refer to City Attorney Pauly for review. Motion carried unanimously.
Council Minutes - 11 - Tues.,October 2, 1979
IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
1. Councilman Osterholt
Osterholt requested that staff try to streamline the agendas, i.e.,
setting public hearings for a time certain and moving some items
ahead of the public hearings. Report on this request to be given to
Council members at a future meeting.
2. Mayor Penzel
a. Penzel reported that the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners did
• take Eden Prairie's suggestion to leave the Crosstown on the file-year
capital improvement program unfunded.
b. Penzel conmented the City has had a problem of the grading permit in
the Menard's area. However, in reviewing the issue with Menard's
contractor and the Menard's people, they have agreed to restore the
area including the transplanting of the appropriate trees.,
B. Report of City Manager
1. Authorization to hire codifier
This item was moved to the Consent Calendar (III. G.). 'j
$ C. Report of City Attorney �.
No report.
D. Report of Director of Community Services
1. Amendment to Joint Powers Agreement/Round Lake Park (ballfields)
(Continued from 9/18/79)
City Manager Ulstad requested that this item be continued to a future
Council meeting.
MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Pauly, to continue the amendment to
the Joint Powers Agreement/Round Lake Park (ballfields) to a future
Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
2. Hidden Ponds Park Status
City Manager Ulstad spoke to the status of the Hidden Ponds Park as outlined
in Mr. Lambert's memo.
No action necessary.
3. Historical & Cultural Commission recommendation on Grill House
City Manager Ulstad reviewed the memo from Director of Community Services
Lambert dated 9/29/79, explaining that the Historical & Cultural Commission
is now meeting at the Brown house and has been for about 2 1/2 years, The
use of that facility is considered interim because of its location in a
regional park. The Grill house at Staring Lake Park is now the property
,act
•
GOuncil Minutes - lc - Iues.,uctooer Z, ' i '
3. Historical & Cultural Commission recommendation on Grill house (continued) FF
of the City and the recommendation from the Commission is that we employ
an architect to give us a report on what the cost would be to restore the
Grill house so the Commission could meet there rather than the Brown
house.
MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Edstrom, to authorize staff to try
and find an architect to give a free estimate on what it would cost to
restore the Grill house or, if that is not possible hire an architect
to do so. Motion carried unanimously.
4. Accept bids for improvements at Bryant Lake Park
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Edstrom, to award the bid
to the lowest responsible bidder, W. J. Ebertz, Grading & Excavating,
in the amount of $68,857.50 for improvements at Bryant Lake Park as I'
recommended by staff. Roll Call Vote: Osterholt, Edstrom, Pauly and
Penzel voted "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
E. Report of City Engineer
1. Mn. PCA grant_program for wastewater treatment facilities in the Rural
Service Area (Resolution No. 79-192)
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Pauly, to adopt Resolution
No. 79-192, authorizing grant application for wastewater treatment
alternatives. Motion carried unanimously.
• 2. Final plat approval for Shady Oak Industrial 4th Addition (Resolution
No. 79-180)
This item was moved to the Consent Calendar (III. H.)
3. Final plat approval for Meadow Park (Resolution No. 79-181)
This item was moved to the Consent Calendar (III. I.).
4. Approval of Mitchell Heights Townhouses agreement
This item was moved to the Consent Calendar (III. J.).
F. Report of Finance Director
1. Payment of Claims Nos. 5750 - 5889
This item was moved to the Consent Calendar (III. K.)
X. NEW BUSINESS
No new business.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
41 MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Pauly, to adjourn the Council meeting
at 1:00 AM. Motion carried unanimously.
3a1n
Sept. 26. 1979
Eden Prairie News 144
15716 West 78th St.
Eden prairie
•
To the Editors
Ror the last six weeks I have been reading in the paper
how no one in Eden Prairie is in favor of the direct route for
Valley View Rd. I think it's important to remember that whenever
it's time to complete a road that has been carefully planned for,
a decade, the local neighbors rise up in shocked indignation.
Everyone understands this feeling, we've all been there ourselves.
Progress that is in the best interest of the community must
'invariably upset a few.
Now it has been suggested by the opponents of the direct
route that Valley View be routed south of Round Lake because
the high school students cannot cross a busy street alone.
I would like to point out that a route to the south of the lake
would be a real traffic hazard to the small children who walk
or ride their bikes to the asns#k park from the large and growing
neighborhood to the south. The City Council knows how desperatly
we need this northerly "direct" route out of the Heritage Rd.
area and I know they will do what is best for all of Eden Prairie. 1,
Stephen Longman
Eden Prairie—
32►t
'i
•
• September 24, 1979
There has been considerable discussion in the paper recently
related to how no one is in favor of the city decision on
Valley View Road. Additionally, we have seen several letters
to the editor of the Eden Prairie News speaking out against
the current plan for Valley View Road with comments suggesting
also that no one favors the route. •
We are home owners in Heritage Park and Round Lake Estates
who currently must exit and run only from Highway 5. Last
year, and after 4-6 years of related debates, the City Council
approved a plan which provides for several means to exit and
return to the neighborhood. These are as follows:
1) The existing Highway 5 •
2) A circular route to Highway 4
via Luther Way (i.e. East) fi
3) A circular route out to Valley View
via 72nd Street (i.e. North)
a) Note: This northern route
opens options for traveling
East or West on Valley View
with its proposed connection
to Dell Road.
11 4) Future western exit to Dell Road
When the current proposed new homes in Round Lake Estates and
Lake Trails are completed, there will be approximately 137
additional residences in this area. Those combined with
existing homes add up to a total in the area of in excess of
200 residences.
The Council's decisions to open up entrances and exits to a
suburban home area keeping traffic flowing in all directions
is a correct one.
The existing route of Valley View assures us a fair compromise •
providing safety, acceas to Round Lake Park and access to the
High School as well. •
THE UNDERSIGNED HOMEOWNERS FAVOR THE COUNCILS DECISION,AS TO THE
BIRECT ROUTE of Vallet View and its westward connection to Dell Road.
Should Valley View not connect to Dell Road the undersigned will
have grave concern as to the connection of 72nd to Valley View as
such connection will cause further traffic congestion at Heritage
Road and Hwy.5 which is now a HIGH RISK entrance and exit with only
the existing homeowners use let alone the additional development
of approximately 137 homes plus additional traffic off of Valley
View coming from the High School.
2aa
1lu-
Petition to the City Council of Eden Prairie and to the Riley-Purgatory
. Creek Watershed District Board
l:e., the undersigned citizens of Eden Prairie wish to express our strong
ir opposition to the plans proposed by the City Council on September 4, 1979,
I for the Valley View Extension. We feel that the proposed timing and
phasing is not in the best interests of the community at large. Further-
more, because of our great concern for the safety of our children, for the
water quality of our recreational lake, and our desire for an improved
park system, we specifically do not wish to see any road either splitting
Round Lake Park or going between Round Lake and our new hdgh NAME ADDRESS DATE
r
pp 'a I ''c /pt<sil_ 4—//.-7y
roue/ -(r.• ., 1.. '7/'a- /71€14 tfon•9„ -is )7
�04,,...4:./,fAi"d...,1° 7/t{-3�F L(,,,,,c,:-..,. 7 /4- 77
g- U -7c'
Q t 1tti3 tt�e_t,��.
r / . 7/2-I 9-/zf
,,, ,,cw.,_ ., w1,-. 7/2g .ttictu•G ,,.. 9- /G-"71
'
lij �17Y n l• . .
_ 7,," /t 9 i�?y
7-/6--72
�/ .i,u t c �t'Jlf 7J/c' /
ti
7� i. I',� iki a:. 7c 3•7 q._// 7I
•r
_AAI.h.,ir"--1i-.�..1 41i 5-,ri.l.:er /.x., ` i..�
•
U4:•A 5f- • kIl1 ft r:.0.... /ia7(.(' ,4
0.• .4I.Fi.t A(.... c/i./75
• c1Li.tEtfi6 e4o�9stz�. id27' ,4. 4-A,..,...,4-A,..,..., .,:i ' 9-1c -79
` . :dr.. /3>79 ..Y/ 1rt'. v. (j-/r- F-1
�k„...) ( l - •- 7`!
'LS l IC==C
CivAt J 7/1.; /,
I'litk,
ti..7/r,� /.0v ,J ,/!-..rt• f- y/i6,iy
�tr t`p.t17. 1\I•itw•o-t 111c .1to,,tie t s��. .w. 7"1E•' %f
_IV..e-. l -2i r8Te...e&- -z.,, A• Y it re
1 l/.r42/ C� -c. ".el (F1.7 %_',T--`7'
. • /�A J 41 J. 4 ('
�i,,•)sN„CCi Y'9N c Tani.) C(lrah' --/S " 7 tl
32,
. •444
•
!i
SPECIAL MEETINGft
}1
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL •
e'
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1979 6:30 P.M, CITY HALL•
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor; Dean Edstrom, David
• Osterholt, Sidney Pauly, Paul Redpath
ii
STAFF PRESENT: Robert Lambert, Director of Community Services;
Roger Pauly, City Attorney I'
OTTHERS PRESENT: Jerry Kingrey $ Jerry Wigen, Co-Chairpersons
Park Bond Referendum Committee; David Anderson,
. Ed King, Dick Feerick, John Reedy, Dick Dahl,
Eden Prairie News
The purpose of this meeting was to consider Resolution No. 79-186, determining the
necessity of issuing general obligation park bonds and providing for an election
thereon.
Mayor Penzel called the meeting to order at 6:30 P.M.
Jerry Wigen and Jerry Kingrey, Co-Chairpersons of the Park Bond Referendum Committee,
• were present to answer questions.
Osterholt asked how the City would pay the operating costs fora pool and ice-
11, facility. Wigen reported that after reviewing the financial reports on other
facilities in similar communities, they estimated that the revenue should equal
the operating costs. He added that there is no data available wr a joint-facility
which should operate more economically.
Osterholt had several questions concerning the hours of operation, the length of the
skating season, and the numbers of rental hours projected by the committee.
S. Pauly questioned the form used by other communities for their successful bond
issues. Did they pass their facilities whith separate questions, or a combined
question, as proposed by the committee? She expressed her desire for a successful •
referendum, and was concerned about the depth of support for indoor ice.
Edstrom asked if it was appropriate to assume that if an ice facility alone would
break even, the combination of an ice-facility with a pool should lessen the loss
contributed by the pool.
Wigen again stated that the revenues should meet the operating costs. He noted
that the school should assume a share of the operating cost of the pool, similar
to what they would pay to operate their own.
Dave Anderson added that although operating costs must be considered, parks also
require maintenance, and they are not revenue producing.
Kingrey reported that the committee had explored all the possible ways to present
the question, and the majority of the people expressed their support of a single
question, rather than risk having their special interest fail.
•
3,214
•
•
o
III Special Meeting 4, 10/10/79 D
Eden Prairie City Council
Osterholt stated that he felt park development is the highest priority, and that
by combining it with facilities, it may not pass; therefore, he favors separate
questions.
Edstrom felt that all parts of the package are needed.in the community, and favored
supporting one question.
• Redpath noted that he would support a single question, since he felt both park
development and facilities are important. 4
MOTION: Redpath moved to adopt Resolution No. 79-186, with voting to occur at the
six Tnormal voting sites. The motion was seconded by Edstrom. j
DISCUSSION: Osterholt stated that although he would favor the resolution, he did
not think that one question would give the voters enough choice, and he would not
.support the referendum in the community.
VOTE: nation passed unanimously. •
Osterholt cautioned the committee to use public funds for informational purposes
only, not to pursuade voters. The Council will give formal approval on funding
`� for informational brochures or signs after they review them.
. Osterholt.also asked that the committee be prepared to work toward another
. •referendum for park development in the spring in the event that this one should fail.
MOTION: Osterholt moved for adjournment, seconded by Penzel, motion passed. The
meeting was adjourned at 7:15 P.N.
•
Respectfully Submitted,
Georgia Jessen
Recording Secretary
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
3215. •
•
•
•
•
Y`RESOLUTION NO. 71-/f 40 IRESOLUTION DETERMINING NECESSITY OF ISSUING
I !
GENERAL OBLIGATION PARK BONDS AND PROVIDING
FOR AN ELECTION THEREON •
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of •
Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: E'
1. This Council has investigated the facts necessary
to ascertain and does hereby find, determine and declare, that
it is necessary and expedient for the City to borrow money by
• ...the issuance of its general .obligation bJnds. in an.amount. not
-to exceed $3,500,000 to provide funds for the acquisition and
betterment of land, buildings and facilities for its program
of public recreation, as described in the report of the
Park Board Referendum Committee, dated September 25, 1979.
2. The question of issuing bonds in such an
amount and for such a purpose shall be submitted to the
qualified electors of the City at a special election to be
. ..held on November 15, 1979, between the hours of .M,
and .M. at the polling places set forth in the Notice
desci:Th d in paragraph 4 hereof. •
•
3. The City Finance Director/Clerk is hereby
authorized and directed to cause Notice of the election to
be given as follows: • (1) by immediately posting in his office
for public inspection a copy of the Notice set forth in para-
graph 4; (2) by publication of said Notice in the Eden Prairie
News, the official newspaper of the City,'once each week for
two successive weeks, the first publication to be not less than
fourteen days before the election; (3) by posting said Notice at
the polling places and at three of the most public and conspicuous
places in the City not less than ten days before the election;
(4) by publishing in the official newspaper of the City a sample
ballot as set forth in paragraph 5 at least one week before the
election; (5) by posting a sample ballot in his office for
public inspection and in the polling places at least four days
before the election.
4. The Notice to be published and posted as provided
in paragraph 3 above shall be in substantially the following
form:
32 g,
•
NOTICE OF SPECIAL ELECTIONir !�
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ► I
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
• � s
• NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special election will
pa held in and for the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, on
November 15, 1979, between the hours of • .M. and
.M., for the purpose of submitted to the-Voters the following
questions
Shall the City of Eden Prairie issue and sell
its general obligation bonds in an amount not
• • exceeding $3,500,000 to provide funds for the is
acquisition and betterment of land, buildings
and facilities for its program of public i.
recreation?
• The polling places for said election shall be
•
•
IL and any qualified voter residing in the City may vote at
said election, at the polling place for the precinct in
•` •which the voter resides.
•
Dated: October _, 1979.
DY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
John D. Frane
City Finance Director/Clerk
•
•
3a ti
•
•
-
T .
5. The sample ballot for said slection shall be posted '`
411 and published as provided in paragraph 3 and shall be in
Substantially the following form:
••CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ELECTION
HELD NOVEMBER 15, 1979
. . Shall the City of Eden Prairie issue •
• . . YES and sell its general obligation bonds
. in an amount nbt'exceeding $3,500,000 .
• to provide funds for the acquisition
. . NO and betterment of land, buildings and
• . . facilities for its program of public
recreation?
INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS: If you wish to vote in
favor of the above proposition, mark a cross (X)
in the square preceding the word "YES." If you
wish to vote against the above proposition,
mark a cross (X) in the square preceding the
word "NO" next to the proposition.
6. The City Finance Director/Clerk is authorized
and directed to cause to be printed official ballots for the
use of the voters at said election, which shall be printed
on blue-colored paper and shall be identical in form with
• the sample ballot in paragraph 5 above, except that the first
line of the official ballot shall read "OFFICIAL BALLOT," and
on the back, so as to be visible when the ballot is properly
folded for deposit, shall be printed the words "OFFICIAL BALLOT,"
the date of the election, a facsimile signature of the City
Finance Director/Clerk, and the lines for the initials of two
judges.
7. The following persons are hereby appointed to
serve as election officials at said election:
( The judges shall count the ballots cast and submit their •
returns to the Council.
• r .
•
•
9
8. Said election shall be held and conducted in ?
ir the manner prescribed by law. On the day of ,
1979, at o'clock .M., this Councirihall meet as a
canvassing Board and declare the results appearing from the l:
election returns, in accordance with law.
•
Mayor
.
Attest:
Finance Director/Clerk
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Nov. 6, 1979
4r CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 79-201 •
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZIN' PERMIT APPLICATION
TO MWCC FOR SEWER CONNECTION AT BRYANT
LAKE STABLES, I.C. 51-357A
WHEREAS, the proposed tanitary sewer in Improvement Contract
51-357A requires a connection to the Metropolitan Waste Control Com-
mission (MWCC).interdeptor system; and
•
WHEREAS, the proposed connection conforms to the Eden Prairie
Comprehensive Sewer Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City
Council as follows:
The City Engineer is hereby authorized and directed to submit
an application for Permit for Connection to or use of Com-
mission Facilities: to the MWCC.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
f.,
John D. Frane, Clerk
j)A
.
November 6, 1979
• CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ti RESOLUTION NO. 79-204
RESOLUTION RECEIVING 100% PETITION,
ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS b PREPARATION
OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN BRYANT LAKE
` ' VIEW ESTATES
(I.C. 51-361)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council:
1. The owners of 100% of the real property abutting upon and
to be benefitted from the proposed sewer, water and street €.
improvements in Bryant Lake View Estates, I.C. 51-361, at
an estimated total cost of $300,000.00, have petitioned the '!
City Council to construct said improvements and to assess
the entire cost against their property.
2. Pursuant to M.S.A. 429.031, Subd. 3, and upon recommendation
of the City Engineer, said improvements are hereby ordered
and the City Engineer, with the assistance of Bather Ringrose •
Wolsfeld, Inc., shall prepare plans and specifications for
said improvements in accordance with City standards and
advertise for bids thereon.
3. Pursuant to M.S.A. 429.031, Subd. 3, the City Clerk is hereby
directed to publish a copy of this resolution once in the
official newspaper, and further a contract for construction
of said improvements shall not be approved by the City Council
prior to 30 days following publication of this resolution
in the City's official newspaper.
. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on
•
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
{
ATTEST: SEAL
•
t John D. Frane, Clerk
3,2A1
1
•
100% PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS
/ i
TO THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL:
The undersigned are all the fee owners of the real property described t ,
lit •below and herein petition for the Eden Prairie City Council to proceed ,
with making the following described improvements:
• 1
(General Location)
X_Sanitary Sewer Bryant Lake View Estates
Watermain _
X Storm Sewe;
Bryant Lake View Estates '
- X Street Paving Bryant Lake View Estates
•
X Other* Bryant Lake View Estates
:Amy other improvements to be done pursuant to Rezoning Agreement dated May 2, 1978,betweene the nudnder-
Pursuant to M.S.A. 429.031, Subd. 3, the undersigned hereby waive any si �d the
public hearing to be held on said improvements, and further state and Eden Prairie.
agree that the total cost of said improvements shall be specially as-
sessed against the property described below in accordance with the
•
City's special assessment policies. We further understand that the
preliminary, estimated total cost for the said improvements is $300.000.00
This petition is subject to additional conditions set forth on Addendum attached hereto
Street Address or other Legal Names and addresses of Petitioners
Description of Property to be served (Must be owners ofrecord)
III
See Exhibit A attached hereto. Parcel 5 Thelma C. Havnes
thereon is owned by Bruce G. Havnes,who
is married to Debby Lee Havnes, and the Bruce G': Haynes
balance is owned by Thelma G. Haynes. All
of said property is to be platted as Debby Lee Haynes
Bryant Lake View Estates. `
(For City use)
Date Received
Project NO.
Council Consideration
• 3z2z •
/ . . .
i
_ t
EXHIBIT A
PARCEL 1: The South 500 feet of that part of the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section
3. Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County. Minnesota, lying East of
the Easterly right of way line of U. S. interstate No. 494, according
to the document number 3201676 on file or of record•in the office of
• the Register of Deeds in and'for said County. •
PARCEL 2: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1000, Files of Registrar of--, f
Titles, County of Hennepin.
PARCEL 3: All that part of the North 20 acres of the Southeast
1/6 of the nnepin County,
Northeast 1/4 of Section 3, Township 116, Range
22Minnesota lying South of the South line of the North 1/2 of the Southeast
1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section 3. and Easterly of the Easterly
right of stay line of U. S. Highway Number 494 as set forth in Notice
of Lis Pendens Document Number 608744.
PARCEL 4: That part of the South 1/2 of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast
i
Quartet of Section 3, Township 116. Range 22. lying Easterly of the
• Easterly right of way line of H. S. Highway Number 494 as set forth in
Final Certificate Document Number 907830.
PARCEL 5: That part of the South 445.00 feet of Government Lot 4. Section 2. Town-
ship 116, Range 22, lying easterly of the easterly right-of-way line of.
• Interstate Highway No. 494, as shown by Final Certificate Document Number
907630.
PARCEL 6: That part of Lot 4 of Section 2, Township 116. Range 22 lying Westerly
of Rryants Lone lake and lying Southerly of the South line of Registered
Land Survey No. 1000 and the Easterly extension thereof, except that
part of the south 445.00 feet thereof lying easterly of the easterly
right-of-way line of Interstate Highway No. 494 as shown by Final Certific ,
Document Number 907830.
•
•>223
•
. ADDENDUM
• (Additional Conditions)
1. The City of Eden Prairie shall not commence the improvements
prior to September 1, 1980, and if, prior to such date, the petitioners
or their assigns, including without limitation Laukka & Associates, Inc.,
.
a Minnesota corporation, shall furnish a bond or letter of credit or other
security satisfactory to the City of Eden Prairie, in an amount equal to
1202 of the estimated cost of the improvements, securing completion of the
improvements by the petitioners or their assigns, as the case may be, then
(i)' the City of Eden Prairie'8hal1 not be obligated to proceed with the
improvements, and this petition shall be null and void,and (ii) the petitioners •
or their assigns, as the case may be, shall thereafter undertake the improve-
ments in accordance with the Rezoning Agreement dated May 2, 1978, between
the City of Eden Prairie and the petitioners, as amended.
2. In the event the City of Eden Prairie does proceed with the
improvements, an equal share of the total assessments therefor shall be •
assessed against each of the lots within Bryant Lake View Estates.
3.2211
Nov. 6, 1979
4r CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 79-205
RESOLUTION RECEIVING 100% PETITION,
ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS & PREPARATION
OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUB-
LIC IMPROVEMENTS IN VILLAGE WOODS
2ND ADDITION (I.C. 51-362)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council:
1. The owners of 100% pf the real property abutting upon and
to be benefitted from the proposed sewer, water and street
improvements in the Village Woods 2nd Addition, I.C. 51-362,
at an estimated total cost of $45,000, have petitioned the City
Council to construct said improvements and to assess the entire
cost against their property. .
2. Pursuant to M.S.A. 419.031, Subd. 3, and upon recommendation
of the City Engineer, said imotbvements are hereby ordered
and the City Engineer, with the assistance of Rieke Carroll
Muller Assoc., Inc., shall oreoare plans and specifications for
said improvements in accordance with City standards and adver-
tise for bids thereon.
•
3. Pursuant to'M.S.A. 429.031, Subd. 3, the City Clerk is hereby
directed to publish a copy of this resolution once in the
official newspaper, and further a contract for construction of
said improvements shall not be approved by the City Council
prior to 30 days following publication of this resolution
in the City's official newspaper.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
522 •
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNL UTA
i 1
100t 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)
X Sanitary sewer Hiawatha Court
X watermain Hiawatha Court •
•
X Storm.sewer . . Hiawatha Court X Street Paving • Hiawatha Court $ Hiawatha Ave.
Other
Pursuant to M.S.A. 429.031, Subd. 3, the undersigned hereby waive any
public hearing to be held on said improvements, and further state and
agree that the total cost of said improvements shall be specially as-
sessed against the property described below in accordance with the 1
City's special assessment policies. We fuether understand that the
preliminary, estimated total cost for the said improvements is $45,800.00
Street Address or other Legal Names and addresses of Petitioners
Description of Property to be served (Must be owners of record)
• Village Wood 2nd Addition Zachman Homes, Inc.
7760 Mitchell Rd.
•
Eden Prairie, r . 55344
•
(For City use)
Date Received_____0/79
Project No. 5,-1(r7.
Council Consideration 11j4��C1
:3l2(,:
•
Nov. 6, 1979 fi
CITY OF EDE" PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 79-206
RESOLUTION RECEIVING PETITION AND ORDERING
FEASIBILITY REPORT ON IMPROVEMENTS (I.C. 51-363) •
•
WHEREAS, a Petition has been received and is proposed to make
the following improvements:
I.C. 51-363.. Sewer and water trunk extension
in the MRS-1 service area located generally
east and west of Co. Rd. 4, south of Rec
Rock Lake and Mitchell Lake and north of
Co. Rd. 1.
and assess the benefitted property for all or a portion of the cost of the
•
improvements, pursuant to M.S.A. 429.011 to 429.111.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council:
That the proposed improvements be referred to the City Engineer
for study and that a feasibility report shall be prepared and
presented to the City Council with all convenient.speed ad-
•
vising the Council in a preliminary way as to the scope, cost
assessment and feasibility of the proposed improvements.
ADOPTED'by the Eden Prairie City Council on
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
•
John D. Frane, Clerk -
IL •
•
32/1
$•••••• "....;..../ ......, ,-----,.......
. '.' " -Zot D LA&ROAD
..... %.5"
..) fl LUTIC —,"Te 31,3
. 1 ,o,"1..." • .. . WL •(,
till.fir• •v N..
t ..
4
r--210"
ilt
it
RR,
1 •.. Cal v lci
1 Tiff "":„MiTCHE t.t.-1 --Nr,— WI ii.
TRONA
N .
4•,,'•••••.
`•-• . ••.•; • Pi • %
-
11E0114Tr
A • 0 1;
RED K R
, .
--„,....,.., .
-...-z:-?....-----,. i; ss...,) •-•,....'
-.- $4„,..... -....... ;:„.;
/ . _... ...a t-,7 ato • _ \‘‘s:•(1:71zzidzz
lie, r ` _-,l'iti; ttc. Z:z.z:
-0,....,-.
• le LaicE-....
-
., ........ .
-=-.....• -.....7_----. -......... ..fii......
..,, .
. .7-
•
t . .14—ti e. .....---••"`
i t• .s i 7:-....--
t. l
"0 a
- ../
...._ •
0,
+ .
QZ:. • \\T 06:
10121
ii r iTopts
....
're
#1- r i Tkil II 0 t4£FtS --------"---.-
.4
.....'......'....cid .
•
•
.S.....'..."...L?). V
ra
tg.
I ; '
( 3 2 2 3 1 1111HIP12*
21111/7
"S, - Flyin
IV
•
•
•
•
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA
PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT
To The Eden Prairie City Council:
The undersigned property owners herein petition the Eden Prairie City
Council to consider making the following described improvements(a)o •
✓ (General Location) ,
Sanitary Sewer
Watermain
Storm Sewer
Street Paving
Other •
•
Street Address or Other •
Legal Description of Names of Petitioners Ace.
Property to be Served (Must Be Pro ert Owners)41. LS-
/rt c L a' tea s Y /c..x��•
P.
141 • •
-
e•
•
(For City Use) •
Date Received
•
Project NO. •
Council Consideration
:122y
•
•
•
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA
`' PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT
To The Eden Prairie City Council:
• The undersigned property owners herein petition the Eden Prairie City
Council to consider making the following described improvements(s):
(General Location)
Sanitary Sewer
Watermain
Storm Sewer
Street Paving
Other
•
Street Address or Other
Legal Description of Names of Petitioners
Property to be Served (Must Be Property Owners)
"+t
? y c ei tr ,isry-,ar -�-4�•
91,0-22t _ei-7(4--ee
(For City Use)
(' Date Received
Project No.
Council Consideration
323O
•
- MEMO
TO: Mayor Penzel and Members of the City Council
THROUGH: Roger Ulstad, City Manager
FROM: Carl Jullie, City Engineer
DATE: " November 2; 1979 i.
SUBJECT:. Change Order No. 1
T.'H.,5/Mitchell Rd. Project
I.C. 51-327
The State Department of Transportation worked up the signal revision plans
for the City's improvement project at Mitchell Road and T.H. 5. After the :.
work was started it was discovered that the State did not take into consid-
eration that the existing traffic controller would have to be raised in
order to fit the grade of the new island that is under construction for the
free . right turn for northbound traffic on Mitchell Road. The work re-
quired is as described on the attached Supplemental Agreement. The cost to •
the City of this additional work is $1,410.
Recommend Council approval of Change Order No. 1, I.C. 51-323.
CJJ:kh
•
3z3
•
'>T]tlalS•7e) 4
1 E OF hMINNL OTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1 3r--I� Sapp.to Contact No._ _'
i
: �ISUPPLEMENTAL AGEtEEMENT Nu. I
Sheet of 1t a:
,;we _ Fed.Project . State Project Na
Brown & Cris, Inc. It SP 2701-23
ss Location a
•
19740 Kenrick Avenue, Lakeville TH5, West 70th Street & Mitchell Road
ontraa a amended as follows:
ii
1;l;EREAS: The Contract provides for the construction of a concrete island around
the existing traffic signal controller at TH5 and Hitch411 Road, and
WHEREAS: The concrete island will be at an elevation higher than the existing
controller, and
' WHEREAS: The Contract does not provide for the adjustr..ent of the existing traffic
signal controller elevation, and
WHEREAS: The traffic signal controller shall be adjusted to proper elevation,
AHD.THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED AND UNDERSTOOD THAT:
t
1. The traffic signal controller shall be relocated and adjusted to elevation as I
shown on the plans. +
2. The Contractor shall be paid for providing a new traffic signal controller
ii, base (plate &119C), new conduit to connect to the existing conduit, relocation
of the existing signal controller and all labor and materials necessary to
complete the installation at the lump sum of $ 1,410.03.
•
See attached plan sheet 15 of 53, Revised 5/20/79
•
o.No. Account I.D. Organization F.V. Requisition No. Vendor Number I Type Terms Source S.Act. Task S.Task
Cost.lob or Client Code Amount Suffix . Object '
SEND
OF TRANSACTION O 0 Entered by
AeO Ael Date Number
a 0 a Date Number Entered by
MS
WED: Original Contract ' \ /s s •t.'
stones of Administration Dated n4 lc- 197G1 r ;1 r. i.L t
t r .:.. 0
Approved by Proj( ect Engineer or ArchitectDattd •'�� 19'
Accepted by Contractor• '--
Approved as to form and execution Dated /r C 19- (f{1D, . -e+ ;
suicUlimus•
Lot t
. Dated 19
Ausstans Attorney General Approved by Agency Head
.TE AUDITOR(White original) 3-CONTRACTOR(Pion/ 3-AGENCY(Goldenrod/ 3243E
• Nov. 6, 1979 _k
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
g •
_ RESOLUTION NO. 79-202
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT !I
OF OLD FARM ADDITION
WHEREAS, the plat of Old Farm Addition has been sub-
mitted in the manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance
Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been
duly had thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in.all respects consistent with the City plan and
the regulations and"requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordin-
ances of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EDEN PRAIRIE:
A. Plat Approval Request for Old Farm Addition is approved
upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's
Report on this plat dated October 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 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 Deed and/or Regis-
trar of Titles for thier use as required by MSA 462.358, Subd. 3.
D. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy
of this Resolution to the owners and subdividers of the above named
plat.
E. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to Execute
the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon coin-
pliance with the foregoing provisions.
ADOPTED by the City Council on
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
•
3233
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
.
ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT
TO: Mayor Penzel and Members of the City Council
THROUGH: Roger Ulstad, City Manager
FROM: Carl Jullie, City Engineer
DATE: October 29, 1979
•
SUBJECT: OLD FARM AODITION
PDROPOSAL: The Developer, Dirlam Properties, is requesting City Council
approval of the final plat of OTd Farm Addition. The plat contains
approximately 14.8 acres and is located south of Chestnut Drive and east
of Mitchell Road. The initial development will consist of 18 Quadra-
minium residential units with lots 1 and 2, Block 1 to be replotted into
two additional quadraminium residential units at a later date.
HISTORY: Zoning to RM 6.5 is scheduled for final reading by the City Council
• on November 6, 1979.
The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on August 7, 1979,
per Resolution #79-141.
The Developers Agreement referred to within this report is scheduled for
execution on November 6, 1979.
VARIANCES: Any variance request must be processed through the Zoning Board
of Appeals.
UTILITIES'AND STREETS: The requirementf for utilities and streets are
covered in items 4, 5 and Exhibit C of the Developer's Agreement.
l
lat of
ld
arm
RECOMcconformance with the drequirements of approval of e this areport andOtheFfollowing: in
1. Receipt of fee for City Engineering services in the amount
of $1500.
2. Final reading of the rezoning Ordinance #79-28 by the City Council. +
3. Execution of the Developer's Agreement.
4. Receipt of cash deposit for street lighting in the amount of
$1,180.80.
.3?,t,
•
•
. Nov. 6, 1979
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
•
RESOLUTION NO. 79-203
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT
OF ALPINE ESTATES 2nd ADDITION
WHEREAS, the plat of Alpine Estates-2nd.Addition has been sub-
mitted in the manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance
Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been
duly had thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in.all respects consistent with the City plan and
the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of -Minnesota and ordin=•-.... .
ances of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EDEN PRAIRIE:
A. Plat Approval Request for Alpine Estates 2nd Addition is approved
upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's
Report on this plat dated October 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 in said Engineer's Report.
C. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of f.
this resolution in the office of the Register of Deed and/or Regis-
trar of Titles for thier use as required by MSA 462.358, Subd. 3.
D. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy
of this Resolution to the owners and subdividers of the above named
plat. •
E. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to Execute
the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon coin-
pliance with the foregoing provisions.
ADOPTED by the City Council on
•
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
IL John D. Frane, Clerk
•
3?31.3- •
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
•
ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT
TO: Mayor Penzel and Members of the City Council
THROUGH: Roger Ulstad, City Manager
FROM: Carl Jullie, City Engineer
DATE: 'October 29, 1979
SUBJECT: ALPINE ESTATES 2ND ADDITIDN {'
PROPDSAL: The property owner, Timothy Gagner, is requesting City Council
approval of the final plat of Alpine Estates 2nd Addition. The plat
consists of approximately 8.5 acres and will be divided into 2 lots
containing +22,000 swuare feet plus 1 outlot.
HISTORY: Zoning to R1-22 was approved through Drdinance #135 , description
#5-8.
The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on July 3, 1979,
• per Resolution #79-63.
The Developer's'Agreement referred to within this report was executed
on August 7, 1979.
VARIANCES: Items 5 and 6 of the Developer's Agreement cover variances.
UTILITIES AND STREETS: Items 2, 3, 4, 5 and Exhibit B of the Developer's
Agreement cover utilities and streets.
PARK DEDICATION: Requirements for park dedication are covered in Exhibit B
of the Developer's Agreement.
BONDING: Requirements for bonding are covered in Exhibit B of the Develop-
er's Agreement.
• RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Alpine Estates 2nd
Addition in conformance with the requirements of this report and the
following:
1. Receipt of fee for City Engineering services in the amount of
$90.00.
•
S
• Old Farm Addn.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Ordinance No. 79-28
It AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING AND AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 135
THE CITY COUNCIL.OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: •
Section 1. Appendix A of Ordinance No. •135 is amended 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 the RM.2.5 .... D,istrict ,
and shall be included hereinafter in the RM 6.5 District.
Section 2. The above-described property shall be subject to the
terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as
of , 1979, between
Dirlam Properties, Inc., a Minnesota corporation,
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
• j
and regulations'of the City of Eden Prairie relating to the RM 6.5
District.
Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective from and after
its passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Eden Prairie on the day of , 1979, and •
..finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting
of the City Council of said City on the day of , 1979.
Wolfgang H. .Penzel - Mayor
ATTEST:
•
John D. Frane - City Clerk
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1979.
��11
•
4 k '
That part of the North Half of the Southwest quarter, of the
Southwest quarter of Section 15, Township 116 North, Range
22 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian described as follows:
Beginning at the Southwest corner of said North Half, thence
Northerly along the West line of said North Half to the
Northwest corner of said North Half, thence Easterly along •
said north line to a point distant 1004.06 feet East from
the Northwest corner of said North Half, thence southerly a
distance of 652.43 feet more or less to a point on the South
line of said North Half distant 998.49 feet East from the
point of beginning, thence Westerly to the point of beginning,
Hennepin County , Minnesota.
EXHIBIT A, Old Farm
Old Farm
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1979
by and between DIRLAM PROPERTIES, INC., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter
referred to as "Owner", and by the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corpora-
tion , hereinafter referred to as "City",
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Owner has applied to City to rezone from RM 2.5 to RM 6.5
approximately 14.8 acres, situated in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota,
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 20 lots
for quadraminium residential units.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the Mayor and Council of the City
4L adopting Ordinance 79-28, Owner covenants and agrees to construction upon,
development, and maintenance of said property as follows:
1. Owner shall plat and develop the property in conformance
with the material dated July 16, 1979, reviewed and approved
by the City Council on August 7, 1979, and attached hereto
as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as
provided herein .
2. Owner covenants and agrees to the performance and observance
by Owner at such times and in such manner as provided therein
of all of the terms, covenants, agreements and conditions set
forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. Owner shall final plat all of the property including Lot 11,
Block 1, depicted on Exhibit B. for construction of 1 resi-
dential quadraminium structure containing 4 residential
units.
•
3a�9
•
8/31/79.
•
Developer's Agreement-Old Farm page 2
•
4. Owner shall convey by Warranty Deed to the City , or dedicate to the
public for public right-of-way, as part of the final plat, a portion
of the property 16 feet wide extending along the entire northwesterly
line of the property and adjacent to the southerly right-of-way line
of Chestnut Street, as outlined in green on Exhibit B, prior to
issuance of any building permit.
•
5. Owner shall construct a sidewalk 5 feet wide and 5 inches deep of
concrete, according. to City Engineer's standards, within the right-
of-way and south of the driving surface of Chestnut Drive as depicted f4
on Exhibit B, at time.of street and utility construction and prior 1
to occupancy of any residential structure.
•
b. Owner shall propose agreements providing for the maintenance of the
common areas of the property and shall submit them to the City Attorney
for review and approval prior to final plat approval.
•
4 7. Owner shall screen all off-street vehicle parking areas from public
streets and adjacent land uses.
•
• P.
•
3240
Developer's Agreement-Old Farm page 3
1 •
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties to this Agreement have caused these
presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid.
DIRLAM PR►' RTIES, INC., a M sota
corpor, of l •Leg lone ota
BY: �'`
•
• Dennis Dirlam, Pres dent k'
BY: /a -di "x‘'-;
STATE OF MINNESOTA) Donald R. Peterson, Secretary
SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was-acknowledged before me this Secretary o
Dirlam Properties, Inc., a Minnesota corporation on behalf of the corporation.
Notary Public
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal
corporation of the State of Minnesota
BY:
Wolfgang H. Penzel, the Mayor
BY:
Roger K.Ulstad, the Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA
SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
1979 by Wolfgang H. Penzel, the Mayor and Roger K. Ulstad, the Manager of the
City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation on behalf of the corporation.
Notary Public
32{II
_r.
•
•
That part of the North Half of the Southwest quarter, of the
Southwest quarter of Section 15, Township 116 North, Range
22 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian described as follows:
Beginning at the Southwest corner of said North Half, thence
Northerly along the West line of said North Half to the ' .
Northwest corner of said North Half, thence Easterly along ?j
said north line to a point distant 1004.06 feet East from
the Northwest corner of said North Half, thence southerly a
distance of 652.43 feet more or less to a point on the South
line of said North Half distant 998.49 feet East from the
point of beginning, thence Westerly to the point of beginning,
Hennepin County , Minnesota.
EXHIBIT A, Old Fano
•
2(12_
k
r
_ :.:•:'r. .n,Tc"[u "ono � �
.,. .i ,, ••\ . 1 ,,. ,_ ' )1.4--,.•%,. \ ' •sk - -•', • ,',..,, \ ';•i;' ..:.,-(- , ...: ,.,,,, .., .,. ;
k �A i .'L:
\ 1 N. •./r1' ` I I • 2 it.
I. ." \ I P
v= .\t 1 n fj,r N, Y:) — fi_� t �E m
` �I ��4 i •X' ,t f i�. i .! N.2 -- I
v .•f�� I<ITr ; N,r``.,! t .� •,,_ % fp ill
i- 1 _ L1
N ' J 1 },;�nl ,so �^[ y�� 'moo ._.• 1 .
r. -- . -- 1-1 .:2'... - iiiii • ,
. , .. ....,....N-_-_-,.‘i-,... .. )1. ,z,,,t.) ...\ ,, : I ....„...i..--,1-e.„. . j„, .1i. - : .!
.' . . i Pi'. \.\---\-1\..\___.1 i; • qv-‘%•• -'---------"Tii-j.--711L-----:.'N'•,iNi\% 11\: If\.i..1 ' : .: •
4 `
e J I s \i r ; 1 � • � 1'3 i . • • '
. 1 . � o � K I:f
N,tilt; -;-...A. Lt:'---:-.: ....-
t_.... \ \ I\ I:.1* "EXHIBIT B" ram" *—Z;
\ I •
•�;• :�• -: �11t11\ July 16,1979 '% : .
I� •
•
• DEVELOPER ' S AGREEMENT
EXHIBIT C
•
page 1 of 4
I. 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,
ponding area and flood plain 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.
II. 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.
III. •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
$ 250 per unit . The amount to be paid by Owner shall be increased
or decreased to the extent that City ordinances are amended 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.
IV. 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. The condition of
the title of any real property or any interest therein to be
dedicated, transferred or conveyed as maybe 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.
•
•
•
320
•
Page 2 of 4 Exhibit CIr
V. All sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer facilities, streets,curb.
gutter, sidewalks and other public utilities("improvements") to be
dedicated to the City shall be designed in compliance with City stand-
ards by a registered professional engineer and submitted to the City
Engineer for approval. All private improvements shall conform to the
City's Building code requirements. The Owner, through his engineer,
shall provide for competent daily inspection during the construction
of all improvements. As-built drawings with service and valve ties
on reproduceable mylar shall be delivered to the City Engineer within
60 days of completion thereof, together with a written statement from
a registered engineer that all such work has been completed, inspected
and tested in accordance with City approved plans and specifications.
Prior to final plat approval; or issuance of building permits, if no
final plat is required, the Owner shall:
A. Submit a performance bond or letter of credit which guarantees
completion of all improvements to be dedicated to the City as
determined by the City Engineer. The amount of the bond or
letter of credit shall be 125% of the estimated construction
cost of said improvements. The bond or letter or credit shall
be in such form and contain such other provisions and terms
as may be required by the City Engineer. The Owner's registered
engineer shall make and submit for approval to the City Engi-
neer a written estimate of said costs. Said bond or letter
of credit shall specify that said improvements shall be com-
pleted and acceptable to the City Engineer not later than a
date to be specified by the City Engineer and that said improve-
ments shall be fully guaranteed against any defects in mate-
rials or workmanship for a period of two years following said
completion andacceptance date. Acceptance of improvements by
City shall be subject to recommendations of the City Engineer
and to receipt by the City of the Owner's warranty guarantying
such improvements 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 improve-
ments in such form as shall be acceptable to and containing
such further terms as shall be required by the City.
B. In lieu of the provisions of subparagraph V.A, above, Owner
may submit a 100% petition signed by all fee owners of the
property, requesting the City to install the improvements to
be dedicated to the City. Upon approval by the City Council,
the City may cause said improvements to•be made and special
assessments for all costs for said improvements will be levied
on the property, except any thereof which shall be dedicated
to the public, over a five year period. Prior to the award
of any contract by the City for the construction of any improve-
ments, Owner shall have entered into a contract for rough
grading of streets included.in the improvements to a finished
IL subgrade elevation. Contractor's performance of the rough
work shall be secured by a bond or letter of credit which
shall guarantee completion of the rough grading as deter-
mined by the City Engineer. The amount of the bond or letter
of credit shall be 125% of the cost of rough grading and
shall be in such form and contain such further terms as may
be required by the City Engineer.
32VS
Page 3 of 4 Exhibit C
C. Submit to the City Engineer a development plan showing existing
contours, proposed grading, finished 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, locations of trails, etc.
D. Pay to City fees for first two year street lighting (public
streets) engineering review, and street signs.
VI. A. Owner shall remove all soil, and debris:from; and clean, all
streets within, the property at least every two months, (or
within one week from the date of any request by City), during
_the period•commencing May 1 and ending October 31, of each `
year, until such time as such streets and improvements there-
in are accepted for ownership and maintenance by City.
B. Within 30 days of installation of utilities and street curb '3
in any portion of the property (if said time occurs between
May 1 and October 31 of any year) Owner shall sod (secured
with a minimum of 2 stakes per roll of sod) that part of the
property lying between said curb and a line 3 feet measured
perpendicular with the curb orinlieu of said sod, place a
fiber blanket with seed approved by the City (secured with
stakes a minimum of 6 feet apart). Either sod or fiber
must be placed upon a minimum of 4 inches of topsoil. The
topsoil shall be level with the top of the curb at the curb
line,and rise ;" for each foot from the curb line.
Owner shall maintain the sod, fiber blanket, topsoil, and
grade until such time as the streets and improvements in
the property are accepted for ownership and maintenance by
City.
Owner shall also sod all drainage swales serving 5 or more
lots a minimum distance of 6 feet on either side of the ..
center of the swale.
•
C. The bond or letter of credit provided in paragraph V. A.
hereof shall also guarantee the performance of Owner's
• obligations under this paragraph VI.
VII. Owner shall file this Agreement with the Register of Deeds or
Registrar of Titles and supply the City with a copy of this
Agreement with information as to Document Number and date and
time of filing duly certified thereon within 60 days from the
date of this Agreement,0,-stir/441:.«,-/ir•,n w«-.•r
VIII. If Owner fails to proceed in accordance with this Agreement with-
in 24 months of the date hereof and provide proof of filing in
accordance with item VII. hereof, Owner for itself, it successors,
and assigns shall not oppose rezoning of said property to Rural.
321160
•
•
Page 4 of 4 Exibit C j
IX. Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforce-
able against Owner, its successors, and assigns of the property
herein described.
X. Owner represents and warrants it owns fee title to the property
free and clear of mortgage, liens k�aand other encumbrances, except:
•
XI. In the event there are or will be constructed on the property,
2 or more streets, and if permanent streets signs have not been
installed, Owner shall install temporary street signs in accor-
dance with recommendations of the City Building Department,
prior to the issuance of any permit to build upon the property.
•
•
•
•
•
•
324'
•
{
That part of the North Half of the Southwest quarter, of the
Southwest quarter of Section 15, Township 116 North, Range I; •
22 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian described as follows:
Beginning at the Southwest corner of said North Half, thence
Northerly along the West line of said North Half to the '
Northwest corner of said North Half, thence Easterly along
said north line to'a point distant 1004.06 feet East from
the Northwest corner of said North Half, thence southerly a
distance of 652.43 feet more or less to a point on the South
line of said North Half distant 998.49 feet East from the
point of beginning, thence Westerly to the point of beginning,
Hennepin County , Minnesota.
EXHIBIT A, Old Farm
•
324g •
RAP
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE LePark
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
11 Ordinance No. 79-31
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING AND AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 135
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: •
Section 1. Appendix A of Ordinance No. 135 is amended 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 the Rural District
and shall be included hereinafter in the I-2 Park District.
Section 2. The above-described property.shall be subject to the
terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as
of , 1979, between Jay C. Kohlrusch
fiL 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 I-2 Park
District.
Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective from and after
•
its passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Eden Prairie on the day of , 1979, and
'finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting
of the City Council of said City on the day of , 1979.
s
Wolfgang H. 1'enzel - Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane - City Clerk •
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1979.
32(J9
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The East One-Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter
and tiw t part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter
of Section 12, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
lying westerly and southwesterly of the following described line:
Commencing at the northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter; thence westerly along the north line of said
Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 872.80 feet
to the point beginning of line to be described: thence.southerly on
an assumed bearing of South 5 degrees 23 minutes 25 seconds east
parallel with the east line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter a distance of 900.00 feet; thence South 88 degrees 05 minutes
• 03 seconds Hest parallel with the north line of said Northeast Quarter
of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 4.30 feet; thence South
31 degrees 31 minutes 37 seconds East a distance of 502.95 feet to the
south line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and
said line there terminating.
Subject to easements'for roads.
Subject to easement for utility purposes as described in Hennepin
County Records, Book 76, Page 4191460.
t
•
•
•
•
•
EXHIBIT A .
it
32SO
f3
9/20/79
LeParc
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as'of , 1979
by and between Jay C. Kohlrusch, 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 to change the zoning from Rural
to I-2 Park for approximately 35 acres, situated in Hennepin County, State
of Minnesota, 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 and develop the property into 5 lots
for industrial purposes.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the Mayor and Council of the City
adopting Ordinance No. 79-31, Owner covenants and agrees to construction
upon, development , and maintenance of said property as follows:
1. Owner shall plat and develop the property in conformance
with the material dated July 2, 1979 and July 23, 1979,
reviewed and approved by the City Council on September 2,
1979, and attached hereto as Exhibits B1 and 62 respectively,
subject to such changes and modifications as provided
herein.
2. Owner covenants and agrees to the performance and observance
by Owner at such times and in such manner as provided therein
of all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions
set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. Owner shall convey by Warranty Deed that part of the property
shown as Outlot A on Exhibit 61 , outlined in red, to the
City immediately upon filing of the- plat
and prior to issuance of any building permit .
4. Owner shall convey to Hennepin County such part of the property
for additional right-of-way for Co.Rd.#39 as determined by the
Hennepin County Highway Department.
3261
if
•
E
•
!!
Developer's Agreement-LeParc page 2
•
5. Owner shall, prior to the issuance of any building permit, submit
to the City's Planning Department for review and approval, a
detailed landscaping and grading plan, including but not limited
to screening of buildings isnd parking lots from-streets and •
surrounding uses.
6. Owner shall grade the property so as not to exceed a 3:1 (1 foot
verticle drop for each 3 feet measured horizontally) upon any
portion of the property.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
32h2
•
Developer's Agreement-teParc page 3
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, Mayor
BY:
STATE OF MINNESOTA Roger K. Ulstad, Manager
SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPINi —
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
1979 by Wolfgang Penzel, the Mayor and Roger Ulstad the City Manager, of the
City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation on behalf of the corporation.
Notary Public
OWNER:
.� .. __—
i Jay ,/Kholrusch
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
1 /
SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The foregoing instrument was acknolwedged before me this a day of 72 £lip
1979 by Jay C. Kholrusch.
H•:. Notary Public
321;3
•
•
•
• LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ir
The East One-Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter
and thrt part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter
of Section 12, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
lying westerly and southwesterly of the following described line:
Commencing at the northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter; thence westerly along the north line of said
Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 872.80 feet
to the point beginning of line to be described: thence,southerly on
an assumed bearing of South 5 degrees 23 minutes 25 seconds east
parallel with the east line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter a distance of 900.00 feet; thence South 88 degrees 05 minutes' • i
03 seconds West parallel with the north line of said Northeast Quarter
of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 4.30 feet; thence South .
31 degrees 31 minutes 37 seconds East a distance of 502.95 feet to the
south line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and
said line there terminating.
Subject to easements'for roads.
•
Subject to easement for utility purposes as described in Hennepin
County Records, Book 76, Page 4191460.
1
( 1
•
•
•
•
•
EXHIBIT A .
(
•
3zr�
.. --.
•
•
. ...
r-Ter tk,g•to Oa or lift Cr.1 la :', "U. Lill/4./I i.1r 1,4 , .
'Cr W
•• 1 1.•112. •• .-...,,, ,..... I
—1------. i 1 1
S'14.1,4 --L1.1•4.6.•-- 4 41 .•:'.. IX C 1C..4..0 F .,' 15..yy it I •
MI tigt or Lc IP, 1 S
&.4..-4,.i,•,,•.•,•,•.-)6.
••-6.1.
tk
. f
. . , /_• ,ii/... /k /
od
•
•• •
1i1I.
A
\ 0 • 0 Exog ..., • • .
u, \s- • •• • .
. 4: •
' ...• '
•C) • 1 U'4 \6 l'4." . /1/
., /**•••,0... , . :
.. t..C. ?,, 611' • t .s ,
0 u)
z t
.- ,t.. .1-• DP. .
11317e. 1.1
// V°
tul I
1. 7-c-, 2.•I/ ,, i • . 0 -0
0 4. 0.1"' /
0 r_.,,_•:* •,,co'r
/ Oa CIO
.19/7,
/"•-•\ )4 0 '''Tu3 4' I 4‘
%
i i",„ t •o 4. ' 404 sik ! i .. i
1.- •CEOTERL 11-1E. 0•..-
"INTL
'..N . ...EittfuVIT4A4t PE.SAzIsE. 4.I r, .
.. •a,. ' liliNPA;r4+11410
FA, -
.,G,.. *-
i .'',..,-‹...3 .,..,....:90 •0 4,4.
•
.
/,..
.........".........4.........4...k.4..s, .\,‘.. • 4•360 -
:Nrsqr'' •
. es
FLOCK
--Et • J.. I
• I 10 • ic) • ...i s‘se-•05'03.°:
* -
i
Y• ' c,,•,,,
t‘.).• '-I5'
o .c'> 'P••:)/.
a
0 • .. 4
_y //.1 -11 el
itt
• -
011.1TIOT y
,:s•i•EticuT -
- 0 0 ,..
..,, SA 0 0,
.
\......
i51 4. .
• e•iP
DC . ao ' '1, •
; •.,‘; •
.0 •
•.. .
. 6 '
tte01 STRUT _...4) I
EASE.MEUT 'v _ 4-161
\ • .3.
t X
0
% .110.01 ..1 14.5
---614os--- ..s. • 51. .St.
--•V t ,-- • •••••,‘
•--1 I- ---13t.5,11-- • i P-- • ..
' .70yri'41,1iJ . ./ ....•
1 ls 1 rt.0 UT soti LILIC OF THE CA,:T la OF•rtiE. stisJ I/4 OF I.k.1/4 / / .,..-•••"' •t
( W
3 ., . . ./....'
dE OF THE IiC lib Or L-
I- /TIM 500134 LI
3 . .
,
* t
EXHIBIT B1
• i
• a
„ 1,
32 55 July 2, 1979 . •
. ..
.., . ,..,.
•
0 li i /. (? 4' ‘,V1 11.1\!k.":77W„r .• ./ •s---'‘. . • . I ill•dz1:;,. .8., • .. ,
-4 ,4,1 , ,i0 i•, -):0,fr /' -... ),1,,,, ,._...___-- .
lf I ;
'' :. i )
1::
• E tt i1•III: J ¼ / : I
• r/ ��'��' . l
/Flit•-;// 1 r-ebP 41 ;r ! II .r pro° a .
itil pril 1 . ' ••"---.""1"2.1111."411 • I
. 1 I .1 .).,-,j'21,. :_-.pr--- 1 . . - lirot, ' .-,;:.. 1 -1.7.:,1 ,,-..7-:*.•[i.-- ---. . • . ..
ir i• ff
,. ., , I, - 'i1 . ir ,' I:1! - ,. ..%• I) r5KCLM St,Iltt u,m. '
AD • i ' 1 1 ,..1 III I . ., I) ua'm •
1 ' I 1 • /�. • --.tOrOs[0 tlY.CAe
-. ,, .. . , ` • ,, ;XI/ •/-!'.' :' - . ..j .,•_:,:.,-.: :„„. ;. •
�Ar:UGK Ij ' 1. i %lam +� ':� ` .•/1.._° •^ 1 •-
/ '!:S I Eiji ' .'/., ;ie' /'� •
• A.:',• 4./
fr
X
, ,. -tom I I,tr ,. ; ; .:,;- \ . \ _ -
.4".'• , /. • 11(1'r� +L ll • • 1
•
y----7-------.1,:
�r ( / . r 'y -r.'tdlt(( rI d/44' ...'..-.1. , ('1 =,
EXHIBIT B2•
32 54, 'July 2. 1979 e
I• I . •
• DEVELOPER ' S AGREEMENT
It
EXHIBIT
•
page 1 of 4
I. 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 flood plain 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.
II. Owner shall submit detailed construction and storm sewer
plans to the Nine Mile Creek
Watershed District for review and approval.
•
Owner shall follow all rules and recommendations of said
Watershed District.
III. 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
I• • building permit for construction on the property. Presently,
the amount of cash park fee applicable to the property. is
S 1,400per acre . The amount to be paid by Owner shall be increased
or decreased to the extent that City ordinances are amended 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.
IV. 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. 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. 1•
•
•
•
3zSV •
Page 2 of 4 Exhibit C
•
V. A. All sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer facilities, streets, curb, gutter,
sidewalks and other public utilities ("improvements") to be made and constructed
on or within the property and dedicated to the City shall be designed in
compliance with City standards by a registered professional engineer and submitted
to the City Engineer for approval. All of the improvements shall be completed by
Owner & acceptable to the City Engineer and shall be free and clear of any lien,
claim, charge or encumbrance, including any for work, labor or services rendered
in connection therewith or material or equipment supplied therefore on or before
the later of, 2 years from the date hereof or , 19
Upon completion and acceptance, Owner warrants and guarantees the improvements
against any defect in materials or workmanship for a period of two (2) years
" ' following said,completion and acceptance.. In the event of any defect in materials
or workmanship within said 2 year period said warranty and guarantee shall be for
a period of three (3) years following said completion and acceptance. Defects in f.
material or workmanship shall be determined by the City Engineer. Acceptance
of improvements by the City Engineer may be subject to such conditions as he may
impose at the time of acceptance. Owner, through his engineer, shall provide for
competent daily inspection during the construction of all improvements. As-built
drawings with service and valve ties on reproduceable mylar shall be delivered
to the City Engineer within 60 days of completion thereof together with a
written statement from a registered engineer that all improvements have been
completed, inspected and tested in accordance with City-approved plans and speci-
fications. Prior to final plat approval, or issuance of any building permit,
if no final plat is required, Owner shall:
•
Submit a bond or letter of credit which guarantees completion of
all improvements within the times provided, upon the conditions,
and in accordance with the terms of this subparagraph V. A.,
including but not limited to, a guarantee against defects in materials
or workmanship for a period of two (2) years following completion
and acceptance of the improvements by the City Engineer. The
amount of the bond or letter of credit shall be 125% of the estimated
construction cost of said improvements, subject to reduction thereof
to an amount equal to 25% of the cost of the improvements after
acceptance thereof by the City Engineer. The bond or letter of
credit shall be in such form and contain such other provisions and
terms as may be required by the City Engineer. The Owner's
registered engineer shall make and submit for approval to the City
Engineer a written estimate of the costs of the improvements.
B. In lieu of the obligation imposed by subparagraph V. A. above,
Owner may submit a 100% petition signed by all owners of the
• property, requesting the City to install the improvements. Upon
approval by the City Council, the City may cause said improvements
to be made and special assessments for all costs for said improve-
ments will be levied on the property, except any property which is f`
or shall be dedicated to the public, over a five year period. Prior
to the award of any contract by the City for the construction of
any improvements, Owner shall have entered into a contract for
rough grading of streets included in the improvements to a finished
subgrade elevation. Contractor's obligation with respect to the
( rough grading work shall be secured by a bond or letter of credit
which shall guarantee completion, and payment for all labor and
materials expended in connection with the rough grading. The
amount of the bond or letter of credit shall be 125% of the cost
of such rough grading and shall be in such form and contain such
further terms as may be required by the City Engineer. ff
325g
page 3 of 4, Exhibit C
C. Owner shall submit to the City Engineer a development plan showing
existing contours, proposed grading, finished elevations, streets,sewer,
water and storm sewer preliminary alignment and grades, minimum floor
elevations, and arrows showing direction of surface drainage, locations
of trails, etc.
D. All private improvements shall conform to the City's building
code requirements.
E. Owner shall promptly upon a bill being rendered by the City therefore,
pay to City fees for first two year street lighting(public streets)
engineering review, and street signs.
VI. A. Owner shall remove all soil, and debris from, and clean, all
streets within, the property at least every two months, (or
within one week from the date of any request by City), during
the period commencing May 1 and ending October 31, of each
year, until such time as such streets and improvements there-
in are accepted for ownership and maintenance by City.
B. Within 30 days of installation of utilities and street curb
in any portion of.the property (if said time occurs between
May 1 and October 31 of any year) Owner shall sod (secured
with a minimum of 2 stakes per roll of sod) that part of the
property lying between said curb and a line 3 feet measured
perpendicular with the curt orinlieu of said sod, place a
fiber blanket with seed approved by the City (secured with
stakes a minimum of 6 feet apart). Either sod or fiber
must be placed upon a minimum of 4 inches of topsoil. The
topsoil shall be level with the top of the curb at the turb
line'and rise 4" for each foot from the curb line.
Owner shall maintain the sod, fiber blanket, topsoil, and
grade until such time as the streets and improvements in
the property are accepted for ownership and maintenance by
City.
Owner shall also sod all drainage swales serving 5 or more
lots a minimum distance of 6 feet on either side of the .
center of the swale. -
C. The bond or letter of credit provided in paragraph V. A.
hereof shall also guarantee the performance of Owner's
• • obligations under this paragraph VI.
VII. Owner shall file this Agreement with the Register of Deeds or
Registrar of Titles and supply the City with a copy of this p
Agreement with information as to Document Number and date and
time of filing duly certified thereon within 60 days from the
date of this Agreement.
VIII. If Owner fails to proceed in accordance with this Agreement with-
in 24 months of the date hereof and provide proof of filing in
accordance with item VIL hereof, Owner for itself, it successors,
and assigns shall not oppose rezoning of said property to Rural.
32 59
Page 4 of 4 Exibit C
IX. Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforce-
( able against Owner, its successors, and assigns of the property
herein described.
X. Owner represents and warrants it owns fee title to the property
free and clear of mortgages, liens and other encumbrances, except:
XI. In the event there are or will be constructed on the property,
2 or more streets, and if permanent streets signs have not been
installed, Owner shall install temporary street signs in accor-
dance with recwnnendations of the City Building Department,
prior to the issuance-of any permit to build upon the property.
• e
•
•
}
3.240
- r
November 6, 1979
INATE OF MINNESOTA
WTY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The following accounts were audited and allowed as follows:
i !
5934 VOID OUT CHECK $ (175.5e ,+
6052 STATE TREASURER 3rd quarter Bldg Surcharge 6,529.34
6053 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL SAC charges-August •30,294.00
6054 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE Liquor 649.98
5965, TWIN CITY WINE CO. • Wine 450.81
6056 MIDWEST WINE CO. • Wine 669.64
6057 OLD PEORIA COMPANY, INC. Wine 1,899.63
6058 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO., INC. Liquor 869.70
6059 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO. Liquor 1,060.49
6060 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK Payroll 10/12/79 9,944.23
6061 PERA Payroll 10/12/79 7,825.69
6062 INTERNATIONAL UNION Dues 176.00
6063 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL SAC charges-September 26,086.50
6064 STATE OF GEORGIA Manual-Engineering Dept 15.00
6065 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO. Liquor 980.69
6066 MIDWEST WINE CO. Wine 593.68
6067 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO., INC. Liquor 775.58 •
'068 KIWI KAI IMPORTS Wine 324.75
%069 EAGLE DISTRIBUTING Liquor 317.69
6070 INTERCONTINENTAL PACKAGING CO. Wine 672.12
6071 TWIN CITY WINE CO.. Wine 193.41
6072 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE Liquor 645.40
6073 OLD PEORIA COMPANY, INC. Wine • 560.11
6074 VOID OUT CHECK
6075 RIVERBOAT RAMBLERS Concert-Historical Cultural Comm 350.00
6076 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE September Sales Tax 2,129.97
6077 PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN October Insurance 5,214.24
6078 WESTERN LIFE INSURANCE CO. October Insurance 363.55 ,
6079 BLUE CROSS INSURANCE October Insurance 222.40
6080 HMO SERVICES October Insurance 1,010.18
6081 GROUP HEALTH PLAN, INC. October Insurance 917.34
6082 HOPKINS POSTMASTER Postage . 18.65
6083 INSTY PRINTS Volleyball flyers-Rec Dept 6.25
6084 "HENNEPIN COUNTY FINANCE Notary Public 10.00
6085 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER State License-Public Safety 200.003. 3
6086 HENNEPIN COUNTY CHIEFS OF POLICE Seminar-Public Safety
6087 HOPKINS POSTMASTER Postage 2,000.00
6088 VOID OUT CHECK
6089 NOREN PRODUCTS Equipment-Public Safety 122.80
6090 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE Liquor 507.11
6091 TWIN CITY WINE CO. Wine 250.68
6092 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING Wine 23.10
"O93 BUTCH'S BAR SUPPLY Supplies-Liquor Store 36.00
{ 6094 MINNESOTA DISTILLERS, INC. Liquor 1,293.20
6095 EAGLE DISTRIBUTING Liquor 794.14
6096 OLD PEORIA COMPANY, INC. Wine 95.00
6097 MIDWEST WINE CO. Wine 329.33
6098 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO., INC. Liquor 418.03
• . 3z6/
•
• 11
November 6, 1979
Page two
6099 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO. Liquor 1,190.43
.00 HOPKINS POSTMASTER Postage P,^-�' '/,Gr,.`re... 397-ff
01 UNITEO WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS October deductions 62.
6102 FEOERAL RESERVE BANK Payroll 10/26/79 9,183.68
6103 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE October deductions 7,716.12
6104 PERA Payroll 10/26/79 7,310.60
6105 SUBURBAN NATIONAL BANK October deductions 206.25
6106 ASHLAND REFINERY Unleaded gasoline 6,453.62
-21.-6107 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Conference o'• ° J.". " 50.10_,
6108 HOPKINS POSTMASTER Postage /3,.°c,.,, 11''""' - ' 397.81)
6109 AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK & TRUST Service 25.00
T6110 AQUATROL CORPORATION Service cc' `" *` f"(-``^� 274.02
6111 ASSOCIATED OIL BURNER SERVICE Service 252.97
6112. ASTLEFORD EQUIPMENT CO., INC. • Supplies-Street Oept 478.21
6113 AWARDS, INC. Softball Trophies-Rec Oept 62.25
6114 BRW Service-T.H. N5 & W. 7Bth Street & Mitchell
Road, Lotus View Orive, Temp Signal on
TH 169, Dell Road, City Park Survey 28,884.80
6115 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC. Supplies-Street Oept 44.82
6116 JOHN BENDER Expenses- 318.06
6117 BITUMINOUS ROAOWAYS, INC. Multi-Use Court-Preserve Park 5,650.00
6118 BLOOMINGTON LOCKSMITH COMPANY Service-Water Oept 133.40
6119 BLOOMINGTON UMPIRES ASSOC. Touch football officials-Rec Dept 70.00
6120 RAE BLY September mileage 39.33
6121 BOBS PLUMBING Overpayment-Building Permit 142.00
6122 BRAUN ENGINEERING TESTING Service-Norseman Ind. Park, Crosstown 6,782.48
g Ind. Park, W. 69th Street, Lake Trails
1 Estates, Round Lake Estates, High Trails,
Ouck Lake Lift Station
-6123 BRENT OISPLAYS Signs-City Hall vtcR°',4--°•'"- 400.CO
6124 PAUL BROWN Touch football official-Rec Dept 279.00
6125 BRYAN AGGREGATES, INC. Rock-Park Dept 547.20
6126 BUSINESS FURNITURE INCORP Supplies 156.20
6127 CARDARELLE & ASSOC. INC. Park Survey 900.CJ
I 6128 CARGILL SALT OIVISION Oeicing Salt-Street Oept 5,293.40
6129 CASTLE CHEMICAL COMPANY, INC. Chemicals-Park Maintenance 102.00
6130 CHANHASSEN LAWN & SPORTS Supplies-Community Service 413.43
6131 CHAPIN PUBLISHING CO. Ads 68.EO
6132 CITY ENGINEERS ASSOC. OF MINN. Printing Spec-Engineering Oept. 5.00
6133 CLUTCH & U-JOINT BURNSVILLE, INC. Supplies 161.31
6134 COPY EQUIPMENT INC. Supplies-Engineering Oept. 26.16
6135 CROWN RUBBER STAMP CO. Oesk Signs 64.C3
6136 •GLORIA CULLEN .Refund-Guitar lesson 16.00
6137 OALCO Cleaning Supplies-Water Oept 175.04
6138 SANOY DALE Refund-Exercise 8.00
6139 OORHOLT PRINTING & STATIONERY Supplies d 3ii 1,24O.95
._6140 OUSTCOATING, INC. Oil Roads
00
6141 EOWARO J. OVORAK & DORIS OVORAK Right of Way 47,500.00
6142 COWARD & DORIS DVORAK & R. ANOERSON Right of Way - 500.00
6143 EDWIN R. & MARTHA DVORAK Right of Way 30,500.00
6144 EDWIN & t1ARTHA DVORAK & R. ANOERSON Right of Way 500.0:3
C1145 EOEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Dues-Liquor Store 100.00
6146 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT Custodial Service 692.35
6147 FEED-RITE CONTROLS, INC. Ferric Sulfate-Water Oept 864.30
6148 JOHN FRANE Expenses 118.00
6149 JACK FREDItICKSON Expenses-Rec Oept 55.00
6150 G.L. CONTRACTING, INC. Service & Repair-Water Oept 1,165.05
32G2
- .
•
•
ji
November 6, 1979 .
Page three •
b151 GLIDDEN PAINT �y ` Paint-Park Dept. 34.80 '
- 6152 GUNNAR ELECTRIC COMPANY INC. Parts & Repairs-Park Dept 156.88
-_6153 GARY HARRINGTON Expenses-Rec Dept Q'ax- a>"` 30.63
-.6154 JUDY HARRI NGTON Expenses-Rec Dept V.)--�" le`` 35.00
6155 HAYDEN-MURPHY EQUIPMENT CO. Cutter-Street Dept 33.55
6156 HENNEPIN COUNTY FINANCE DIRECTOR Welding Gas • )70.91
6157 HONEYWELL INC. Parts & Repairs-Water Dept 91.60
6158 HOPKINS DODGE SALES, INC. Parts & Repairs 38.07 ;
6159 HOPKINS PARTS COMPANY Supplies-Street Dept. 166.24 f
6160 MARK HURD AERIAL SURVEYS INC. Topographic Mapping-Engineering Dept 1,610.00
6161 INSTRUMENTATION SERVICES INC. • . Radar Repair-Public Safety 59.00
6162 MICHAEL JENSEN '- • Refund-Guitar lesson - 16.00
6163 GEORGIA JESSEN Service-Community Service 195.50
6164 JIMMY JINGLE Expenses-City Hall 25.00
6165 JEAN JOHNSON Mileage 46.57
6166 K C AUTO BODY Equipment Repair-Public Safety 287.56
6167 ANN KISPERT Expenses-Lake Trail Estates 200.00
6168 LANDCO EQUIPMENT, INC. Parts & Repairs 124.34
6169 LANG, PAULY & GREGERSON, LTD. Service 7,231.62
6170 LOGIS Service 1,237.88
617T LOWELL'S AUTOMOTIVE SPECIALISTS Paint-Park Dept 49.51
6172 LUND PAINT & DECORATING CENTER Paint-Park Dept 11.45
6173 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC. Supplies-Sewer Dept 12.25
w174 ROBERT N. MARTZ Expenses 105.25
175 ROBERT MASON CONSTRUCTION Overpayment-Building Permit 100.00
6176 MAYVIEW RADIO Equipment Reapir-Public Sfety 231.75
6177 MEDICAL OXYGEN & EQUIPMENT Oxygen-Public Safety 59.93
4178 MERIT PRINTING Dog Registrations 277.72
6179 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION Blacktop 1,385.33
6180 VOID OUT CHECK
6181 MINNESOTA GAS COMPANY Service 53.44
6182 MINNESOTA TORO, INC. Supplies-Park Dept 211.7E
6183 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP Street Light Installation 263.S2 !
6184 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP Service 24.S1
6185 MUNICIPAL & PRIVATE SERVICES, INC. Service-September 654.75
6186 RICHARD NADEAU Refund-Guitar lesson 16.02 i
6187 NATIONAL RECREATION & PARK ASSOC Subscription-Park Dept 50.0:
6188 THOMAS NESSA Expenses-Rec Dept .. 8.25
6189 NORTH AMERICAN CREDIT SYSTEM Service . 33.2:
6190 . •NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. Service 6,023.87
6191 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. Service 7.12
6192 NORTHWESTERN BELL Service •
10.47
6193 PALM BROTHERS Equipment-Liquor Store 1,724.00
6194 PARK AUTO UPHOLSTERY Equipment Repair 42.50
6195 PENNY'S #25 Supplies-City Hall 94.60
6196 PEPSI COLA/7 UP BOTTLING CO. Pop-City Hall 27.75
.-6197 PERBIX, HARVEY, SIMONS Service 206.00
6198 PETTY CASH Postage 9.85
5199 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING, INC. Printing Supplies-Public Safety 73.10
200 RAPID COPY, INC. Liquor ID Card 1.03
6201 GLENN RAY Instructor-Rec Dept 64.03
6202 DALE REDPATH Expenses-Open House 25.00
32L3
y .
i
•
•
November 6, 1979
,ge four - '
4,
,
6203 RIEKE-CARROLL-MULLER ASSOC. Service-Crosstown Ind. Park, Round 14,928.58
Lake Estates 2nd Addition, Cardinal
Creek Estates, Valley View Road,
. High Trails Sewer & Water, Shady Oak
Ind. Park, Eden View Addition, Eden
Prairie Lake Trail Estates, Round
Lake Utilities t
6204 PAUL ROGERS Plowing-Park Dept 175.00.
6205 MRS. ALEC RUTH Supplies-Community Service 19.60
6206 JAMES SALENTINE . Expenses-Rec Dept 5.50
6217." SATELLITE—INDUSTRIES,—INC: Portable Restrooms-Park Dept ' ' 449.50 ' 1
6208 SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS Supplies-Water Dept 8.90
6209 SHAKOPEE BAKERY Expenses-Public Safety 19.80
6210 SHAKOPEE FORD, INC. Van-Engineering Dept 5,939.67
—6211 SHEDD BROWN INC. Supplies-Liquor Store . 351.31
►6212 RUSSELL SMITH ASSOCIATES, INC. Service -91,"""'"" 300.00
6213 ST. PAUL STAMP WORKS, INC. Dog Tags 94.92
6214 SCHMIDT SOD COMPANY Sod-Street Dept 181.50
6215 STATE TREASURER 3rd Quarter 79-Bldg surcharge 248.11
6216 VERNON T. STEPPE Conference-Fire Dept • 60.00
6217 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET CO. Parts & Repairs 10.82
--6218 WILLIAM TERRIGUEZ Expenses-Rec Dept •
.219 TOWN'S EDGE FORD, INC. Equipment Repair-Street Dept 20.03
120 TRI-STATE TREE SERVICE, INC. Tree Hauling • 168.00
6221 ROGER ULSTAD November Expenses 100.00
6222 VAN WATERS PA ROGERS Chlorine Liquid 183.40
6223__ KEITH WALL Meeting expenses 5.50
6224 RIVER WARREN AGGREGATES INC. Rock-Street Dept 86.55
6225 SANDRA WERTS October expenses & Mileage 60.03
6226 WESCO Supplies-Park Dept 8.78
6227 STEPHEN WHITE Tuition-Fire Dept 20.00
6228 XEROX CORPORATION Service-Public Safety 180.CO
6229 ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY Chemical Supplies-Street Dept 22.09
6230 COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION Traffic Signal Maintenance 63.96
6231 CHRIS ENGER October Expenses 100.00
6232 ALLIS-CHALtMERS Supplies-Water Dent 1,425.00
6233 CARL JULLIE Expenses 5.00
6234. GEORGE & CAROLYN MILKOVICH Relocation fee 6,300.00
6235 'PRAIRIE VILLAGE MALL ASSOC. November Rent 1,855.13
TOTAL $333,159.57
I
Eden Prairie, Iinnesota
November 1, 1979
To: Members, Eden Prairie City Council
Attn: Wolfgang Fenzel, President
Re: Approval of Sutton 1st Addition, located at 7012 Baker Road.
I respectfully request review of prorosed plot submitted
to the City Planning Commission on October 22, 1979.
Their recommendation in conjunction with the City Engin-
ilkBering Department will be followed to make the small subdivision
fit in with adjoining properties.
The public decision being requested at this time is
final approval of preliminary plot of Sutton 1st Addition.
•
Michael N. Sutton
11314 Pioneer Trail
Eden Prairie, Minn.
30/G5
•
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: John Franc
DATE: October 17, 1979
RE: M.I.D.B.'s Douglas and Roy Olson/Eagle Drug - $1,200,000
Eagle Drug is a cooperative purchasing organization of about sixty retail
drug stores. The Olsons who are members of the Eagle organization propose
to construct a distribution center to serve Eagle members. This building
will replace their present facility which is too small. Eagle estimates
their operation will initially occupy 50% of the 60,000 square foot building
and employ 27 persons. The total project cost is $1,450,000. A public
hearing could be scheduled for December 4, 1979.
•
•
32GG
•
•
•
(• .
•
• CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA
Application for
Industrial Development Bond Project Financing
•
1. APPLICANTS: Douglas J. Olson and Roy H. Olson
a. Business Name - Eagle Drug Building Partnership
b. Business Address - 1216 West 79th,Weet
Bloomington, Minnesota 55420
c. Business Form (corporation, partnership, sole proprietor-
ship, etc.) - Partnership to be organized
d. State of RssaapsYatizzx organization - Minnesota
e. Authorized Representative - Douglas Olson •
5121 Vernon Avenue South
Edina, Minnesota
f. Phone - 612/929-0034
•
•
•
2. NAME(S) AND ADDRESSES OF MAJOR staxmosauxo PRINCIPALS:
•
a. Douglas J. Olson
5121 Vernon Avenue South
Edina, MN
b. Roy H. Olson
5121 Vernon Avenue South
Edina, MN •
c.
•
•
-1-
•
3a41
•
•
•
3. GIVE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF NATURE OF BUSINESS, PRINCIPAL
ir PRODUCTS, ETC:
Real estate investment in building to be 50% leased to and
occupied by Eagle Drugs, Inc., a drug wholesale firm. Remainder
of building will be leased to unrelated tenants on an interim
basis until Eagle Drugs, Inc. requires additional space.
Owners are shareholders of Eagle Drugs, Inc.
4. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
a. Location and intended'use:
70th Street and Shady Oak Road, both to be constructed, and
• legally described as Lot 3, Block 1, Shady Oak Industrial Park,
3rd Addn.
b. Present ownership of project site:
Astleford Group subject to Contract for Deed to Richard W.
Anderson, Inc.
c. Names and address of architect, engineer, and general
contractor:
Steenberg Construction Co. - General Contractor
1371 Marshall Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104
John Hanley -*Architect and Engineer
•
b. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST FOR:
Land . $ 21n,nnn
Building $ 1,100,000
Equipment $ -0-
Other(Financing fees, legal $ 140,000
fees, construction interest, •
closing costs; and contin-
gency)Total $ 1,450,000
IL
•
-2-
3,2a
6. BOND ISSUE -
II
a. Amount of proposed bond issue - $1,200,000
b. Proposed date of sale of bond.- December, 1979 •
c. Length of bond issue and proposed maturities - 30 years
• 4
d. Proposed original purchaser of bonds - Institutional lender(s)
to be determined.
e. Name and address of suggested trustee - N/A
f. Copy of any agreement between Applicant and original
purchaser - None
g. Describe any interim financing sought or available -
Construction financing to be provided through bank
h. Describe nature and amount of any permanent financing
in addition to bond financing - None
7.. BUSINESS PROFILE OF APPLICANT.
a. Are you located in the City of Eden Prairie? No
b. Number of employees in Eden Prairie? None
IL i. Before this project: None
-3-
3aG9
•
•
•
•
t •
•
t,
•
ii. After this project? 1980 - 27
1981 - 35
1982 - 40
a. Approximate annual sales - 1979 - 610,000,000
1980 - 612,000,000
•
d. Length of time in business 45 years •
in Eden Prairie • None
•
•
e. Do you have plants in other locations? If so, where?
Present office/warehouse is 1216 West 79th Street, Bloomington, MN 55420 •
• f. Are you engaged in international trade? No
8. OTHER INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT(S):
•
a. List the name(s) and location(e) of other industrial
development project(s) in which the Applicant is the
owner or a "substantial user" of the facilities or a
"releated person" within the meaning of Section 103(b)(6)
of the Internal Revenue Code.
• None •
•
•
-4-
•3�7U •
•
b. List all cities in which the Applicant has requested
irindustrial revenue development financing.
None •
•
•
•
•
e. Detail the status of any request the Applicant has before
any other city for industrial development revenue financing.
•
• None •
•
•
•
•
•
41• d. List any city in which the Applicant has been refused
industrial development revenue financing.
•
• None
•
•
e. List any city (and the project name) where the Applicant
has acquired preliminary approval to proceed but in which
final• approval authorizing the financing has been denied.
•
• - None
•
•
-5-
32'1E
•
•
f. If Applicant has been denied industrial development
revenue financing in any other city as identified
in (d) or (e), specify the reason(s) for the denial
and the name(s) of appropriate city officials who
have knowledge of the transaction.
Hone
•
•
9. NAMES AND ADDRESS OF:
a. Underwriter (If public offering) NA ••
•
Agent
b. Private Placement PmNisliaseu (If private placement)
Dougherty, Dawkins, Strand and Ekstrom, Inc.
414 IDS Center •
Minneapolis, MN 55402
•
•
i. If lender will not commit until City has
passed its preliminary resolution approving
the project, submit a letter from proposed
lender that it has an interest in the
offering subject to appropriate City
approval and approval of the Commissioner
of Securities.
•
•
•
•
•
_6-
a2-12
•
•
• b. Bond Counsel - Mackall, Crounse & Moore
10 1000 1st National Bank Bldg.
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Partnership a. Q0'414447101= Counsel - To be determined.
d. Accountant - Casey & Casey
6600 France Avenue South
Edina, MN 55435
•
•
10. WHAT IS YOUR TARGET DATE FOR:
a. Construction start - December, 1979
b. Construction completion - July, 1980
•
•
S •
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The undersigned Applicant.understands that the approval or
disapproval by the City of Eden Prairie for Industrial
Development bond financing does not expressly or impliedly
constitute any approval, variance, or waiver of any provision
or requirement relating to any zoning, building, or other rule .
or ordinance of the City of Eden Prairie, or any other law
applicable to the property included in this project.
'�
• !JO4
$y (
• Date
•
-7-
4213
•
•
r .
•
4 . •
• 11. ZONING - TO BE COMPLETED BY THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT_______,,
I
•
a:- Property is zoned - • • _ _
b. Present zoning (is) (is not) correct for the intended
use.
•
. .
•c. Zoning application received on
• • for which is correct for the
. intended use. .
•
. d: Variances required - • -. • • • .
IL
• City Planner •
•
•
• •
•
•
• • •
•
-8-
• • • 32111
•
1
To: Mayor and Council
From: John Frane
Date: October 31, 1979
RE: MIDB's for Cooperative Power $8,000,000
The Council held a public hearing on August 21, 1979 and approved C.P.A.'s _
request for preliminary approval of I.R. Bonds. Unfortunately the ndtice
of hearing indicated the hearing would be on August 4, 1979. Why the date
of August 4th was shown I don't believe can be assessed as any one persons
fault, but the preliminary approval granted on August 21 is not in force
because notice of hearing was incorrect.
A public hearing on the C.P.A. request could be rescheduled for December
4, 1979.
t
3Z 15-
s
d
dev O torment •
corporate on
October 16, 1979
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota
Res Overlook Place
ILLadies and Gentlemen:
Our office has reviewed the recommendations of the city council as
pertaining to multi-family units on the Overlook Place site. Although
we believe the proposed twin home plan was ideally suited to the
site other alternates will better meet the goal'the city council
outlined.
Our revised plan titled Overlook Place and dated 10-15-79 represents
a single family lotting concept which blends with the adjacent
single family home heighborhoods. Hustad Development is requesting •
on behalf of Wallace and Ruth Hustad that the property be rezoned •
to R1-13.5 with consideration given to the following variances from
the standards of Ordinance 135.
a. That the side yard set backs allow a minimum of 5 feet
garage side and 10 feet living area.
b. That the square footage size of Lots 1-13, Block 2, Lots
1-7, Block 1 are under 13,500 sq. ft.
c. That Lots 1-7, Block 1 and Lots 1-3, 5-10, 12, 16, 19-21,
Block 2 are less than 90' mean width.
d. That the 1 car garage requirement be waived for Lots 1-7,
( Block 1, and 1-10 Block"2. (All other lots require garage)
12750 PIONEER TRAIL,EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA 55343(612)941-4383
•
The proposed plan provides a variety of single family housing opportunities
in the low to medium price brackets. The lots along new Overlook Place
will provide a similar style and cost home to those of Yorkshire Point.
The staff has suggested a method to better locate the future garages by
putting footings in with the home construction, then the garage can be
easily added later.
..The lots along Creek Knoll Road..will be.for.larger homes in..a price__
range similar to those of the Creekwood neighborhood. Lots 11, 12, 13 �..
of Block 2 along existing County Road 1 will be built at a later date
after the Co. Rd. 1 realignment is completed.
At this time we have talked to different builders regarding their purchase
of lots for 1979 and 1980 construction, however at this time no agreement
has been reached.
The existing home on the site which is currently used as our office will
be converted to a single family residence and sold.
The site plan and preliminary grading and drainage plans illustrate the
Cuse of existing sewer, water and storm sewer systems which serve the site. •
As was proposed in the previous submission a mini park area is proposed
for a small child play area with play equipment installed. A pathway
will connect Yorkshire to the mini park. The 29 lots will pay the
city's cash park fee and we will improve the tot lot area.
The following table summarizes the project statistics:
Project Acres Units Minimum lot size Density _ .
Overlook Place 9.9 29 7,000 sq. ft. 2.93 unitsac.
Yorkshire 6.5± 28 5,000 sq. ft. 4.3 units ac.
Park 7.2
Over all area 23.6 ac. 57 units 2.42 units/ac.
Thank you for your consideration of our rezoning PUD development plan
and preliminary plat request.
Sincerely,
i
•
•
/� Wallace. H. Hustad
WHH/er
32?1
•
Unapproved
Planning Commission Minutes -5- October 22, 1979
•
into the possibility of a pathway. Engineering reviewing the storm
sewer problems out lot and checking the drainage, particulary on
lots 4 and 5. Motion carried unanimously.
Torjesen was E. OVERLOOK PLACE. by Hustad Dev. Corp., and Zachnan Homes Inc.
excused at Request to rezone 10 acres from Rural to R1-13.5 and preliminary
9:45 plat single 29 family lots. Located north of Pioneer Trail and
east of Yorkshire Place. A public hearing.
Planner explained that this item had previously been reviewed by
the Planning Commission as 14 duplex buildings or 28 total units
and referred to the Council for approval. The City Council sub-
ABSENT: Bearman, sequently revieWed the request and felt that the duplex land use
Martinson was inappropriate as a transition between two single family projects.
They, therefore. have referred this item back to the Planning Corn-
mission. Hustad has since that time revised its plat to single
family units.
Dick Putnam gave a presentation explaining the size of the lots.
the number of tots and the grading plans for this project. He
also explained that after talking to the Planner there was some
concern over the amount of trees to be cut for the development
of this project. Therefore Putnam reviewed the site plan and
found that the tree tine had been drawn incorrectly and that they
would not be cutting as many trees as anticipated.
111 The Planner reported that the staff recommends that the area shown as
park be graded with berms and a totlot installed according to
Community Service Department recommendations, the cash park fee
be paid at time of building permit issuance on all 29 tots, there
be resolution to the satisfaction of the City Engineering Dept.
of the drainage and sanitary sewer utility questions, side yard set-
back variances of 5' garage side and a 10' living side be limited
to lots 1 - 7 block 1 and tots 1 - 10 Block 2. the request for no
garages at initial construction be limited to lots t - 7 Block 1
and lots 1 - 10 Block 2 and that foundations and block up to a
sill plate for a garage be installed as an attached portion of the
house at the time of initial construction. The project must
be reviewed and approved by the Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed
•
District prior to grading.
Bentley asked whether there had been any plans for a pathway
which would allow access to the totlot for the children at the
botto of the hill.
Levitt inquired why Clots were allowed on one cut-de-sac. when it
the past, projects were not allowed to have more than 3 lots fronting
on a single cul-de-sac. He noted that if the housed did not have •
garages there would be no alternative other then to park in the
cut-de-sac.
Dick Putnam, Hustad Development Coro. replied that only 4 of the
6 lots realty have access to the cul-de-sac. The balance of the
of the lots would access onto straight roads.
32 U
•
•
Unapproved
Planning Commission Minutes -6- October 22, 1979
Bentley inquired why there was a recommendation to allow lots 1 - 10
block 2 to not have garages.
Planner replied that the staff felt that the lots on the top of the
hill could be a neighborhood similar in character to Yorkshire Point.
• Bentley stated that he felt that there would be less transitions with lots
1-10, Block 2 all without garages: He felt this reinforced the image of
small home on small lots. He felt that a better transition would occur if
only the western lots adjoining Yorkshire Point were given a garage option.
The remainder of the lots in the develpment would be required to have garages
according to ordinance •
felt that
Stewart Loper, 9506 Woodridge Circle, Eden Prairie. MN,
there was a definate need for a totlot for this area. He also stated
that he would prefer to see the houses custom built with garages.
Dick Putnam, Hustad Corp, replied that the lots had not yet been sold
therefore. he had noway in knowing whether or not the homes would be
custom built.
John Kelly, 5976 Yorkshire Lane, Eden Prairie, MN felt there should
not only be a totlot but also a park for the older children. He also
agreed with Mr. Loper that the houses should have garages or atleast
garage options.
solin thoughtcthereashouds Creekwood Drive,
definately besomeEden
typePrairie,
MN,
pathwaythatstated
that
would
she9
lead to the park or totlot.
Planner replied that currently the Community Services Staff is invest-
igating the possibility of a mini park site to serve the Creekwood
area east of Creekwood on The Preserve property.
John Kelly, 5976 Yorkshire Lane, expressed his concern of the size of
the lots.
Greg McCormick 9449 Woodridge Drive, Eden Prairie, MN also stated his
concern of the size of the lots.
Pat Walquist,9500 Woodridge Drive, Eden Prairie, MN expressed that
she also was concerned about the totlot. _
MOTION: Virgina Gartner moved, Bentley seconded to close the public
hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Gartner moved, Bentley seconded to recommend to the City
Council the rezoning from RM 6.5 and Rural to R1-13.5 for Overlook
Place per the staff report dated 10-17-79.
5238-1
•
unapproved
Planning Comnision Minutes -7- October 22, 1979
Levit stated that he felt all the homes should have garages.
Bentley then suggested that the motion be amended to read Commission
recommend to the City Council the rezoning from RM 6.5 and Rural to
R1-13.5 for Overlook Place per the staff report dated 10-17-79 with
the change that only lots 1 - 7 Block 1 be allowed the garage as an
option. The balance of the lots would be required to have a garage
according to city ordinances. Mover accepted amendment.
VOTE: Carried 3-1 •
G. VALLEY KNOLLS 2nd, By Marvin Anderson. Request to preliminary plat
single family lots on 4.5 acres zoned R1-13.5. Located west to Duck
Lake Trail. A publ'fc hearing.
Mr. Fred Haas, Anderson Construction, gave a presentation•explaining
that in 1972 Valley Knolls was rezoned from Rural to R1-13.5 and
preliminary platted into 49 lots. -In 1973 a portion of that addition
(39 lots) was preliminary and final platted. The present request for
preliminary plat-approval will complete the platting, and will include
giving Mrs. Miska approximately 15 feet on the south side and 20 feet
on the north side of her property, in order to allow her platting of
three of the thirteen lots being requested.
The Planner reported that the staff feels that the plat should be revised
so that each lot meets the requirement of 13,500 square feet, that the
developer work with the Engineering Department regarding number and
location of service hook-ups Payment of cash park fee at time of
41 building permit application would be required, and the developer submit
grading and development plans to the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District
for review and approval.
Levitt inquired what the density of the 13 acres would be.
Planner replied that there would be 3 units per acre.
Levitt inquired why the whole development was not platted at the
same time.
Planner replied that it was not platted because the utilities had not
been installed along Duck Lake Road.
Glen Olson,1700 67th St W., Eden Prairie, Mn, stated that he is con-
cerned about the cutting down of the oak trees on lot 7,and the drainage
• of the area. He stated that he felt that there should be a definite
grading plan and that the grading should be supervised to insure that
it is done correctly. He also stated that he is concerned about the
amount of traffic that will be generated after Duck Lake Road is paved.
George Kissinger, 6601 Barberry Lane, Eden Prairie, MN voiced his
• concern of the oak trees on lot 7.
Bentley inquired whether Mrs. Miska had signed any type of an!an agree-
( ment to preliminary plat her property or that she would accept any
special assessments or that she wishes to sell her land to Marvin
Anderson.
Planner replied Mrs. tiiska had not signed an application for preliminary
plat and that the petition for improvement of Duck Lake Road had come
33?�P�
•
STAFF REPORT (0
TO: Planning Commission •'
FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: October 17, 1979
PROPERTY OWNER: Ruth and Wallace Hustad
APPLICANT: Hustad Development Corporation
REQUEST: Preliminary Platting for 29 single family Homes
on 9.9 acres of property and rezoning from Rural
and RM-6.5 to R1-13.5
PREVIOUS
REQUEST: Platting and rezoning for 28 units of Duplex on
6.2 acres of property.
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission had previously reviewed their request for 14 duplex
buildings or 28 total units on 6.2 acres of property and recommended
approval of the platting and rezoning to the City Council. The City Council
subsequently reviewed the request and felt that the duplex land use was
inappropriate as a transition between two single family projects. They,
therefore, have referred this item back to the Planning Commission and
I/ instructed the staff and the proponent to work with a project that is half
way in between(in lot size)the Yorkshire Point small lot size on the west
and the Creekwood 13.5 lot size on the east.
Thedeveloper's current request includes 3.7 additional acres of land along Creek
Knoll Road that was previously zoned RM-6.5 as a part of the Councils
request and as a response to the Planning Commision's request that this
area be used totallyas single family. The current request is for 29 single
family lots with variances requested to allow a 5' side yard setback on
the garage side of the home and a 10' side yard setback on the living side
of the home. As part of the request they are also proposing lot sizes
under the 13.5 requirement of ordinance 135 and frontage variances as out-
lined in their letter of October 16, 1979. The request also is made for
the ability to not provide garages at time of initial contrustion on lots
• 1 through 7 in Block 1 and lots 1 through 10 in Block 2.
LAND USES
The current plan illustrating a lot size transitioning from the smaller
Yorkshire Point lot size on the western side of the property up to 13,500 sq. ft.
lot sizes on the eastern side of the property is an appropriate transition
and the land use proposed as single family detached is consistent with the
Comprehensive Guide Plan. However, the current plan will require that more
total land area be occupied by buildings then in the previous request be-
cause the single family homes placed individually on lots rather then com-
( bined as in the duplex units will occupy more square footage on the ground
level and leave less total side yard setback between structures.
•
3219
•
% - f
Staff Report-Overlook Place -2- Oct. 17, 1979
SITE PLAN
The current plan also requires that a short cul-de-sac which serves six
lots be pushed out into the wooded slope and three of the homes on the
end of this short cul-de-sac would require a fill slope of approximately
24' at a 2 to 1 slope. This will mean the elimination of approximately
1/3 of the existing woods on the site. By the time the entire site grading
is done for the upper and lower lots and the lots out toward County Road 1
less then 1/2 of the existing trees will be remaining. Larger and fewer
lots in these wooded locations would reduce the amount of vegetation removal
that is necessary.
UTILITIES AND STORM SEWER
Approximately in the location of lot 13 of Block 2 there is a culvert that
comes under County Road 1 which takes drainagefrom an area south of County
Road 1 and brings it north of County Road 1. This drainage is proposed to
flow down a swale contructed along the eastern side of 13 and subsequently
between lots 14 and 15. In reviewing this on a tentative basis with the
Engineering Department,there seem to be the possibility for a real erosion
problem if this storm sewer drainageis not carried in a pipe. Therefore,
the proponent should be required to meet any requirements regarding storm
sewer drainage of the Engineering Department.
41' With regards to sanitary sewer utilities there is an 8" existing sanitary
sewer shown on the very eastern portion of the plat paralleling Creek Knoll
Road which has its southern terminus on lot 15 of Block 2. The City Engi-
neering Department had previously required that this sanitary sewer be
installed so that southern terminus was at the very southern
property line of the plat on lot 14. This has not been accomplished and
should be done as a part of construction of this plat.
As the Planning Commission will recall in the original Overlook Place,there
was a concern as to lots fronting on to existing County Road 1 until such
time as that became a city road. Planning Staff would still recommend that
lots 11, 12 and 13 be place in an out lot and not allowed access to County
Road 1 until such time as County Road 1 is realigned. Then access would
come from old County Road 1 as it was turned over to City as a city street.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Planning Staff would recommend that the Planning Commission recommend
to the City Council approval of the preliminary plat and rezoning from Rural
and RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 subject to the following items:
1. The plat should be revised so that lots on the end of the short
cul-de-sac do not require a 2 to 1 slope and so that the encroach-
ment into the existing vegetation be significantly reduced.
2. That the area shown as park be graded with berms and a totlot
installed according to Community Service Department recommenda-
tions.
•
321Q
•
•
Staff Report-Overlook Place -3- Oct. 17, 1979
3. The cash park fee shoud be paid at time of building permit
issuance on all 29 lots.
4. There should be a resolution to the satisfaction of the
City Engineering Department of the drainage and sanitary
sewer utility questions brought up on this report.
5. Side yard setback variances of a 5' garage side and a
10' living side should be limited to lots 1 through 7
in Block 1 and lots 1 through 10 in Block 2. Lot 1, Block 1
and lot 10 Block 2 are corner lots which require a 30' front- .
yard setback on 2 sides.
6. The request for no garages at initial construction should be
limited to lots 1 through 7 Block 1 and lots 1 through 10
Block 2 and that foundations and block up to a sill plate
stage must be installed as an attached portion of the house
at the time of initial construction.
7. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Riley-Purgatory
Creek Watershed District.
8. Slopes should be to 3:1. ••
•
CE:jo • •
•
•
32 6
•
; .
•
•
MEMORANDUM
T0: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
DATE: September 14, 1979
SUBJECT: Community Service Staff Recommendations for Overlook Place
During preliminary discussions with the developer, staff discussed waiving
the requirements of a pathway from Yorkshire Point down to the totlot to be
located in Outlet A, in return for developing a totlot in Overlook Place.
After an onsite inspection and considering the difference in grade, the City
staff recommends that there be a totlot developed in Overlook Place as well
as in the park area near Purgatory Creek. The young children in Yorkshire
Point and Overlook Place would be better served with a tot lot in Overlook
Place because of its location within the neighborhood and its ease of access.
Due to the small lot size in Yorkshire Point and Overlook Place, a totlot
should be located within that neighborhood.
As Outlet A is developed into a park, the people living in Yorkshire Point
and Overlook Place will certainly demand a pedestrian trail for access to
the park. Therefore, the trail should be required and contructed in 1979.
• This small park will have a skating area, a small open spice for active play,
ILand should also have a totlot area.
.-r
RECOhA9ENDATIONS
•
r► The Community Services staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat for
Overlook Place and rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5 subject to compliance with
the following items:
•
1. This plat should he subject to the recommendations of the Planning
Staff Report dated August 9, 1979 with the exception of number 7.
2. The developer should dedicate the lot on the west side of the cul-de-
sac in lieu of the cash park fee requirement.
3. A six foot bituminous trail should be constructed from the cul-de-sac
through the mini park connecting to the trail from Yorkshire Point
leading down to Purgatory Creek.
4. The developer should grade and seed the dedicated lot and construct a
totlot structure according to Community Service Department specifications
as part of the dedication and mini park requirements (the City could
require up to .62 acres for park.dedication, plus a half acre mini
park developed as per City specifications.)
• 3212 •
MEMORANDUM
it TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
DATE: September 14, 1979
SUBJECT: Development Proposal Check List
•
PROJECT: Overlook Place
PROPONENT: Zachman Homes F,'}lustad Development
REQUEST: Rezoning from RM 6.5 and preliminary platting for 14 duplex buildings
on 28 individual lots waiving sideyard setbacks.
LOCATION: East of 169, north of Co. Road 1, west of Creek Knoll Road
BACKGROUND: See Planning Staff Report
CHECKLIST:
1. Adjacent to parks? (Neighborhood, Community, Regional)Neighborhood Park (Outlet A)
Affect on park: This development will create a greater use demand for park services
in this area.
•
2. Adjacent to public waters?"
Affect on waters: •
N/A
3. Adjacent to trails?
Proposed 8' asphalt bike trail on•County Road 1
Type of trails: (bike, multi-use, transportation, etc.) bike
Construction: (asphalt, concrete, wood chips, aglime) asphalt
Width: 8' Party Responsible for construction? City
Landownership: (dedicated, density tradeoff, etc.) R.O.W.
Type of Development? (residential, commercial, industrial) residential
Where will CASH PARK FEE go? (what neighborhood)See recommendations
Need for a mini-park?Yes, see recommendations
•
303
•
• -2- 1
S. REFERENCE CHECK: •
a. Major Center Area Study: N/A
b. Neighborhood Facilities Study: This area is on the border of the service area
for Homeward Hills Park and Lake Eden South and will be served by the park
to be developed in Qutlot A.
c. Purgatory Creek Study: . u/e - •
N/A
d. Shoreland Management Ordinance:
•
e. Floodplain Ordinance: . N/A
f. Guide Plan: See Planning Staff Report
( 4 g. Other:
Developer
f
6. Existing or pending assessments or taxes on proposed park property:
will assume assessments on.dedicated park property.
• 7. CASH PARK FEE? see recommendations •
8. Adjacent proposal:
ee1WOoa residents are opposedoto tion hisvoiced
deve opment. Thr ey
against proposal:
would rather see this area developed as a park.
9. Number of units in residential development?
14 duplexes •
Number of acres in the project?
6.2 •
Special recreation space requirements: See recommendations _
10. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: see attached report
C
•
•
3311
•
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION %•;�;
320 Washington Av. South UHopkins Minnesota 55343
HENNEPIN
_it 935-3381
October 25, 1979
•
•
Mr Chris Enger
Planning Director
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie MN 55344
Dear Mr Enger
RE Proposed Plat - "Overlook Place"
CSAH 1 NW Quadrant of Creek Knoll Road
Section 26/27, Township 116, Range 22
Hennepin County Plat No 782
Review and Recommendations
Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County
review of proposed plats abutting County roads. We reviewed the above
plat and found it acceptable with consideration of these conditions:
- Since Mn/DOT's TH 169/212 and CSAH 1 intersection project will realign
CSAH 1, Hennepin County requires no additional right-of-way on this
portion of CSAH 1.
- Because Mn/DOT's project places the connection of existing CSAH 1 to
realigned CSAH 1 opposite Lots 12, 13, 14, we recommend not developing
these lots until after completion of the realignment project. All new
access to a County road or revision of existing access requires an
approved Hennepin County entrance permit. See our Traffic Division for
entrance permit forms.
- The developer should provide a grading and drainage plan to Hennepin
County for review.
- Since this plat is within Mn/DOT's TH 169/212 and CSAH 1 intersection
revision project, it must receive Mn/DOT approval.
C
HENNEPIN COUNTY
on equal opportunity employer
3215
Overlook Place
Page 2
- All proposed construction within County right-of-way requires an approved
utility permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not
limited to, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and land-
scaping. See our Maintenance Division for utility permit forms.
- The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within.
County right-of-way.
i
Please direct any response or questions to Les Weigeit.
Sin ely
7 '/ i
v
r mes M Wold, PE
c�,. Chief, Planning and Programming
JMW/LDW:bg
cc McCombs-Knutson Assoc. Inc.
Jim Ault •
•
n
a
Department of Transportation
District Five •5801 Duluth Street •
of sue' Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422
August 9, 1979 t612)5453761
•
Mr. Carl Jullie •
• City Engineer of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
RE: S.P. 2744-30 (T.H. 169)
At C.S.A.H. 1 in Eden Prairie
Dear Mr. Jullie:
I have recently received a copy of the preliminary plat layout
for the area on the north side of C.S.A.H. 1 and west of Creek
Knoll Road. Attached is a copy of a portion of one of the
sheets on which we have sketched our proposed construction of
new C.S.A.H. 1 in the area of the plat.
•
We will be constructing a ditch in front of the easternmost lot
of the plat and I have attached copies of preliminary cross
sections showing the ditch. Some modifications will be necessary
by the consultant in order to make the plat fit the proposed
construction of C.S.A.H. 1.
The preliminary plat is currently undergoing the review process
in the district but I feel that you should have the attached
information so that you are aware of the problem. Some discussion
will be necessary with the consultant to resolve the difficulty.
Sincerely,
efi
C. C. Ellis, P.E.
District Final Design Engineer
•
Attachments •
GCE:mt
ct: Z4-�
An Equal Opportunity Employer
-O-® 32Y�
•
. .
—
• . •.• • !.. • 1 RA
• ... .. •4.. •
..
' '• •'
'. .
• .
•tO
' ,. ,
• . : .. 1 - • id .g
••,.. • . ' . - • .
. . - •
•
• " •,. • . . .
.•••• •
••
.. 0
• •. . tl-.1., . di ,..,
V
• . .!: .. . , • . . . .
• . .. •': A'.: •••• 1
. . •,, . ,
.. • . •
' ';• q• •1: . . • •
. . • ••• ... . . t ›* Ai
_______:_________________--- ev.?.. . :01 . '. *.:' . : . \,,,LLI.,.... • , 4 tg '
. atiV 2 i t• "-- 2
, • ...1 . .
. - •
• 1 %
... • * 1 "4,,. 1 %
• 14 •f==zt,,
.... . • ‘ • k I ti
• :. . :•
• z
-----D
to:
..2,
__ ----
t•-•:
a-
-C3;
. ________ _840 . • ,......Re'''. ..-' U)t
---.--- • .;•I' _:.... . • -4 tV-411' :i':!I. 1 I - :' . i.,
Mi---FOW.-:
—----------
r•--,--r^•-•••••-c""" . ....
--• -
------777—--' 0 7 -- ' . 01--- -d.:.:L-..11'-r:Z;4.1,11
. ,
my.' 00- . • . fir.... t 4 \
. OW '• _411
.;____,----- \_... co•-c
I .----- — .-- '- - - 1 II 0,/1 . I..• 1,,
raMO ''e•!-- ,..,„
.....-- Illir.;.i-i' ' '1•• Lu
... „.. ..cat I 7:-.1..,i.f.iii •
riii 070 lig
klehMliki II m iiiir 10 ;•-• If
1
All•••
i----- •-tat-...
......-----
,t.Itt
1:.i5.;•1
....
...r fi.
zvri/S
4 ... . . ..
. ,,tt ---...... :t7. .•
4.•=4. — 1!3
gitl
111. 5
,4•/......,„. ,), / 4:4 _.- '. :'•!:!.".v. i 17.
N,:. .4 •1. 4*..
1 2 ii •.
' •'..-.:).1":, . 1,....;..„ .t........_ ...... ___IF.........,....,.„,„:1.....::2„.:-.17: : 'i.\r•f."1.'1.,
i ! • 4k*\ : ,,,1`41;12'7;;.•:*::"•:?7:.. l.;...,;*-.• • .;,*-':::::.'. 1-•" :`....i:A.'`•.2-71. . Vii....ti;
a st.
\ • * • ••••• ...:,•Ve . • •,!...•••• *7:P:. ..,-?':'...i.-
1 • .,......4.•,*". ". .,. •":— , •.• . ,**• 1 t
i I . ....-- % ) - 1 ' 1i
i \il
/_;. _PI\
. ) ..
fr---ei
IS I
•
‘,1,, \ ,., 001. *,......... 5. '......-
\ il
•Aillity,$:
am - .'• /ram. Q'64 •• \
`. ;14 T •s; lid . , - •
is
-%:, `*4 a p9fFfjrtiN,
.„..-„,:::‘,. _______..
..
,,
. ...4 NI-ge"Mir=___2"---_____
=,..: Vim.>:
'''''''7:.>•4:4.":,-.3 Irma talc, .,.,, ._..,.. .„ , ,
c ,....:,_,....,r4
1
,; . Ft_ .....ilm,----- _. ... 1.,
ilil iihk-'11:1‘‘Iiiii 111 .1.
\\\:'
,,,
s:.-74.1-111- ....•.'-‘;.1-1)11T,' 1.1=L9—.1-I.-im".. Milk IIIIIIIIIIII Mat lint III ' .
VQ,-_,,,,1-3.-'.iii , -.-,'',. ..- ..k,, .
:a--.-.--"-,k-'"-.,-_- -:-•-.-.02.7,-.....•" ate+ t—.-.n<...r. c. ,a•.--7":.-- i,..4, it'.!'.'.: •. /I +-:e:.""ltA".•).•t■-1.• (.
`. ..,.ram'.:. 1.+_•".•••«_ ? A ',1,1 37Y'4.:.:6•'; .�ti.s.4. 1Z '`' "'t4; --E.--v •`-
1-:--,-,-'-:
rA
.L .r st' •0'• e
i t
ssl �� t
,.;
1 j '
+
CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR
DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTER )� 'g i
SIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE
1?'it>•fiii)! CONSI&I1i NGI• RS it to %HattTut a....
•
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.79-196
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT
OF OVERLOOK PLACE •
BE IT RESOLVED by the eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Overlook Place
dated Oct. 8, 1979. , a copy of which is attached hereto and amended
as follows:
•
is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie
Zoning and Platting ordinances and amendments thereto and is herein
approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the day of
19 .
Lolfgang H. Fenzel, Mayor
John D. 1rane. City Clerk
SEAL
•
•
• 3290
•
•
STAFF REPORT
• TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Chris Enger, Planning Director
DATE: September 5,3479
PROJECT: CREEKVIEW ESTATES
APPLICANT: Heinen & Burnett
LOCATION: South of Co.Rd. 1, East of Purgatory Creek &West of
Bennett Place
' REQUEST: 1. Rezoning from Rural & R1-22 to R1-13.5
2. Preliminary platting of 25.5 acres into
29 lots.
BACKGROUND
The 1979 Guide Plan Update illustrates this parcel as single family
residential with the western portion of the parcel illustrated as
floodplain/park.
The Purgatory Creek Study of 1974 suggests a Conservancy Zone
from the creek as illustrated by the dotted line on the western
side of the plat shown in figure 1. This Conservancy Zone is to
be the limit of build /no-build.
This area is adjacent to Purgatory Creek and its floodplain, therefore
the suggestions included in the Shoreland Management Ordinance for
lot sizes abutting General Development waters should be adhered to .
This requires a minimum lot size of 13,500 ,with a minimum width
at building fine of 90 feet, minimum width at ordinary high water
mark of 90 feet, and a minimum setback from the ordinary high water
mark of 100 feet. The development will meet these requirements
In all cases.
•
No environmental assessment worksheet is required on the project as '
It does not fall within the 50 units or 40 acres of developable
land within a shoreland criteria.
There is floodplain within the parcel and it is proposed to be
dedicated to the public as are the wetland areas occurring within
the creek valley.
•
•
329t •
.�1�-+`f 6 .• • i - 4• .''! fir. ... • ,... :.: ... ..,. _, ..______ ko.44......,..- , ..„...:-7:e•-*•-.1, •%..::-.... Ns ::
/,,,,,...,
. i . , 1 •t•- • ., • .- •• • -----) r•-,-.7•1 .... .----...A. • .-. .1•‘...%••.• -.\-. ___..,:‘ -
.'v.:�`.-•.:+ uvp.: }..._ ,�• ( ;` • mil`..
\:..•.1.....••••...:•;.:'---:::•,t2 4 -).-A,... •;;Y',.% r . . ; LI ti,.. , I_ ....., ., :‘•. .1 ,•1..a7.::...: _
.4., -__,L.....: t.::::;........7.' ••• •":''''. j . ‘c. 1:-;<., ' •••. ..-• .I s, V,t.I•„W i - .1.: 1...!•',.1 t•:. 1:t
tvi.
si
..• - .'•• - ''`Z:•:- '\•''• `... t`••\•..--,fs'4, .[I ,. ,. -_ ..; ..-(:•-•--", --." *4 :. .....-:;/../..-) .:iii: ir;41. ,
j� {
, i
"--.•- l. •may.• .,
- .a.-;'• -, , .•••••r R\`t -..: rack I. \gyp - w-- ;•,... •• '1 +.i�'
•111 • . i .
. unit
. I ... . .., . lIznt.' ii
iitrsh-:
• . 2,294FIG.1' . i.. zt r
Stafff Report-Creekview Estates -2- Sept. 5, 1979
I
The topography of the kite rises from a low point of approximately
780 on the western side near Purgatory Creek to a high point of
approximately 830' toward the center of the plat. The western
portion of the plat containing the steep slopes toward Purgatory
Creek contain a large number of mature trees, a great percentage
of which are elm and are being impacted by dutch elm disease.
There is an existing sump hole approximately 15 feet toward the center
of the plat bordering the Sutton property in the North. There is no
drainage outlot from this area.
The soils of the area are generally sandy loam soils which are
developable for residential use:
The only permanent water on the site is Purgatory Creek.
There are existing homes in the area : one home owned by Larry
Heinen occurs on lot 5 , block 1; and the Kussmaul home located
on lot 8, block 2, fronts on to Bennett Place.
Other existing residents include the David Holland home (south-
east of the plat), and Mike Sutton ( northeast of the plat4
TRANSPDRTATION
Currently access to the site is gained from Bennett Place which is
served through Blossom Road toward the east.' Blossom Road intersects
with Co.Rd. 1 at an approximate 60° 'angle which is a dangerous
intersection and should ultimately be abandoned.
• Bennett Place does not currently. exist north of the intersection of
Blossom Road and Bennett Place . There is 33 feet of right-of-way,
• and a full 60 feet of right-of-way must be obtained north of
Blossom Road on Bennett Place to an intersection with Co.Rd. 1
This intersection has been previously reviewed by the County Highway
Department with review of Olympic Hills Fifth Addition, which will
be the northern portion of the intersection.
You will note in the proponent's brochure that he is depending upon
a condemnation effort by the City to provide the Bennett Place access
IL to the property.
The grades on Creekview Drive , as it runs east/west through the center
of the plat, should be reevaluated by the developer's engineer . There
is a very short span of approximately 71/2% grade with a 12% grade occurring
on either side of this. The Planning Staff feels it may be better to
make a longer more gentle grade for safer and better continuity in the
.....1 evefnm 7i7CIA.
• Staff Report-Creekview Estates -3- Sept. 5, 1979
4
There is a temporary deadend which should include a temporary
turn around cul-de-sac at the southern portion of the plat. In
addition there is a permanent cul-de-sac shown towards the north
end of the plat which should be continued through to the property's
northeast boundary. This will provide opportunity to continue
the street through the Sutton property over to Bennett Place when
that property is ready for development. I've spoken to both Mr.
Sutton and Mr. Heinen about this possibility.-
DRAINAGE
A more detailed review of the storm sewer and utility systems must
be accomplished by the engineering department prior to final plat •
application.
•
However, according to general engineering guidelines, it is obvious
•
that several items need improvement in the storm sewer system.
The catch basin located at the intersection of Creekview Drive and
Creeekview Court are designed to accept sotrm water runoff from
approximately 780 feet of Creekview Drive which would be is excees
of engineering department recommendations. These catch basins
would also be expected to take in storm water runoff from the adjacent •.
lots on Creekview Drive which would contribute about 81 acres of
surface water runoff to these catch basins.
S.
Catch basins can only take water volume at approximately 3 cubic
feet per second, therefore , it appears that the storm sewer system
is underdesigned and additional catch basins toward the center of
Creekview Drive should be added.
The detailed design of the storm sewer pipe as it enters Purgatory
• Creek must be evaluated for erosion and sedimentation control by the
'Riley Purgatory Creek Board of Managers. •
The proponent should also prepare a comprehensive plan for erosion
control on individual lots adjacent to the creek during construction.
Since the lots will be built upon by individual builders there must
be a system of control from each lot of sediment to the creek.
Staff Report-Creekview Estates -4- Sept. 5, 1979
4i PARKS/OPEN SPACE
The project proposed does not contain any area designated as a neighborhood
park. The neighborhood park for this area would be the Homeward Hills
Road Park to the west, and the Franlo Road park to the east. Therefore,
the cash park fee applicable at time of building permit issuance should •
be paid.
The Conservancy Zone area of Purgatory Creek is shown on Figure 1 and
an easement should be given which prohibits building within this
Conservancy Zone. Modification of the northern cul-de-sac to a
through road should allow more building p'd•room'so as not to' require ' ""' '-
variance from the Conservancy Zone line.
The developer proposes to dedicate 5.16 acres of land lying along
the Purgatory Creek slope and within the floodplain area. The
Community Services Staff recommends that this area may be accepted
by the City of Eden Prairie but will not be considered part of the
park fee requirement . The developer may either use the dedication
as an income tax credit or retain the property in his ownership and
file restrictive covanents on the property within the Conservancy Zone
with the City as a party which prohibits building of structures , or
remnval of natural, healthy vegetation.
•
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Planning Staff recommends the Commission recommend approval of the
rezoning from Rural and R1-22 to R1-13.5 , and preliminary platting of
29 lots subject to the following conditions:.
1. Cash park fee applicable should be paid.
2. Improvement to Bennett Place must be ordered prior to
commencement of construction
3. The project must be approved by the Riley Purgatory Creek Board
• of Managers.
4. The storm sewer system must be redesigned according to City
Engineering recommendations prior to final plat.
5. The street system should be redesigned in terms of grade to
spread-out the 7A1 grade prior to final plat.
6. The northern cul-de-sac should be extended to the northeasterly
property line to allow a temporary deadend .
7. The southern deadead road must be constructed with a temporary
cul-de-sac and signed as a temporary deadend.
8. Variance to allow building within the Conservancy Zone should
not be allowed. 32°16.
approved 11
Planning Commission Minutes -4- Sept. 10, 1979
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT 'I
D. Nemec Knolls, by Mr. & Mrs. Donald Nemec. Request to rezone from Rural tl
• to R1-13.5 and preliminary plat 3 acres into 5 single family lots. Located
at 9449 Creek Knoll Road. A public hearing.
• The Planner located the project and reviewed the proposed road system consisting
of a temporary cul-de-sac which could be extended north, the impact of the
Purgatory Creek Conservancy Zone upon the lots, and noted that grading and
utility plans would have to be submitted to the City Engineering and Watershed
District for review and approval prior to final plat approval.
Mrs. Nemec noted that sewer and water service are available to the lots
and that the road proposed saves as many trees as possible.
Torjsen ained in
he
aff report
MrsJeNemeceifewed she iseinecommendations agrreement. Nemectrespondedtaffit and asked
affirmative.
Levitt asked if any variances are being requested in the platting. The Planner
responded negative.
Motion 1
evltt moved, Gartner seconded,to close the public hearing on the Nemec Knolls
plat. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion 2
ft evitt moved, Torjesen seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of
the rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 for Nemec Knolls as per the staff report
of Sept. 4, 1979, with the addition of No. 5-That no buildings be allowed within
the Conservancy Zone of Purgatory Creek. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion 3
Levitt moved, Bentley seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of the
preliminary plat dated July 18, 1979 as per the staff report of Sept. 4, 1979
and item 5 in Motion 2. Motion carried unanimously.
E. Creekview Estates, by Larry Heinen. Request to rezone from Rural to R1-13.5 &
preliminary plat 25.5 acres into 29 single family lots. Located at 9840
and -940 Bennett Place. A public hearing.
Steve Pelham, Merila-Hansen, Inc.,presented the project with the use of overlays
depicting the location, road system, all lot sizes above 13,500, through'road
at'the northeast corner as recommended by staff instead of a cul-de-sac, location
of Conservancy Zone, location of utilities, and building pads of the lots adja-
cent to the creek.
The Planner summarized the reconmendations of the staff report and emphasized the
need for erosion control and restrictive covenants across the back of lots which
abut the creek (below the 810 contour).
Gartner inquired who would pay for the Bennett Place road construction. Thect
he
Planner replied it is expected the proponent will request the City to
an assessment hearing.
LeMr.
Pelham re did not pliedhave
the
required
a � foot frontage.
. lhamepliied that the frontages would be adjusted
•
Torjesen asked if Bennett Place extended to Co.Rd. 1 would align with the road
north of 01 serving Olympic Hills Fifth. The Planner responded affirmative.
•
Planning Commission Minutes -5- approved
Sept. 10, 1979
ir Torjesen asked if the developer can provide the needed right-of-way if
right-of-way is not obtained from Mr. Blossom. The Planner replied affirmative.
Mr. David Holland, 9860 Bennett Place, objected to giving up 13.5 feet for right-
of-way and the possible assessments to improve the road.
Torjsesen asked if it would be necessary to hard surface Bennett Place
south to Blossom Road. The Planner replied negative.
Motion 1
Bentley moved, Gartner seconded, to close the public hearing on Creekview Estates.
The motion carried unanimously.
Motion 2
Een€T y moved, Torjesen seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of
the rezoning from Rural &R1-22 to R1-13.5 for Creekview Estates as perthe
staff report of Sept. 5, 1979 with modificaton to 6—allowing the north cul-de-sac
to be extended contingent upon the adjacent property's development; and
addition of the following: .
9. That all lots be platted with a minimum of 90 feet of frontage
and be in conformance with Ord. 135.
10. Request the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission to
define the Conservancey Zone location prior to City Council review.
11. Recommend that Mr. Holland's property not be assessed for Creekview
Drive until such time as he develops the property.
12. That Bennett Place not be improved past Creekview Drive to the
south at this time.
•
Motion carried unanimously.
Motion 3
Bentley moved, Torjesen seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of
the preliminary plat dated 8-29-79 as per the staff report of Sept. 5, 1979 with
the modification and additions listed in Motion 2. Motion carried unanimously.
F. Mile West Office Building, by Bud Andrus. Request to rezone .78 acres
.from Ruralto Office for a mult-tenant office building. Located west of
Purgatory Creek and North of MacDonalds.
----Retterath left at 11:00 PM
Dick Schwarz, representing Bud Andrus, reviewed the project noting the following
items: the site is less than 1 acre in size, a right-in off of TH 5 serves
the property along with the internal road system, the building is proposed to
be constructed of wood and will contain 4-5 office suites each with a private
entry, they concur with the recommendations of the staff report,and were unaware
that the property falls outside of the Edenvale PUD and therefore would be
subject to cash park fee payment.
The Planner summarized the recommendations in the staff report highlighting
the site's proximity to Purgatory Creek, necessary easement across the north
side to allow for access to adjacent property, and the recommendation that the
southern most entry into the parking lot should be eliminated for safety reasons.
•
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
DATE: September 28, 1979 _
SUBJECT: Development Proposal Check List
PROJECT: Creekview Estates
PROPONENT: Heinen•and,Burnett
REQUEST: Rezoning from Rural and R1-22 to RI-13,5
Preliminary platting of 25.5 acres into 29 lots.
LOCATION: South of County Road 1, east of Purgatory Creek
BACKGROUND: See Planning Staff Report
CHECKLIST: •
1. Adjacent to parks? (Neighborhood, Community, Regional) No
Affect on park:N/A
2. Adjacent to public waters? Purgatory Creek
Affect on waters: None
3. Adjacent to trails? No
Type of trails: (bike, multi-use, transportation, etc.) N/A
•
Construction: (asphalt, concrete, wood chips, aglime) N/A
Width: Party Responsible for construction? N/A
Landownership: (dedicated, density tradeoff, etc.) N/A
Type of Development? (residential, commercial, industrial) Residential
Where will CASH PARK FEE go? (what neighborhood) Franlo Road Park
Need for a mini-park? Nn
32.97
•
• _y-
ir 5. REFERENCE CHECK:
a. Major Center Arca Study: N/A
b. Neighborhood Facilities Study: This area will he served by the neighborhood
parks at Franlo Road and Homeward Hills Road.
c. Purgatory Creek Study: The area within the conservancy area should be protected
• through restrictive covenants.
d. Shoreland Management Ordinance: Setbacks must be met.
e. Floodplain Ordinance: No construction fill is anticipated within the
floodplain.
f. Guide Plan: 1979 Guide Plan shows this parcel as single family residential.
g. Other: •
6. Existing or pending assessments or taxes on proposed park property: All
assessments shall be paid by developer.
7. CASH PARK FEE? Should be paid at time of building permit.
8. Adjacent neighborhood type, and any neighborhood opinion voiced in favor or
against proposal:
•
9. Number of units in residential development? 29
Number of acres in the project? 25.5
Special recreation space requirements: None
10. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval as per Planning Staff Report
with the follrn_ing additipn. 9. Jhe cQDStYaJCY zone )
ale h<< ►�-----
of the creek should be established at the 810 contour.
•
•
Minutes - Parks, Recreation & approved October 1, 1979
Natural Resources Commission -7-
d. Creekview Estates
Steve Pellinen presented the plan for the proposed development.
Kruell stated that 29 lots in 25.5 acres is misleading since a
portion of this area is not being developed.
•
•
R. Anderson noted that the scenic easement appears,to run through
the lots,.very close to the street, leaving little building space,
especially the two lots at the curve of the road.
Kruell asked if there is an agreement that no one will use the
"no-build"• zone, how is that agreement enforced?
Lambert explained that the 810 contour line was being used as the
guideline; the agreement goes on the deed, which gives the City
leverage to act if someone reports a violation.
•
R. Anderson stated that there have been problems in the past with
• covenants,and he favored encouraging dedication of scenic easements.
•
Lambert stated that as long as trails cannot be built there, the owners ,
will be the best caretakers; they want to protect their invest-
ment. However, if there is any plan to develop trails, then the
land must be owned by the City.
R. Anderson suggested that if a park along the creek was not feasible,
•
maybe a bridge accross the creek would give the public a chance to
• enjoy the creek valley from a different perspective.
Mr. Larry Heinen, one of the ovmers of the property, responded
favorably to the suggestion that the road alignment be moved in and
easterly direction to prevent crowding the houses at the curve.
MOTION: Dave Anderson moved to recommend to the Council approval of
Creekview Estates per the recommendation in the Memorandum of
September 28, 1979; adhering to the 810 contour and subject to
an easterly re-alignment of Creekview Court, to allow rore suit-
able building space; subject to the Engineering Department reviewing
the proposed realignment of the road. Johnson seconded, and
the motion passed, with R. Anderson opposed.
e. Hidden Glen
Mr. Don Hess presented the concept plan for the Hidden Glen project
proposing 230 single family homes, a mini-park, and a ten acre
neighborhood park in 114 acres.
( Tangen asked if the mini-park was to be developed in the first
stage, and was told it would.
VanMeter asked what the timetable was from one stage to the next.
Hess told him that it would be determined according to when Pell
430
Riley- Purgatory Creek Watershed District
8950 COUNTY ROAD t4
•
d-.. EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA 55343
23/27-053G
September 18, 1979
Mr. Chris Enger
City Planner
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
Re: Creekview Estates Development: Eden Prairie
Dear Mr. Enger: •
The engineering advisors to the Board of Managers of the Riley-
Purgatory Creek Watershed District has reviewed the preliminary plans for
the Creekview Estates Development in Eden Prairie. The following policies
and criteria of the Watershed District are applicable to this development.
1. In accordance with Section E(2) of the District's revised Rules
and Regulations, a grading and land alteration permit application
must be submitted to the District for review and approval.
Accompanying this permit application, a detailed plan outlining
how sediment will be controlled from leaving the altered areas
on the development site both during and after construction must
be submitted to the District for review and approval.
Due to the extremely steep slopes on this development, the
District will require that land alteration be staged or phased
for this project.
2. A detailed storm sewer plan must be submitted to the District for
review and approval. The District notes that the drainage and
utility easement, as shown on the preliminary plans, end at the {,
• rear lot lines of lots adjacent to the creek. The District will
require that all storm sewer to be installed down the bluff area
be extended to discharge into the creek. Detailed plans as to
how energy will be dissipated from the storm water runoff must
be included as part of the storm sewer plan.
3. Due to the close proximity of this project to Purgatory Creek
and the steep slopes involved, the District will most likely
require a performance bond for the project.
I
(
•3�01
Mr: Chris Eager ( ( '
Page 2
September 18, 1979,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this development at an
early date. If you have any questions regarding the District's comments,
please contact us at 920-0655.
inter e ,
f
Robert C. Obermeyer
BARR ENGINEERING CO.
Engineers for the District •
RCO/111
cc: Mr. Conrad Fiskness
Mr. Frederick Richards
•
•
33U2.
I
•
?den Prairie, Minnesota
September 17, 1979
To: Creekvicw Estates Developer
Larry Heinen
I am writing this letter to you on the advice of Chris Enger, City
Planner.
I have given considerable thought to your propo:.al for develo .ent
of Creekview Estates. I was at the City pinnnsr."e:meettr{g,on St �g� 10,
1979. I was called on to give my opinion on the utility loop
property.
As you know, I have a very short fuse - so decided not to say any
thing other than, quote: I will see Chris aboutthat:a We Weshad ourAssidie-t
cussion on Wednesday, September 12, at 4:00 p.m.
City Planner sat in. '
My personal feeling is thattj do not'want that loop. That would add .
t
me. An 8" Sewer
between 5120.00 and f$15 atsa depth ofc6sftfor Water hydrants arei ll t
Sever $650 •
each. Manholes aro $600 each. The extra coat of the 160 ft.of road at
It $30.00 a foot, will add another $4,800. The lose of four cul-de-sac lots •
at an estimated $2,000 each will add another $8,000. .
I need Bennett Place only to my proposed road, which is approxi-
mately 250 ft. to the south edge. You need Bennett Place to Creekviow
Road. Duo to the fact that the road will end there and serve only your
proposed development, I see no reason why I should agree to the road and
utility assessment beyond my need. This is an extra 140 ft.
.1.
Tho approximate added costa are: •
Cul-de-sac Lose: $4,800
Road Cost ,800
- Sewer Loop
Loss of Sale on Lots 8,000
•
Bennott Place extension past my noed: '
• Cost of Utilities (1/2) $3+500
Coat of Road (1/2) 2,200
Total added costa for your iovelopment $20,500
With these added costs, I will reject any development on my prop-
erty until something agreeable to me can be arranged.
•
I will entertain an offer from you on my property on an undevel-
I. opod per-lot basis. ,
�1 • Sincerely,,2iy, /p ff
Michael N. Sutton •
. 11341 Pioneer Trail
Eden Prairie, Minnesota
3309 • .
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ••`;
320 Washington Av. South 4)
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
1y, /
HENNEPIN
935-3381
September 6, 1979 •
Mr Chris Enger •
Planning Director •
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie MN 55344
Dear Mr Enger
RE Proposed Plat - "Creekview Estates"
CSAH 1 - SE Quadrant of Purgatory Creek
Section 26, Township 116, Range 22
Hennepin County Plat No 767
Review and Recommendations
Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County
review of proposed plats abutting County roads. We reviewed the above plat
and found it acceptable with consideration of these conditions:
- Due to bad intersection angle and very bad sight distance to the west at
Blossom Road/CSAH 1 intersection, I recommend no additional traffic load to
Blossom Road. The developer should provide access to the plat via proposed
Bennett Place. Blossom Road should end with a cul-de-sac at CSAH 1.
- The proposed Bennett Place should intersect CSAH 1 opposite the Bennett
Place being constructed as part of Olympic Hills Fifth Addition. Any new
access to a County road or revision of an existing access requires an
approved Hennepin County entrance permit. See our Traffic Division for
entrance permit forms.
- All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved
utility permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not
•limited to, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and land-
scaping. See our Maintenance Division for utilty permit forms.
- The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within
County right of way.
Please direct any response or questions to Les Weigelt.
Sincerely ti
James M Wold, PE •
Chief, Planning and Programming
JMW/LD10:bg HENNEPIN COUNTY
cc Larry E Heinen
James W Burnett on equal opportunity employer
Merita-Hansen, Inc A4(>it
•
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.79-197
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT
OF CREEKVIEW ESTATES
BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Creekview Estates ,
dated August 29, 1979 a copy of which is attached hereto and amended
as follows:
C
is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie
Zoning and Platting ordinances and amendments thereto and is herein
approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the _day of ,
19
ldolfgang H. Fenzel, Mayor
John D. Frane, City Clerk
SEAL
•
•
•
lir STAFF REPORT
•
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: CHRIS ENGER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
APPLICANT: MENARD, INC.
Crown Auto Store
REQUEST: Request rezoning from Rural to C-Reg-Ser
Preliminary platting for 1.06 acres
LOCATION: NW quadrant of TN 5 and I-494 , Southwest corner
of the Menard Addition
DATE: September 20, 1979
BACKGROUND
The site is the first outlot besides the initial 13.3 acre Menard Nome
Care Center to come in with a rezoning request within the 75 acre
• Menard Addition. The entire 75 acres is illustrated in the 1979 Update
it Guide Plan and the Major Center Area Report as Regional Commercial.
4
},.t The existing zoning of the site is Rural.
• ACCESS
The project will take access from the proposed service drive titled 'Plaza
Drive' which will run north of and parallel to TN 5 and I-494. This
service drive will connect the intersection of West 78th Street and TM 5
which is currently under realignment and installation of signals to be completed
this year.
• The project will also have access to the parking lot area of Menard's Nome
Care Center.
•
ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS
•
The Parking Ordinance, #141, requires 8 spaces / 1,000 G.F.A. for the retail
area of the store , space / 1,000 G.F.A. for the storage area, and 3 spaces /
1,000 G.F.A. for the auto service area of the store. This brings the total
requirement to about 33 spaces. The site plan provides 35 spaces. .
IL Ordinance 141 also requires parking areas of 5 vehicles or more be at least
10 feet from any side or rear lot line , 5 feet from any building, and parking
is not allowed within the front yard setback.
•
•
•
Staff Report-Menard 2nd Addition page 2
Crown Auto Store •
q
Landscaping according to Ord. 178 must be accomplished. A landscaping plan
has been submitted, however, additional landscape materials must be provided
since the high point of the berm , adjacent to Plaza Drive, is only 1 foot
above the high point of the parking lot adjacent to the building. Therefore,
areas in which screening is not provided through the use of plant materials
would be visable above the berming.
Also, relative to landscaping, there is no consistent plan which ties this
landscaping and site plan in with the Menard landscaping and site plan.
A plan showing the site's relationship to Menard's Home Care Center parking
lot height must be submitted.prior to review by the City.Council.
5i�n_s
Signs for the buildings and free standing signs must conform to the Sign
Ordinance #261. The sign ordinance does not allow the useage of roof top
signs which would be required if the signs are to be placed on the mansard
roof.
Building materials for the main building must.be consistent with Performance
Standards of Sec. 2.7 of Ordinance 135.
C
EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
The submittal information states that the building and parking lot area is
situated on the site to preserve as many of the existing trees as possible.
However, the site grading plan indicates that the entire site will be altered,
therefore, none of^the existing vegetation will be preserved.
RECOMMENDATIONS
• The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the request for rezoning and
preliminary platting of 1.06 acres of land from Rural to C-Regional Service
of each of the following items:
1. That the building be developed into comformance with all City
Ordinances.
2. Cash Park Fee $1400 per acre be paid as part of building permit.
3. A more complete landscaping drawing illustrating the joint re-
lationship between Menard Hone Care Center and the Crown Auto
Store must be submitted prior to City Council Review.
4. The plans for development must be approved by the Riley -Purgatory
Creek Board of Managers prior to grading permit.
•
3301
•
•
• l t
MIRO I .
'
, i U
/
IMAM/
•
{tl
env 1 / ,,
/ �4‘ 4\ ..> �� _ I
. "47 * .
':lA
'. ; .� \ nM,I ••/,'?
•
' �� ` ,. jj
'�!! �S
�» '' ' -OPOSED CROWN
AUTO STORE
SITE PUN
MENARD ADDITION
I I
MENARD. INC. .
IIM II.141 WIRE.WISCINSII Sliil E71SUAilll
EXHIBIT IIBI' (..• : ...
I
. •
. 1
, •
. 1 1
11 . ‘ ! 1
•ill 0 ;;•1 ./ /
cx),
i il 11 I
1
• i L-li . 1 . i
\ .. I.
.....••••••••• •...-
I :
• i
1 i
I •
Iti 'il' • .'.I.•t .., !,
iii..1 il LI*1;1',.tf..•'a.4 4
*"...'"..'7" .1
• 1 I 1
•••• )1 '9'. . . 1
....... •
..'' ; j ' '1' . • . MENARD HOME CARE CENTER • •
,...... J1
Q . . • .
. .
Uldl:I
d. 1 ' • . •t .
II .it Cii I ITT ill Kt .. . • , .. . 1
. . .
. '
(1.
0.11 • •
vr, NI"!`" • z;
• . • . Opt. 04 ID c NZ
; ID. • a 40 t
t: V411 1 if.
so ID ira,i
121 1111
I
*I- • 4 ! I 4'S`. 111 lir I 4Y
I et
•
• M'. . ,I io-,.., . kii ! . 44)K 11, I fpi,
gle*i - °I . • lur, - 1 ily I i
. 'Z>\• 0-1 • . I v so 1 I sr 1
...10 N
Pok, ID :V'3/4 la!• I . I t,*)
if
,IS'
• • .'.. I - 1
SE II I ie.
.. '
.. . • v. ID1 - .
I T .
ili
4
0
0 .la'''
I . ti,ilc
1
a. 6 . pfri. + I IS' 111 31' '
0 -'' q IP I
M . ' t 4 0, i g
4,,,..,,,,,,.. N. III li' . man"
111NIA.V
0.. I:,, I . IiI.
*C-, ',, ,„_. • •If vm OUT
z,,,,
4itt4 f.
i
1.
. (--:------__ . (NP
( -..---...„* ....-,„ -----„........• ,,„,:, „......„....----- -----. t
•
.
'- ts, .,
. ,-...-..
-----
... s ,,..
.:-:--: ••- c, -- ----== .
RoAD .
.,_
. .
- . .
.._.... •
. .
•
approved
•Planning Commission Minutes ' • -5- '
Sept:'24-1979
• MEMBERS ABSENT: Gartner
Hidden Glen PUD, Motions continued •
I/Motion 3:
Levitt moved, Retterath seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of the
Hidden Glen PUD Concept as per the 9-24-79 plan and the staff report of 9-21-79 with
the following change to 05 in the mcom endations: All small lots (72x125) would be
required to have garages in the initial construction phase. Motion failed 2:4
(Retterath, Levitt voted aye) ( Martinson, Bentley, Bearman &.Torjesen voted nay)
Bearman relinguished.chair to Retterath.
MOTION-4: Bearman moved, Bently seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval .
of the Hidden $eln PUD concept as per the 9-24-79 olan and the staff report of 9-21-79
with the following change: that the morthern smaller lots not have a garage require-
ment; but that the southern lots where no garages had been renuested be developed with
the initial buyer's option of having garages built or not. The motion was defeated
2 - 4. (Bearman, Bently voted aye) (Martinson, Retterath, Torgeson and Levitt voted
nay)
Chair back to Bearman.
MOTION 5:
Torjesen moved, Retterath seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of
the Hidden Glen PUD Concept as per-the plan dated 9-24-79 , the staff report of .
9-21-79, and the letters outlined in
Motion 2. Motion
&Motion tied voting Tnay}sen,
entley & Bearman voting aye)
Levitt stated the lotting concept is acceptable, but believes the ordinance require-
ment of garages reflects the community's desire to have homes constructed with
garages.
D. Menard 2nd.Addition, by Menard , Inc., Request to rezone from Rural to C-Reg-Ser
and preliminary plat 1.06 acres for a Crown Auto Store. Located north of TH 5
• and West of proposed Menard Store. A public hearing.
•
Dan Johnson. Suburban Engineering, Presented the request. He outlined the project's
location, proposed berming, access circulation, location of utilities, and stated some
of the trees along the north and northwest sides of the lot will be retained.
Mr. Bob Schulz, Crown Auto Stores, Inc.,•reported that the building construction
would be similar to stores constructed in Wisconsin having face brick on
the
front
to the one sheet
approved for the wood
Menard buildingother 3 sides, and a mansord roof '
similar
The Planner reviewed the staff report which recommends approval but no variance from
City ordinances, and added that the staff was unable to evaluate a pedestrian circu-
lation system as the surrounding uses are unknown.
•Aary Prochaska, Menard Inc., stated the proponent is also 'requesting outside storage
area for tires and trash containers.
Beaman did not feel enough has been done on the site to preserve the existing 3�)�
trees.
Bearman asked if any one in the audience•had questions or comments. None were raised.
•
' approved
-6- Sept. 24, 1979
Tanning Commission Minutes .
Motion 1:
'nti cy moved, Retterath seconded, to close the public hearing on Menard 2nd
•
Addition . Motion carried 6-0. .
Motion 2: Council approval of the .
moved, Retterath seconded, to recommend to the CitytheCo staffc reporta of
•
ent ey Ser for the 1.06 acres as p
rezoning with Rural to C-Reg-
Motion tarried
w�i�i carman voting
9-20-79 emphasis on recommendation No. 1 "That tine bu ldin be develo a �n
conformance with all j-t Ordinances"
' •nay. - • •
. •
Menard 2nd, motions continued
Motion 3:
Bentley moved, Retterath'seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval
of the preliminary plat dated 7-26-79 as per the staff report of 9-20-79
with special emphasis on recommendation No. 1. . • _
• • •Discussion • -
-
•
Bearman Stated his disapproval'of the original Menard plan; and his negative vote
on the 2nd Addition because of the requests for outside storage, removal of too
many tree, lack of support given to the numerous commission recommendations, and
the number of variances needed.
4,1 vote:
tion carried 4:2 with Bearman and Torjesen voting nay.
OLD BUSINESS
Minutes of September 10, 1979. P.1, III, B, Motion, should read - ... to recommend
the Comnissioidecline to review future development proposals of proponents who are in
non-compliance of Developers Agrements as brought to our attention by staff.
Martinson moved, Bently seconded to approve the minutes as written I, corrected.
-Motion carried 6-0.
. j
VI. NEW'BUSINESS
Hakon Torjesen informed the Commission he may be requesting a 5 month leave
of absence. The Commission members expressed their preference that Mr. Torjesen
be granted a leave of absence and not be replaced.
Motion
ent cy moved, Retterath seconded, to recommend to the City Council that Hakon
Torjesen be allowed to take a 5 month leave of absence from the Planning Commission
in the event it becomes necessary. Motion carried 5:0:1 with Torjesen abstaining.
' -
VII. ADJOURNMENT •
Retterath moved, Bentley seconded, to adjourn at 11:27 PM. .
lotion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Jean Johnson 53i) -
p� GENERAL OFFICES
'• Z SV IA 11sr ■ g r` c PNONE UTEN O.
2.)E/74 591I AU RE,WISCONSIN S4701
August 23, 1979
Chris Enger
City Planner
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Rd.
Eden Prairie, MN 55343
RE: APPLICATION FOR ZONING DISTRICT CHANGE AND PLATTING
Dear Mr. Enger:
Menard, Inc. is proposing to develop a Crown Auto Service Center on the
Menard Second Addition property located west of U.S. Highway 494 and north
of Minnesota State Highway 5. Legally described as follows:
. . , that part of outlet A, Menards Addition, Hennepin.County,
111 Minnesota, as platted. •
Beginning at the intersection of the southwesterly line of Lot 1, Block 1,
and the northerly line of Plaza Drive, as platted in said Menards Addition;
Thence N 45 00'00" W, bearing assumed, along said southwesterly line of Lot 1,
a distance of 274.20 feet; thence S 45° 00'00" W, along said southwesterly
line of Lot 1, a distance of 50.00 feet; thence S 76° 16'18" West, a
distance of 92.93 feet; thence S 15° 37'35" E, a distance of 217.50 feet to
the northerly line of said Plaza Drive; thence N 74° 22'25" E, along said
northerly line of Plaza Drive, a distance of 270.45 feet to the point of
beginning; containing 1.06 acres.
The property is owned by Menard, Inc. and will be leased to Empire Crown
• Auto, Inc. and provide the people of Eden Prairie a complete auto service
center. There will be no gas pumps located on the property, rather the
primary business will be to sell auto parts and accessories on a retail
level.
The proposed building will be of wood frame construction and about 7,200
square feet. Approximately 3,400 square feet will be devoted to retail
sales, 2,500 square feet will be devoted to the storage of those parts and
1.300 square feet to minor repairs and maintenance of vehicles. There will
be no outside trash storage or servicing of autos. The building will be of
•
similar architectural style approved for the Menard Store located just
east of this site--primarily brick facade with glass front and steel mansard.
IL •
•
a31z
Chris Enger
Page 2
August 23, 1979 •
•
Primary building orientation would be towards Plaza Drive with secondary
and tertiary accessibility towards Menard Plaza on its adjacent east side.
There will be ample parking for 35 cars with the building situated on the
site to preserve as many of the existing trees as possible. The landscap-
ing screens the parking from Plaza Drive by use of plantings and a large
berm.
Sincer y
Robert Schultz
Project Manager
Menard, Inc.
RS:cv • ,
•
CC: M. Prochaska
•
•
•
•
•
313
•
•
•
STAFF REPORT
e MEMO:
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: August 24, 1979
FEE OWNER: Joseph Dolejsi
APPLICANTE: Zachman Homes Inc.
REQUEST: Planned Unit Development Concept Approval for 125 acres
of land as Residential single family unattached.
PROJECT LOCATION: Project is located in the very northwestern portion of the
community, is bounded on the north and west by Highwat 101,
c-on the south by the existing Lochanburn Addition and the pro-
posed Edengate Townhouses, and bordered on the east by the
Purgatory Creek flood plain, and on the north by vacant property
privately owned.
BACKGROUND'
The 1968 Comprehensive Guide Man depicted this area as low density single family
residential. The 1979 Comprehensive Guide Plan Update also depicts this area as
single family low density residential. The graphic submitted in the development
brochure, which is shown as the Land Use Guide Plan on pg. 10 of the report depicts
area to the north and east of this site as medium density residential. This land
use designation was depicted as such in one of the original work study copies of the
land use plan and was intended to reflect a density transfer off of lowland areas
to an upper area much the same as was doen for the Edengate project. The final
form of the Guide Plan approved by the Commissions and City Council did not illustrate
medium density residential on this site, which would have the effect of trading off
the density prior to a development plan.
i
The 1979 Comprehensive Guide Plan Uodate illustrates the Hidden Glen land area as
low density residential. The current zoning on the site is Rural, allowing one unit
per 5 acres of residential use.
LAND USE •
•
The residential subdivision lying to the south of the Hidden Glen project is
known as Lochanburn, and contains minimum 22,000 sq. ft. or one-half acre lot
sizes at a density much less than 2 units per acre.
The Edengate project, which lies to the south of the Hidden Glen proposal, east of
Lochanburn, is a townhouse project which originally included 120 acres, 80 acres of
which have been dedicated to the public as flood plain-open space area. The density
was transferred off of the 80 acres to the remaining buildable 37 acres, for a final
total unit count of about 178 units. This brings the gross density for the Edengate
project to 1.48 units per unit.
The Planned Unit Development request for the Hideen Glen area is for 250 overall
single family lots on 125 acres. The development concept proposed for minimum
13,500 sq. ft. lots in the southern portion of the project abutting the existing
•
Staff Report-Hidden Glen Page 2
Lochanburn area and for smaller area single family without garage requirement
9� for the northern part of the subdivision for 9,000 sq. ft. lots. There is also a
request for a variance from the frontage requirement in both residential areas to
. allow an 80' frontage in•the southern area and a 72' frontage in the
northern area. These frontage variances carry with them a request for variances
from the side yard setbacks to allow 5' side yard setback from the garage, 10'
from the house, and 15' from a'two story home.
The Community Services Department is requesting approximately a 6 acre mini park
. in the southern portion of the site, depicted as a 2.7 acre area of mini park by
the developer. The remaining open space areas are wetland areas and are not
necessary as a part of the active park requirements of the area. The 6.2 acre
mini park being requested by the Community Services Staff makes up roughly 5% of
the total land area required if a straight land dedication were required of the
entire:subdivision ;he City could request 10% total land area or 12.5 acre,
therefore the cash park fee would be paid for a portion of the subdivision, in
addition to land dedication for neighborhood park.
In addition to the neighborhood park requirement, there is 'a mini park
required . for the northern 76 9,000 sq. ft. lots. This area is of considerable
distance from the southern park site, and should contain a one and one-half to two
acre mini :park site.
The Planning Staff feels that the northern 76 lots proposed at 9,000 sq. ft. sizes -
with•no garage requirement and side yard setback variances cluster too many small
lots with . these type of variances in one portion of the community. This is one
of the front doors to Eden Prairie, and is the appearance by which Eden Prairie
will be known by the travelers along Highway 101. In addition, placing these
smaller lots all in one place will set the tone for development occurring to the
east of this, by lining up small lots along the common lot line. The Planning
'Staff therefore feels that although the developer has made a valid attempt to
displace the smaller lots with no garage requirements from the existing residential
area, that it would be more beneficial to break the smaller lot.portion of the
subdivision request into at least three segments and to incorporate them in-
ternally in various parts of the subdivision not adjacent to surrounding property.
An alternative to this which may be more palatable and a better land use would be •
rather than going to the smaller lot size without garage requirement to change unit
type on portions of the subdivision and incorporate some duplex or quadraminium
construction which could include garages and would open up the amount of space
between units and allow for common tot lot area.
In additions the Planning Staff feels that the character of the area of northwestern
Eden Prairie is not typified by 80' frontages with 5 and 10' setbacks. The Staff
would therefore suggest that if the frontage were to be varied to 80', that this
not occur on any perimeter lot and that the side yard setbacks not be waived.
PHASING
The proponent intends to access Phase 1 off of Highway 101, and the Planning Staff
( would recommend that no further phasing be undertaken until Dell Road is extended
trhough to this property.
•
331C
Staff Report-Hidden Glen Page 3
•
TRANSPORTATION
The scheduling for the completion of the 62 Crosstown Highway is anticipated
in 1981 if funding is available. However, this date has been continually pushed
back as Federal funds have not been available for this project. Therefore, there
is no assurance that the 62 Crosstown Highway will be continued through on any
particular time schedule. In addition, Trunk HIghway 101 contains a very hazardous
curve or set of curves at the Chanhassen/Minnetonka/Shorewood borders. In meetings
with Hennepin County,who inayultimately be responsible for taking on maintenance of
Highway 101 and the Minnesota Highway Department, as well as Staff members from
Chanhassen/Minnetonka/ and Shorewood curve that is reflected in the develop-
ment brochure as a 7 degree curve was agreed upon by all present except for Hennepin
County. Hennepin County would request the 4 degree 30 minute curve, which is
a more gradual curve and would bite into the subdivision more substantially.
The difference between the 7 degree curve and the 4 degree 30 minute curve is that
the 7 degree curve is sharper and relies on super elevation of one side of the curve
in order to accomplish a 50 mile per hour speed limit. The developer in this case
proposes to dedicate the right-of-way for the 50 m.p.h. super elevated curve,
however, there are currently no funds available for construction of this improvement
and. Highway 101 is anticipated to continue as it is for some years.
The loop street system illustrated for the northern 9,000 sq. ft. lots should
include a connection to the property line to the east in the northern portion of
the plat.
it The central access point for the entire subdivision, which divide the
northern portion of small lots from the southern larger lots, is shown slightly
misaligned at Pleasantview Drive which occurs across the border in Chanhassen.
This is probably a graphic error and should be corrected so that the intersection
is completely aligned .In addition, to insure continuity within the subdivision
there should be one dominant through road from east to west of a 60' right-of-way
which would include a sidewalk along one side of the road within the right-of-way.
DRAINAGE
The drainage pattern shows a major divide from a north/south access, which would
divide the subdivision roughly in half. The drainage for half of the subdivision
drains toward the west into the County Road 101 ditch system, and subsequently to
Lotus Lake. The Planning staff from the City of Chanhassen has raised concerns
regarding the quanity of drainage and exactly how it is to be handled prior to
entrance into Lotus Lake. There are sedimentation ponds illustrated for the drainage _ .
going east to Purgatory Creek, but no sedimentation pond for the drainage going
west to Lotus Lake.
The lowland areas utilized for storm water inundation should have portions of the low
land accessible by City street in order to facilitate future dredging if sedimen-
tation has become a problem over the years. Along with this, all finished floor
elevations on lots should be planned to be at least 2' above the natural overflow
of the wetland areas or the 100 flood, whichever is more. The developer must be
( conscious of this in the preliminary platting and zoning of the subsequent phases,
because some of the lowland areas appear to be landlocked.
3311-.
•
•
•Staff Report-Hidden Glen Page 4
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Planning Staff would recommend that the Manned Unit Development concept not
be approved as currently outlined for the following reasons:
1. Request for side yard setback and frontage variances are not consistent
with the existing neighborhood of the area.
2. Transferring density at 2 units per acre for many of the lowland areas
results in very small lots in the northern portion of the subdivision,
putting too many of the same type small lots without garages in one
location.
The Edengate Townhouse project lying to the south and east of this project
illustrates that a straight density transfer at 2 units per acre may not be
possible. In the Edengate density on a gross basis is 1.48 units per acre.
3. The Planning Staff would recommend that the smaller lot area made up of
roughly 76 lots be treated in one of the following fashions:
A. That the small lot area be broken up into at least 3 areas which
would be consolidated internally within the overall•subdivision,
cutting down the impact of 76 small lots all in one area
OR:
B. The density not be taken up in small lots, but rather be utilized in
different housing types such as duplexes or quadraminiums to allow
more open space area and retain the garage requirement.
4. The open space area which will be required for dedication as part of the
neighborhood park dedication should not be allowed as a part of gross acreage for
• •density calculation.
5. Access to the property north and east of Hidden Glen, on the northern end
.• of the smaller lot subdivision area should be planned for. •
6. The northern access to Highway 101 should be aligned with Pleasantview Drive
to the west in Chanhassen and this access should be continued through the •
project as an east/west through road of a 60' right-of-way with a
concrete sidewalk along one side.
7. Dell Road will be completely oonstructed and paid for by the developer
and should contain within the right-of-way a 8' wide blacktop pathway along
one side of Deli Road.
8. The sideyard setback variance should not be granted and the frontage variance
should not be granted forlots abutting aajacent properties.
9. Phase 1 only should be allowed access to Highway 101 prior to construction
of Dell Road .
10. A variety of housing must be illustrated as a part of any zoning and preliminary
platting request.
330
Staff Report-Hidden Glen Page 5
•
II. A mini park of between one and one-half to two acres in size should
be incorporated for the•northern portion of the site. Lowland area
necessary for storm water retention and should not be utilized for active .
park areas.
SUMMARY •
The Planning Staff would recommend that the developer re-submit a Planned
Unit Development Concept taking into account the recommendations of this
• report.
CE:ds
•
•
•
( • .
•
3318
i
o
�.a•
•
.n. ... ‘
. ., ,. • . • . .
. j ....
w .; .�• --;".• _ , 4 T it`��,./r" •sail'•{ '. -•~'• -_` •• ,,tI
{.
•
u' ..
, r •x .
r.At J• '.:. H
; .••r;,, L') 1' ` ri�, •,T ,*Air'
! )'
1.1 '
9, ,g,. .. , 'IVAN,' ti i I ,.% .!..-1*-" 1.:;..f,..:'L.-.•-• ..1. .1'1 1.•'')
f .' —H /+/may}\/ 1' V .•1 ,` .1 •. .:: •'
.s.:f ,. , /1 .I i \\ . .i�, '�'3 Q' •1T '03? N133i:it3N
S . M _1. cae amtQco
.r _ 1 ' WO ' a .'00' li3A73V0•
t 'I ram. .'• '� O0. _ �' r `�k. 'i,'t '
.01 >->. • -- - 0 'c ._ ,,
lb,r,r-Ztr-it3Clr2C2G_9.w •
Q.' a ) ' • • • .•%
>N °• • r
O ,1sue.._,,... `='!«.-
. vz • • 4 •...7 � .
tE.g
ta
h s till v •,)� • "3. 1� . ' '•r .;,t•• ( Maw
c
•
•
STAFF REPORT
ir TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: September 21, 1979
PROJECT: Hidden Glen
FEE OWNER: Joseph Oolesji
APPLICANT: Zachman Homes, Inc.
REQUEST: PIID Concept approval for apprxoimately 230 single family
homes on 114 acres , including an approximate 10 acre
park.
• REFER TO: Previous staff report dated August 24, 1979
BACKGROUND
The request was referred back to the proponent and staff by the Planning
Commission for revision to reduce the total number of variances (lot size,
frontage, setback), and redistribute the small lots single family into
2 or more clusters.
The proponent has returned with a new proposal which enlarges the
neighborhood park from 6 acres to 9.32 acres, adds a 1.7 acre mini-park
in the northern corner, and splits the smaller lots into 2 clusters.
The concern of providing an internal neighborhood through road has not been
addressed by the proponent and the staff suggests a system similar to that
shown in figure 1 as a potential method to gather internal neighborhood
trips and more clearly define the transportation system within the
neighborhood. The system illustrated by the proponent would be very
difficult to give directions and provide street continuity. The system
within Figure 1 would cut-off through traffic from Chanhassen to Dell Road,
but would provide a central spine road for the residents in the subdivision.
After visiting with the Community Services Staff, it is the Planning &
Community Services Staffs' recommendation that the neighborhood park proposedas
9.32 acres be expanded by adding the four northern lots (giving the park
street frontage) this would increase the park by approximately I acre.
If the park is graded according to City specifications and the land dedicated
clear and free of all assessments, there would be no cash park fee required.
The northern mini-park has been expanded from .38 to 1.74 acres at the request
of the City Staff. In addition, this park should be dedicated free and clear
of assessments , graded, and meet all Community Services Department
41 specifications.
There are a number of cul-de-sacs proposed in the plan several of which could
be continued through. These are noted on figure 1. The cul-de-sac toward
the carter of the plat should be stubbed up to the northern boundary.
Staff Report- Hidden Glen -2- Sept. 21, 1919
S
The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the general PUD Concept of
Hidden Glen with the following stipulations:
•
1. Prior to any construction within phase 2 provision for access
to Dell Road must be achieved.
2. The northern mini-park area should be graded according to
City specifications and the southern neighborhood park should
be enlarged as shown in figure 1.a d graded according to
specifications, dedicated free and clear of all assessments,
and the lots would not be subject to cash park fee payment. •
3. An internal neighborhood through road within a 60 foot right-
of-way containing a 5 foot concrete sidewalk along one side
and a 32 foot wide street ( back of curb to back of curb) must
be incorporated similar to the one shown in figure 1 . •
4. The sideyard setback variance to 5 ' garage side, 10 ' house side,
would only apply to the northern area of small lots. These lots
would be evaluated in the rezoning request to determine the
appropriateness of the variance and the provision for garage locations.
•
5. The southern area of small lots would be required to have garages •
in the initial construction phase.
•
6. Sideyard setbacks would be 10 ' garage side and 15 ' house side,
for the balance of the lots in the subdivision. The lots shown •
in the revised PUD Concept "G" have 90 foot frontages would remain
as 90 foot frontages .
•
CE:jj
• 33P I
t 1
1 1
1
1
V
a
co
• W
C
--- 1_) --"---
Off( •
�
t 6 p,
Ot
z
w
t-
„Iy� y W
to •
, w . o I
r,
. _______ <:-) fivr
4).::- 4-'-------- ;
..___\: . .
\.Q.,...1
FIG. 1 3322
approvea
Planning Commission Minutes -3- Sept. 24, 1979
MEMBERS ABSENT: Gartner
B. Michelangelo Gardens PUD, by Rembrandt enterprises, Inc. Request for PUD
t;oncept approval for medium to hi density residential on 36 acres located
j East of US 169/212 and north of Nine file Creek. A continued public hearing.
The Planner reviewed the staff reporton the PUD request noting that access,
grading, unit type, number of units, and an EAW will all receive close evalua-
tions at time of project rezoning.
Mr.• Demonceau, architect for Rembrandt, stated he is in general agreement with
the staff report and will work with the City staff and adjacent landowner's to
develop access.
Mr. Bentley inquired if public transit is available to the site. The Planner
replied negative.
•
Mr Levitt asked how the Shoreland Management Ordinance would effect this
proposal. The Planner replied the project proposed at time of rezoning would
be evaluated according to all ordinance requirements.
Motion 1:
Torjesen moved, Levitt seconded, to close the public hearing on the Rembrandt
PUD. Motion carried 6-0.
• Motion 2: •
Torjesen moved, Martinson seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of
the Michelangelo Gardens PUD Concept based upon the 8-31=79 plan and the staff
report dated 9-20-79. Motion carried 6-0.
C. HIDDEN GLEN, request by Zachman Homes for PUD Concept approval of single family
detached on approximately 125 acres. A continued public hearing.
• The Planner reported the revised PUD Concept plan responds to the staff's and
commission's previous concerns in that the concentration of smaller lots has
been divided into two areas, a mini-totlot has been added, and the park area
has been enlarged. He stated that the staff is recommending the southern most
area of small lots (72 x 125) be approved with garages;and the proponent desires
approval of that area with medium sized lots (82 x 165) without garages instead.
The Planner then reviewed the revised road system suggested by the staff which
attempts to preclude through traffic from TH 101 to•Dell Road but would facilitat:
movement of traffic within the neighborhood. The road is recommended as GO foot
right-of-way with a sidewalk along one side.
•
The Planner then stated the increase in size 'of the neighborhood park allows
additional frontage on a public street, and that if the developer grades and
enlarges the park size as recommended by the staff, that the cash park fee pay-
ment could be waived if approved by the Counsil.
Levittinquired how many lots are within the revised concept plan. The
developer, Mr. Zachman, responded approximately 228-330.
IL Levitt then asked if Mr. Zachman would be constructing the portion of Dell
Road which bisects the project. The planner replied affirmative.
•
3325
•
•
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -4 Sept. 24, 1979
4r., Hidden Glen, continued
Mr Don Hess, site planner on the project, estimated the mini-park size at
1.14 acres not the 1.78 referred to on the plan and in the staff report,
and stated the 10 acre neighborhood park size is also an estimationandsubject
to revision during development phase application.
• Mr. Levitt inquired how the proponent has responded to the Highway Department
letter regarding TH 101. The Planner replied that.with the Highway Departments
of: Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, Eden Prairie, Minnetonka, Chanhassen,
and Shorewood, all involved in the road design, speed and geometries, that
it is difficult to speculate what the final outcome maybe. i.
Chairman Beannan asked if anyone in the audience had questions or comnents.
• None were raised.
Levitt asked the developer why no garages are being requested for some of the
lots. Mr. Steve Ryan, Zachman Homes, replied the reduction in overall purchase
price & down payment for the home allows approximately 15% more of the buyers
to qualify for purchase. (i.e., home/lot selling for $61,000 requires down
payment of $1,600; the addition of a garage increase the selling price to
approximately $66,200 which requires a down payment of $2,600.
Bearman inquired what the monthly payment is for an approximate mortgage of
$60.000 at 10%. Mr. Zachman replied $600/month. •
Levitt asked what size of homes Mr. Zachman will be constructing. Zachman
responded the basic plans are 864 & 960 square feet.
Steve Ryan statedthat although the request is for the possibility of some homes
to be constructed without garages, the buyers still have the option to purchase
a garage with a home.
Mr. Dick Feerick spoke in favor of the proposal and the request to allow some
homes to be built without garages as it will fill a void in the housing market
which is between $70,000-100,000 today.
Motion 1:
orjesen moved, Bentley seconded, to close the public hearing on the Hidden Glen
PUD. Motion carried 6-0.
Motion 2: . .
Torjesen moved, Bentley seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of the
Hidden Glen PUD Concept as per the plan dated 9-24-79 and the staff report of
9-21-79 replacing recommendation #5 with the following; "that the southern smaller
lot area (72 x 125) be revised to medium sized lots (82 x 165) with no variances
and the option of no garage. •
Discussion: '
Bentley asked if the Minnesota Dept. of Transportation letter of 9-10-791 the
Minnetonka letter of 8-21-79 and 8-9-79 could be attached to the motion. The
addition was accepted by the mover and seconder.
Vote: Motion failed 2:4 (Torjesen & Bentley voting aye) (Martinson, Levitt,
Retterath and Dearman voting nay)
332N .
approved
Planning Commission Minutes • -5- • Sept:-24-1979-
' •
Hidden Glen PUD, Motions continued •
'Motion 3: •
eVitt moved, Retterath seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of the
Hidden Glen PUD Concept as per the 9-24-79 plan and the staff report of 9-21-79 with
the following change to 115 in the mcomnendations: All small lots (72x125) would be
required to have garages in the initial construction phase. Motion failed 2:4
(Retterath, Levitt voted aye) ( Martinson, Bentley, Bearman &'Torjesen voted nay)
Dearman relinguished.chair to Retterath.
MOTI 4: Dearman moved, Bently seconded, to recommend to the City Council aoproval
of the Hidden Geln PUD concept as per the 9-24-79 plan and the staff report of 9-21-79
with the following change: that the morthern smaller lots not have a garage require-
ment; but that the southern lots where no garages had been renuested be develoned with
the initial buyer's option of having garages built or not. The motion was defeated
2 - 4. (Dearman, Bently voted aye) (Martinson, Retterath, Torgeson and Levitt voted
nay)
Chair back to Bearman.
•
MOTION 5:
Torjesen moved, Retterath seconded, to recommend to the City Council approval of
the Hidden Glen PUD Concept as per-the plan dated 9-24-79 } the staff report of
4entley,&aDearman outlined
nd the letters voting aye) (Levittt, Martinson &otion 2. M Retterath otion d voting T Torjesen,
nay)
•
Levitt stated the lotting concept is acceptable, but believes the ordinance require-
ment of garages reflects the community's desire to have homes constructed with
garages.
D. Menard 2nd .Addition, by Menard , Inc., Request to rezone from Rural to C-Reg-Ser
and preliminary plat 1.06 acres for a Crown Auto Store. Located north of TH 5
• and West of proposed Menard Store. A public hearing. • -
•
Dan Johnson, Suburban Engineering, Presented the request. He outlined the project's
location, proposed berming, access circulation, location of utilities, and stated some
of the trees along the north and northwest sides of the lot will be retained.
Mr. Bob Schulz, Crown Auto Stores, Inc., reported that the building construction
would be similar to stores constructed in Wisconsin having face brick on
the front , sheet steel over wood frame on the other 3 sides, and a mansord roof
similar to the one approved for the Menard building.
•
The Planner reviewed the staff report which recommends approval but no variance from
City ordinances, and added that the staff was unable to evaluate a pedestrian circu-
( lation system as the surrounding uses are unknown.
Aary Prochaska, Menard Inc., stated the proponent is also 'requesting outside storage
area for tires and trash containers.
• Beannan did not feel enough has been done on the site to preserve the existing
trees. • 53X)
_..___ ..,. .Arnmr„tc. Hone were
•
approved
. Planning Cor:asaion tanutes - 4- Aug. 27, 1979 •
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT
A. C717100;: PASS continued ru'lic hc'rinv (continued)
. Frs. Pat '}alouist, 9500 '.:oodridge Drive, opposed the added traffic that
:•ould occur from the development, in addition to the already established
50 riles per hour lthit on County Road 1.
LCTI0f: 3entic•: moved to close the public hcrring on Overlook Place. :totterath
seconded, motion carried unanimously.
=IO::s Bentley raved to recommend to the City Council the epprovrl of the re-
'zoning from :hsal to RI! 6.5• -s per the original plans dated July 16, 1979;
ot:Mentions of the site Flan for Outlet A (Cutlet A Detail Finn dated August S/27/79
and sketch- plan presented by.Eustad tonirht.of Outlet A proposes tot lot revision
alto dated 8/27/79); Hennepin County Department of Transportation Setter dated 8/2/79;
Minnesota Department'of Transportation letter dated August 9, 1979; and staff report
of August 9, 1979 with the folloe,•in, additions: (11.) Request City to install
tot lot in north portion of area pith cash park fees generated from this project,
12.) Notification of residents of Yorkshire Point prior to city council public
herring, (13.) Request proponent provide varied styles of structur:s to submit
to the city council before council public hearing. Gartner seconded, motion
carried, 6-1, Rettorath voing "nay".
•
Torjesen asked for a point of clarification'on whether this plat approved the 1
units indicated Ps Cutlet A, with continency that they not be built until the
realignment of County Road 1. The Planner responded aff;.rmetive.
LOTION: Bentley moved to recommend to the city Council approval cf the rreli_.rin: _
Piet dated July 16, 1979, with modifications and aditiona previously stated in
above lETION, specifically that this p:•elirin ry plot designate Outlet A and con-
tP.in the contingency that the units not be built until the realignment of county
Road 1 has been completed. Gartner seconded, motion carried 6-1, :ietterath voting
"nay".
•
B. }:I::.:i'ti GLUT, request by Zachman homes for IL'i: Concept approval of single
family attached and detached on approximately 125 acres. A continued public
hearing.
The Planner explained t1p^.t this request was continued, and briefly iscuascd
the communication received from the ;ity of Minnetonka and from henrerin leunty
Department of Transportation. He also summarized the recor_•cendations 'f the
Staff report.
t�. Don 1'.ess explained that it is their intention to come back to the next
meeting, and presented a letter of invitation to the Planning .o:.:aission for a
tour of various homes built by Zach an in Eden prairie. i:e expressed concern
with the traffic situation relating to }.ighway 101 and its relationship to
Phase 1 of their project. hoar much capacity presently exits?
Less explained the points that they were not in agreement with of tie Staff
rorort, which were:nos. 4 and 5 (they h-d originally :lanned their project
ILnth these suggestions, but .pas dr"11rnd bec..u;e they 1d not . ,nt to ct!rent
de••clar:. nt of the ]::nc' to the .'•.gat); no. 6 (they did not .favor trs:'fi.:
throu•1. their devc•1m::,nt); ]ocntien of :.manor lots nt the so caller "d,+ore.y
to Ldcn I rnirio" (he felt ].-n 7aca;in ^n.: •:ddi;ional.bcr:irg ou]:: :iti ato
the vie:: of the co i:mi ty of travelers nlon• i:i:••,::ay ]01). They :ere in -erc"a1
ngreement with the remainder of the reccr...cncattns,
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 5 - Aug. 7, 1979 {
liB. HI..'DE:: GLEN continued r•ublic hccrinr (eoatinaedj
The Planner noted that the traffic issue was a major concern on this project,
and explained the reasons for his reconendations - 3/4 of this devclapncnt
will ultira tely access off of Highway 101. he suggested sdditiongl study of
Dell locd, and noted that the Guide Flan does not indicate an ill•. zoning any'rhere
but the Ldergste lroposal.
Some of the Cor:..issioners expressed reservation on the request for t::e 76 smaller •
lots of 9,000 sq. ft.
1•:GTIGNs Levitt moved to continue the ;ublic hearing on Hidden Glen to the meeting
• of September 10, 1979. Gartner seconded, motion carried 7-0.
Mr. Robert Kruell, 67S0 Tartan Curve, requested that:the proponent and the city
kee: in mind the limited amount and type of models; we are bein= devel:+ped by •
the developers, rather than the Council and Staff; he coneurra ,.^ith the•rrol.oncnt'z
•
view of the east/west ali7amcnt rna they favor the E-2 alignment. Ee questioned
the tour propoacd by ?Ashman Eames, and requested it be discussed as a Fart of
this project. Ryan responded that citizens are invited on the tour also.
• The Planner explained that }ruell was referring to the open meeting law, and
suggested that since these projects are easy to find, the Cr.::ias'.oners and resi-
dents review then at their leisure, and that the developer hqve information avail-
able to hand out. r
C. Sri �Y c,li, :u,. R.L3fl:I:� ±'.', iIATTIUG, renue.^.t by Richard An`_erson for Pt •
C:nse t aprraval of er-ra .:rtc'y 1 0 acres of in_ustri-1 uses; resonin: f'ca
?rral -nd I-5 to I-2 Far.: for Shady Oak Industrial Pcrk; `-.'.: Is:'ustrial
F,rk 3rd :dition; Shed'' Cal: Industrial P^rk 5th Addition; prclimin•ry platting
•
of the industrial additions; 4..d aproval of an Environmental Assessment ':orkOhect.
A continued public hearing. •
The Planner ezp1a ned that the L.A.-:. ::as not yet complete, and foul: be continue:
to the next meeting.
lr. Richard Anderson, developer, presented the proposal,explaining the backgrcund
of t`e site and what they have done with it. Eighteen building :cites have been
sold or spoken for. Ee briefly outlined the various changes they have wade,
specifically that the outside storage request has been e1L:.i.nated. Anderson cs-
plained that they are requcating the zone change from. I-5 to I-2 so they can
have rrhing •.:ithin 50' fro:.. 69th Street.he noted that both Alson Learnin,7 and
G.T. :irk conpanics were 30' from 69th.
Bentley inquired :•lhcthcr the i.ropoacnt has considered residentiel uses as out-
lined in the Staff report. Anderson responded affirmative, expininin- he did
not favor residentinl uses next to the junk yard.
The Planner presented color slides of the }reposed development from various
•
directions. he co:xentcd on•the 5th Addition in relation toU.c Smetana Study,
( c::}ls'nip.• thit it :oul ' be bcncfici') for in^re::s and c:gels of tr:ffia trl:a
generated that t:.cre t,c anther industrial road out to :lyi.nC Cleve. :.rive.
3321
Planning Commission Minutes - 9 - August 13, 1979
ABSENT: Martinson, Retterath
D. OVERLOOK PLACE, public hearing (continued)
MOTION: Bentley moved to continue the public hearing on Overlook Place
to the Manning Commission meeting of August 27, 1979, and that we also allow
the proponent to schedule a public hearing before the City Council; direct
the Staff and proponent to work out cul-de-sac problems (specifically drive-way
entrances, size of cul-de-sacs, use of island, and other matters discussed)
Torjesen seconded, motion carried 5-0.
•
E. PRESERVE CENTER 2ND ADDITION PLAT, request to preliminary plat 5 acres zoned
• RM 6.5 for 7 duplex lots. A public hearing.
The Planner explained that this project and the Preserve Center Re-plat
project as part of the extension of Preserve Boulevard.
Mr. James Hill, Planning and Engineering consultant for James R. Hill, Inc.
briefly explained the proposal and its background, and that the setbacks
• required can be met.
MOTION: Torjesen moved to close the public hearing on Preserve Center 2nd
Addition preliminary plat. Gartner seconded, motion carried 5-0.
MOTION: Torjesen moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the
preliminary plat for the Preserve Center 2nd Addition Plat dated 7/18/79.as.
per the staff report of August 7, 1979. Gartner seconded., motion carried -O.
•
' PETITIONS AND REQUESTS
A. HIDDEN GLEN, request by Zachman homes for PUD Concept approval of single
family attached and detached on approximately 125 acres. A public hearing.
•
Mr. Don Hess presented the request by Zachman Homes through the use of
overlays and additional commentation on each aspect of the proposal.
• Bentley inquired what total density was being proposed, and also whether
there was potential platting into the•flood plain. Hess responded 2 units
per acre, and the platting was not meant to infringe into the flood plain.
Levitt asked whether the proposal depended upon the upgrading of Co. Rd. 62
• and Highway 101. Hess responded that the subdivision can stand on its own
merits, and they are making no assumptions on the roads.
Bearman directed the Planner to investigate flood plain encroachment and
situation of tree cover on the site.
Bearman, referring to the Yorkshire Point development, inquired whether the
same type of situation would exist in the proposed development.
Mr. Steve Ryan, Zachman Homes, responded the lot sizes are 72' by 125' and
that they are significantly larger than Yorkshire Point lots, but still without
garages.
Mrs. Sandy Collins, 6641 Tartan Curve, inquired the size of the mini-park
and what it will contain. Hess responded 2-3 acres, and that a comnittment
will be made to City policy and City guidelines will be followed.
•
•
33A
• .approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 10 - August 13, 1979
A. HIDDEN GLEN. . . .public hearing (continued)
Mrs. Brenda Welch, 18810 Harrogate Drive, was concerned with drainage,
explaining that her land was flooded, and did not want another swamp on y'
her land. She also expressed concern that there was no park in their area.
Bearman assured Mrs. Welch that research would be done on the drainage
situation before any action would be taken.
•
Mr. Stanley Riegert, 6611 Lochanburn Rd., expressed oppositon to two entrances
on Highway 101, and also with drainage problems in the area: Hess responded
that the park would be located totally on high ground, and that•the conclusions
of the soil study indicated that the soil was bad, and they intend on making
the conclusions available to the Engineering Department.
Mr. Robert Kruell, 6780 Tartan Curve, referred to small lot sizes with houses
without garages proposed in the area located in a portion of Eden Prairie
exposed to people traveling through, and requested that the developer increase
the choice of models; more attention be given to the gradual transition between
existing houses from north part of Eden Prairie as you move into this project
(from economic standpoint); more control •by the City of the Dell Road extension;
time frame; and what type of review should the citizens of this area make.
Mrs. Lloyd Schroeder, 18809 West 62nd St., requested pictures of the proposed
houses for such small lots and expressed concern about the effect on their
property value,
MOTION: Gartner moved to continue the public hearing on Hidden Glen PUD
to August 27th for a staff report. Torjesen seconded, motion carried 5-0.
.Gartner left the meeting at 1:35 A.M.
B. SHADY OAK PUD, REZONING AND PLATTING, request by Richard Anderson for
1110 Concept approval of approximately 100 acres of industrial uses; rezoning
from Rural and I-5 to I-2 Park for Shady Oak Industrial Park; Shady Oak
Industrial Park 3rd Addition; Shady Oak Industrial Park 4th Addition; Shady
Oak Industrial Park 5th Addition; preliminary platting of the industrial
additions; and approval of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. A public.
hearing.
Mr. Richard Anderson briefly summarized the proposal, explaining that the
project contained approximately 100 acres of land, including 5 additions, with
the fourth addition located in the northerly portion of the propery, which is
presently zoned I-5. Two buildings are planned for this addition, Parker Hannifin
and Crown Plastics. He is requesting rezoning from I-5 to I-2 because of
the 50' front yard setback required in the I-2 zoning district. The
request would also be for a common drive-way.
Bearman inquired whether the proponent was requesting outside storage for the
4th Addition. Anderson responded negative. He explained that he is asking
for outside storage for the Shady Oak Industrial Park, and Shady Oak Industrial
• Park 3rd Addition, which are sites surrounded by trees and which cannot be seen
• too readily. it is also the intent to put up an eight foot fence.
�32g
401 Town.,Road W..Yiat.. MN 55391 413 5711
HIDDEN GLEN 0 ZOO 400
''4 tM:wl4h1
_ ,, _-• -..
a a Lilphi. � IF,,-: _ilit 0 ti wall-�, 't_ _Ai:, ..-,. . . .
tsr-----kl;d1:1414'41,Arti*. %1/4- /il iiiiiplitp- „ F
\z... r .4a-i kft°144.111-11041 if' ' 4Pit '4'' '' '
"1 \!i�� 11YitII �� _,_ 4 ate a t
- �� mg, -wwfilik
i�tt�t�„ - - Irav� !P' it*hie _ tom..
.".:1.):.
' '' lirigirOMICarlia MVO VIOW 1 16;(/- -'1.4!;\,.''. g...- ')/.' . -,46.11 :
.; ., ,,,l,„„„,,,itp3.,,,,„,,Ifig.
lit `1111* 1)1 ; , • , ti ,
J
$ , tikily•A')‘• '' ...:., ---- -\. : -•-
1611414/ - ,. i •
-..
. " u Ib \Aam �
,. . r
0 6 oil. Wm,dli" ,•11;NA*114%), 4, .; i U ,. rcI- lik
0001c,54 fillimair L 1114#011r, •-.-.w-,. ,,_ 4 I 0
I
4 • 411611% ,Ittrir 0
°4C° •U /it�"� �//,I
f' • A Itimati
IIno
4-.° V , r* —;.—- 4
1 , A, •,- 1 It y�, �b W.
1 I' s� ` - r Ih
•
j.1
., *el, I 0 t 11._.,._v It, , lit•i . 4 7.1 - ,,t/r.. • .1 • 1 1_\,,1!„.7'``--. ----,..--....s ...,......... 1; .,
.1
: • 4i W YT-r-ritageire Anzirentirinittr- •...,i
r,... ...raw •,i..0
--I'
„.‘
, . t 1
,,t f -------, 41/1,4 J/'i ,,-4 i •" I
\ 0.,. *, V •, • eIntAi / 1.: -.::-• i ‘.
%,',•••""•
Nk‘,,,, 4^4/-,efAlIP*4 i #'#./e 1./' 1%s,,,. I:1, ,..._ ,• /
.N."111riltillf—4"4&414* . "4..4.7_7.%-:N#4:t7-4-).4 ftii-r;4"a''4:F*".":T .. ..!4---,7-1F,It"-`4•14 li '
, 1 r'•1 ,
'•-.,'I ' it,
,, 111 ---"--1-.N.... '• - t ri r-geg- 17..-1,!..:,• -----..t.—4 1:' r.• IW'"1
. .0... -- .\;• .. HIPS • "\, -.1.•1;iii-;114,!* i
itipisit ANA Sy , ,
'•‘\4 \_••-_--'y tt..,;;,,)'I '...4: 1,4,ff3: /111......•••°frilia.,,c .:,.... '..!`,'.% ;''''.-':.•\ \:i f 7----'-‘'' . ,: .----: -.<•-t..* • . '
-• • rmapri, ,,r. , . (
PCP"'11 tilliall%''" ' - '-''.... '•-,-•••••„/ 111 I:1 \ V°"- ° 57 .,...,
' ,.., N.,- -..•--,..i'r
0, p, ! 11....-1; - . • .,,,..•.•Vii .• 1 I''‘ 1 \\'', • '•-":, - r 1
0:tg 1,44101 id,.,,,, POO ' . --'-•--,1 •-• ' '
1, rim kitsodoeeilsolv• ,a--- *, -4-' :.„:," ' 11.-::
i
•
)
' WI 44,.. 1410,,p\\•:..,,,,:-,,,,-;,..,./ ,'••.„4 -
4 )
Ir. 1"%,,-'11111:911 S'"'".....111•"11-211k(ifilla\(:- .:•-"..:‘-',:-.\,';•:''r-----\----0 , ,... .It) 12--/i% • ! I
;.--- • ..__, • __....,--- 110 L ',rage i , ,_.::\ •••-:`. -..:•::, ±.7:(\,,... 1......\:_iii4 1,
i. , ,. - ri4Talli 7,401 FAh. f "..":•,>,,,,,...'.7f .,,
0.1041,01.tiormsy
• -- ,:•`-...,.. I %. sit. Ameoticrtio. , ,,,
-4„...., ,, akv, igir .. -r f,,,,... y '
--I
,.'lois. r.--'........kk;11.. :.-,:•:-......":-...4 -iM 41111bi ,.
wit;:::::-` r:-,`..7\--........ ,,- : i,:-',...- °6't
t..... '41 ',.,... -•
•-• • ---- fit
rn ..,,..,1,., e_z „...., ...Ili I ,if, ,' '• ' /.:,...",.„i A 0
-,10 ; •',,.,,,, .,-..S:,. `c;,,,?". ...:-- -.. ;..',:,',./1.,...:: ,,""' • i %%t i"\._1:rw Ali; I •
17, _ ./ ,:,/1,pr:" .`'.- -„,,,,,-..t- \ :,. ••• ,i'.\\;:::?:,;;;,.:T-L'r!fAt 44....,t V' .1'II
g ft, , V • /.• :...:%,,,,-,,,:,/,-10-'iN,:, / . • i\AIL_ E •'1/4
*;•;',:;•-is-.. - 'n' ' ,,, ' .-...-.\ - ....- • ^DI v).1
,.....--- -1 \• '4 •••, !
••
. ..,,..„........„0...:1,7„..7,............. , ......4% ... . .2...'::.•:*ti. ;N44.:47t2: 2- f L.,.-121.•...."1 i 0
OP 1 \
I
I ii• •-....."7-....- .'':-18.,i:,,.,,.... ,.:;,.' ti
/•••'-'1,. ',..., . , •-1---\ ),,1 a . w , . • , . 4,
. -1: a. ' \''''',\''' ( .> •:.. ' ''-' ..''''''- ,-"... 4.• ,• -,...', .flu fl
N ' 1 Cd'
.;; .,.. ; .;4 ., ..,•.:,I.,
, 1,1i \I/ - ; .'..,,' .. '11 , • . :•.'-*::';'"e*:;.-... T... '.:•.:-4!.4"''' 1 '
--0 4ZS 0 ' , I 1+‘ ,0., ,. .,,,.,, e . . ,.., 2.4-,....f..; .-...-: ,.1, •. 1
— — . •\.„, ,,,,t •.: . .;•••••...-‘..0 1: . ‘,,t.c., -•,1 • - ...-#:1
su z io a Ft.. .,... . L1\_____ ,,,,;„.._-,:_:,,,„,,,,, , ,.., 0. • , ..; ..,- ; . .,,,•,..
..._.,._
Ve ,,- ,, s • .______,,, ,,._ ,,„ , ...
._s, Z 8 0. - ,., \ .....Az , . -..• .r , ,..,... . ,,,,:t :IP . ,
. .. • ' A
Z •" '.. •;.%a 1% ;_ .........:1,1.--ii' .. r, '
( • .,i
.411i,1 '
If I t , .. .„,, .0
II ...:iiir?" '',- : \' .--- --'
L‘ '
I•...` 7.11 Win II nil•-.4111111r, -: -\''- ''• • ' '')' ---N.
..., • , ;001 . . ..,
a .
# :,%,...-..• ' '.....! ..1'... .'" ,:,. ‘ . . 4.•if 1;1
9A'5t' .:. • ''.. :- •'. .i . '
.. .• '. 411r '''' :' ;I -`e'' : .... . 11 .,,.-..-;i y,,1 ,-...;, .••••., :I
. jt,•,.,' ., ' -,.:•,''...1(--( \ •••••••"'''';'ll' -2' '" '' •. . '''.';'; ',.....411a :::i ';';'...;'t'': . ••:';,• ' ' ''
•• I
i •
t i c
!"Irtr ,,,,,. t ` y• 4 1^rti to i .. ,-
mr r -'rJ« � dyeta, �r-, ..,.. e.bl ...R •q°q„. �I '�- ".J}S,
) 74: f— '
; , , .,,,,„,, ., ,,f,----7...-,,t.,,,,„N„„s.,.. .......r .,,,:t\r..T..11.
` r..s
t, ,r-- J ., 1 �,,, 1 .4 \J('r. , ,,,.... , .., ,. --- . --„, ,3' ',i r r t ' '''', ".1 I r.....-47.'",4....4' ''l 4.0' s,
S, ... r iF
—'. 1 �9 yt (�
it ` - -
„+L i ' , ;1.,,.. / / ���/, ' � f it
)( ' T yip t! ,;�� { , T
/, I > +l
1,i?4,v .15.____
ry a �N � �`4�� .,� /� � < � 1:7,
►►i, A Mai, -1 -
Z'
• '�iiso‘ iiiiiiitili -, 1K $
- 1 -u...4_,-/ _ i
--lilt. .:;0'Atititt '.4116)Pip' ' "( 0 I ,_
0
6. . 4.-4
,t yaw.
,
1� y .r I
i , �\ I
,.. . er, „Li ,
ii,•
., � i^l l
. ,
11
6404 .. ,ie. 1?• i .. *me.a...r+w — - 1—✓�I . " � sv aRc II ' j( Ai \ i� /I i ....-i- - /// V.
1J1 'L_ iLk.
Z i 40.,.
..
, „
to ...,--,,,
�., ' , lip 1 i .-44 4'V • . .:('N , . .., t
. . 1
3 ,+i'''� i;l' t E. A.
p Cy. e diI.
in.( 0 • \ , )1 11 ' , ' ‘ '.- " r ' . ..',..j.
_f ��'
t.Y`'. . - • tic., }
MEMORANDUM
Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
DATE: September 28, 1979
SUBJECT: Development Proposal Check List
PROJECT: Hidden Glen
PROPONENT: Zachman Homes, Inc.
REQUEST: PUD Concept approval for approximately 230 single family homes on 114
acres including a 10 acre park. •
LOCATION: East of Highway 101 and south of County Road 62.
BACKGROUND: See Planning Staff. Report •
CHECKLIST: •
C 1. Adjacent to parks? (Neighborhood, Community, Regional) Duck Lake Neighborhood Park
Affect on park: This development would create a leacre neighborhood park that
would serve this neighborhood and the existing neighborhood.
2. Adjacent to_public waters? A portion of the site is within the Purgatory
Creek FToodplain.
Affect on waters: None
3. Adjacent to trails?There is a sidewalk proposed running east/west through the site.
This sidewalk will connect to a trail running easterly to Duck Lake goad.
Type of trails: (bike, multi-use, transportation, etc.)liulti-Use •
Construction: (asphalt, concrete, wood chips, aglime) Concrete
lDeveloper
Width: 5 PartyRes ansiblc for construction?
Landownership: (dedicated, density tradeoff, etc.)
R.0.11.
Type of Development? (residential, commercial, industrial) residential
C _
Where will CASH PARK PEE go? (what neighborhood) N/A
Need for a mini-park?` yes
•
-2-
/' 5. RI F RENCE CHECK: •
l a. tiajor Center Arca Study: N/A
b. Neighborhood Facilities Study: This study referred to the Lochanburn site as
•
•
a neighborhood park. This area will now be served by the 10 acre Duck Lake
mark site and the 60 acre Edengate Park.
c. Purgatory Creck Study: ' See attached comments
d. Shoreland ]Management Ordinance: N/A
c. Floodp).ain Ordinance: No, construction or fill is anticipated within the floodplain.
f. Guide plan:The 1979 Guide Plan depicts this area as single family residential.
g. Other:
Developer
6. Existing or pending assessments or taxes on proposed park property:
will pay assessments on dedicated park property, 10+ acre park dedicated to
City Plan.
7. CASH PARK FEE? N/A
8. Adjacent neighborhood type, and any neighborhood opinion voiced in favor or
against proposal:
•
9. Number of units in residential development? 210
Number of acres in the project? 114
Special recreation space requirements: Mini park devglorti____LerILDOECLOIL.
of the site.
10. STAFF RECOMMENPAT1ONS Staff recornends approval as per Planning Staff R aort
dated September 21, 1979 with the followinn addition to recommendation lip. 2.
The neighborhood park shall be graded and seeded according to a City approved
_jar and cpypisleiLApring the first phase of d elonmrAt.
HIDDEN GLEN
Community Services Staff Comments regarding the Purgatory Creek Study.
The conservancy zone in the Duck Lake Trail Sector covers a significant
amount of the sector. It does not seem to follow any ridge line,
vegetation line or any other natural feature. In this sector the City will
be acquiring over 100 acres of open space just within the floodplain. Due
to the terrain and large floodplain area, staff recommends the conservancy
zone withing this area of the Duck Lake Sector follow the same contour
as the floodplain.
C
3335
•
•
Minutes - Parks, Recreation & approved October 1, 1979
Natural Resources Commission -7-
I
d. Creekview Estates
Steve Pellinen presented the plan for the proposed development.
Kruell stated that 29 lots in 25.5 acres is misleading since a
portion of this area is not being developed. •
R. Anderson noted that the scenic easement appears to run through
the lots, very close to the street, leaving little building space,
especially the two lots.at the curve of the road.
Kruell asked if there is an agreement that no one will use the
"no-build" zone, how is that agreement enforced?
Lambert explained that the 810 contour line was being used as the
guideline; the agreement goes on the deed, which gives the City
leverage to act if someone reports a violation.
R. Anderson stated that there have been problems in the past with
• covenants,and he favored encouraging dedication of scenic easements.
•
Lambert stated that as long as trails cannot be built there, the owners
will be the best caretakers; they want to protect their invest-
( However, if there is any plan to develop trails, then the
land must be owned by the City.
R. Anderson suggested that if a park along the creek was not feasible,
maybe a bridge accross the creek would give the public a chance to
enjoy the creek valley from a different perspective.
Mr. Larry Heinen, one of the owners of the property, responded
favorably to the suggestion that the road alignment be moved in and
easterly direction to prevent crowding the houses at the curve.
MOTION: Dave Anderson moved to recommend to the Council approval of
Creekview Estates per the recommendation in the Memorandum of
September 28, 1979; adhering to the 810 contour and subject to
an easterly re-alignnent of Creekview Court, to allow rore suit-
• able building space; subject to the Engineering Department reviewing
the proposed realignment of the road. Johnson seconded, and
the motion passed, with R. Anderson opposed.
e. Hidden Glen
tie. Don Hess presented the concept plan for the Hidden Glen pro,icct
i,ropasing 230 suite family honks, a mini-park, and a ten acre
neighborhood park in 114 acres.
Tango) asked if the mini-park was to be developed in the first
stage, and was told it would.
VanMeter asked what the timetable was from one stage to the nest.
Hess told him that it would be determined according to when Dell
•
Minutes--Parks, Recreation & approved October 1, 1979
Natural Resources Commission -8-
Road is extended; they are forecasting one to two years for that
project.
• Kruell suggested trails into the floodplain area in the winter,
but was told that the topography was not good for this.
MOTION: Kruell moved to recommend to the Council approval of the'
Hidden Glen proposal, since it meets with the approval of the
Commission from a recreational view point. Dave Anderson seconded.
DISCUSSION: Tangen pointed out that being responsible for "natural
resources" broadens the,scope of the Commission and their concerns.
VOTE: The motion passed unanimously.
R. Anderson turned the chair over to George Tangen, Vice-Chairperson,
at 11:50 P.N. when he left the meeting.
3. Council Report
Lambert reported that the Council had approved the Comprehensive
• Park Plan recommended by the Commission.
IV. OLD BUSINESS
• A. Hidden Ponds Park Status
This was an informational item, and no action was required.
B. Round Lake Study
MOTI0ii: Kruell moved to recommend to the Council approval of the report
and it's recom!endations. VanMeter seconded, and the motion passed
unanimously.
C. Metro Park Study
Kruell suggested that this item be on the agenda so the Commissioners could
be briefed in advance of the presentation by the Metropolitan Parks and
Open Space Commission at the Council meeting.
•
Lambert explained that the major chance they were proposing was to
eliminate Eden Prairie and Bloomington as implementing agencies, leaving
only the seven countys.
MOTION: Kruell moved to recommend that the Council object to this action.
Dave Anderson seconded.
DISCUSSION: Lambert pointed out that the rcaional parks will require
maintenance at an estimated cost to the city of ;200,000 per year.
Allowing the counties to take over would be wise, in that Eden Prairie
,will still hive the parks, yet will not have to pay for their maintenance.
3331
b.' Minnesota
:�� Department of Transportation
District 5
2055 No. Lilac Drive
‘4>oF Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422.
(613)5453761
September 10, 1979 •
Mr. Chris Enger '
Planning Director
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
In Reply Refer To: 315
S.P. 2736 T.H. 101
Plat review of Hidden Glen located
east of TH 101 and South of 62nd Street
in Section 6, Township 116, Range 22
in City of Eden Prairie, Hennepin County
Dear Mr. Enger:
We are in receipt of the above referenced plat for our review in accordance
with Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03 Plats and Surveys. We find the
plat acceptable for further processing. However the development as proposed
would generate approximately 2,100 vehicle trips daily. This development,
along with additional proposed developments, either in the planning stage or
under construction, will adversely affect existing TH 101. Because TH 101
will no doubt continue to serve this areas as a major north south access
route, every effort should be made to protect its operating integrity. These
efforts should be directed at the following items:
- Intersections on TH 101 should be limited to collector streets serving
the development. The location of these streets should be compatible
with future development on the west side of TH 101 in Chanhassen.
• - The City should include necessary turn lane construction on TH 101 with
the proposed street construction.
- The developer should provide additional right of way adjacent to TH 101
so when improvements are necessary, due to additional development, they
can be accomplished with little or no disruption to the existing
development. In the past we have recomeended an additional 27 feet on
each side as a minimum.
- Lots abutting TH 101 should be served by the development's interior
street system and should not have direct access to TH 101.
- Before construction of any access points onto TH 101 the developer
must have an approved entrance permit from our District Office in
Golden Valley.
•
An Equal Opp.unini:j Employer
3MW
Mr. Chris Enger
ir September 10, 1979
Page 2
•
If you have any questions in regard to the above comments, please contact
our District Layout, Research and Development Engineer, Mr. J. S. Katz at
545-3761 extension 150. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincer
. M adaord
District Engineer •
cc: Charles Weaver
Metropolitan Council
Gary Backer
Hennepin County Surveyor's Office
•
ei1n0
•
August 21, 1979
•
Mr. Chris Enger
Planning Director
City of Eden Prair:.e
89500 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Mr. Enger:
We have recently had the opportunity to review the concept plan for
Hidden Glen as requested by Zachman Homes. On an overall basis, we
find the uses to be complementary to those existing single and double
family units located in the southwest corner of Minnetonka. We would,
however, raise issue with the proposed realignment of Trunk Highway 101
through Hidden Glen with respect to the subsequent impact on the location
Ar of the Minnetonka section of T.H. 101.
IL
As you may or may not be aware, the Minnetonka City Council granted
approval to the attached site plan and a rezoning from R-1 Single Family
Residential to R-4 Multiple Family Residential which is located west of
T.H. 101 and north of Townline Road. This plat has not yet been devel-
oped to date; however, if development were to occur, it would have to be
built as approved by the City Council.
If the 50 m.p.h. super-elevated curve were extended into Minnetonka as
proposed, the roadway would diagonally traverse this approved site plan.
The City of Minnetonka may then be responsible for acquiring the
necessary right of way for the new alignment through condemnation pro-
cedures. Secondly, a remnant triangular shaped parcel would result which
may be difficult to develop for residential uses as designated by our
guide plan.
In light of the above concern, we request that the alignment shown as part
of the Hidden Glen concept plan be studied further in order to determine
a mutually benefiting alignment. It is our recommendation that a joint
meeting be held between ourselves and the Hennepin County Transportation
Department at the .earliest possible date.
Sincerely,alt4c..) '" cc; Bill Crawford
'Ann Perry Jim Wold
Project Planne
/dk • 33110
the city offices are located at 14600 minnetonka boulevard minnetonka,minnesota 55343 933-2511
•
•
.. .7 ii�'•�/(��'!0 %, ICI., tM .
Y L Fi pp C.
La w
1 1 .*'7. • * :4---,1,-:,?. •
k
M /GP s 1 I. r` Cr''' a►..
- , . s!el
: _i tr `at �A V
Q r • i •• ` t I
Iwo r
4i-A � f �_= �` i £ _
w 'r
'S 0 M tQ ~—{ tea '
-.. 1I • :
1
•
' /3' t\ • r .ntI�'
1i-h- :' ?3 a ' jug
`' . •` 'emul r::
,
tr �-• yr• Ar`�, ,_•
.. �• ,• ' •�. by f
4.
1 . . r 3 f
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
320 Washington Av. South ;` ..f*';
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 ,+:�•••'
HEN NEPIN
•
935-3381
August 9..1979
•
Mr Chris Enger
Planning Director
City of Eden Prairie
&950.Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie MN 55344
Dear Mr Enger
RE Hidden Glen Development - TH 101 & Future CSAH 62 (62 St)
In response to your request for reconanendations on the above
proposal. I'm enclosing a copy of a letter sent to you in May.
This letter sums up Hennepin County's concerns.
The Hidden Glen proposed intersection of Dell Road and 62 St
is good.
Please send any new development plan or proposed plat for
additional review.
(/: ncerely
., M. 4)/4(
•
t•9ames M Wold, PE
Chief, Planning and Programing
JMW/LDW:bg
•
Enclosure •
cc Evan Green, Mn/DOT
Donald Hess, Landplan Inc
•
HENNEPIN COUNTY
33u2 an equal oppoduntty employer
flit , .i►)
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION twv-4'-.. 4
7-
11320 Washington Av. South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 �
HENNEPIN
•
ji__ 935-3381
May 25, 1979
•
Mr Chris Enger
Planning Director .
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road •
Eden Prairie MN 55344
Dear.Fir Enger
RE TH 101.- Townline Road (CSAH 62) Intersection •
A . Proposed Residential Development
• Donald Hess of Landplan Inc., requested County input regarding 1)
• ' possible realignment of TH 101 at the Eden Prairie/Chanhassen/
Minnetonka border and 2) location of a proposed Dell Road inter-
section with Townline Road (future CSAH 62).
Dennis Hansen, County Traffic Engineer and Dave Schmidt, Preliminary
Design Engineer, reviewed several alignment studies prepared by
Mn/DOT, District 5 office. These studies showed alternate TH 101
realignments from Pleasant View Road on the south to approximately
.1000 ft north of Townline Road. The attached print shows the align-
ment alternates.
• Alignment study review reconuendations:
• - Maintain north/south continuity of TH 101
- Horizontal curves of 4° 30' or less •
- TH 101/CSAH•62 intersection channelized, include free right movements
- End CSNI 62 at TH 101 -
He reconuend locating the CSAH 62 Dell Road intersection a minimum.of
( l mile cast of TH 101. Sight distance along Townline Road from TH 101
•
• HENNEPIN COUNTY
043 on equal oppodunlly employer
•
TN 101 - Townline Road
Page 2
• to Purgatory Creek is good. Our main concern is adequate intersection
spacing and elimination of turning movement conflicts between the major •
CSAH 62/TH 101 intersection and Dell Road. There shouldn't be any
other direct access to CSAH 62 between TH 101 and Dell Road.
•
Please submit any new development plan or proposed plat to me for
additional review.
ncerely -
//'/,‘1,/„ •/4(
James M Wold, PE •
Chief, Manning and Programming
• J1111/DBM:bg
Attachment
•
• cc Mitch Wonson, Minnetonka
Evan Green, Mn/DOT •
11/ Donald Hess, Landplan, Inc.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
3301
•
•
October 2, 1979
I
City of Eden Prairie Planning Commission
%Ms. Liz Retterath E. Mr. Levitt •
8950 Eden Prairie Rd. . - .
Eden Prairie, Minn. 55344
Dear Ms. Retterath and Mr. Levitt; .
• I am writing in follow up to the Eden Prairie News Report enclosed. As a resident •
in the area where Zachman Homes plane to build I am concerned and -feel these facts
should be considered in both granting construction permits and allowing no garages
on some homes. (Personally I feel these homes should have garages.)
1. The Jim Zachmans statement that you can't offer homes with garages below
$65,000 as FHA down payment is too high vs. a &60,000 value may be true
at present for FHA in this one example but all the facts were not given.
a. In the current mortgage loan market nothing down VA loans are
available up to $100,000.
b. Insured conventional loans are available with 5% down with a
maximum loan amount of $60,000 and with 10% down the maximum
is $75,000 There may be a pending change authorizing an in-
crease on the $60,000 minimum loan with 5% down.
c. There is a bill in Washington awaiting signing in October„to
increase FHA Max loans from $60,000 to $67,500.
2. Zachman Homes has built in Bloomington and I feel that the city inspectors
office should be'contacted as to the quality of his construction and that
city's experience with Zachman Homes.
Perhaps several of the present lenders as well as the previous ones be contacted
as to their experience with Zachman Homes.
In closing, I want you to know I am concerned about the city of Eden Prairie using
discretion on granting construction permits and backing various developments. I
- am sure the job has been done with an element of quality by our city representatives
in the past and hope this trend continues.
Sincerely, •
/626 ' 1"-'61461)
Don and Donna Werdick
6661 Tartan Circle
Eden Prairie, Minn. 55344
H. 934-9209
B. 929-3356
IL
• 3,3145 •
Pia're s sptit on Zachrnan .
.request fop.gaccage ss homes
III By Dick Dahl Chris Enger recommended that area be f.
A request by Zachman Homes for . reduced in size because it Is"one of the• a
garagelcss homes in northwest Eden front doors of Eden Prairie"on the Hwy. st
Prairie will go to the city council without, 101 carve.
anything approaching consensus from • The balance of tbe lots in Hidden Glen b
the planning commission, would exceed the city's 13,500-square-foot I
The commission on Monday night split minimum lot size,but with the T4 so- u
33 on the motion to accept the Zachman called"medium-sized"lots being granted
concept plan for about 230 single-family a frontage variance to 82 feet (the ,,
• •units—about 90 of which would be small, minimum ordinarily is 90).
9,000-square-foot lots with no garages. The total proposed density for the area, 1 ,
• `Another 30or-so of the small lots would be which would include a 9,3-1ere neigh- •
-on the south end, but with no garage borhood park on the south side and 1.7- •
• waivers• acre mini-park next to the northern small
.'' The site is'the extreme northwest lots,wound be two units per acre •
-
corner of Eden Prairie and would be THE BUILDER,Jim Zachman,told the
called Ridded Glen. . , commission t irraso_d�f tos„h�d ar�dge-
The commission's deadlock (one variance t ill trdscddm the
member,Virginia Gartner,was absent) mec an�LEB Joao} ,
':,followed a trio of motions reflecting a "1`he on the smaller lots,he said.
• -,variety of commission sentiments. would be sold for about 160,000,Including
•Each motion was defeated 4-2. the lot costs.Garages add about 65,000 to
• the cost,he said.
• THE FIRST MOTION,made by Hakon " "Yo can 8 000 house toe lot of
._Torjesen, was that the garage ppeet It w gsiya (Qr.k "
• requirements be waived for both areas he sal .
'but' that the southern lots be made, Zachman said that under current FHA
medium-sized lots-82 by 165 feet. Tor- regulations, the maximum mortgage
j, en and the seconder of the motion, allowed is 460,00000 which requires a$1,600
III •'George Bentley, were the only corn- down payment.The addition of a 45,000
°nrlsslonersvotingyes, garage, therefore, would'mean $6,600
• ' Theaecond was made bLL.evitt.-who down.
• mild he doesnriike the idea of no garages. Torjesen said he found that a per,
`i,evi tt,however,said he doesntm8ud•fhe suasive argument for a garage waiver.
small lots,and moved that the conceptual The-Zachman request will go to the
lotting plan—with the two areas of small council Nov.6 at the earliest.
lots—be accepted rithou the•gage
•waive. IN OTHER PLANNING commission
—Liz Retterath was the only corn- action:
rr stoner voting with Levitt on that o"ne. —A request for a Crown Auto Store to
• Rilethi3—was made by William the Menard's Addition was recommended
.•Bearman, who relinquished .chair- for approval, but without variances
manship to Liz Retterath to make the requested for building exterior and
motion,and was for acceptance of the signs.City ordinance doss not allow metal
small lots in both areas, but pivinrq buildings,but the Crown Auto building
hameownersin the southern area the **told be wood frame with a metal skin. ,
option of having garages.Bentley and —Concept approval was recommended
Beae'man voted yes on that one, for Michelangelo Gardens—a medium-
•density residential plan for 360 apart-
. THE SPLITTING of the small lots into meet units on 36 acres adjacent to Hwy.
. two.areas was done at the recom- 169-212 west of Shady Oak Pork and north
. mendation of planning staff,and the 'of Nine Mile Creek.
commission at a previous meeting.The .—Rezoning and preliminary platting
, original 7achman plan was for 76 of the for Richard Anderson's Shady Oak In-
9,030-square-foot lots in one'location on dustrial Park Third and Fifth Additions
the northern side. . was also recommended for city-council
In his original staff report,city planner approval.
•
•
5 14(
LD-79-PUD-1D
Hidden Glen
CITY DF EDEN PRAIRIE
10 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESDLUTION 79-198
A RESDLUTIDN APPROVING THE HIDDEN GLEN PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT AND AMENDING THE 1968 GUIDE PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of Ordinance 135
provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas located
within the City, and
WHEREAS, the Hidden Glen Planned Unit Development is considered a
proper amendment to the 1968 Comprehensive Guide Plan, and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did consider Zachman Homes, Incorporated's
request for PUD approval of residential and open space uses, and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie did hold a public
hearing on November 6, 1979.to consider the request for PUD approval.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota as follows:
1. The Hidden Glen PUD, being in the County of Hennepin and
the State of Minnesota, and legally described as outlined
in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD approval for residential
and open space uses as outlined on the plan dated
ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this
day of , 1979.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
•
ATTEST:
•
John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL
•
33g1
MchIangeIo
Gardens
PUD concept stage approval
•
Prepared for:
Rembrandt Enterprises
3434 Heritage Drive
Edina, MN
55435
33416'
1. PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
a. Ownership: Rembrandt Enterprises, Inc.
Purchased for:
Purchased by: Rembrandt Enterprises, Inc.
Nature of Title: •
b. Developer: Rembrandt Enterprises, Inc.
Nature of Business: Owner/operator of several retirement housing pro-
ject including: Rembrandt - 88 units
Roybet - 65 units
Heritage Manor - 63 units
Also involved in several development projects in Twin Cities area as well
as other cities including: Detroit, Michigan,Livingston, Montana. These
include residential, commercial, office, and industrial uses.
Involvment: Intention on this project are to be developer, owner/operator
of the project.
c. Fiscal Resources: Interim resources provided by Rembrandt Enterprises
with long term to be determined. Nature of participant will be private
capital and property.
d. Development Method: Rembrandt is anticipating developing their project
probably as condominiums; responsibility of common area and facilities
are responsibility of Ando Association
e. Development Timing: We anticipate the planning and approval process to
be completed this year, design of phase one, and construction to begin
by fall of 1980.
f. Critical Public Decisions: Site has access, all utilities are available to the
site and any others will be dealt with in the next 4-6 month period.
Storm sewer is not available to site and site drainage must be designed.
g.
•
2. PLAN AREA IDENTIFICATION '
a.b. Identify Boundaries/Project Area: Site Is 36+ acre parcel located in Eden
Prairie lying north of Nine Mile Creek and east of Highway 169-212. It
is bounded by the Hanson property to the north and Anderson property
to the east,Schoenfeld property to the south and Highway 169 to the west.
c. Regional Relationships:
d. Existing Land Use/Occupancy: Property is presently not in use and has
(s no occupancy.
• -1- 1a9
•
•4 11,..11 ... L: 'l• . .4
'li ' '-7. 71
r
-:'1I• - I • * ) • ....=4.41.. • ;• 1\ I '‘' •.-i t1 I..
1 ' I
1 • • I 1,44• 44. .1• . k., / I. 1
. t :,. ,•: - „
; I ...• !.,..
..,. _, j". .!.'. .,,,it - t \
4f.' ,...i
• ..C;-.- ----.. . T..PUD 4.6 _.4 ',' \
.....411,...,-4 1. .1......,;....47.4..,.e....„.
7 i----I• • • i.. .1 .,.44 . 1N-...... irLTv..-f:-.--: r-1,7,---•
.ire • ik. !.ilt, j • t , 1 ,i tt:• PUD i :.,.......,.. .':44.4.• . 3i. _.- ...:......
AI.• it,.
•,1: \\ t I _i 1 ,71-2 i
..-.:It. \7(
:• I •„ \,
ki
•• j - T-' :--i • • 22'4
,r )
i:_•-• TO;',`. 1(•••'-':..!
ir * ..
I 1% ":41411314/14Y114.Y, , i'22('" • ''0,, . :-Vrt •
-...,,,... 1 Ell
4 4 OFF1 •...... ....., -.. . C ‘• •••:----. 10, •, •. .1 k 4......--....,
77V .k.,..„. Z2 3 ‘::"\ iti.n .\....'N , • 'COMM- r 1.---.1 " •
w .7\-- I , .- ,` t •!(:01,41.V.r'Pi 72qc Hiii,""4 1 .1 I:.....-••• •;";'.,'
•." ''. 'Fp-s, ".1 .1 ---- --.....;.- -" --- -- - !• , , i .-; - -;..-vo.--'
. , -\.: I j ? .--\ „:,A , ..-,••_. .„,... ,417//. A-2 eN ..**".' 1 :.77! •"i i I ..* 'torl 1 \ ••• \,,?:). . jc.°;! .r7:.7,.,/ I ;.. •1 • •.;•I r 1 '
*--.1 ••:•-• -1 1 vs . ,, „ . .:,1 1 ,,,
I I
*,..1 .‘4', r•l• PUD1.. c\it k ;eilir? :),/,..:i.....-,:-.7 .14,14:: '.' ts!? I .1 .,.,/-12Y-1)
.1 • .1',2".111.' . , i n .., .. ., , .. . ..i r.- i,
.. •i.2''‘:''i' *Of) .-r?Q,,N ' ..4 '\.: ,',..'i Nsztla , .,, I . nwtt t i!
t."
1*-.• 1r -t,,
-- --411.•14..,. 2`,.4•1-5„.:..i.k,'-'\\"(•F..,,,,.. ... . ....1...
2 . 4,,A„,,K.. : ......-..f..:'-.'4-.
t •).'i;''i.. .. - . I: •; '' • 12.
• t .,•• 2
.....: 1 ' ........,-4,.-,•••,-,---- . ,. ..,-; II e,p. , . /, ,
III.92 '• .t? fc>L,pc:..:.1 •
;d: . ik.,.. \ N.\ • hm--• .„...._..../
.,,N,,, m..., .,,,,,. \ •..../.,„,4 i Fp . .be, ) N: •. :,..„,...1...ti : .
..............17.111... .--.:-..-,.,r-it: , '''''. ! ,
..,..,‘ ; ..,.....k . .:::--- '•-....../.- ii;/ . motzEttva....;
‘ • 1141 47 4. •
,,A • i•\444.-...... C•kt 0 / ) t•I •
- PUD i•
I. et.7,ri--•.,: ,i,, '*-- '')i-ste"-- 1,-( •
4.• ' .:•;-,...*t '! .,., . .. . --- ' ... -"-i ....,
,•• i'... -
, , ..: _,....„,..r2 . ..,- ; ,y L - _•••• 1•..-!,I1t!P • •
c•strc Ns., .f.::-".:- ; .7't-,,-. ' ' - ---
• • • . fir.,_. . ..•
. -..." ' ' ..;•/"."\- i ! 44 '..„ ....:,,,:44 c.. c..., , - , •
, t,„„ ,...• 4-1,:;:,
p242 I '
'''. A.i l • i;1 er...Wiri.., t.\! ". • -.. i..-.---,/ ki tt.:.;. :-..:
. F.P , •.r,-t•,,•. • A -:'''",...,.....,,,tzt „
• • • ,...m..........:'.....! at; '1 - (,.. . .-1)f-). . • '.;
e' .. ..:-....,_.....• ......... . . td C.
• ri-1° C.' i . ) .. 1" i r?„..1.41,37 .... ... CRt a•
••..1:"....-f fs.....s. .s.t.. ' 1
CRIG k. . .. ,
i • i 1:7.
....-11P6b ./ .i....._. .... ,(• • .;..
. .. .. PUD \,..... .: ,. : ),...•
• i
722 N .1 1 • ' : t• 1 ' ''''''''' 1 70-3 ,... ••••,.., ,..
••
r , ,.•
e t.
---,K. •, 0 t.-1 •,....-....
.y....._/- ..,...
•i........i.i..,... ..1 ,....4 ,.,,..,..--..- ...,,: . L ,....__ ..• .. ,..,...,v_t___.
------ -I ( • • :-.•...:-.. ;•.--...r.,- ..-.:,,:• ,. 1
-- • i
; ..t.:.,,,, ,,,..•.,,•,5 ii‘zi,..,, ..1,,,,.•. • ‘,. ,,....!
'II 42 I '
4• S.1
I i ...
1. 1.."• "...1.• ' fN.,.--*i 2'1 .",•••• ••45:*2 . -' ' l• . 4!
!
* * r;,2 1. 3-11 4 ' V.:>>, ' • •.' ''. ' ‘• !
.
......... •• ,•• • , . ,[-••••-1.) . ‘
i xi. a
:2 t‘ r.i..."-k'-'.r,.„«,i•-•;.•
••
(.1/4 •-•,,,,, •••... . ',..,
. --• I 1 .
. 1 .
1 .
. .
'‘‘LfiL T.YEI...,,;,., ! . tes, t. •% s••• '
i' ‘‘I'''"\ %. g •
-'....kocipAcri\Ti t•P . '"I`i PIA3k--.S i
• i , . .. .........._....:•. % r • • 1, 1.. .
. , . . . . i • ..-fi) ?N, ' ..'1,:: t.1
' i - • •C
. .. ,
1 •• ...'.. - ' ;I' : ......3?G,0 f.7.„:"4,77:17;51‘.:. .t•rs
it•• No.•e.- *1• .
„ . ''. , .•. .
. , .....
. . .
f. Zoning Property is presently zoned open or agricultural.
g. Guide Plan: Eden Prairie guide plan has this property directed toward
medium-high density residential use. (See guide plan, next page.)
h. General Analysis: Much of the property along the west and southerly
boundaries are non-developable properties having extremely poor sub
soil condition and being located in the Nine Mile Creek flood plain.
The remaining portion of the property located on the north and western
boundaries of the property is gently rolling to hilly and has healthy
cover of mature oak stands that should be preserved. Property also is
in a buffer area between industrial uses to the north and east, and
residential uses to the south. These reasons, I.e. limited site develop-
ment, natural feature and vegetation that should be preserved, and being
a transitional or buffer area all point toward the site use as medium-high
density residential..
3. PLAN PROJECT AREA ANALYSIS
a. Topography, Slopes: Westerly portion of site abutting 169 generally flat at
a topography of 860 feet. Along southern border topography ranges
from 840 feet to 850 feet. This is the Nine Mile Creek flood plain
area. The remainder of the site in the northeasterly portion of the
site is a rolling hilly area with topography ranging from 860 feet to
4 890 feet. Slopes are generally moderate but In some areas they do get
steep. (See Exhibit 3.)
b. Soils:. Soils on the westerly portion of site along 169-212 are very poor
having 5-7 feet of good soil over up to 30 feet of unbuildable soil. The
southern portion of the site is in the Nine Mile Creek flood plain and is
also unbuildable. The remainder of the site is rollirg and wooded and
Is suitable for development. Soil tests have been done and will be pro-
vided if required.
c. Vegetation: Vegetation on the site exists predominantly on the buildable
portion of the site. It consists generally of small trees/shrubs, and
mature stands of oak trees. (See Exhibit 2 for further Identification
and location.)
d. Water: There is no standing or. running water on the site. The southerly
border of the site is in the flood plain of Nine Mile Creek. Being at the
very edge of the flood plain, the site is dry and can be walked through.
e. Photographic Analysis: (See enclosed air photos of site area.)
1
i
I
1
j { RI1 ' ' IT— 7 '--.- 1 -RIVI-- 11
MWT
1 11
it ;13.141aij '.‘''.
i 1 ,:::$''"4:fi.....].
fl'it RM : ' ,____ la... --1--. -I' • - ' i:-\' 7. 0.. , r,• I w r.,,,,r7j..t t
. .....• 2'.- ,- . ,, :--- -- 'II' V'(.
p � ', •• ,) -- - r -id.,
t
.. .1 —7-7 ' \ii; \ P . .:'-' '' - ('-; i / f gm_ ...-HTI,ci— -----„\-:./,`,:c."-•'''',
. '—f.44.....,i-,,,-.;:' ., 1 - - All : '''.
1,ia1. !(31.!:v 1 Q is
, ___:......_ , '-; i_I :
..‘Cc.-
� f J
-,•, RC 1 )\- -,.. iiipp---- -‘)(!) • --
)/1.\39/\\...0,00- ,4,..tisir, i61,.....„........1.....7...1 1.
„,,,,,,,........... 420 , ',as,
Id ,; ci1,. ' # 'aca ac:r:.cas,...,, + .��wr.....
/' RC 1_
d �� -�_ � tea' •,.
tM . P RC � —..,---Li.- -,rg O -
•
f. General Natural Ecological Analysis: Generally the development of the site
will respect and respond to existing contours of the site; preserve the
existing stands of mature oak; and not disturb natural habitat existing
in the flood plain area.
4. PLAN PROPOSAL
a. Goals:
1. To provide a medium to high density project to meet the expanding hous-
ing needs Eden Prairie and the southwest sector of Metropolitan area.
2. To provide a use for the site which will be its highest and best use
and will best serve the community.
3. To provide a transitional need in the area from the office/warehouse
uses on the north and east to residential and lower intensity uses to
the south.
4. To preserve the natural amenities of the site at the same time provided
a convenient comfortable place to live.
b. Land Use: The land use for the site will be in .3 categories generally.
IL (See Exhibit la.)
•
1. Recreational/Open Space: 16+ acre abutting Highway 169 where soils
are not suited for development will be used for recreational purposes.
A golf course has been suggested as a potential use for this property.
2. Natural (Flood plain): This use will exist along the southern border of
the property that lies in the flood plain. it constitutes approximately
6+ acres of the site.
3. Residential: Approximately 14+ acres of the site is suitable for building
purposes and this portion of the site would be proposed to be developed
as a medium to high density residential project consisting of a majority
of condominium type unit and some townhouses. The overall site
would have a density of 10-11 unit/acre.
c. Transportation: The sites close proximity and accessibility to the metro-
politan freeway system via U.S. Highway 169 and 212 make it an oppor-
tune site minutes away from the Eden Prairie Center, the Southdale
shopping center, and the 494 strip. Immediate access to the site from
Highway 169 is via the existing diamond interchange at County Road 61
(Shady Oak Road) and then south on Flying Cloud Drive. Future access
to the site may be provided by a connection for Valley View Road to
the south. Flying Cloud Drive presently ends at the site and is there-
fore used very little. Development of this project would therefore
affect existing traffic very little.
Ott - 33?)3 ( B
-3-
g
co,Rt) 4.1 ii
I-
11)//: a_ 1t
St-it pCLsGS 1,_-_,.
tJ i-r-
3(a.3 icG
./ N 11 A-
r�� f 'lt �
9 tb Upu.E
view tD, '
\ ACCISS NUS
bit j -,
d. Common Area and Facilities: The site has a considerable amount of area
to be developed as common area uses. Facilities suggested for these
areas include a golf course, tennis courts, swimming pool and recreation
building. These facilities will be the property of and the responsibility
of The project association. Phasing of these facilities are yet to be
determined.
a. Utilities: All utilities including sanitary, sewer, water, gas, and electrical
are immediately available to the site. Storm sewer is not available to the
site and a proper drainage system for the site would have to be designed.
(See Utility Map.)
f. Mass Grading: No mass grading Is being projected for the site. Some
excavation will occur however, as the structures are being proposed
to set into the hillside.
g. Development Phasing: Although a final phasing program has not been
established, it is ebticlpated that the project will develop in four phases,
each being two or three structures. Phase one would begin at the north
end of the site with phases 2,3, and 4 developing to the south as the
earlier phase's development is completed.
Housing-Population Profile: The project will be a mix'of one, two, and
three bedroom units ranging in cost from $60,000 to $90,000 providing
housing for an adult community ranging in age from late twenties to
early sixties.
j. Land Use Profile: (See b. Land Use.)
k. Transit impact Analysis: Initial access for the site would be from Flying
Cloud Drive. As Flying Cloud Drive presently ends at the site the
present traffic flaw is minimal in serving only a couple industrial users.
This project would be the only substantial user of Flying Cloud Drive
at this location and with the existing road system. As the project dove-
lopes, a southern access from Valley View Road is proposed for the site,
thus reducing future traffic loads.
•
•
�{� a.)(355 (-(B
1
. .
Li_
::-.7,. 4 II i
PI e (�lj) ram; x
oj
f� r
(aB)
•
, : rj nt, a
. :. : P
1--.T ill:
1:illi i .
1f .
I
/I
'1 • W
•
�. •� , ^ Cap I
ii
r" \i,:.y...... ..„..........,.........,./.....-----:-_______---..c. •k 1 . 0 '
aae
J /
• ..;. I• . .....0)0E.ft
r•bars
NAM
. � C
33
. .
F
, ..
, .
01 4,111 a
• ......,--,-,1
Gr----i fil..
PI- ..
I •
. 'P._!). P.-•.-. ,41-0- S i a I.f ri----7. I.
qt
-1-- Is
(>4 Illi-ii 8 fail gill
.......______ ..gi
I -4-4,Z
) iz .
.'',''.......:..,'.,:.1.''..
_ .
. I
.._L--4-------1-_ •
-_____---------------r—i—i .
•1 1 I ,•' I ,
. -...--214.."••••••••"---"`
X>:.- I ,
11
# 1
..
. 11 ..
..,
.....1
1 c ..
i I
. ,
... . •
..
— -0: ::, ,..;r_ __IL„,,..7''.! ‘...--• •! •j so-- • _ _....
i !"., --...;?...--------•----:__-,--',till ! 1 ! 1 CO. I
! .. .
, .
Ill ir 1 „,, p . I i%.•
. ..
• I 0.,.. ,.
;!!it •ri• !O ... • I smo.....! .
11 a.
. _ i .___.....! ..s__ ,.._ --, '\ I .
c
1 . '' \ ,
'', :•-'--_. 1..! , - . --li / ,,, ;•••
...
__ _
•--- -- -- I
: a
...
NH MU g
1....... ..._
— • 3353 213 tu
. .
. . .
....
.: ....,..
•
•
!!,/A • ., Taal .
t----I
0 •tii3) t•-•-, ili TI
tc)j) ,:.• ch
( __I __ ,11)) c
. •
I.=
,t ill fil5 f '' . _ _
• __.....,„ (.L .:, 111-41
ir. i i
: ., ! •-,___i • -
•
...„ i i.
11'4 ai . r-T.-----/\. 1111:
• i" 1 ‘ •-• • i . lit
- ,,, , g 3 3
: - L' \-- ) ItiLi 0 to A a
I
.--____4_
i \.1 --
i •
'I 1 :•
• ./ Tr
• .
. ..
.. di
cc w.i.
• . . .
I
_
1 1
. ....,
,...... ....................—..............7........,,,..,___ •
el .
_ ,_... , . CNI •
.,, -; . I
• ,‘ . i
.'• 1 , . ;,, s
.1 it lk .. \ \.,TO . • . . s.
§ '
WI),.1.,.,.
. , . .
.c. .. ... t.„...
\ 1 u)
...,. . _
....
. f
., \ t*_...- ,.••. •J # : \'...4.....:, 9
c.
— , 100,,• , ..J,(..s.. ,,..2„..., . -6.,;.•:, ati5
/ i 1
GI
, --:" -- ,•• , .
li I \ 1
(.5
-
Li., . . s_ . 5:.. c2
,,,.
!I 1 ir It
$, I .,.
. .. •. . z,
1;.:4, -• - . .ti ..... ..1, \ .•: ; 021
-",
LI-1'''.'--- ; .• - '-- 4.
....,...
I, ,\ \ s); •
\, \ C 6 :
--:-........,....... - - -----
,4.,
( -.--.••••••••....... - .._ :. ,777-_,•:----___
Iral............
•........ ''--'11 111.11111 MI
•C°-
• • 0 C
. .
•
• .1se .
335i ,
• .. __.__ .
•
1•
N
1
S QI.) j
1
i—:1 041) Il
t-(c\t, (� 1 ��,1\1 Jf I Iltai
(Lts
QM
n (n!1 to I illh ,
I
=1 ' ' 1. 1
1 ---1 3111�'. 11111J
. ,..--- ,C
p:
•
f•, fJ, A;
•
-r /II y
,haf
ts' - . ': t;! ". .. ' i!' , '. '. :."': ". ' i el
• „.„5„:046. 4 _
...
ti- --400-'• - - - 4 — ''
r. ', icr ".'• ,3' ''."141 1 op.,..--....er.,i,j6: f i, - • rii
, ,„ . ..
,,,„110. A .... . •,. ; ..,. ..,.... A . .
„i6 ...
,,,,.... .k. ,,,, ••-.4-. .„-- .-'1 ,,; :,.1,,-,
cr•\,
.0( c
Atisg ,
4., n . . '‘ -',
_oie ram. \_L%; .:•.... ,�. .�a
a: ;
f._ \'�,;mow .�
= - :�.,
.'. �.�. - �'( qtt1 .
• . 'Is . '. •:litt:401
• 3351 32
.
- [ Clel
ail ,=;
4, a
'ki >>> or gs R =I
` s
41) (0.IC) (1 i,; a
flit -
(rr.ij t<
_____ _— ----- -- 9•
I t
•
ii[
•
; .
. ,..,,,,..,„.‘,........,...CA,
p err }g j
(g
t (F YV
7".,!.c,i 1 kpi..i.i\.,.,.„.,.,...,--:,,:„,,.*,;-;_‘;;__"1__:i:„(:7.-\7_.7,3 wy90
,.fi • . ., "r r;'',4i?ee 3 f/',( 1 I (•
•
STAFF REPORT
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 1979
FROM: CHRIS ENGER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
APPLICANT: REMBRANDT ENTERPRISES, INC.
REQUEST: Planned unit Developement concept approval for
medium density residential land use of approximately
10 units per acre on 36.3 gross acres.
PROJECT LOCATION: Project is located in Smetana Heights sector of the city
adjacent to and directly east of 169/212,south of the
Hansen Auto Parts site,west of Richard Anderson-Shady Oak
Park,north of Nine Mile Creek.
BACKGROUND
The existing zoning on the site is Rural. The 1979 Comprehensive Guide Plan
illustrates this site as high density residential or industrial.
The Smetana Lake Sector Study also illustrated this knoll area as residential
as well as the northern area of the Schoenfelder piece & the entire area east
• of this is shown as LeParc and the Fifth Addition of Shady Oak. Therefore,
the land use proposed is consistent with existing City plans for the area.
The land use directly north of this site is currently an auto parts salvage
yard which has been in existence for many years and is grandfathered in
as a non-conforming use. The status of the salvage yard would be that no
expansion is allowed under our current ordinances and that a transition to
an appropriate existing City zone is expected in the future. In the
interim it will be•necessary for the Rembrandt residential area to provide
for its own,self contained views in order to not be adversely impacted by
the salvage yard. Because of the vegetation on the Rembrandt parcel,
careful integration of the units into the woods and preservation of a thick
area of woods on the northern boundary should mitigate any impact of this
salvage yard on the residential.
This area is within 300 feet of a shoreland area and does contain more
than 40 units , therefore an Environmental Assessment Worksheet will be
required at time of rezoning application. In addition,units must be
constructed at least 2 feet above the 100 year flood plain elevation and
will not be allowed to encroach within the floodplain itself. The
minimum setback outlined in the Shoreland Management Ordinance for
General Development Waters would be 100 feet for RI 6.5 , and 150 feet
for RM 2.5.
•
•
Staff Report-Rembrandt PUD Pa9e 2
S
EXISTING SITE CHARACTER
The character of the site is described in the brochure provided by the
proponent. It is basically divided into two'distinct areas: A lower wet
area of poor soils occurring on the southern portion of the site as the
floodplain of Nine Mile Creek, along with this low area, is the western
portion of the site which is an area of poor soils, although not wet, which
was created through the over burden of poor soils during the 212 construction.
The eastern portion of the site is high and sparsely wooded.
SITE PLAN
The site plan illustrated is a concept development plan only to give a frame-
work of development in the future. However, no skematic grading plans have
been submitted and a preliminary look at the project by the'staff indicates
that proper setbacks have not been provided from the public road and that the
total number of units shown , in the locations shown, may not be desirable
under the final grading study.
In the rezoning phase detailed grading plans will have to be submitted
illustrating storm water retention and drainage methods.
The open space for the project is provided on the western portion of the site
and is shown skematically as a pitch and putt 3ho1e golf course in combination
with open play fields. The Planning Staff feels that this area of the site
may be well suited in size and location for a City park which could serve the
• needs of this area and the residential uses contemplated to the south.
Therefore, the private association recreational facilities , such as : swimming
pool, suana,shuffle courts, etc., should be incorporated near the units
and maintained by the association.
TRANSPORTATION
Access to the site is perhaps one of the most critical items which needs to be
addressed. Currently, the only access to the site is from the end of the
cul-de-sac of existing Flying Cloud Drive as it comes down from the full diamond
interchange of Shady Oak Road and 169/212. This provides only one way
in and one way out for over 360 units, and it also provides a main entrance to
a residential area which must come past industrial property.
Staff Report-Rembrandt PUD page 3
Richard Anderson's Shady Oak 5th Addition would contemplate a cul-de-sac
touching this property's NE corner . Access to this cul-de-sac should be
provided for this residential property as a second way out for the first
and second phase shown on page IA of the development brochure. This would
not then precipatate through traffic because the public systems would be
interrupted by the private drives and parking lots by the condominium assoc-
iation. However, the condominium would have access in and out through the
industrial park to the east. •
The third and fourth phases of this development would depend upon gaining
access out through the SE corner of the development across the southern portion
of Richard Anderson's 5th addition to connect with Briarfield Estates. The
entire cost of this road connection may have to beborne by Rembrandt Properties .
In any case, the third and fourth phases could not proceed without this south-
ern connection.
The method in which the connection to the existing Flying Cloud cul-de-sac
is depicted is not acceptable and will have to be revised to provide a con-
tinuous public road through the site rather than a 90 degree corner jog.
,t 4 RECOMMENDATIONS
I.. •
• The planning staff would recommend to the planning commission approval of the
planned unit development concept for Rembrandt Properties for meduim to high
density residential use with the following stipulations:
I. That this approval does not reflect a specific number of units.
2. Rezoning of the individual phases will be evaluated based upon general
provisions of this staff report, the Comprehensive Guide Plan,
city ordinances, final drainage grading and utility plans, final road
plans, how the building proposed fits the site, and final building
plans, as well as additional considerations that are brought up during
• the rezoning review.
3. Satisfactory completion and review and approval of an Environmental
Worksheet.
CE:pb
•
•334'3
Minutes - Parks, Recreation & unapproved October 15, 1979
Natural Resources Commission -3-
ft RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS
A. Reports of Commissioners
None
B. Reports of Staff •
1. Development Proposals
a. Nemec Knolls (Continued from October 1, 1979)
• Mr. and Mrs. Nemec were present to answer questions for the Commission.
Staff recommended approval, with Cash Park Fees, a scenic easement
within the conservancy zone, and dedication of the floodplain
along Purgatory Creek.
Mrs. Nemec reported that sewer construction removed most of the trees
along the creek, but they had taken it upon themselves to replace
them in order to preserve the creek's natural beauty.
Tangen thanked the Nemecs for coming and expressed appreciation for
their concerns and appreciation of the creek.
MOTION: Tangen moved to recommend that the Council approve the
• Nemec Knolls proposal, as per the staff recommendations, and R. Anderson
seconded. •
DISCUSSION: Kruell had a question concerning the road and it's
connection to the north.
Mr. Nemec explained that the Highway Department plans to take 75 feet
at the northwest corner for road improvenments, requiring them to
develop a cul-de-sac. The proposed road, if extended, will meet
Sunnybrook Road to the north.
VOTE: The motion passed unanimously.
b. Michelangelo Gardens (Continued from October 1, 1979)
The Commission had voted to table this item until after the EAW is
available. However, the EAW is not completed until the developer
comes in with a request for rezoning; therefore, the Commission
should act on the P.U.Q. concept proposal at this time.
Kruell asked how the Nine Mile Creek is approached as a natural
resource. It appeared to him that maximum development should not
be permitted so close to the creek.
Lambert told him that the creek is classified in the same manner as
Purgatory Creek or Riley Creek, and that the development is proposed
only up to the floodplain, not the creek.
•
Minutes - Parks, Recreation & unapproved October 15, 1979
Natural Resources Commission -4-
Tangen observed that east of this area the development of the land
had been mishandled, and preservation is important now to prevent
this from continuing.
R. Anderson agreed, noting that a major concern was the possibility
of cutting trees and taking away the hills; the least amount of
impact is desired in this area. '
•
Tangen also pointed to their proposal for a three-hole golf course,
suggesting that other park uses would be better.
Kruell asked why staff had proposed an aglime trail rather than a
hard surface.
Lambert explained that it was because of poor soil conditions.
MOTION: Kruell moved to recommend that the Council give the Michelangelo
Gardens proposal P.U.D. concept approval, generally in accordance
with staff recommendations per the Memorandum of October 11, 1979;
deleting the golf course and substituting other recreational uses,
• and noting the concern of the Commission about final plans for the
• treatment of the wooded areas. Tangen seconded, and the motion
carried with Fifield abstaining.
2. Park Bond Referendum Status Report
Lambert presented the context of the proposed informational brochure,
which is to be sent to voters prior to the Park Bond Referendum.
Tangen wished the wording concerning park improvements to be changed.
Instead of "will receive improvements. ." it should read "The following
improvements are proposed . . ".
Lambert noted that the Commission should feel comfortable with their
plan, since it is feasible if the referendum is passed.
Kruell favored outlining the sites and facilities since he feels to be
successful, people must see what they will get.
MOTION: Tangen moved to recommend to the Council approval of the context
of the informational flyer, changing the wording in the section on
park improvements to read, "The following improvements are proposed
if the referendum is approved." Fifield seconded.
DISCUSSION: Kruell noted that the sites follow the plan developed
by the Commission, but wondered how much juggling would be done in the
future to accomodate pressure groups.
VOTE: Passed unanimously.
A short break was called at 9:15 p.m. by Chairperson Richard Anderson.
Robert Johnson left the meeting at this time.
. 33(oc
Minutes--Parks, Recreation & approved October 1, 1979
Natural Resources Commission -6-
.1 Tangeu questioned the consistency of the Conservancy Zone as it is
being drawn along the creek.
Lambert told him that staff was trying to be as consistent as
possible by following ridge lines and tree lines in an attempt to
preserve the natural character of the creek. He noted that the
developer may dedicate the "no-build" land to the City if they wish,
but they still must pay a Cash Park Fee.
R. Anderson stated that he favors dedication to make the creek •
public. There could be problems in the future where the land is
not owned by the city. •
MOTION: Tangen moved to table the development proposal, since
no one was available to answer questions. Dave Anderson seconded,
and the motion passed unanimously.
c. Michelangelo Gardens
Greg Dumondeaux presented the concept plan for 350 condominium
units, in which recreational facilities are provided within the
development.
Tangen expressed concern about the actual construction plans
S (grading,etc.) since the trees and hill on that site are important
to the character of the overall area. He asked if the proposal
would come back when rezoning was requested.
Lambert told him the Commission would also see the final develop rent
proposal, but this is a concept proposal.
VanMeter asked how many of the trees on the site could be saved?
Dumondeax told him that by using an estimate from aercal photographs,
they felt that 905 of the trees could be saved.
Kruell commented that concept approval can be son.zwhat binding. lie
felt the Conrnission should have answers now to all their question .
He asked if the E,W could be reviewed.
Lambert told him that the.planning staff was doing it, but he
did not know when it would be complete.
R. Anderson asked how far this was from the nearest park property.
and was told that it is only 500-1000 feet from Nine Mile Creek.
Tangen questioned how tall the buildings would have to be to acco date
360 units in a 10 acre building area. He was told no more than
three stories.
IL MOTION: Tangen moved to table the item until the next meeting
after the EAW is available. Kruell seconded the notion which
passed unanimously.
•331,4/
•
MEMORANDUM
46: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
DATE: September 28, 1979
SUBJECT: Development Proposal Check List
PROJECT: Michelangelo Gardens •
PROPONENT: Rembrandt Enterprises, Inc.
REQUEST: PUD Concept approval for medium density residential land use of approximately
10 units/acre on 36.3 acres.
LOCATION: Smetana Heights, east of 169/212, south of Hanson Auto Parts.
BACKGROUND: See Planning Staff Report
CNHECKLIST:
i. Adjacent to parks? (Neighborhood, Community, Regional)
tlo
Affect on park:
2. Adjacent to public waters?
Nine-Mile Creek Floodplain
Affect on waters: Concept plan shows a mini golf course in thr flnndpl?ln
3. Adjacent to trails? There is a proposed trail corridor along the southern
boundary of the site.
Type of trails: (bike, multi-use, transportation, etc.) Pedestrian
Construction: (asphalt, concrete, wood chips, aglimc)Aglime or loodchips
Width: 6' Party Responsible for construction? City
Landownership: (dedicated, density tradeoff, ctc.) Dedication
Type of Development? (residential, commercial, industrial) Residential
Where will CASH PARK FEE go? (what neighborhood) Smetana Area
Need for a mini-park? Not as long as recreational facilities such as golf course,
swimming pool, etc. are provided.
• 3947
-2-
S. REFERENCE CHECK:
10
a. Major Center Area Study: N/A
b. Neighborhood Facilities Study:
c. Purgatory Creek Study: . N/A
•
d. Shoreland Management Ordinance: Setbacks must be met.
e. Floodplain Ordinance: No construction of structures within the floodplain.
f. Guide Plan: See Planning Staff Report.
•
g. Other:
6. Existing or pending assessments or taxes on proposed park property:
P1/A
7. CASK PARK- FEE? The cash park fee applicable at time of building permit shall be paid.
8. Adjacent neighborhood type, and any neighborhood opinion voiced in favor or
against proposal:
9. Number of units in residential development? Concept development plan only.
Number of acres in the project? 36.3 gross acres
Special recreation space requirements: The western portion of the site should either
be dedicated for park purposes or developed into a golf course as proposed.
10. STAFF flCCOhtUNDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the PUD Concept as per the
Planning Staff Report dated September 20, 1979.
33a
-3-•
Sept. 24, 19J9
lamming Commission Minutes• MEMBERS ABSENT: Gartner
Rembrandt enterprises, Inc. Request for PUD
Micheianappr Gal—for mediumPUD, by residential on 36 acres located
ost of approval for to hi density
' s East of US 169/212 and north of Nine Mile Creek. A continued public hearing.
t
The Planner reviewed the staffn t o, and th EPUD
AW will accevalua-
ess,
grading, unit type, number
of tions at time of project rezoning.
Mr. Demonceau, architect for Rembrandt, stated he is in general agreement with
the staff report and will work with the City staff and adjacent landowner's to
develop access. •
,
Mr. Bentley inquired if.public transit is available to the site, The Planner
replied negative.
•
Mr Levitt asked how the Shoreland Manage ro emencttroposedancetiou d dfeffeotithis ,
zould
proposal. The Pianner palld theordinance requirements.
be evaluated according to
Motion 1: ublic hearing on the Rembrandt
or�esen moved, Levitt seconded, to close the Q
PUD. Motion carried 6-0.
to recommend to the City Council approval of
•
Motion 2 Martinson seconded, and the staff
theejch movee,
Michelangelo Gardens PUD Concept based upon the 8-31.79 plan
.D report dated 9-20-79. Motion carried 6-0.- royal of single family
s C. HIDDEN LEN, request by Zachman Homes for PUD Concept apP
detached on approximately 125 acres. A continued public hearing.
The Planner reported the revised PUD Concept plan responds to the staff's and
commission's previous concerns in that the conchnntration ndofa smaller
plotsahas
as
beensiend intog two areas,tte a m hetstt has ro uther desiresst
has been enlarged. He stated that the staff is a�n�eand"thethe
p southern most
area of small lots (72 x 125) be approved with 9
approval of that area with medium sized lots (82 x 165) without garages instead.
the staff which
The Planner then reviewed the revised road system suggested by
attempts to preclude through traffic from TH 101 to Dell Road but would facilitat
movement of traffic within the neighborhood. The road is recommended as 60 foot one side.
right-of-way with a sidewalk along ark allows
additional frontage on a public street, and that if the developer grades and
The Planner then stated the increase in size'of the neighborhoodpark feepay-
eark size as recommended by the staff, that the cash p
nlrcs dhe P by the Counsil.
meett could be waived if approvedThe
tr
j Levittinquired how many lots are within
nxthe
revised
8 cconcept plan
developer. Mr. Zachman, responded app portione of Dell
4 �'! Levitt then asked if Mr. Zachman wouldlbe constructinanner replied effhrmativ
Road which bisects the project. The p
39
•
approved
Planning Commission Minutes -3- Sept. 10. 1979
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT
G. Michelangelo Gardens, by Rembrandt Enterprises, Inc. Request for PUD
Concept approval for medium-hi density residential on 36 acres located
East of US 169/212 and north of Nine Mile Creek. A public hearing.
The Planner reported the staff met with Mr. Anderson, Mr. Sciola of Briarfield
Estates& Mr. Demonceau from Rembrandt Enterprises to review the road system.
The revised plan for Mr. Anderson's property will be presented tonight.
}
Mr. Anderson stated the plat now depicts 70th Street as a cul-de-sac to serve
the industrial lots of the 3rd and 5th Additions, and service.to the residential
portion of the 5th Addition will be via the road system through Michelangelo
Gardens.
Mr. Demonceau briefly reviewed the site plan for Michelangelo Gardens noting
the area's poor soils and vegetation dictate the serpentine design of the
road system from the site's northwestern corner to its southeastern corner
which is adjacent to Mr. Anderson's proposed multiple residential.
Torjesen requested the forthcoming revised staff report contain discussion
relative to 1-2 Park Vs. I=5 Park zoning, and perhaps some sort of restrictive
covenants to protect the back of the lots from future development.
Motion
Torjesen moved, Gartner seconded, to continue the public hearing on Shady Oak
Industrial Park 3rd & 5th Addition to the Sept. 24, 1979 meeting, and allow
the proponent to request a council public hearing. Motion carried 6-1 with
Martinson voting nay.
G. Michelangelo Gardens
Mr. Demonceau illustrated the site's topography, soil condition, vegetation,
and slopes through the use of hardboard drawings. He estimated the site's proposed
density at 10 units / acre, 360 units on 36 gross acres, and four phases of
development.
•
Gartner inquired when the golf course depicted adjacent to US 169 would be
constructed. Mr. Oemonceau replied he was unsure during which phase the
course would be constructed with.
Bentley noted that a recreational area for the project is important as the
surrounding land uses are industrial.
Levitt asked if the residential units would be a mixture of rental and ownership.
Mr. Demonceau replied all units are anticipated to be ownership.
Torjesen asked if the project would be similar to the Rembrandt development off
of Crosstown 62 in Edina. Mr. Demonceau replied it would be similar in building
texture but not in occupancy.
( Motion: Gartnor moved, Retterath seconded, to continue the Rembrandt PUD public
Hearing to Sept. 24, 1979 for a staff report. Motion carried unanimously.
.33'10
I
•
#`NNESQt4
IA Minnesota
it C( .� 4 Department of Transportation
4, District 5
2055 No. Lilac Drive
OFT Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422
September 25, 1979 . (8:2)5453761
.
Mr. Chris Eager, Planning Director
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 •
In Reply Refer to: 31$.
S.P. 2763 T.H. 169/212
Plat Review of Micheangelo Gardens
located East of TH 169 South of CSAH 61
and North of Nine Mile Creek in part of the
Northeast 1/4 and the Northwest 1/4 of the
Northwest 1/4 of Section 12, Township 116,
Range 22, in the City of Eden Prairie,
Hennepin County
Dear Mr. Eager:
CWe are in receipt of the above referenced plat for our review in accordance
with Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03 Plats and Surveys. We find the
plat acceptable for further development with consideration of the following
comments:
- The developer should be aware of and check for existing right of way
monuments along the highway right of way line.
- It appears the proposed street through the plat will serve as a City
street. We suggest you review the connection of this street to the
existing cul-du-sac and consider an improved alignment. A simple
radius curve between the frontage road and the proposed street would
eliminate severe jogs for both directions of travel.
If you have any questions in regard to the above comments, please contact
our District Layout, Research and Development Engineer, Mr. J. S. Katz at
545-3761, extension 150. Thank you for your cooperation.
Since ,
.'/,, .., ./4/ /;)//:
?n
''W. M. Crawford, P../
District Engineer , .
( cc: Charles Weaver
Metropolitan Council
An Equal Opportunity Employer
4ifr® 337/
•
LD-79-PUD-13
Michelangelo Gardens
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 79-199
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MICHELANGELO GARDENS PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND AMENDING THE 1968 GUIDE PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of Ordinance 135
provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) ofcertain areas located
within the City, and
WHEREAS, the Michelangelo Gardens Planned Unit Development is considered
a proper amendment to the 1968 Comprehensive Guide Plan, and Smetana Lake
Plan, and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did consider Rembrandt Enterprises.
Incorporated's request for PUD approval of residential and open space uses
and recommended approval of the PUD to the City Council, and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie did hold a public
• hearing on November 6, 1979 to consider the request for PUD approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota as follows:
1. The Michelangelo Gardens PUD, being in the County of Hennepin
and the State of Minnesota, and legally described as outlined
in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD approval for residential
and open space uses as recommended by the Planning Commission
at their September 24, 1979 meeting.
3. That the PUD meet the recommendations of the staff report dated
September 20, 1979 from the Planning Department.
APOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this
day of , 1979.
•
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
•
John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL
I
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: John Frane
DATE: October 24, 1979
RE: LOGIS Resolution #79-179
The resolution has been revised and approved by the City Attorney.
•
•
33'13
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 79 - /'/p
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota is a member of
Local Government Information Systems (LOGIS), a joint powers
organization of local Minnesota government units formed pursuant
to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59;
WHEREAS, LOGIS has entered into an agreement with Optimum
Systems Incorporated (OSI), a California corporation, effective
as of August 23, 1978, and entitled "Local Government Management
Information System Agreement, Contract No. 2027" (hereinafter
referred to as the "contract"), whereunder LOGIS contracted to
purchase from OSI certain items of computer hardware and soft-
ware which, if accepted by LOGIS under the contract, will be
employed by LOGIS for the benefit of its members, including the
City of Eden Prairie, in providing economical data processing
services to the members of LOGIS.
WHEREAS, under the terms of the contract, particularly Sec-
tion 4.01(a) thereof, each member of LOGIS is required to •
execute a written statement, to be effective upon acceptance of •
the property under the contract, which runs in favor of both
LOGIS and OSI and which embodies the terms and conditions of
Paragraphs 4.01(c) thru 4.01(h) of the contract.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,
MINNESOTA AS FOLLOWS:
1. (4.01(c)) The City acknowledges and agrees throughout
the duration of the contract that, as between OSI and LOGIS,
title and full ownership rights to the GEMUNIS/3000 System and
all components thereof delivered to it remain with OSI. The
City further acknowledges and agrees that the GEMUNIS/3000
System and all components thereof, inclusive of the ideas and
expression therein contained, are valuable trade secrets and
proprietary information of OSI, whether or not any portion
thereof is or may be validly copyrighted or patented. The City
covenants that it will not make use of the GEMUNIS/3000 System,
directly or indirectly, for the benefit of any party which is
not a member of LOGIS, or which has not executed a written
statement satisfactory to OSI under the contract embodying the
substance of the covenants hereof as required by Section 4.01(a)
of the contract.
33-7y
2. (4.01(d)) The GEMUNIS/3000 System and all information
related thereto, in whatever form imparted to LOGIS or the City
by OSI in connection with OSI's performance under the contract,
will be deemed confidential and proprietary to OSI, will be held
in trust and confidence by the City, and will be safeguarded by
the City to the same extent that the City safeguards its propri-
etary material, which in no event will be less than that which a
reasonably prudent governmental unit would exercise under
similar circumstances. To those ends, the City agrees to take
reasonable steps necessary to ensure that the GEMUNIS/3000 System
and all information related thereto are not made available by
the City or by any of its agents, servants, and employees to any
other person, firm, or entity, except as permitted by the contract.
The City further agrees to take reasonable steps_neeessary to ensure
that all those above-named individuals having access to the
GEMUNIS/3000 System will observe and perform the obligations
hereby undertaken by the City.
3. (4.01(e)) LOGIS may modify any computer program compris-
ing the GEMUNIS/3000 System. All such modifications will be
deemed an amendment to the license granted by the contract and
subject to all of the terms and conditions of said license, and,
only for the purposes of such license, those modifications will
be deemed a part of the GEMUNIS/3000 as defined in the contract.
4. (4.01(f)) The City will reproduce and include OSI's
IL copyright notice wherever it appears on copies, in whole or in •
part, on any form, including partial copies and modifications, of
the computer programs and other materials comprising the GEMUNIS/
3000 System, inclusive of, but not limited to, documents and the
manuals delivered under the contract.
5. (4.01(g)) To the extent that the City modifies any docu-
ment or manual delivered to it relating to the GEMUNIS/3000
System pursuant to the contract, or incorporates any information
from a document or manual delivered to it pursuant to the afore-
mentioned license into a publication originating with the City
for dissemination by the City, then, and in such event, the
City will first comply with the provisions of Paragraph 4.01(f)
of the contract, as embodied in Paragraph 4 of this Resolution,
and the City will disseminate such document only to its agents,
servants, or employees.
• 6. The City makes the foregoing covenants, which run to the
benefit of LOGIS and to OSI, in fulfillment of the City's obliga-
tion under the contract, and effective as of the date provided
therein.
•
-2-
3 c
7. The City specifically declines to adopt in this Resolu-
tion the terms and conditions of Paragraph 4.01(h) of the contract.
Wolfgang Fenzel, Mayor
John Frane, City Clerk
C
-3-
•
33 6* •
•
•
•
•
•
•
4z 33 oa24
I
October 23, 1979
TO: Roger Ulstad
FROM: Keith Wall J(e,) •
SUBJECT: 911 Resolution
•
•
We did participate in a good share of the 911 planning process and are
satisfied that the final. 911 plan will meet the needs of our city.
Since we do not operate a Public Safety answering point (police and fire
dispatch center where 911 trunks terminate), our major concern throughout
this lengthy process was the result when dialing 911 on an Eden Prairie
telephone. It is likely,Northwesttern Bell equipment dependability not
withstanding, that emergency calls from our city will terminate at the
Hennepin County Sheriff's dispatch facility. The dispatchers will then
handle emergency calls as they have in the past.
The County is responsible for the development of a plan and the funding of
certain equipment costs, so they are asking our council to pass the
attached resolution.
•
•
3q1 •
RESOLUTION NO. 79-207
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 403 require that each
county submit a final 911 plan to the Department of Administration
by December 15, 1979 and each county shall have an operational
911 telephone system by December 15, 1982; and
WHEREAS, the Hennepin Emergency Communications
Organization(HECO) has prepared a final "911 Plan For Hennepin
County" that has been submitted to the Hennepin County Board of
Commissioners; and
WHEREAS, the rules promulgated by the Department
of Administration which govern the design and operation of 911 systems
in Minnesota require a certification by the county board that the final
911 plan meets the needs of the safety agencies whose services will
46. be available by dialing 911; and
WHEREAS, representatives of the City of
have participated in the deve..opment of the final"911 Plan For
Hennepin County".
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED that the City of
hereby certifies that the final"911 Plan For
Hennepin County"meets the needs of the safety agencies whose services
are available within the City'of ; and
IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of
recommends that the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners approve
the final"911 Plan For Hennepin County" as submitted by HECO.
I
•
•
October 16, 1979
TO: Roger Ulstad, Manager
FROM: Jack Hackin
•
SUBJECT: Authorization for Public Safety Director to'Advertise for
Bids on Mr Pack Charging System ;
I•would like to request permission from the City Council to advertise
for bids for an air compressor charging system for filling breathing
air packs that the firemen use when entering smoke filled buildings.
It is a strong possibility that we may only receive one bid for this
item. I checked with Minneapolis and Burnsville, who just recently
purchased this type of equipment, and both of them received only one
bid.
Receive permission from City Council November 6, 1979
Advertise for bids November 8, 1979
t. Close bids November t$, 1979
Council award contract November 20, 1979
I am requesting the above time schedule because of a possible price
increase of $500.00 by December 1, 1979. Unit would not be delivered
until after January 2, 1980.
If you have any questions, please call me.
Co
•
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jean Johnson, Assistant Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: October 9. 1979
PROJECT: VALLEY KNOLLS SECOND ADDITION
APPLICANT: Marvin H. Anderson Construction Co.
REQUEST: Preliminary platting of 13 single family lots,on 4 acres
- • zoned R1-13.5
BACKGROUND
In 1972 the Valley Knolls Addition was rezoned from Rural to R1-13.5 and pre-
liminary plattted into 49 lots. In 1973 a portion of that addition (39 lots)
was preliminary and final platted. The previous approvals were for a total
of 49 lots on approximately 22 acres, 3.45 of which was dedicated to the city
as park. The present request for preliminary plat approval will complete the
platting of the Valley Knolls Addition. The property on which the existing
home sits is 8/10 of an acre and was excepted from the 1979 plat. With the
addition of this property the total number of lots for Valley Knolls 2nd addi-
11 tion has increased from 49 to 52.
LOCATION MAP
-_ = Coachli ,A
- = - I
Manor-i tM (�--}�-ff A -
JQ -2:" =_7l =" enn 73-
_____
fi`f- ilione
�_� 272 S
- dliii
MIL -.::::
y4
ial;1.{.ti Country '" t
/� 2,N, ,�, Valley 7 ,Vista /1; `;.
1 o+s+ 2nd j
t4T ids l .. , E%i*--. R I-22 �/-
. _ RUB go ■ ,(R.�. �
(. a ra� •
j
'i- - _puck 'a + .�._,_girr i
—•''' "'— _ I222 33ZU - `� . ' 8. P
i '
•
Staff Report-Valley Knolls 2nd -2- Oct. 9, 1979 • .
EXISTING SITE CHARACTER
The majority of the site was previously graded and has since grown back in
weeds, etc. Large trees occur around the existing home and north of the
existing home. Presently, Duck Lake Road is being improved with utilities.
ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS: R1-13.5 District
'Minimum lot size 13,500 sq. ft. Setbacks:
Maximum units/acre 2 front 30 ft,
Minimum width 90 ft. • sides 1Q15 ft.
minimum depth 100 ft. rear 20 ft.
12 of the 13 lots proposed in the 9-24-79 plat do not meet the minimum lot size
requirement of 13.500 square feet. The previous preliminary plat of 1972 con-
tained 6 of 10 lots under 13,500. If 1 lot were dropped and the additional
footage added to the remaining 12 lots, all lots could meet the minimum lot
size requirment.
The previous plat had 10 lots on 3.14 acres (3.18 u/ac) and the revised plat
depicts 13 lots on 3.94 (3.3 u/ac).
SITE PLAN
The utilities being placed along Duck Lake Road allow 10 hook-ups for Valley
Knolls 2nd based upon the 1972 preliminary plat submitted bithe developer to
Reike, Carrot, Mueller Engineers. The developer should work with the City
Engineering Department and RMC to resolve the number of needed hook-ups. The
existing home should be allowed a hook-up so that it can be sewed when neces-
sary.
TRANSPORTATION
All of the lots access to Duck Lake Road.
Design some of the lots with *T. or turn around drives should be incorporated
to minimize vehicles backing onto Duck Lake Road.
TRAILS
The pathway system along Duck Lake Road is planned for the east side. The •
original staff report on the 1972 plan recommended some type of walkway be in-
stalled by the developer along Duck Lake.Road and Duck Lake Trail,
CASH PARK FEE
All lots, except the lot containing the existing home, shall be subject to
payment of the cash park fee applicable at time of building permit issuance.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
t The proposed residential uses are consistentwith the Guide Plan.
The Plat does not meet ordinance requirements for lot size and density.
The previous plat (excluding existing house) contained 10 lots and utilities
are being installed for 10 lots.
Staff Report-Valley Knolls 2nd -3- Oct. 9, 1979
RECOMMENDATIONS
ir The planning staff would recommend approval of Valley Knolls 2nd plat con-
tingent upon the following modifications:
1. All the lots be platted 13,500 square feet or larger, this
will require dropping 1 lot.
2. Developer work with the Engineering Department regarding
number and location of service hook-ups. •
3. 'T' drivers or turnarounds designed for some of the lots.
4. Payment of cash park fee at time of building permit appli-
cations.
5. Developer submit grading and development plans to the Nine
Mile Creek Watershed Distric for review and approval.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
331)-
' .
• I ,
' • • '.. 1 ...
•
. '• . •
..................L. .
• . 4` s,
-•' •• . .
••••• . .- ' . • -..-. • . .
. . •
4/0 .
. . • . • .
• ;7
410; " • , . <\, •:..• , i.,_1 I.. .. - — part of the SW 1/4 of
•. ,. , .- .,
.......,;,i •,..,... \> \, - 1J ....• ..• .J..... ..„ .. . , 0- -
— , • ..
-- 1.'... ri ., ...,..... \ •• 1.—1 ,
. . . . ...
, .•t •
• .4., 1 I.,/poi,......_...4. .4: i:,, rr _...: 1 1 -711.1 4' ..„ .. • . . .
..... • ' :
' !1 —•"4•••/ . •N Ar 1 --“..—. ..• --•••• :;t::....*• ...:•A,-*•••.e--:-•2,4 • ...•,t I ,
,..t..;,.......1..,....lar---- •41.Z t ,
r
1 —..---.--.- 2, -
: ,t • n ., (.... k
•::;.„, /...;.,,,,,,.;-:---49'9 ••• ,
• 7* • f '4
,•,.i. I:t::
. ,,• .414,.:;/•;•'44..4.---- .4-12%, , 1.•
..4*a —.4....1 •• :-4. . ...... ,, 4;4 ..'.•.....,..4.••:.;•te . '...IA,...; ' •• • ,. X',
•., .4 1 . /.•••.ir.•.• •.5•••A.,••e•'r.
.,,c:...:,`••••••ce':•••.7..•-•-••"...1•41 • :
1 t .LP ,ti...7...-:.-'7 '''''.4isi
. . . . . .
•....-.14 -.1 •4.,. A :' • ••..t-. 1--.1 •, /3
). .. . ,I'. '.4.
. • . I 1• . •
..„.......,...____—_ .t.
... • %, •I? ,k
.• t' .7/ 1•‘." ...
•
1 • '-:-.... -- 14C . ... . ,...._...,.. . :
-1-'''$•4
-"C'''I !,•" i
/ tido :
• .T. .•.'''''' -7'1 '12 . ..ze .1. ! 1
;:•2 • ‘1 11 •.., .., • La-• k • - .4
..... 7:?:7,....-It` ti,...c,r.•,--arst,q,.".:-..snrce-r '.
t r—r—, ,...,,, .FT—, 7 2, .
: • .1 I L., .r.__...., ,.. : 11.5-.
•.1 .4%• , • i I_.7.• ;I,... 1 1 /-', -•
I • 4.5,..i. c‘rx.eop,- in's.-ez,er...er
....
. .4-/ . \, *!.. 4*. .'
I ••
0.-•
'.'•. k
. •;. ------..?•." . .4...-- - ,--,-, •. •
4...
••••---: •..:„..,,,,.., ... • • • .
i:. ....,,. ,:; , , ,,. ‘ ...,........„ , _ -_, ,, . .1/4.
• ,.. .
„,.,..•; , , ...,,
4- . ry i.--;•.-_1 1 ,..>,,... ,;•--, ,--__..,,.. .... ..
. . ... • .. •. . . : . . -.: - -- • • •
/„..,-,-r-• .c.,,-..., 1:: .
..-lit 1 .r. .4, 1....-• ...-, a.. .. . • .....
. I.,' ... .r.7 `'. --- •:1 •••''.. N ' ..• ...i:-.:1 , ••'' . . . . .
. , • •• ..'..• 1
.. .,.• ..-..0.41,. t. •3••••• 1•
s••
' .. '•••'•.......... .,.
,. u• . L
.4 ... ._. -• ..'
.
t; I .' ' - . .. •/ .3 / i . •.%••••- 1.t
'..4i.
' : \... 1 a•-•,- 4/ .. ..
••—r-1.. 1 hr: I r."1-;•7 •': —- I
t......,- I. ,...1 .......r--. ; .., . :. • r-3--.- •
..._..,
I • • • ...- • •• -. i.
i -•• .. ....... .1...•:.• bi-•-\'4 \ 1 . • •
• $ a
— I I
:.• :
...,—.....—
...'';.i,••t.•-'t-•:'..1..'.... E..1.7,...r-:
—:-: ??.,•i•."':,-'...:•3•:••:-.r•.f•-•••;.•;.,.-..,-f.-•-.-. •-•.-••
•
.''.•/.—•/.._—. %_,4
... —--—.-
. 1972 Preliminary
Plat
il Valley Knolls
. •; • N_. -. S
2nd
Add.
.
...
• •
• ••5 • . 1. ."•••••... ....„...1:1=-- '-': • ' . .
i, -I' t*-• 11 „„... 1' .; .
• •
. tt• •• • i .1 • •i ',% e • • •
4, .e •, . 1, .•
,, !.1:••••-.••10.i .
1,. •“. , I /..4.‹....... .
• • 't
. I • 1 . It -,•••••11, :'• . % ‘.../ •I ,. • I
4, 1 1..-1..7.2... I! '• - II' . . \ /..• ',----7-
, ...
1 , I. '
. -. ....
1 ' '• • I •• ....................... . :.• 1 I
i .( • 1- • • ..r'TRAIL'. ..
)1
i-. ... :•-•*- •:-. • 11€ • . .
•
. t
r..:___...,-----7--- • - • ,- .
. , • .i .. . . , . •
. •
. . .. .- -••
• • . •
33Z3 4 .
• •
•
•
.J ——
(�tlA +f t. ...e.wa ► r 90DmS
w --�'^KE T C ;4.1.79q2 i 8 rw ox00. 1Z
U ..,4 Ib
U f °� ♦ ire r'1 ai
G r i�i f.r<t�.pn�i.04iloil�61261 l).l IE�., w� ;• ���s E l�.aa,cn
puz sttou xa{{sA .CIO} 3{?{d '� w in IT;',:.e:°.' .o. CAcs
1--- o
J y� ��. �o=M,I.,...,...• f:, rN�O
r - - , o z
/Casu}m}{atd pasodo.Id 616t t '•s `
_. .
x o6g i
.._ ,„
4.Er-ln,";T
�+ �•W Fwioo ww 4 A
. `V iNN.4. C nia • _ a.r qq �' r a
g; i-s5- a ;i-Ye it E z
y Ci.n "
1S p.p. •
e E':�i$2m5
_ ; d
t' O
I � I , + -�1NNr 11
g
•
r--1:13 , f i
® aN4^1.OP:�b.4� i iI • • 21�•m� _
r L - 00mt11 21
C • a I� 1-- ids' ' i e.z C7
ff�^ I gr.
100 D ;of. din N,'ZO
t, 3 I '' ' F mz 8 • 0-r 2
CD ! I pow cgs . -,. . ?X Go _
PI —
`►i C r r 14O a -1 f I 33 vs yr z
lit 1"0 s N1 8 r • • Z
g
1
4:8 1 L Ib '..• -•. .--._
o . y
• IC I'�t IN z N N;rfrl
L.
t.. ' J; •
;--1�0;. ,4I i• <
PI
- ' �I N
- M W E N: .• . w i I.
0. tw if
.. j mow rr.r :• A
II
(i 1> . 1zlr •
1= 11`19
17) 3) 1 1 4 1" 1 f
I . I 1 1 4 I 1 i
g.
• i• 1 lj:� 1111 I
! 1 1 I ( 1
::. . 111111 •
'• YM ✓. 7
•
unapproved
Planning Commision Minutes -7- October 22, 1979
Levit stated that he felt all the homes should have garages.
Bentley then suggested that the motion be amended to read Commission
reconmend to the City Council the rezoning from RM 6.5 and Rural to
R1-13.5 for Overlook Place per the staff report dated 10-17-79 with
the change that only lots 1 - 7 Block 1 be allowed the garage as an
option. The balance of the lots would be required to have a garage
according to city ordinances. Mover accepted amendment.
VOTE:- Carried 3-1
6. VALLEY KNOLLS 2nd, By Marvin Anderson. Request to preliminary plat
single family lots on 4.5 acres zoned R1-13.5. Located west to Duck
Lake Trail. A public hearing.
Mr. Fred Haas, Anderson Construction, gave a presentation explaining
that in 1972 Valley Knolls was rezoned from Rural to R1-13.5 and
preliminary platted into 49 lots. -In 1973 a portion of that addition
(39 lots) was preliminary and final platted. The present request for
preliminary plat-approval will complete the platting, and will include
giving Mrs. Miska approximately 15 feet on the south side and 20 feet
on the north side of her property, in order to allow her platting of
three of the thirteen lots being requested.
The Planner reported thatthe staff feels that the plat should be revised
so that each lot meets the requirement of 13,500 square feet, that the
developer work with the Engineering Department regarding number and
location of service hook-ups Payment of cash park fee at time of
C building permit application would be required, and the developer submit
grading and development plans to the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District
for review and approval.
Levitt inquired what the density of the 13 acres would be.
Planner replied that there would be 3 units per acre.
Levitt inquired why the whole development was not platted at the
same time. •
Planner replied that it was not platted because the utilities had not
been installed along Duck Lake Road. -
Glen Olson,1700 67th St W., Eden Prairie, Mn, stated that he is con- .
cerned about the cutting down of the oak trees on lot 7,and the drainage
of the area. He stated that he felt that there should be a definite
grading plan and that the grading should be supervised to insure that
it is done correctly. He also stated that he is concerned about the
amount of traffic ' that will be generated after Duck Lake Road is paved.
George Kissinger, 6601 Barberry Lane, Eden Prairie, MN voiced his
• concern of the oak trees on lot 7.
Bentley inquired whether Mrs. Miska had signed any type of an'.an agree-
ment to preTiminary plat her property or that she would accept any
special assessments or that she wishes to sell her land to Marvin
Anderson.
Planner replied Ctrs. tliska had not signed an application for preliminary
plat and that the petition for improvement of Duck lake Road had come
33115.
Unapproved
Planning Commission Minutes -8- October 22, 1979
from Marvin Anderson Construction and the developers of High Trail
41 Estates.
Fred Haas, Marvin Anderson Construction,stated that in,1972 they had
this land preliminary platted. The size of the lots were made smaller
at that time to provide more space for a nark
Glen Olson, 1700 67th St. W. Eden Prairie, inquired if there really
where any assessment on Mrs. Miska land.
Planner replied he was not familiar with the assessments on the land
and would check with the Engineering Dept. " '
MOTION: Gartner moved, Bentley seconded to close the public hearing_
on Valley Knolls 2nd. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Gartner moved to deny Valley Knolls request to preliminary
plat. Motion died because of lack of a sencond.
MOTION: Bentley moved, Levitt to recommend approval of Valley Knolls
2nd preliminary plat dated 9-24-79 based upon the staff report dated
10-9-79, contingent upon a signed contract between Elaine Miska and
• Marvin Anderson Construction stating that the parcel to be conveyed to
Elaine Miska from Marvin Anderson Constrution according to the pre-
liminary plat dated 9-24-79 be free and clear of existing assesments.
Motion carried 4 - 0.
V. OLD BUSINESS
Minutes of October 22, 1979. P. 2 Motion 4, line 2 Omit the word "an",
P.4. final Paragraph. vote should read (Toriesen and Bentley voting aye)
(Martinson, Levitt, and Bearman voting nay). P. 5 Motion should be
added between the third and fourth motion and should read:
MOTION 4: Bearman moved, Bentley seconded to recommend to the City
Council approval of the Hidden Glen P.U.D. concept as per the 9-24-79
plat and the staff report of 9-21-79 with the following change: That
the northern smaller lots not have a garage requirement, but that the
southern lots where no garages had been requested be developed with the
initial buyers option of having garages built or not. The motion was
defeated 2:4 (Bearman, Bentley voted aye; Martinson, Retterath, Toriesen
and Levitt voted nay). '
VI. NEW BUSINESS
NONE
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Levitt moved, Bentley seconded to adjourn at 1:15.
Motion carried.
• 331641
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.79-200
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT
OF VALLEY KNOLLS SECOND
BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Valley Knolls Second
dated' September 26:79, a copy of which is attached hereto and amended
as follows: -
is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie
Zoning and Platting ordinances and amendments thereto and is herein
approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the —day of
19 .
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
John D. Frane, City Clerk
SEAL
3�g(o
•
•
•
•
ii .. •
MEMORANDUM
•
TO: Mayor and City Council • • •
THRU: Roger K. Ulstad, City Manager
•
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services t`'y\�
DATE: October 26, 1979
•
SUBJECT: Request to Hire Appraiser for Miller Park Parcel 12
The City of Eden Prairie has applied for a 1980 LAWCON Grant for Parcel
f2 of Miller Park on Mitchell Lake. This project is ranked sixth of
twenty four project requests. It is fairly certain this project will
receive 50% funding and possibily 75% funding. •
One of the requirements for tho.•final application form is to provide
a current (within 6 months) appraisal of the specific site to be acquired. •
City staff requests authority to hire an appraiser to update the appraisal
IL of this property. .
Attached is a copy of the priority rankings for the LAWCON/LCMR projects.
As you will note; the Miller Park project is ranked sixth. Eden Prairie
Purgatory Creek project is ineligible due to the higher ranking of the Miller
Park project. Only one project per community is funded in the area of
planned urbanization.
The City received $100,000 in grant assistance for acquisition of Parcel •
#1 of Miller Park in 1979.
BL:md
•
•
• aw •
• \ .
TABLE 2
RTC:.::`R"(OED PRIORI:, RANR::IG FOR LAG'COM/LCMR FCNDIStC
AREA OF PLANNED CR?ANt2ATION3
Metro Metro State
Recreation Rankin; Pins. Agey Final Total
Rankin , w/Rousin; Rankin. Rankine Proieet :Jane Re?. No. Cost
NA2 2 2 • 1 Chanhassen-Lotus Lake Access 7196-1 $115,000 .
NA 1 3 2 Andover-Crooked Lake Accesa3 7151-1 $22,000
NA 3 4 3 Carver Councy-Lake Virsinia Access 7156-1 $56.600
NA 4 5 4 ;found-Lan;don Lake Access 7201-LA $67.500
'1 7 1 5 Ransey County.Nita 3ear Lake 8each4 7190-1 $156.300
i
4 6 7 6 Eden P_airia-M:ller ?ark 7131-1 $150.000
2 5- 12 7 Maplewood-North Nazelvood PLayfield 7145-1 $1.1,000
7 8 11 8 Coon Rapids-Hoover Park School 7224-1 $215.558
5 9 10 9 Inver Grove Heights-Valley Park5 7213-1 $190,000
3 10 14 10 Maple G.-owe-Cadar Isla School 7182-1 $204.690
Playfiald
. 10 16 8 11 Apple valley-Farquar Lake Park 7155-1 $91.445
6 13 15 12 Eagan-Rahn.P1mk 7144-1 $195,000
•
u 15 13 u Mimatouka-shadow Park 7146-L 8215,900
�. . 11 12 16 14 North St. Paul-Southwood Park • 714E-1 $75.000
8 • 11 _. 17- . - ---15' - Mains-Lochnese ?ark 7183-1 $110,000
14 • 22 6 16F Woodb r -Carver Lake Park 7198-1 $180,000
. 9 14 19 17 Andover-Crooked Lake School'Park 7152-1 $92,351
19 17 18 18 Mound-Indian Mound Park 7201-1 $132.300
15 18 22 19 St. Paul Park-Heritage ?ark Shelter 7107-1 , $27.000
18 19 21 20 81oosington-Notmandale Park Pond 7185-1 $15-.000
20 24 20 21 Crean ood-Meadvilla Park 7119-1 $36.J03
21 24 22 Moundnvinw-Silver View ?stk. 7184-1 8104,100
16 23 13 13 Little Canada-Spooner ?ark 7200-1 $.10,2.00
17 20 * * Edan Prairic-Pnr-,acary Creek ?ark 7130-1 5800.000
,
* :neligibla applications due to a higher ranked project from the sane cotruait7:
Eden ?rai:ia-P z;atar7 Creek Park. el. No. 7130-1. $800.000
1 ..ak•.vcd C.:c:_t:..r Co1L se. Nacre Trail Araa. Refo-al 40o20-1 - :his aoel cation has been
-clef-,d by ."t to the :rails '.;i:hin Local Parks ;ant ,ro,ran of :he 197 C'rnilws Outdoor
Rc_rra::on Act.
•'::A•' :cans not applicable. Recreation criteria vas not spoiled to the priority lake accosts
prreets.
1 ?-tor to devslao-^:t the I R and .4idevcr rust satisfy LiwCCN ;rant recci_enents as to :ease
cvnerthip at the land.
at to ..rx.:er_. Raesev C:o t: 13 to confer with .Y-..OT aacriet Of:ica 9 as to the location
o: :.^.o pr.•?.).ts park tierces :sad.
S _nver Crove iei:,h:s, prior ru davelorsent, is to confer with MaOOT :o inaura no conflict with
the prcposed Latayet:a Freevey.
•
r..
NOV 1117/
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
•>))))) CONSULTING ENGINEERS■LAND SURVEYORS■SITE PLANNERS
Reply To:
12800 Industrial Park Boulevard
Plymouth.Minnesota 55441
October 29, 1979 03121550.3700
Mr. Roger Uistad
City Manager
City of Eden Prairie
8950 County Road No. 4
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Subject: Feeders, Inc.
Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed -
100 Year Flood Plain Elevation
Dear Mr. Ulatad:
We have discussed with the Watershed District Engineer, Bob
obermeyer, the status of revising the 100 year flood plain elevation
for the subject property to 821. As per Mr. obermeyer they have not
received any correspondence from the City of Eden Prairie regarding
this matter. •
Attached is a copy of a letter which was sent to you earlier
regarding the adjustment of the flood plain elevation. As per conversa-
tions with City Staff, the City Council had suggested that the supportive
data be submitted to the Watershed.
We suggest that all required information be submitted to the Water-
shed District immediately, because of the current proposed planning of
the Feeder's, Inc. development in this area.
If you have any questions or require any further information, please
advise.
Very truly yours,
MCCOMES-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
Cull PaPeearson, P.E.
PP:sc
Enclosure
cc: Maclay Hyde, Feeders, Inc.
Robert Obermeyer, Watershed District •
14768
Minneapolis-Hutchinson-Alexandria-Granite Falls
•
•
•
•
•
•
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
' .>)))))t' CONSULTING ENGINEERS 7 LAND SURVEYORS" SITE PLANNERS
•
Reply To:
12805 Ohon Memorial Highway
M'innsepolit,Minnnoia 55441
June 8, 1979 1812T 8�3To0
•Mr. Roger listed •
City Manager
City.of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
• Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
Subject: Petition for lowering flood
Contour Purgatory Creek
Dear Mr. Ulstad:
•
We attach a petition from the owners of land adjoining the flood
way of Purgatory Creek. Over the past few weeks we have held meetings
with you, your staff and with Mr. Obermeyer regarding the possibility
of lowering the flood contour.between State Highway No. 5 and Research
Road.
The attached letter from the watershed district show that this .
is feasible with the removal of the culvert located in the field road
to the north of Research Road.
If you have any questions regarding this meter please advise.
Very truly yours,
•
McCOMBS-kNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
Dickman C. Knutson, R.L.S.
DCK:sh
Enclosure
•
•
•
•
•
•
3310
Minneapolis•Hutchinson•Alexandria•Granite Falls
MFk10RAND1114
TO: Mayor and City Council
'T1RtU: Roger K. Ulstad, City Manager
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
DATE: October 26, 1979
SUBJECT: Petition for Lowering Floodplain - Purgatory Creek and •
Proposal for Land Planning Services
Attached is a copy of the petition from the owners surrounding the
floodplain of Purgatory Creek off of Highway 5 requesting the lowering
of the 100 year flood contour from 824 to 821 in the area from Research
Road to State Highway S. Also, attached is a copy of a proposal for
land planning services for the joint planning of the Purgatory Creek
Open Space and Floodplain within the same arca. This proposal was
initiated by the landowners and has been reviewed by the Parks, Recreation
and Natural Resources Commission.
Although, Barr Engineering Company have advised the City that culverts
• downstream have been planned to allow the capacity of the increased flows
that would be created by this lowering of the floodplain, the Watershed
District has not reviewed this request to date. The City is the proper
agency to make the initial review of this type of request.
The major reason for the request of this petition is to decrease the
costs of the proposed southwest section of the ring road that will pass
through this arca. If the floodplain contour is lowered, the ring road
would require considerably less fill. It should ba noted that this lowering
would not move the proposed roadway any further into the floodplain. The
road would simply be at a lower level. There is a significant amount of
laud on the west side of the existing floodplain that would be
removed from the floodplain, as can be seen by reviewing the attached map.
The Council reviewed this resolution at their August 21, 1979 meeting and
requested that the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
review this request prior their taking action.
At the October 15, 1979 meeting,the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource::
Commission reviewed the petition for the lowering of the floodplain alone;
with the proposal for land planning services for this same area. The
Commission took the following action:
MOTION: Krueil moved to recommend that the City Council deny the petition
for lor:e.ring the floodplain until such time as the upstream affect has been
properly determined and a land use study completed. '1'angen seconded.
DISC)!SSTtN: V:m kter asked if the study could he limited by price and if
bids could be taken on the study. He was told that bids would be taken
and that setting a cost limit was a good idea. There was additional
discussion an to u:hat this study should be limited to. This should be
determined by City staff and Watershed District staff.
VO'tli: Motion p ssed unanimously. 3391
•
•
•
Staff concurs with the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
recommendation that the petition for the lowering of the floodplain be •
denied until a study of this area be completed. Furthor, that City
staff meet with Watershed District staff and the property owners to
.determine what the scope of the study should include, cost limits and
cost sharing. When this information is gathered, the staff would then
return to the City Council with a recommendation for action regarding
this site. •
BL:md
•
•
•
•
3342 •
•
•
•
•
We the undersigned owners and taxpayer of the property as shown
on the attached drawing hereby petition the City of Eden Prairie to
pass a resolution, to be forwarded to the Riley-Purgatory Watershed
District, requesting the lowering of. the 100 year flood contour from
824 to4821 in the area from Research Road to State Highway No. 5.
According to Hr. Robert 0benncyer, of Darr Engineers, the Watershed
District Engineer, with the removal of 60" culvert under the field road
north of Research Road, the 100 year flood contour for this
area can be reduced to the 821 elevation. The basis for this
request is: Section 14 of-the flood plain ordinance governs amendments
and provides:
"The flood plain designatiods of the Flood Plain Map and •
• Profile shall not be removed from any areas unless it can
be shown that the designation is in error or that the
areas to be so removed are filled to an elevation
at or above the flood protection elevation, provided
that any areas no removed are contiguous to other lands
lying outside the flood plain." .
• The removal of the Northrup Ring road crossing in effect makes the
present flood plain designation "in error." Thank you.
Vads fi-- !./tifrOL. ----------.
(/tee !°rurdee,T .
itt / .6/1/H nlil_t/
•r,r:� f� . .
/ /'/ L.:Ai:a 22 r-r.
��
(a, 1 0.q ' (1 J
• b•e„kt._ . .p.,..1..........„ ____________
.....__________
3393 .. act '
•
1
. .1
. ..
. . .
•• • •11
.............-- .• fccs-rt-zr...------....==s .
ITT__-----...... =_--
.."7--`.-f1..sr..'-' .r.._i t1t;..,114-.,;;7'..7a1 i1S,4.4,1.....:.1'•1..Z:‘,.:L.N..Z:.-......F.„-,..:•,:..:'....%-._`_-..!',:i.!,:...•..,.'._':ff.-:•!,'•-‘.;S.1..•'..-.-F.'.1.„„c1'..734..-.t../.:(./.,/4.j,.:..1
.f,.141....,.,‘...,(1:.,5.-..7..•,.....-:::r....-_ .,1 -v.;.:,L..„..„(... .•.•.._7_..;
Lr —_,.tf...:"./....'V.....,.4,"i,.-.1,."2...:,•.f....'..:..........,.....,-1,...)„-..*...\.4.„.t,5 A.1.•.7..t
,_.„n
7 I
i..
..•- • :,.1,,.,...:;_• . ...• . 1,•,,,....rz;'r i 1-\;-t=::.-Is:z .,,---- ...1:---,\\-- i
• : .c,--7...r4' /-.I .; t . . ,:-..:,. .,4‘' '
. •-...',..._:,.•,.•• .!..*-:t..1.---*-1.-:.•-..\ ..-..... ...\s.‘ ,
r
`: .,4 . ,2,,.. ,._.:.... ,.,: s : __.' ••• .;:-:,„...,..4:7.7.--,'V; 7--'"'-'• '
:j.lt.:,;,-:,•..t:r- - .."- '..... r ,,
. '.. i<c....•Li 4(. -'2-') 1-.
„„,...". : ,.••• t , .. ,.
-''',.•.•*Al."4/••, „,..• • ',.. • 144 ',......
'11 71 • ..t ..,,,,,,, ,.‘ .., . ,
...,,..„........_ .. . ......„.. ,... Nocnsow:"... • • I -A-.V . I :. '<.1:.:'0...........:. ..,...\.t .
1 0,-
---4.(1..1_:;I. .:.....1\a,,I -• \• •••'t • c ^ I 1 cp - • ..=1 s .':1:-:::---le-...h. -:.*
- . 5•.;;:..Y.i.i ....-- -•• -.' ,'? :,..,,,-:.\-7... - ! 1 . \ -. 1 - .. • -. hs•k•-•/, '.'i\ ''
:.•: '' ',..... z.-7.1 t 1.-',..1/4,\" 1 —'). . '•-•.•si.. . . i, ..•,_0,„
... ,. .... . ‘ •. - '•••• ••- FEEDERS.ZUG. .... .7z.. . i....
.- 4•1:5-: ',. .•t _ •. •• • c • 4cil :Pr--"*.-----•S‘. i' •.: • \
..,.. /..-1 .:-.Ts.. • -, .- , . • t. ' -- \ ---------- :,,A.;,...1,...
;-.7.:-.;;%-*.:;::' •-••;;:,•--••• 1..: .7.'• ..:• :L.'. ....Z. ii; • ... •.6.-15 T.:N-e..... 821f\ '---, r''''.;i ,
c....„1.:_:,- -..-z--.... ..• 1.-).... •
1
---.,),
,. _ Ci2.,„:„.. ,,fir.,/CoNro,.,- ,, !,::ef.,....j.•
--•-::za.f-'"----:'"...leEike-rti E.);.,./.1 eruct -.; .„ - . ‘i 1.I. .1. • 11ki r
l'...
.. t . Ai t • t \ . . •‘,..,t.i -
-..,:-...-.4.•;:-.-..--::-4 ---,--,- ._ ...... ... . ..... :-- • • la _Li__ .,_ .i..11... .
:. .
. . ..1 • .
7.,..1.--_-_-7 -1 . - .\ •,,,.• • ' '(ks r:'. ) trA\! r• .•
- :!..• 4
,_,.- .- •• ' • X'-,N," , •-. 1.;---e----:-- - fill:L___ - 1.1 --- i 1 .
:.- --k .q---,---- -,-- ----7 1-----•--... ‘.... .,---...---.."•:,4 t• • • ll . .. ,
_ .• ,,
) _; _ : i - ,p. -, v. . ,.•-•• . _ _ i
: -•- ..4------f—.--i•---.--------, __.....-
yr"; • -: • • • • ' •
. J.
i . r 4—_-__N. •,, .re.ano5,z.o. 821 .' ,1... ,
• _
1 NI .
1 1 v.ciao.arstil C.0%-aT c:)•)C2
• -......\,.. -,,--. -, , , .... SLE2MEL-SM.At?', . . I .,i , t-.),.
............:!.,.-.4.7 •------,-- -- DCVO._ C 0 Re.1.: ....; , 't ; . ./7,)':./.'i;•. ,
•"-e:7:"" .-.")-." t ._.1 • 1 ‘ -/.:--- • i
, .--.
•....... I : ( t . \ 4.4' •
).-.}
''.1•:'..-. "f4-4":":"•'... •:71:::;: i :1E./ti I: AND f:resoN '1. - ....:.7".•-, ; ... Col....n-c
• :I-- •••;•.'(;.;--;: '')--:::: :•7::./1 I ".i . . • . ,
• ''''• s_ ;•-•::..':. •'1.-,''-7-;'--..-j-/( ' *- •
•• ••••••::::::.,..-.7-;-:- ".;,-----1../1
c.....".....„
-•:;_ ,. .;,..
" . .
••-• ':;.•-•:.7.. •,::•'.(--e: _ 1--' i_ ,__....., .., 1_:...__:.___._... ......2--.. ....., •-i—_,...- -•:7 ;.... ......•..:.•:...:..:.:: .
--:„........:_...-z...-.. ,..:•,,•-• \ _ \<..i ____, . ,i........7:_____:j.. .- :Ir...„ ../i //, „.. :,..:,.... ..7 '
-:-...'..--•-••":•:--1: -&:'\1_,,.) ,,;:.,,...„.:..., 1_,_.::.._:\A,., . r- .-.........,-----...,. • :•• f......._..... ............,....J.77 /il \.1'1--‘ •
:1'.••••-•-•-• -'`- -I/::/'‘•‘•\` • f 1:-.- -- , . — ..il -• .1/ / ', ...0-,, ,
"N. , ''' t ,"." ,. 1,1./--...• 1.--is. k•i • •" r.—--- • ' .."--•-•,-..-; •-,• e•:
N7:-. ••\-11;nmAr•g.,:Grom;I:,-Ali.... „t?y i _!..! • ,• .7-;',(..-•.."'.:',:.":,';:•,":--.•,,.*../'''..0::- .
•'`..--- ' "1 -.-.--.•'•-•*:.-, ..''':.•\\). I; - .- . ,•::--z- z`,7> .
/
).f:.7.S;-,41-,./ 4:-.--.,-;:-......- . i'..,..:..) . • `.. .."' ; • •.•!,.:.'„,„----; 7.1 '...:•j ' i ,' , .'• •)\e i -
•••1. 1.••//,'"1:' -I,...\ •-,- • ,....L.,-z----L-,•-.4.. %. • \: :/.
.. :I•Z.--,-..!.c....- ,'--.1 • -.1 .-'!-0...,'••-."----....r ' 77:'• '7'7:77- •*"t-•-•'"-'' if* .;• ,•'..... ! , \ ,,
.:-_:.017.7-= \•• ,.-, I „,..,' ....1 ....•:.../ . a ), -..` --.• •••• ••• V /
:... \ ,r'' . .. IP'(1/ . t' ' i...••••1.-• • i•-. * • - • • ' . •*• • l'n
, . .-...,. • -•• . .-..: .2f...4.5" 6 'to,....A-7-', : ..: At: ••••i:\ •.., -r...t -•-• 1.
. •• ‘.,.'A 7 '• 1 , I. 0- IN %A.......- •••• ) .
, • I. .
•
.. • •
•
;141.1
• .. .
• ,•• •
• .• II I I I•ci :
•
S . •
• October 1, 1979
•
Mr. Roger Ulstad
City Manager •
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
Mr. Ulstad:
I attach for your consideration two (2) copies
of a proposal for professional land planning
services for the joint planning of the Purgatory
Creek open space and flood plain area lying
between Highway 5 and the proposed East/West
Parkway in Eden Prairie. Please review it and
if you have questions, simply give me a call.
On the otherhand, if you wish to discuss
the proposal or have me meet with any other
I of the participants, I will be happy to do so
at your convenience.
BRAUER & ASSOCIATES LTD., INC.
Frgd Hoisingtori/
Vice President
mt
Enclosures
•
tr
•
IJJJ •
3395
7901 Clyin j Cloud Drive,Eden na te,Minnesota 5'5344 0 (612)9•11-1660
•
June 14, 1979
4r
City of Eden Prairie
City Council
8950 Eden Prairie Road SS
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
RE: Proposal-Agreement for Professional Planning and
Engineering Services
Eden Prairie Sector Golf/Development Project
Council Members:
This letter proposal outlines a scope of services, a fee schedule
and other elements which will serve, if approved, as an agreement
between the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, herein referred to as
the OWNER and BRAUER & ASSOCIATES LTD., INC., herein referred to
as the CONSULTANT.
It is the intention of the OWNER to retain the CONSULTANT to pro-
vide professional planning, engineering, landscape architecture,
administration and other assistance in development plan prepara-
tion, environmental assessment preparation and processing, preli-
minary engineering and coordination with the City of Eden Prairie
for the development of a golf development project site of approxi-
mately 1,000 acres in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, referred to as the
PROJECT.
The OWNER and CONSULTANT agree as set forth below:
A. SCOPE OF SERVICES - BASIC SERVICES
The CONSULTANT shall provide normal professional services on
an interdisciplinary basis required to complete the 'following:
1. Basic Site Inventory and Analysis for the purpose of iSen-
titication and definition of existing conditions in the
following areas:
a. Office and field check boundary monumentation, 'ease-
i meats and other property survey considerations as a
basis for property identification, planning analysis,
and design control (does not include actual
topographic or boundary survey).
b. Prepare current base map using existing boundary .end
,.
topographic mapping to indicate the current site con-
/ an an accurate basis for planning, design
• and development drawings.
V
.. .. _ - .. r.w.. rn tr a.\n t4 li.nil
City of Eden Prairie -2- June 14, 1979
c. Identify and describe zoning and platting ordinance +�
requirements so that appropriate application proce-
• dures can be followed and review City Comprehensive
Plan Concepts and proposals as they affect the
PROJECT.
d. Locate and evaluate public utility improvements in
place on or adjacent to the site, including sanitary
sewer, storm drainage structures, watermain, gas and
electric services, streets and storm water ponding
areas, and the same for proposed services.
e. Evaluate existing natural am: other related conditions
• from available documents and on-site observations as
basic input for preparation of an environmental
assessment of the impact of the proposed project.
•
• f. Identify, review and analyze applicable regulations of
agencies other than the City (DNR, EQB, MHD, Hennepin
• County, Metropolitan Planning Commission, School
District, and other Special Purpose Districts).
•
g. Review and evaluate development goals and objectives
provided by the OWNER as a basis for plan recommen-
dations.
h. Prepare Planning/Design Program Report in letter form
)
which will outline the planning objectives, develop-
ment strategy and time schedule, and development para-
meters.
i. Meetings as required with OWNER and public agency
staff for coordination and review but no (0) public
meetings.
2. Prepare Schematic Concert Development Plan for OWNER eva-
luation and direction prior to preparation of platting and
zoning applications. The plan will indicate most
appropriate land uses:
a. Major center and guide plan land uses.
b. Major recreational facilities:
. trails . field games
. golf . conservation areas
c. Community facilities:
. center . arena
. swimming pool . maintenance center
Additionally, locations and configurations of tracts to be
divided for sale, location of roads and public services,
general shape and grade level, for development sites, and
recommendations of development phasing for public facilities. 3
3331
City of Eden Prairie -3- dune 14, 1979
• 3. Preparation for Common or Public Facility Areas only:
a. Design Development of the Concept Plan including pre •
-
paration of rezoning and development plan for approval
by the City, Watershed District, DNR and County.
Submission documentation will include:
i. Design Development Proposal including land use and
zoning designations, streets and right-of-way •
reservations, common or public areas and facili-
ties, utilities (except electric and gas) schema-
. tics and other information required to describe
• the plan proposal.
ii. Site Grading and Drainage plan to show general
shape and configuration of the building sites pro-
posed, storm sewers or open channels required,
• storage areas and operating levels and other data
required to describe the drainage plan.
iii. meetings as required with OWNER and agency staff
but no (0) public meetings.
•
C b. Presentation and Processing of Design Development
Proposal and Rezoning through public agencies •
including presentation at public meetings, meetings •
with board and agency staff, preparation of supplemen-
tal or additional materials requested during the pro-
cess and regular meetings with OWNER to report on
progress and status of the process (up to four (4) •
meetings).
c. Prepare and Submit Environmental Assessment worksheet
documentation which describes potential environmental
impacts as a result of the proposed development to the
City and assist in preparation of a submittal to N CR. •
d. Represent the OWNER before the NEQB at hearings, pre-
pare additional or supplemental information, make pre-
sentations before the Technical or other committees of
the tilQB and provide other services as required to
process the EAW, if required.
B. SCOPE OF SERVICES - ADDITIONAL SERVICES
The following services are not covered in Paragraph A, and if
•
any of these service:: are authorize.' by the OWtaat, they shall
be paid for by the Otafla; as hereinafter provided:
•
3393
•
•
•
•
I;
City of Eden Prairie -4- June 14, 1979
)
. 1. Prepare and Process an Environmental Impact Statement.
2. Direct and Coordinate Preparation and Submittal of the
FlPlat.
•
3.. Golf Course and Major Field Games Area:
a. Development Cost Estimates.
• b. Management and Maintenance Recommendations.
c. Detail Design Development, Construction Drawings and
Specifications.
•
• d. Preparation of Water Appropriation Permits.
4. Prepare Construction Documents for streets, utilities,
drainage, landscape, site preparation, lighting, struc-
tures and other work required and specifically authorized
by the OWNER.
4L5. Bidding Procedures.
6. Construction Observation.
7. Inspection.
8. Construction Management.
9. Redesign, Revisions, Additions to or Deletions from docu-
ments previously approved and accepted by the OWNER.
10. Additional Professional services as specifically required
and authorized by the OWNER.
C. FEES FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
The OWNER agrees to pay the CONSULTANT for progress on or
completion of professional services outlined in Paragraph A,
above, as follows:
1. For the CONSULTANT'S services described in Paragraph Al,
Inventory and Analysis, a lump sum fee, including all
expen cs, in the amount of EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS
($8,000.00) payable monthly in proportion to the services
completed and billed.
2. For the CONSULTANT'S services described in Paragraphs A?,
Schematic Concept Plan, a lump sum fee, including all
expcnsen,in the amount of FIFTEEN Tl1OUSA::O FIVE: UUUIWED
DOLLARS ($15,500.00) payable monthly in proportion to the.
Services completed and billed.
•
3�qq
•
City of Eden Prairie -5- June 14, 1979
3. For the CONSULTANT'S services described in Paragraph A3a,
4 Design Develoonent of the Concept Plan, a lump sum fee in
the amount of TWENTY-ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($21,000.00)
payable monthly in proportion to the work completed and
• billed.
4. For the CONSULTANT'S services described in Paragraphs A3b,
A3c and B1 through B10, a specific fee basis to be
established as part of the authorization to proceed with
those services or the hourly rate plus expenses fee basis
outlined below:
Senior Professionals $47.00 per hour
Professionals $18.00 - 39.00 per hour
Technicians $13.00
25.00 per hour
Administrative $10.00 per hour
a. The OWNER shall compensate the CONSULTANT for all
reimbursable expenses on the basis of actual expen-
ditures directly connected with the PROJECT, including
mileage, cost of soil borings, testing or special con-
sultants as directed by the OWNER and identifiable
materials, services or supplies used in reproduction
of records, drawings and specifications or field work.
b. The OWNER shall compensate the CONSULTANT for all
overtime required by the OWNER'S schedule involving
technical and administrative personnel at''vne and one-
half (1-1/2) times the hourly rate.
D. PAYMENTS TO THE CONSULTANT shall be made as follows:
1. Statements will be submitted to the OLWNER on a monthly
basis, with a breakdown of time and expenses for services
performed, or work completed, through the 25th of the pre-
vious month.
2. Payments on account of the CONSULTANT'S services are due
and payable within 30 days of receipt of CONSULTANT'S sta-
tement of services rendered.
E. OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES
The OWNER shall make available or allow access to all existing
data related to the work and all other data or information
which may develop that could possibly have a bearing on the
decisions or recommendations made under this Agreement. The
OWNER shall specifically provide:
3u(ro
f
•
•
City of Eden Prairie -6- June 14, 1979 •
•
( 1. Legal descriptions, deeds, boundary and topographic Gur- )
veys, zoning, annexation, or permit agreements, and other
data relevant to the property ownership, restrictions,
easements, etc.
2. Property Management information including current wildlife
or soils management plans, agricultural or timber manage-
ment plans and all other data relating to resources.
3. Budget or finance information which will affect develop-
ment and construction schedules, methods and facilities.
4. Payment of all filing or processing .fees and charges•o€
public agencies and timely payment of CONSULTANT'S fees.
5. Marketing or other information which will serve as a basis
for establishing the mix of various residential types.
6. All existing data and plans for public utilities and
drainage. '
7. Additional data or information which will have a bearing
on the planning or design conclusions and recommendations •
of the CONSULTANT.
t8. Legal counsel, advice and services available to the
CONSULTANT during the term of this agreement on any or all •
matters related to the PROJECT such as, but not limited
to, title opinions, interpretations of agreements, cove-
nants and laws affecting the PROJECT, advice and assis-
tance in processing applications, review and prepara-
tion of PROJECT agreement documents, participation in
presentations to public agency staff and boards, and
general counsel on the legal implications of all sub-
stantive or procedural aspects of the PROJECT itself.
F. TERM, TERMINATION, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS •
•
1. The Term of the Agreement/Contract shall be concurrent .
with the work authorized.
2. Termination may be accomplished by either party at any
time by written notice, and shall be effective upon
payment in full for all services performed to the date of
receipt of such notice.
3. The OWNER and the CONSULTANT each binds itself, its part-
ners, successors, assigns and Llal representative, to the
other party of this Agreement, and to the partners, .suc-
f censors, assigns and legal representatives of such other
party with respect to all covenants of this Agreement.
•
•
. 3q01
•
•
City of Eden Prairie -7- June 14, 1979
S 4. Neither the OWNER nor the CONSULTANT shall assign, sublet
or transfer his interest in this Agreement without the
written consent of the other.
G. NONDISCRIMINATION
The CONSULTANT will not discriminate against any employee or
applicant for employment because of race, color, religion,
sex, national origin, physical condition or age. The
CONSULTANT will take affirmative action to insure that appli-
cants are employed and that employees are treated during
employment without regard.t'o.their race, color, religi,on,.sex, . ..
• national origin, physical condition or age. Such action shall
include but not he limited to the following: Employment,
upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment, advertising,
layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compen-
'sati.on and selection for training including apprenticeship.
H. CONSULTANT'S RECORDS, DOCUMENTS AND INSURANCE
1. The CONSULTANT shall maintain time records for hourly fees,
• design calculations and research notes in legible form and
will be made available to the OWNER, if requested.
•
C 2. The CONSULTANT shall carry insurance to protect him from
• claims under Workman's Compensation Acts; from-•claims for
damages because of bodily injury including death to his
employees and the public, and from claims for property damage.
3. The CONSULTANT reserves the right to secure and maintain
statutory copyright in all published books, published or
unpublished drawings of a scientific or technical
character, and other works related to this PROJECT in
which copyright may be claimed. The OWNER shall have full
rights to reproduce works under this Agreement either in
whole or in part as related to this PROJECT. One copy of
each drawing shall be provided in reproducible form for
use by the OWNER, but the original drawings will remain
the property of the CONSULTANT.
I. EXTENT OF AGREEMENT AND APPLICMULE LAW
1. This agreement represents the entire and integrated
agreement between the OWNER and the CONSULTANT and super-
sedes all prior negotiations, representations, or
agreements, whether written or oral, with respect to the
PROJECT. This agreement may be ani,,nded only by written
instrument signed by both OWNER and CONSULTANT.
!1102-
•
•
City of Eden Prairie _g_ June 14, 1979
2. Unless otherwise specified, this Agreement shall be
• governed by the law of the principal place of business of
' the CONSULTANT.
J. The OWNER hereby contracts for the Basic Services as outlined
in Paragraph(s) of this Agreement. 1
P
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the OWNER and the CONSULTANT have made and
executed this Agreement,
•
This day of , 1979.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
Eden Prairie, Minnesota In presence of.
IL •
BRAUER & ASSOCIATES LTD., INC.
Eden Prairie, Minnesota In presence of:
Pa at. , Ft.L.A. v •
President
vww
•
NO3
. .
. .
•
, .
..", -.•''••- ' I •.1..—r•: a
TTT
1 Mere? 5
• I . ‘• •
„... .. ... %. 1, •1 . .'
• a --"'''.4'r • . r :
••-•. • , • .4.• • ...,....., •-. ..... es.-I-••-7-A-.•
s• ..'
1...7 .). -: i ..-=,,v ‘.. • • •:
-• / -.6,_ ,P,•., s i ...., •••• \ • I s•••••••
•
-• ' S- •••••. • •••••
.a. -- ••••••. -...
/ ' I '
••• .-7• i :•-t•-•,-r--1"..... -...• .
•u••. f.. • • • .....
••r...1 .--.'T-77.- •••••••••-••.•
•x- • ..-
-.. • .- • ' '•
- •••
III..`.....4.-P 7 -:--1--5''''''''..:%...E•)ttjtillEl. it_-:_ \____...._:_r_.,„.::.,_._--I
•.‘ *--;;:3,--:, .•.tti•Jet• " •• '''•••/•' 1 ti '
/...i•• -'" •.---.—
--- •••••i •----:=77.7--..-_,-f•-•
• ...\ .......,....— • :47.--..,.:-•• P. .„....„ ••
--... I
‘-•-•A:•1.7.-t..•.••=e-:.
.....
I -: „.--....
• i . .".'•,•;:7 ;:-"..-7. _-•—_-.,-.. r"...-'‘ ....-- :. I .... ....
•••••••••,•-'•••-....., ....1.--.- •...7.1,. a.. .7...:.,,.....'...... • a.
l - .---9./...4Y a.•••• •••Z•••••••••-_,-•-••-- • • ••••.......... . ..-•
I ./ .----.--•-•-
/ •s•••....4'?"••• 1......• . ,,.•=sz*
..-:;„.....-—I ... •• -
•
i ..:.-r•-=
I.
I „.
.7" .:--,Z•fl tr., ) V'
•
, .......s. • I . .- $ •
a..•\ •• • * s • .
• •.a '/ '\ •• • . ......, , ... .
. •s ......• ,,. •••••••.c....--.--..
/ . • •,.. .. f.-t,.;./*•'•--.. . 1 .
. a'- • •"7... . ...
-. .. 4 •
•C• • -•• • -L. • ..• . 4 - '...
• • -...---1.
, ....• ..
.„. ..„.. t.----•• •4: ____A..•., . . ..1•0 ..
...........r...... ..• ', 1.... ilts voi to so ps um mg mg etr; '.. _______---.-.. - ••7•••,•*e
.... - ••••. ..
.? .........._.._-r--- W.71.11* .. ,........... 46 . ....e.
-- -•:--• • • -----••••-.aira... eaSA tg. •
-*••-•-•••...-.......1 1
• '•-r• •-.. --wax%112- •
' . 1-4 ••1 • •
• •••
• ..I.. ..-..----.
...-
. ------ 7••••••• - A. ...-•-
--a
.......
ILL
--
--.1.---'4...,04,4'. t. •--..-.....
----K.: ,
.•:i -t-.- .-------
Edon .,
. ---1-: ; n
• 44P
''' ?.- •- Pralrte
-- *.'...?;_I It -_ —.- Center
' e
.,
) .4 .,. i . 1 i-
, ‘..........
'
__ ..:-•.• * n
•
• 41.•.e,d4*e
_-- _
-
1
.
u • _•
'•s N•
c'••s •
......--:.-'—______R-1. . • • :•:-.-0—:17--- • • ,. ._.........
, •
_ .
g ASSESSMENT
.. •
o . • . .
-' laltc:"1 Fr% 1
tt..) . i '..e
-.. .-
-4,...-
-- g •__L__) • U . •
__ • G.
Ilse*tch Rd. -
6 ,•-,:- •
-
••• es OM r.44 C.0 IIIII Eial ' •••
1 •'•_....,--;.0 11. Carty.i„...0, •• .
.. . • - - • 10. 1•• •••••••••-••••--'- -." '-- : .. • ' as'•..
...... • • . I • "."-•• •
7.• it • ' [.. •..-.' . ;•".
0 . !
•• i I •* !, •••••:!..
•
. - -. ' •'••.
. . +. ...., s •
• •PI
.•
. a
. . • • •
(. .. ........ ... --.- P*.
••• • ••'. i ..2••P::` :.. •
:•
• '. ,.... ..;.• '
•••••;;;••••• • •• •
. ..:17• •' . .
,
"...
.
•
. • 311014 , $4.,4...j. •.
. • • •
'',•.-
..„.. „