Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 07/14/2014 AGENDA CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP & OPEN PODIUM MONDAY,JULY 14, 2014 CITY CENTER 5:00—6:25 PM,HERITAGE ROOMS 6:30—7:00 PM, COUNCIL CHAMBER CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Council Members Brad Aho, Sherry Butcher Wickstrom, Kathy Nelson, and Ron Case CITY STAFF: City Manager Rick Getschow, Police Chief Rob Reynolds, Fire Chief George Esbensen, Public Works Director Robert Ellis, Community Development Director Janet Jeremiah, Parks and Recreation Director Jay Lotthammer, Communications Manager Joyce Lorenz, City Attorney Ric Rosow, and Recorder Lorene McWaters Workshop-Heritage Room II I. DESIGN STANDARDS KICKOFF (5:30 p.m.) II. 2015 BUDGET (6:00 p.m.) Open Podium - Council Chamber III. OPEN PODIUM (6:30 p.m.) A. PRIVATE KENNEL LICENSE FOR 9980 DELL ROAD • Andrew and Cindy Kostigan • Linda Johnson IV. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY,JULY 14, 2014 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Council Members Brad Aho, Sherry Butcher Wickstrom, Kathy Nelson, and Ron Case CITY STAFF: City Manager Rick Getschow, Public Works Director Robert Ellis, City Planner Julie Klima, Community Development Director Janet Jeremiah, Parks and Recreation Director Jay Lotthammer, City Attorney Ric Rosow and Council Recorder Jan Curielli I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION IV. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS A. TOUR DE TONKA B. DONATIONS FOR 4TH OF JULY HOMETOWN (Resolution) V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS VI. MINUTES A. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY,JUNE 17, 2014 B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY,JUNE 17, 2014 VII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS VIII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION FOR 9980 DELL ROAD C. EDEN GARDENS by Homestead Partners. Second Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 8.39 acres and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 8.39 Location: Southwest corner of Scenic Heights and Eden Prairie Road. (Ordinance PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Change) D. ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF EDEN GARDENS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA July 14, 2014 Page 2 E. ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING NO-FAULT SEWER BACKUP AND WATER MAIN BREAK COVERAGE F. AWARD CONTRACT FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF LIFT STATION NO. 6 TO MINGER CONSTRUCTION INC. G. AWARD CONTRACT FOR DUCK LAKE TRAIL CULVERT REPLACEMENT TO PARROTT CONTRACTING INC. H. APPROVE ADDITIONAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR SEH INC. FOR BURR RIDGE STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS I. AWARD CONTRACT FOR 11191 BURR RIDGE REAR YARD REPAIR TO NATURAL ENVIRONMENTS J. AWARD CONTRACT FOR 2014 BUILDING ENVELOPE RESTORATION TO RESTORATION SYSTEMS, INC. K. AWARD CONTRACT FOR SOLAR PANELS ON THE COMMUNITY CENTER ROOF TO ALL ENERGY SOLAR L. APPROVE SIGN RETROREFLECTIVITY POLICY IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. EDEN HEIGHTS EAST by Stewart Land Partners, LLC. Request for Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 1.7 acres and Preliminary Plat on 1.7 acres into 4 lots. Location: Southwest corner of Pioneer Trail and Eden Prairie Road. (Ordinance Zoning District Change; Resolution for Preliminary Plat) B. TELECOMMUNICATIONS—VERIZON WIRELESS—COMBINATION LIGHT POLE/CELL TOWER AT EP HIGH SCHOOL by Verizon Wireless. Request for Site Plan Review on 66.55 acres. Location: 17185 Valley View Road. (Resolution for Site Plan Review) X. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS XI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. SOUTHWEST LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT MUNICIPAL CONSENT (Resolution) XII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS XIII. APPOINTMENTS XIV. REPORTS A. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA July 14, 2014 Page 3 B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER 1. Strategic Plan Update C. REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 1. Southwest Corridor Investment Framework Report (Resolution) D. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR F. REPORT OF POLICE CHIEF G. REPORT OF FIRE CHIEF H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XV. OTHER BUSINESS A. CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS PURCHASE OF 11201 BURR RIDGE LANE XVI. ADJOURNMENT ANNOTATED AGENDA DATE: July 14, 2014 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Rick Getschow, City Manager RE: City Council Meeting for Monday, July 14, 2014 MONDAY,JULY 14, 2014 7:00 PM, COUNCIL CHAMBER I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. OPEN PODIUM INVITATION Open Podium is an opportunity for Eden Prairie residents to address the City Council on issues related to Eden Prairie city government before each Council meeting, typically the first and third Tuesday of each month, from 6:30 to 6:55 p.m. in the Council Chamber. If you wish to speak at Open Podium,please contact the City Manager's office at 952.949.8412 by noon of the meeting date with your name, phone number and subject matter. If time permits after scheduled speakers are finished, the Mayor will open the floor to unscheduled speakers. Open Podium is not recorded or televised. If you have questions about Open Podium, please contact the City Manager's Office. IV. PROCLAMATIONS /PRESENTATIONS A. TOUR DE TONKA Tim Litfin will make a presentation on this year's Tour de Tonka B. DONATIONS FOR 4TH OF JULY HOMETOWN (Resolution) Synopsis: Monetary and in-kind donations allow us to build an even stronger community event by offsetting the overall event operating costs. This year, donations were given by: Platinum-$1,000-$4,999 Gold-$500-$999 Silver-$100-$499 J.A.Price Agency.Inc- CES Group/Mammoth Wall Trends-$300 $1,000 -$500 Starkey Hearing A to Z Rental-$250 Technologies-$1,000 Republic Service-$1,645 Flying Cloud Animal Hospital-$100 In-Kind Trash Service Lions Tap-$100 Biffs-$200 In-Kind Sanitizer MOTION: Move to adopt the resolution accepting in-kind donations $1,845 and monetary contributions $3,250 for the 4th of July Hometown Celebration. ANNOTATED AGENDA July 14,2014 Page 2 V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS MOTION: Move to approve the agenda. VI. MINUTES MOTION: Move to approve the following City Council minutes: A. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY,JUNE 17, 2014 B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY,JUNE 17, 2014 VII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS VIII. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Move approval of items A-L on the Consent Calendar. A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION FOR 9980 DELL ROAD C. EDEN GARDENS by Homestead Partners. Second Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 8.39 acres and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 8.39 Location: Southwest corner of Scenic Heights and Eden Prairie Road. (Ordinance PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Change) D. ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF EDEN GARDENS E. ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING NO-FAULT SEWER BACKUP AND WATER MAIN BREAK COVERAGE F. AWARD CONTRACT FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF LIFT STATION NO. 6 TO MINGER CONSTRUCTION INC. G. AWARD CONTRACT FOR DUCK LAKE TRAIL CULVERT REPLACEMENT TO PARROTT CONTRACTING INC. H. APPROVE ADDITIONAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR SEH INC. FOR BURR RIDGE STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS I. AWARD CONTRACT FOR 11191 BURR RIDGE REAR YARD REPAIR TO NATURAL ENVIRONMENTS J. AWARD CONTRACT FOR 2014 BUILDING ENVELOPE RESTORATION TO RESTORATION SYSTEMS,INC. ANNOTATED AGENDA July 14,2014 Page 3 K. AWARD CONTRACT FOR SOLAR PANELS ON THE COMMUNITY CENTER ROOF TO ALL ENERGY SOLAR L. APPROVE SIGN RETROREFLECTIVITY POLICY IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS /MEETINGS A. EDEN HEIGHTS EAST by Stewart Land Partners, LLC. Request for Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 1.7 acres and Preliminary Plat on 1.7 acres into 4 lots. Location: Southwest corner of Pioneer Trail and Eden Prairie Road. (Ordinance Zoning District Change; Resolution for Preliminary Plat) Official notice of this public hearing was published in the July 3, 2014,Eden Prairie News and sent to 46 property owners. Synopsis: This is a 4 lot single family subdivision that conforms to the requirements of the R1-13.5 Zoning District and Comprehensive Guide Plan. The 120-Day Review Period Expires on September 10, 2014. The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the project at the June 9, 2014 meeting. MOTION: Move to: 1 • Close the Public Hearing; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 1.7 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat on 1.7 acres into 4 lots; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Staff and Commission recommendations and Council conditions. B. TELECOMMUNICATIONS—VERIZON WIRELESS—COMBINATION LIGHT POLE/CELL TOWER AT EP HIGH SCHOOL by Verizon Wireless. Request for Site Plan Review on 66.55 acres. Location: 17185 Valley View Road. (Resolution for Site Plan Review) Official notice of this public hearing was published in the July 3, 2014,Eden Prairie News and sent to 148 property owners. Synopsis: A proposed 119-foot Verizon Wireless cellular tower will replace an existing 100-foot light pole overlooking the stadium at Eden Prairie High School with a 116' monopole and 3' lightning rod for a total height of 119' to accommodate wireless antenna and a 12'x30' equipment shelter structure. Integration of the telecommunication tower is accomplished by closely replicating the existing light standard using a similar self-weathering brown core-ten steel monopole without constructing a new tower within the immediate vicinity. The purpose of the site plan review is for a cellular tower greater than 80 feet tall. ANNOTATED AGENDA July 14,2014 Page 4 Background City code states that "a tower's setback may be reduced at the sole discretion of the City Council, to allow the integration of a tower into an existing or proposed structure such as a Place of Worship steeple, light standard, power line support device or similar structure. Integration may include replication of the existing or proposed structure by a new structure provided the new structure is substantially similar in design and color to the exiting or proposed structure and extends no more than 20 feet above the highest point of the existing or proposed structure". (Emphasis added). The setback to residential property requires four feet of setback for each foot of tower height for a total setback of 476 feet in this case. The proposal is for a 450' setback from the closet residential lot to the north. The developer seeks the City Council's support for a proposed 450 foot setback. Should the City Council not support this request, the alternative is for the proponet to construct a new tower to accommodate the cell providers capacity needs. Locating a new independent cell tower, resulting in an additional tower structure within the area, would be inconsistent with the intent of the City Code to reduce the number of cell towers. The developer's option integrates the cellular tower with the existing lighting standards on the southwest side of the football field, which best addresses T-Mobile's goal of improvement to its cellular coverage serving the adjacent residential areas. Staff recommends approval of the proponents identified option. The 120-Day Review Period Expires on August 9, 2014. The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the project at the June 9, 2014 meeting. MOTION: Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 66.55 acres. X. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Move approval of Payment of Claims as submitted (Roll Call Vote). XI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. SOUTHWEST LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT MUNICIPAL CONSENT (Resolution) The Metropolitan Council has established an alignment in the form of municipal consent plans for the Southwest Light Rail Transit which will operate from downtown Minneapolis through the communities of St. Louis Park, Hopkins, Minnetonka, and Eden Prairie. The proposed alignment includes 16 new stations and approximately 16 miles of double track. It will be part of an integrated system of transitways, including connections to the Green Line in St. Paul, the METRO Blue Line, the Northstar Commuter Rail line, bus routes and proposed future transitways. The total project cost of$1.7 billion will be funded through a mix of ANNOTATED AGENDA July 14,2014 Page 5 federal, state and local sources, with federal funds making up approximately half the total. Background Information The City of Eden Prairie is required under Minn. Stat. 473.3994 to host a public hearing concerning the physical design components of the Southwest Light Rail Transit plans. That hearing was held at the May 20, 2014 City Council Meeting. If the city disapproves the plans it must describe specific amendments to the plans that, if adopted, would cause the local unit to withdraw its disapproval. Failure to approve or disapprove the plans in writing prior to July 15, 2014, is deemed to be an approval unless an extension of time is agreed to by the city and the responsible authority. MOTION: Move to adopt the resolution approving the physical design component of the preliminary design plans for the Southwest Light Rail Project within the City of Eden Prairie. XII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS XIII. APPOINTMENTS XIV. REPORTS A. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER 1. Strategic Plan Update Synopsis: The City Council has discussed elements of the city's strategic plan during several work sessions this year. These elements include our vision, mission, goals, and current strategies. An update will be provided at the meeting on the current state of the city's strategic plan. Additionally, there will also be an unveiling of a new performance dashboard that will be published on the city's website. C. REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 1. Southwest Corridor Investment Framework Report(Resolution) Synopsis: The Southwest Corridor Investment Framework is the result of the Transitional Station Area Action Planning (TSAAP) initiative in which Eden Prairie has been involved. Staff is recommending acceptance of the report subject to certain amendments to preservaddress direction from a City ANNOTATED AGENDA July 14,2014 Page 6 Council workshop presentation on the final report. It is intended to be a "living" document with the ability to make future changes. It could potentially be used as a basis for considering future Comprehensive Plan amendments and funding priorities. Background The Southwest Corridor TSAAP initiative has been a collaborative process led by Hennepin County Community Works. Eden Prairie and the other communities have been involved since selection of the consultant, HKGi. The initiative was funded through HUD's Sustainable Communities program and has involved open houses and Planning Commission/City Council updates. Hennepin County released the final report for City consideration on January 16, 2014. The full report and an executive summary and key maps are available at: http://www.swlrtcommunityworks.org/southwest-corridor- investment-framework-0 At the March 18, 2014 City Council workshop, the Council heard a presentation on Eden Prairie portions of the final Southwest Corridor Investment Framework report and provided comments. Some concern was expressed with the amount of housing redevelopment shown in the Golden Triangle Area(GTA) by 2040, which could encourage redevelopment of existing employment or limit future employment growth. Staff also noted that the maps for the Town Center station area inadvertently showed a future east-west roadway impacting Emerson-Rosemount's building and that should be corrected. Staff recommends revising the Investment Framework to replace the GTA station area future land use map with the attached"Golden Triangle Future Land Use—Proposed Recommended Revised Southwest Corridor Investment Framework TSAAP Plan"map. The map combined with other changes in the GTA that are already anticipated in our adopted Comprehensive Plan reflects year 2040 projections of approximately 29,000 employees in the GTA and about 1900 housing units. The previous Investment Framework land use map reflected 2040 projections of about 22,500 employees and about 2700 housing units, so the differences include an increase of about 6500 employees and decrease of about 800 housing units since the Council reviewed this in March. The Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of similar amendments on April 11, 2014. Those have been reviewed in more detail and modified by staff to further protect employment opportunities through greater flexibility in a mixed use area. The proposed conditions of acceptance address the GTA land use amendments, the Town Center east-west roadway amendment, and ensuring that the Investment Framework is a"living" document that is amended based upon additional information and potential future City Council policy changes. Any future Comprehensive Plan amendments would involve public hearings at the City and approval by the Metropolitan Council. ANNOTATED AGENDA July 14, 2014 Page 7 MOTION: Move to: Adopt the Resolution accepting the Southwest Corridor Investment Framework report subject to the following conditions: 1. The Southwest Corridor Investment Framework will be amended to revise the Golden Triangle Area Future Land Uses in accordance with the revised map included as Exhibit A. 2. The Southwest Corridor Investment Framework will be amended to revise the Town Center future east-west roadway alignment to avoid impacts to the existing Emerson-Rosemount building. 3. The Southwest Corridor Investment Framework will be updated and amended as new information and City of Eden Prairie policy direction becomes available. D. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR F. REPORT OF POLICE CHIEF G. REPORT OF FIRE CHIEF H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XV. OTHER BUSINESS A. CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS PURCHASE OF 11201 BURR RIDGE LANE XVI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Move to adjourn the City Council meeting. HRA MEETING HRA I. ROLL CALL/ CALL THE HRA MEETING TO ORDER HRA II. APPROVE MINUTES OF HRA MEETING HELD ON DECEMBER 3, 2013 ANNOTATED AGENDA July 14,2014 Page 8 MOTION: Move to approve minutes of the HRA meeting held December 3, 2013. , HRA III. PUBLIC HEARING TO APPROVE EDEN GARDENS HOUSING PROJECT AND HOUSING AGREEMENT, SET INCOME AND PRICE REQUIREMENTS, AND APPROVE PURCHASE AND SALE OF PROPERTY AT SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SCENIC HEIGHTS AND EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD Synopsis: The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie (the "HRA") is considering the purchase of an approximately 8.4 acre parcel from MnDOT for$900,000 and immediately selling the same parcel to Eden Gardens, LLCs for$950,000 for the Eden Gardens Green Mid-Market single-family housing development. The parcel is located at the southwest corner of Eden Prairie Road and Scenic Heights Road. The $50,000 difference between the HRA purchase price and the price at which the property will be sold to the Developer will be used to cover various costs incurred by the City. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 469.001 to 469.047 (the"HRA Statute")provides authority for the HRA to undertake the Project to provide affordable housing for persons of moderate income and their families. A Purchase Agreement and Housing Project Agreement establish specific requirements of the Developer. MOTION: Move to: • Close the public hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution determining to carry out a Housing Development Project (the "Project"), identifying the project area and adopting findings; and • Adopt the Resolution approving purchase and sale of the project area and establishing terms and conditions for the Project; and • Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Purchase Agreement, Housing Project Agreement and such other documents as are necessary to consummate the transaction. HRA IV. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Move to adjourn the HRA. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Proclamations and Presentations July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VI.B. Jay Lotthammer, Director, In-Kind and Monetary Donations to the 4`h of Parks and Recreation July Hometown Celebration Requested Action Move to: Adopt the resolution accepting in-kind donations $1,845 and monetary contributions $3,250 for the 4th of July Hometown Celebration. Synopsis Monetary and in-kind donations allow us to build an even stronger community event by offsetting the overall event operating costs. This year, donations were given by: Platinum- $1,000-$4,999 Gold - $500-$999 Silver- $100-$499 J.A. Price Agency. Inc - $1,000 CES Group/Mammoth - $500 Wall Trends - $300 Starkey Hearing Technologies - A to Z Rental - $250 $1,000 Republic Service - $1,645 Flying Cloud Animal Hospital - In-Kind Trash Service $100 Lions Tap - $100 Biffs - $200 In-Kind Sanitizer Background The City of Eden Prairie has provided a high quality 4th of July Hometown Celebration for the past 31 years. This summer the public was invited to the spend their 3rd and 4th of July at the newly renovated Round Lake Community Park, featuring a state of the art splash pad, playground and skate park. The festivities kicked off on the 3rd of July with a newly added"Rocking at Round" event the night before the 4th of July Celebration. The evening celebration featured a skateboard competition, a live band, bingo and concessions. Thousands of people gather around Round Lake Park and the surrounding area on the 4th of July to view and enjoy the ramped up and oh so spectacular fireworks display shot off over the lake. Attachment Resolution CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2014- RESOLUTION RELATING TO ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL THAT: The monetary gifts to the City in the amount of $3,250 to be used for the 4th of July Hometown Celebration. $1,000 J.A. Price Agency $1,000 Starkey Hearing Technologies $500 CES Group/Mammoth $300 Wall Trends $250 A to Z Rental $100 Flying Cloud Animal Hospital $100 Lions Tap In addition, in-kind donations of $1,845 were used for at the 4th of July Hometown Celebration. Trash Service at a value of$1,645 from Republic Service Hand Sanitizers at a value of$200 from Biffs These donations are hereby recognized and accepted by the Eden Prairie City Council. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 14th day of July, 2014. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk ITEM NO.: VI.A UNAPPROVED MINUTES CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP & OPEN PODIUM TUESDAY,JUNE 17, 2014 CITY CENTER 5:00—6:25 PM, HERITAGE ROOMS 6:30—7:00 PM, COUNCIL CHAMBER CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Council Members Brad Aho, Sherry Butcher Wickstrom, Kathy Nelson, and Ron Case CITY STAFF: City Manager Rick Getschow, Police Chief Rob Reynolds, Fire Chief George Esbensen, Public Works Director Robert Ellis, Community Development Director Janet Jeremiah, Parks and Recreation Director Jay Lotthammer, Communications Manager Joyce Lorenz, City Attorney Ric Rosow, and Recorder Lorene McWaters Council Member Nelson was absent. I. COMMUNITY CENTER SOLAR PANEL PROJECT City staff, led by Facilities Manager Paul Sticha, has been exploring the possibility of installing solar panels at the Community Center. After interviewing several companies, All Energy Solar was chosen to move ahead with the project. Nick Nelson and Mike Allen of All Solar gave presentation on the project. They propose installing a 4.76 kw solar panel system on the lower roof of the Community, located so that it will be visible to Community Center users. A kiosk will be placed in the Community Center lobby to provide information to the public about the project. It will describe how solar energy works and provide particulars of the project. The turnkey cost of the project is $63,468. A 10-year solar rebate will reduce the cost by a total of$37,208.83, resulting in a final cost to the City of$26,259.17. If the project is approved by the City Council at their July 14 meeting, installation would begin as soon as the first week of September and the system should be functional by mid-October. Council Member Aho suggested linking the information from the Community Center kiosk to the City's website so that it reaches more people. Aho asked about the length of the payback period. Nelson said the payback period is 14 to 15 years. The system is expected to last from 30 and 40 years, so there will be at least 15 years of additional life after payback. Aho said that seems like a long payback cycle. Council Member Butcher Wickstrom said she very much favors the idea of residents having the opportunity to see solar in action. II. 2015-2024 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN Getschow said this is the second 10-year Capital Improvement Plan(CIP) the City has completed, and it will cover the years from 2015 to 2024. Kotchevar said the Planning Commission will also review the plan to ensure it is in line with the City's comp plan. The plan will then be presented to the City Council for approval at their December 2 meeting. City Council Workshop Minutes June 17, 2014 Page 2 Kotchevar explained that for purposes of the CIP, capital improvements are construction projects or capital purchases that cost more than $25,000 and have a useful life of more than five years. The CIP identifies capital needs,prioritizes needs, determines funding sources, and includes a monitoring program. The CIP covers 12 departments and includes 28 funding sources, 18 of which are City funding sources. A main component of the CIP is maintenance of City resources, including trails,play equipment, buildings, and public safety communication infrastructure, IT infrastructure, utility infrastructure, and City streets. The total capital improvement plan is $265,834,763, which is about $10 million more than the previous plan. About $135 million is derived from City sources, and $131 million is from other sources. Kotchevar reviewed the various funds, including fund balances and significant projects covered by the funds. Capital Maintenance and Reinvestment Fund: This fund includes items that are one-time expenses funded by one-time revenues. For the past several years, the City has transfer $200,000 to $300,000 in budget surplus in this fund. The fund also receives dollars from liquor store profits, antenna revenue, CIP tax levy, City Center rent and workers comp and property insurance dividends. Significant projects include trail maintenance, public safety radio replacement,playground upgrades and replacement, a new cold storage building, and various road upgrades. Council Member Aho asked if there is a target amount for this fund. Getschow said there is no formal target for this fund, but rather the strategy is to cover expenses out for the next 10 years. Pavement Management Program: Ellis reviewed the Pavement Management Program, including the rating system and guidelines for determining prioritizing the order in which roads are repaved or reconstructed. Ellis noted that the pavement management program is funded by franchise fees, and reviewed anticipated fund balances out to 2024. He said the goal of the program is to stay in the black. He said when the franchises are renewed, there will likely need to be an increase from $2.50 per pay period to $5. While that may seem high, it is important to remember that the fees are set for five-year periods, and that the franchise fees enable the City to maintain City streets without having to burden property owners with onerous special assessments. Transportation Fund: Kotchevar said these are MSA funds, and therefore the balance fluctuates greatly from year to year. $100,000 per year goes toward operational and maintenance improvements. These funds will also be used for LRT improvements, Medcom Boulevard and Creek Knoll Road. Park Improvement Fund: This fund receives dollars from cash park fees, and it is budgeted very conservatively. Projects funded through this fund include development of Cedar Hills Park, Miller Park athletic field improvements, Minnesota River vista, Purgatory Creek Park access, Flying Cloud Fields regrading and Miller Park Shelter. City Council Workshop Minutes June 17, 2014 Page 3 Economic Development Fund: Major projects include entry monument signs, Presbyterian Homes/Prairie Center Drive streetscape, and possible LRT station betterments. Jeremiah pointed out that fund the City spends on LRT betterments may be reimbursed by the project. Facilities Internal Service Fund: Approximately$120,000 is spent annually on building restoration. Additional projects include Police Department remodeling, Fire Station 2 roof, City Center heat pump replacement. IT Internal Service Fund: This fund will be used to maintain and upgrade the City's internal and external networks, complete fiber implementation, replace the police mobile computer system, and upgrade the phone system. Debt: Kotchevar said capital equipment bonds will be used to purchase a new tower truck and several new fire engines in 2023 and 2024. Debt payments supported by the tax levy are approximately 6.5 percent of the general fund budget. According to Moody's Investors Services, a percentage of 5 to 15 percent of the general fund is considered a moderate debt burden. Kotchevar said Moody's assigned the City a Aaa rating in 2013. This bond rating was affirmed in 2014. Standard & Poor's also assigned a AAA rating to the City's bonds in 2014. Council Member Case suggested that income from the cable franchise go into the IT fund, since that is something concrete the public can easily understand. Aho said he likes the idea of using internal service funds to charge back services to individual departments. Mayor Tyra-Lukens said she likes the 10-year CIP model, and that looking out that far provides the City Council with the ability to see how income and expenditures level out over time. III. OPEN PODIUM IV. ADJOURNMENT ITEM NO.: VI.B. UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY,JUNE 17, 2014 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Council Members Brad Aho, Sherry Butcher Wickstrom, Ron Case, and Kathy Nelson CITY STAFF: City Manager Rick Getschow, Public Works Director Robert Ellis, Community Development Director Janet Jeremiah, Parks and Recreation Director Jay Lotthammer, City Attorney Ric Rosow, and Council Recorder Jan Curielli I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. All Council Members were present. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION IV. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS Tyra-Lukens said Eden Prairie was recognized recently as a top work place in the State of Minnesota in the area of medium-sized companies. She noted we were the only city among those recognized. She reviewed the questions that were asked of City staff members about their experience in the work place. A. MARCHING ARTS DAY PROCLAMATION Tyra-Lukens read a proclamation proclaiming July 11, 2014, as Marching Arts Day. She presented the proclamation to Jo Benson, representing the Eden Prairie Band Parent Organization. Jim Tarbox, representing the Minnesota Brass Drum & Bugle Corps, reviewed the list of those who will be participating in the Drum Corps International event in Eden Prairie on July 11. B. DONATIONS 1. GPS EQUIPMENT FOR THE OUTDOOR CENTER FROM THE LIONS CLUB (Resolution No. 2014-55) Lotthammer said the Lions Club has been a long standing contributor to facilities and our recreation programs in the City. Tonight they are donating $1,200 to go towards hand held GPS units at the Outdoor Center to be used in geocaching programs. Curt Connaughty, representing the Lions Club, presented the check to Mayor Tyra-Lukens. MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to adopt Resolution No. 2014-55 accepting the donation of$1,200 from the Eden Prairie Lions Club for purchase of hand-held GPS equipment for Outdoor Center programs. Motion carried 5-0. 2. PERFORMERS AT JAZZ/RIBFEST FROM THE NOON ROTARY CLUB (Resolution No. 2014-56) Lotthammer said the Noon Rotary Club is also a long-time supporter of Eden Prairie and tonight is donating $500 for the 2014 Concert Series at Staring Lake Park. MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Case, to adopt Resolution No. 2014-56 accepting the donation in the amount of$500 from Eden Prairie Noon Rotary to be used towards the 2014 Concert Series. Motion carried 5-0. 3. ARTS IN THE PARK FROM A-Z RENTAL (Resolution No. 2014-57) Lotthammer said A-Z Rental is donating $250 to enhance the Arts in the Park program at Purgatory Park. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Nelson, to adopt Resolution No. 2014-57 accepting the donation in the amount of$250 from A-Z Rental Center of Eden Prairie to be used towards Arts in the Park. Motion carried 5-0. 4. 2014 SPECIAL EVENTS FROM KINDERBERRY HILL (Resolution No. 2014-58) Lotthammer said the Kinderberry Hill Child Development Centers has donated$1,250 towards 2014 special events. MOTION: Nelson moved, seconded by Case, to adopt Resolution No. 2014-58 accepting the donations in the amount of$1,250 from Kinderberry Hill to be used toward 2014 special events. Motion carried 5-0. 5. 2014 SPECIAL EVENTS FROM LIONS TAP (Resolution No. 2014-59) Lotthammer said Lions Tap, another long-time contributor, has donated a total of$1,300 to be used for 13 special event programs. MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Case, to adopt Resolution No. 2014- 59 accepting the donations in the amount of$1,300 from Lions Tap to be used towards 2014 Special Events. Motion carried 5-0. 6. 2014 SPECIAL EVENTS FROM NEW HORIZONS ACADEMY (Resolution No. 2014-60) Lotthammer said New Horizon Academy has donated$750 for Movies in the Park and the Doctor Doolittle summer musical. MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Nelson, to adopt Resolution No. 2014-60 accepting the donation in the amount of$750 from New Horizon Academy to be used towards 2014 special events. Motion carried 5-0. C. PRESENTATION ON SCHOOL DISTRICT REFERENDUM Superintendent Tryggestad said the School District determined this past week to place two questions on the referendum this year. The first referendum question is a sustaining question that would renew the current levy with an additional amount that will allow the district to remain at current class sizes and programming for a minimum of five years. He noted that question, if passed, would cost the average home owner$96 each year. He said the second question would make an investment in reading skills by lowering kindergarten and first grade class sizes to 20 and adding more reading specialists for grades 2-6. Approval of the second question would cost the average home owner$56 per year. He noted the second question is contingent on question one passing. Eden Prairie High School Principal McCartan said their goal for the second question is to have all students reading at grade level by third grade and to be on a college/career ready path by grade 8. Tryggestad said the School District believes this is a more reasonable and doable referendum than the one that did not pass last fall. He said if the current referendum isn't renewed, there will be an 11% gap in the budget the following year. Tyra-Lukens thanked them for the presentation and asked if there will be more details on the referendum coming out soon. Tryggestad said there will be. Case asked about the effect of the retiring debt on the cost of the referendum. Tryggestad said the costs he quoted are the net increase after the debt finance. Case noted the Council and the School District represent the same people, and the reputation of Eden Prairie impacts all of us. He said the City should do whatever we can to help the School District stay strong. V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Aho, to approve the agenda as published. Motion carried 5-0. VI. MINUTES A. COUNCIL GOAL SETTING WORKSHOP,APRIL 8, 2014 MOTION: Nelson moved, seconded by Case, to approve the minutes of the Council goal setting workshop held Tuesday, April 8, 2014, as published. Motion carried 4-0-1,with Butcher Wickstrom abstaining. B. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY, MAY 20, 2014 MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to approve the minutes of the Council workshop held Tuesday, May 20, 2014, as published. Motion carried 3-0-2,with Case and Nelson abstaining. C. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, MAY 20, 2014 MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Nelson, to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting held Tuesday, May 20, 2014, as published. Motion carried 4-0-1,with Case abstaining. VII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS VIII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. HIGH POINT AT RILEY CREEK by D.R. Horton. Second Reading of Ordinance 16-2014 for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 5.0 acres and Preliminary Plat on 5.0 acres into 12 lots. Location: 9765 Sky Lane. (Ordinance No. 16-2014 for Zoning District Change) C. APPROVE CONTRACT WITH NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER TO CONDUCT COMMUNITY SURVEY D. AWARD CONTRACT FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF MILLER PARK SOCCER FIELD #9 TO MINNESOTA DIRTWORKS,INC. E. REJECT BIDS FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF FRANLO PARK TENNIS/BASKETBALL COURT AREA F. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BRAUN INTERTEC FOR CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS TESTING AND INSPECTIONS FOR THE AQUATICS EXPANSION PROJECT G. AWARD BIDS AND ASSIGN CONTRACTS TO RJM CONSTRUCTION FOR THE AQUATICS EXPANSION PROJECT H. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RES SPECIALTY PYROTECHNICS FOR THE FOURTH OF JULY FIREWORKS DISPLAY I. APPROVE LEASE WITH METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION FOR USE OF COMMUNITY GARDENS J. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH HTPO FOR MILLER PARK SOCCER FIELD #9 K. APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH ARVIG ENTERPRISES FOR PHASE 4 CONSTRUCTION OF THE FIBER OPTIC NETWORK TO THE EDEN PRAIRIE CENTER POLICE SUBSTATION AND THE ART CENTER L. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-61 APPROVING PARTICIPATION OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY IN ONE AFFORDABLE EDEN PRAIRIE SINGLE-FAMILY PROPERTY M. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-62 APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE 2014 PRIMARY ELECTION AND GENERAL ELECTION N. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-63 DECLARING THE CITY'S OFFICIAL INTENT TO REIMBURSE ITSELF FOR PRIOR EXPENDITURES OUT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUBSEQUENTLY ISSUED SERIES OF BONDS (EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD PROJECT) O. APPROVE VALLEY VIEW ROAD (COUNTY ROAD 39) & PIONEER TRAIL (COUNTY ROAD 1) FLASHING YELLOW ARROW CONVERSION PROJECT P. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-64 APPROVING CONTRACT WITH C.S. MCCROSSAN FOR SOUTHERN SEGMENT OF SHADY OAK ROAD Q. AWARD CONTRACT TO RACHEL CONTRACTING INC. FOR RIVERVIEW ROAD CULVERT REPLACEMENT AT PURGATORY CREEK R. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BRAUN INTERTEC FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MATERIAL TESTING FOR EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS S. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WENCK ASSOCIATES FOR PHASE V POND INVENTORY AND INSPECTION PROGRAM T. APPROVE ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE PHASE II NPDES STORM WATER PERMIT PROGRAM U. APPROVE AMENDED FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIATION BYLAWS V. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-65 AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF 11201 BURR RIDGE LANE, EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA BY NEGOTIATION OR CONDEMNATION Getschow noted there are updates on goldenrod paper for Items C and U. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to approve Items A-V, except Item P, of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Nelson moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to approve Item P of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 4-0-1,with Case abstaining. IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS /MEETINGS X. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Nelson, to approve the payment of claims as submitted. Motion was approved on a roll call vote,with Aho,Butcher Wickstrom, Case,Nelson, and Tyra-Lukens voting "aye." XI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Getschow said the Council has held public hearings for the next two items. A. EDEN GARDENS by Homestead Partners. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 8.39 acres; Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 8.39 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 8.39 acres; Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 8.39 acres and Preliminary Plat on 8.39 acres into 36 lots and 7 outlots. Location: Southwest corner of Scenic Heights Road and Eden Prairie Road. (Resolution No. 2014-66 for Guide Plan Change; Resolution No. 2014-67 for PUD Concept Review; Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Change; Resolution No. 2014-68 for Preliminary Plat) Getschow said this is a proposal for 36 single family homes in a green neighborhood development on the southwest corner of Scenic Heights Road and Eden Prairie Road. There have been several workshops and City Council meetings devoted to discussion of this proposal. Some of the concerns expressed by neighbors dealt with the need for a three-way stop sign at the intersection of Thatcher Road and Stanley Trail, and that has been included in tonight's action. Matt Hamish, representing Homestead Partners, gave a PowerPoint overview of the project. He said they are revisiting offering geothermal as an option for the home buyers. This will be the first neighborhood in the State to receive Green Path Advanced Certified status. Homeowners will see real energy savings on a monthly basis because of the design features incorporated in the structures which will make them 80%more energy efficient than the average existing home. He noted they have 33 reservations for the homes as of today. Aho said the developer and everyone has done a nice job with the design given the constraints they were given. He did not like the fact that the City is taking a different role than with past projects and has put a lot of constraints on the project in terms of pricing and green aspects. Those constraints have resulted in an artificial increase in density for the development. He said the City has great tools for guiding development, but he was concerned that we have to purchase this property and then resell it. He stated he was not in favor of the project. Butcher Wickstrom said she felt differently about the proposal. She thought it is incredibly innovative. We can see the interest in it from the number of reservations even before the project has been approved. She believed you sometimes have to do things a little differently in order to get something done. She also believed this is a landmark project, and one that provides green building options that residents are really excited about. This is in the forefront of how we will live in the future. The proposal is cutting edge, sustainable, innovative and 80%more energy efficient. She thought this is an improved version before us tonight because we listened carefully to what the neighbors had to say and made some modifications to address the traffic concerns. She enthusiastically supported the project. Nelson said she also supports the proposal and was very glad we had the option for doing a pass-through for the land to get this going. It is sometimes easy to think of new things but hard to get funding when it is something new. However, once you do something like this, it is a spur for similar development in the next houses that come through. She thought this will be a very successful innovative development that will be good for the City. Case said he completely supported the project as well. He thought we put constraints any time we zone property. He also thought this project in its present state would not be taking place today as a green project without some government participation. He believed government has to incentivize the positive results they want. In our City we collect cash park fees and have a landmark tree ordinance that were put in place to do good. He noted we did not have to invest any money in this project. He thought the project shows positive government participation that results in something good. Tyra-Lukens said this is an intriguing project and a unique opportunity for the City to get involved in guiding a project that obviously is desired by a lot of people. She thanked the neighbors for their input. We have a much better project because of their input. She thanked the builder for taking a risk. She was not bothered by the fact that we are signing this over and have somewhat led the development. Some of the places that we all like and enjoy involved city investment, such as Excelsior on Grand. She was very much in favor of the proposal. MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Nelson, to adopt Resolution No. 2014-66 for Guide Plan change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 8.39 acres; and to adopt Resolution No. 2014-67 for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 8.39 acres; and to approve 1st reading of the ordinance for Planned Unit Development District review with waivers and Zoning District change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 8.39 acres; and to adopt Resolution No. 2014-68 for Preliminary Plat on 8.39 acres into 36 lots, 7 outlots and road right of way; and to direct staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating staff and commission recommendations and Council conditions. Motion carried 4-1,with Aho opposed. B. SOUTHWEST LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT MUNICIPAL CONSENT (Resolution) Getschow said the Metropolitan Council has established an alignment in the form of municipal consent plans for the Southwest Light Rail Transit(SWLRT) which will operate from downtown Minneapolis through the communities of St. Louis Park, Hopkins, Minnetonka, and Eden Prairie. The proposed alignment includes 16 new stations and approximately 16 miles of double track. It will be part of an integrated system of transitways, including connections to the Green Line in St. Paul, the METRO Blue Line, the Northstar Commuter Rail line, bus routes and proposed future transitways. The City of Eden Prairie is required under Minn. Stat. 473.3994 to host a public hearing concerning the physical design components of the Southwest Light Rail Transit plans. That hearing was held at the May 20, 2014 City Council Meeting. He said the Council has until July 14 to approve or disapprove the plans for the SWLRT. He noted the Council packet contained a lot of information including public comments we have received on the plan. Rosow said there are a number of issues regarding municipal consent. He said Minnesota statutes governing the LRT proposal requires the Met Council to submit the physical design components of the preliminary plan to each city and county through which it travels. He said the statute relates only to the physical components of the plan and does not require the cities to consent to the project as a whole. The City Council has no control over whether the SWLRT proceeds; that decision is in the hands of the Met Council. Rosow said he met with the counsels of the other cities to discuss the municipal consent options available to cities. Those options are: to approve the physical design components; to disapprove with proposed amendments which would require the city to state in the resolution those physical design elements that, if they were changed, would prompt the city to approve the design and which would then kick the process back to the Met Council to review and make a decision within 60 days; to approve with a "wish list" of things that do not relate to the physical design that the Council would like to have; or to take no action which would be tantamount to a consent. Rosow said the proposed resolution tonight approves the physical design components of the plan and defines outstanding issues that would require future cooperation between the Met Council and the City. Rosow said the total estimated cost of the project is over$1.7 billion and will be paid for with funding from the Federal and State governments, the Hennepin County Transit Improvement Board, and the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority. No City funds are dedicated or required for any portion of the project. By granting municipal consent the Council is not agreeing to provide any funds for the project. Tyra-Lukens said she understood municipal consent is not agreeing to spend tax dollars,but she asked if we are agreeing with the Met Council's goals for light rail as part of municipal consent. Rosow said the City would be agreeing only to the physical components of the project and would not be agreeing to their goals. Case asked if we are agreeing just to the design components within the boundaries of Eden Prairie. Rosow said that was correct. Tyra-Lukens commented we have been working on light rail since 2002 on many different committees. At times she served as a representative of Southwest Transit on those committees, and she wanted to discuss what happens to Southwest Transit in the whole process. Southwest Transit and the SWLRT project office have been meeting to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that addresses the cohabitation that will occur at the Southwest Transit site. Many of the issues have been resolved, but there are still some significant issues remaining that would affect Southwest Transit's ability to deliver stellar service. Some of the attempts to resolve some of the issues have occurred as recently as last Thursday; however, there was no action taken on approval of the draft MOU, They are meeting again next week. While it is not necessary for the MOU to be resolved before municipal consent is given, she thought the situation at Southwest Transit is really unique. The MOU needs to address how the two transit agencies will share the same facility. Our residents place great value on Southwest Transit, and we want to protect our bus service here in Eden Prairie. There are infrastructure decisions that could have a negative impact on the ability of Southwest Transit to deliver their service. The service could be disrupted by the construction of the SWLRT. There also needs to be sufficient parking for both parties. There is language in the MOU that needs to be included to protect the bus transit. For those reasons, she suggested the Council postpone the vote on municipal consent until July 14. The next City Council meeting is scheduled for July 15, but we have enough time to give notice that we are moving the meeting to July 14. Aho said he serves on the Southwest Transit Board and felt very strongly that we need to wait to get a better understanding of acceptance of the key points of the MOU. Rosow said the project office has said they are going to produce a new draft based on the eight issues being negotiated. There is a meeting set for Monday morning. He said he wanted to confirm on the record that July 14 is a valid date that is available to give municipal consent. The Manager of the SWLRT Project Office said July 14 is an eligible date. MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to change the date of the City Council meeting from July 15 to July 14 and to continue the municipal consent process to the July 14 meeting. Nelson said she was very much in favor of the SWLRT, but she did think it is worth finishing the process with Southwest Transit. She urged all parties in the process to meet as often as necessary so they are finished by July 14. Aho said the Environmental Impact Study(EIS) for the currently proposed route has not been completed. That is something he would like to see have more study and definition before we are asked to make the vote. It puts us in a tricky position to have to vote on municipal consent without knowing the results of the EIS. There are a lot of potential pitfalls, and we can't put conditions on our municipal consent Tyra-Lukens said she agreed but did not think there is any way an EIS could be done before the July meeting. She asked for guidance from Mr. Rosow as to what it means to give approval before the EIS is done. Rosow said the results of the EIS will not be available by July 14. He said, with the manner by which the legislature set up the process, there would never be an EIS completed when there was only 15-30% of the design complete. A number of comments have related to this issue and he noted there are remedies available to them within the environmental impact laws. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried 5-0. XII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS XIII. APPOINTMENTS A. STUDENTS ON COMMISSIONS Getschow said seventeen students are being recommended for appointment. MOTION: Aho moved to appoint to the Conservation Commission—Ashray Manepalli, Anthony Polyakov and Sophia Modeas for the Fall and Spring terms; Butcher Wickstrom moved to appoint to the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission—Britta Carlsen and Brian Gilje for the Fall and Spring terms; Tyra- Lukens moved to appoint to the Heritage Preservation Commission—Courtney Sweeney, Alexander Modeas and Zeinab Hussen for the Fall and Spring terms; Case moved to appoint to the Human Rights and Diversity Commission— Elizabeth Corpuz, Emily Higgins, Karena Lin and Tanvi Mehta for the Fall and Spring terms; and Shreya Venkatesh for the Fall term; Nelson moved to appoint to the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission—Jacqueline Armstrong, Pratik Baandal, Jennifer Powell and Riley Tillitt for the Fall and Spring terms. Seconded by Butcher Wickstrom. Motion carried 5-0. XIV. REPORTS A. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER 1. Resolution No. 2014-69 Authorizing Issuance,Awarding Sale, Prescribing the Form and Details and Providing for Payment of$17,155,000 General Obligation Tax Abatement Bonds, Series 2014A(Aquatic Expansion Project) Getschow said this resolution will authorize issuance and sale of the 2014A bonds to finance the Community Center Aquatics Center. Rusty Fifield, representing Northland Securities, said the bids were opened this morning. Nine bids were received, which was an excellent market response. He reviewed the bids received and noted that Piper Jaffray was the low bidder with a 3.09%true interest cost. That interest rate will save the City about $370,000 from the initial estimate put forward with the proposal. He noted they did a credit rating review as part of the process and Eden Prairie received triple A ratings and positive comments from both Moody's and S&P. The high rating was given because of strong marks on financial management and the stewardship of City finances. He noted Eden Prairie is in a rare group to receive two triple A ratings. Tyra-Lukens noted it is very good news and will mean a substantial savings for the City. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Aho, to adopt Resolution No. 2014- 69 authorizing issuance, awarding sale,prescribing the form and details and providing for the payment of$17,155,000 General Obligation Tax Abatement Bonds, Series 2014A. Motion carried 5-0. C. REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR D. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR F. REPORT OF POLICE CHIEF 1. Discussion of Ordinance Relating to Number of Vehicles Parked on Private Property Getschow said a resident had expressed concern about the number of vehicles parked in a driveway. The Police Department looked into our current City code and some neighboring city codes to see if we should make any changes. Police Chief Reynolds said our code does not limit the number of vehicles a person can park in a driveway. Vehicles cannot be parked on the grass and must be in running condition. The number of recreational vehicles is limited to two on the property, and those can be parked off the driveway. One individual deals with this situation, and he reports getting one or two complaints a year. Most situations he looks into are in compliance with the code. He often runs into a situation where there are a lot of licensed drivers living in the home. He noted only two of our neighboring cities regulate the number of cars, St. Louis Park and Minnetonka. St. Louis Park limits the number to three, but allows for exceptions and has no regulation against on- street parking. Minnetonka limits the number to four and also limits on street parking all year long. Reynolds said he did not think the number of complaints we get warrants a change to the code. We have been working with the property owner about whom we have received several complaints. That property owner has two driveways on the property and is in compliance. Case said he appreciated the Police Department looking into the situation. G. REPORT OF FIRE CHIEF H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XV. OTHER BUSINESS XVI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Nelson, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 5- 0. Mayor Tyra-Lukens adjourned the meeting at 8:34 PM. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VIII.A. Christy Weigel, Clerk's License Application List Police/ Support Unit These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. Requested Action Motion: Approve the licenses listed below New On-Sale & Sunday Liquor License Licensee name: Anderson Franchise Investments, Inc DBA: Peoples Organic Coffee &Wine Café 990 Prairie Center Drive - 1 - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VIII.B. Deputy Chief James DeMann Kennel License Application Police 9980 Dell Road These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. Requested Action Motion: Approve Kennel License for 9980 Dell Road contingent upon applicant installing a 6 foot tall fence in the back yard of the property. Private Kennel Andrew & Cindy Costigan 9980 Dell Road Background • Andrew & Cindy Costigan at 9980 Dell Road are applying for a Kennel License for their 5 dogs. All 5 dogs are American Pit-bull Mix Terriers. • Staff performed an inspection of their property on June 30, 2014. • The backyard is currently partially fenced in but Mr. Costigan noted that he was planning on having a new fence put in towards the end of July. • Mr. Costigan admitted that one of his dogs was able to escape from his backyard on 2 separate occasions. • The 5 dogs appeared to be healthy and social. • Although a fence is not required, staff recommends he install a 6 foot fence to contain the dogs. • The recommendation is based on Certified Trainer Pat Miller who is Whole Dog Journal's Training Editor(www.whole-dog-journal.com) and also from Missouri Pitbull Rescue Group (www.mprgroup.net). • This recommendation was made based on the breed having a tendency to climb and jump over fences. • There are adequate waste disposal receptacles and food/water storage facilities. • Costigan has stated that he understands the recommendation for a 6 foot fence but wanted a portion of the fence be 4 feet tall due to that fact that there is a 4 foot retaining wall drop off behind the fence. • It is recommended that this Kennel License Application be approved under the condition that a 6 foot fence be installed in Costigan's backyard to contain the dogs. - 1 - City Council Agenda July 14, 2014 Private Kennel License— Clerk's List Page 2 The City of Eden Prairie received correspondence (attached) from the following neighbors: Linda Johnson from 10020 Dell Road has expressed concern over this Kennel License being granted due to the breed of the dogs. She stated that these dogs have gotten loose in the past and that she was worried about the safety of children and other dogs in the neighborhood. Charles & Gayle Demers from 10001 Dell Rd also expressed a concern over this Kennel License being granted due to the breed of dogs as well as inadequate fencing for Mr. Costigan's yard. See attached letters for additional details of these concerned citizens. David Petrocchi from 9942 Dell Road expressed concern over the safety of his children and the fact that the application was received after the applicant was already in possession of the dogs. City of Eden Prairie Kennel License Process: • An application for a kennel license shall be submitted to the City Clerk accompanied by the appropriate fee (Sub 4.A) • The applicant must also submit an acknowledgment form signed by at least one (1) of the property owners of each parcel within two hundred(200) feet of the land where the kennel will be established. The form shall state that the applicant has notified the property owners of the application and that they may contact the City with any comments they might have. (Sub 4.A) • See letter from Ms. Linda Johnson • A records check on the property and owners looks for any pervious animal related calls or complaints. • Only Animal related call was a dog at large call on May 23, 2014. • A kennel license may be issued after an inspection reveals that adequate safeguards are present to protect the surrounding neighborhood from nuisances and to insure compliance with this section. (Sub 4.B). • Our inspection done by Animal Control looks at security of any existing fencing(although not required), quality and safety of any dog houses on the property(although not required), adequate receptacles for animal waste, and sufficient means for storage of food and water. Attachments • Private Kennel License Inspection Report • City Code Section 5.60 relating to Kennels • Minnesota Statutes relating to Kennels • Correspondence from Linda Johnson • Correspondence from Charles and Gayle DeMers • Correspondence from David Petrocchi Private Kennel License Inspection Case# 14023819 Date 6/30/2014 Time 1300 hours ACO Peters#281 City Of Eden Prairie jrpoLict Police Department• Licensing JEDEN 8080 Mitchell Road •Eden Prairie MN 55344-2299 \ PRAIRIE'/ Phone: (952)949-6200 TDD:(952)949-8399 Licensee Name: Andrew &Cindy Costigan Phone: (612 ) 207-3049 Licensee Address: 9980 Dell Road Zip: 55347 Person(s) present during inspection: Andrew &Cindy Costigan,Sgt. Jerrad Biggar 1) Type of Property: (S'ingle-family Duplex Apartment Town home 2) Number of animals present during inspection: 5 dogs 3) Is there a fence in place to contain the licensed animal(s) on the property? CYED NO Type/Material: Temporary Utility Fence Height: 4 feet Condition: Good Repair Needed 4 to 6 feet tall chain link fence along south property line that belongs to neighbor 4) Is there a dog enclosure on the property? YES NO Type: Material: Size: #of animals intended to contain: Is the enclosure: a. less than 2,000 square feet? YES NO b. screened from view of adjacent property? YES NO c. at least 10 feet from adjacent lot line? YES NO d. at least 50 feet from any dwelling (other than owners)? YES NO e. not in front yard? YES NO 7/1/2014 Private Kennel License Inspection Case# 14023819 5) Is there a dog house on the property? YES NO a. Is the house elevated? YES NO b, Does the door contain a wind flap? YES NO 6) Are adequate receptacles in place for storage and disposal of animal waste? ® NO a. Will the receptacle prevent odors from annoying others? (MI NO A private service picks up the yard weekly 7) Does the applicant have sufficient means for storage of food and water? ® NO Describe location and type of container: Water is always available, dog food is stored in plastic containers. 8) Prior Animal Contacts: Type Disposition (warned, Date Time (barking, at-large, etc.) tagged, unfounded, etc.) Dog at Large 5/23/14 1045 Advised after the fact 7/1/2014 Private Kennel License Inspection Case# 14023819 Property Owners within 200 feet expressing concerns: Name: Linda Johnson Address: 10020 Dell Road Home Phone: Other Phone: Describe Concern(s): See attached letter Name: Address: Home Phone: Other Phone: Describe Concern(s): Name: Address: Home Phone: Other Phone: Describe Concern(s): 7/1/2014 Private Kennel License Inspection case# 14023819 Summary Kennel inspection at 9980 Dell Road does not have a secured fence yet. Property has a utility 4 foot fence attached to the backyard area. Andrew has contractors working to prepare fencing around his home. He is planning to install 4' chain-link fence enclosing approximately half his property. Indoor inspection meets kennel guidelines. Recommend homeowner completes enclosed fence to encompass yard. DISPOSITION: Recommend Approval Recommend Denial ACO Initials: 2 0 Supervisor Approval: 7/1/2014 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY CODE SECTION 5.60. KENNELS. Subd. 1.The provisions of Minnesota Statutes, 1992, Sections 347.35 and 347.37, are hereby incorporated herein and adopted by reference. Subd. 2. A. "Dog" means a canine of either male or female gender. B. "Cat" means a feline of either male or female gender. C. "Owner" means any person owning, keeping or harboring a dog or cat. D. "Private kennel" means a place where more than two(2)dogs or two(2) cats over six(6)months of age are kept by their owner for no commercial purpose provided that the total number of dogs and cats over six(6)months of age shall not exceed five(5) in any private kennel. E. "Commercial kennel" means a place where any number of dogs and/or cats of any age are kept, confined,or congregated for the purpose of selling,boarding,breeding,training,treating or grooming. Subd.3.License Required.No person shall own,harbor,keep or allow the keeping of more than two(2) dogs or more than two(2)cats over the age of six(6)months on his or her premises without first obtaining either a commercial or private kennel license. Subd.4.License Restrictions. A.An application for a kennel license shall be submitted to the City Clerk accompanied by the appropriate fee. The applicant must also submit an acknowledgment form signed by at least one(1) of the property owners of each parcel within two hundred(200)feet of the land where the kennel will be established. The form shall state that the applicant has notified the property owners of the application and that they may contact the City with any comments they might have. B. A kennel license may be issued after an inspection reveals that adequate safeguards are present to protect the surrounding neighborhood from nuisances and to insure compliance with this section. A license may not be issued if the kennel does not comply with the applicable State health and maintenance standards promulgated pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, 1992, Section 347.35 C. A license shall be issued for a maximum of one(1)year and shall expire on December 31 of each year.A license may be revoked because of a violation of this section or any other relevant law, ordinance, or regulation. D.All licensed commercial kennels within the City are subject to inspections as provided in Minnesota Statutes, 1992, Section 347.37. A license violation not corrected within ten (10)days after notice will be grounds for revocation of the license. Source: Ordinance 23-94 Effective Date: 7-22-94 2013 Minnesota Statutes These statutes(347.31 to 347.40)primarily deal with Commercial Kennels. 347.31 DEFINITIONS Subd. 2. Kennel. "Kennel" means any place,building,tract of land,abode, or vehicle wherein or whereupon dogs or cats are kept, congregated, or confined, if the dogs or cats were obtained from municipalities, pounds, auctions, or by advertising for unwanted dogs or cats, or dogs or cats strayed, abandoned, or stolen. "Kennel" does not include a pound owned and operated by any political subdivision of the state or a person's home where dogs or cats are kept as pets. 347.35 BOARD OF ANIMAL HEALTH RULES. The Board of Animal Health shall promulgate rules as it deems necessary for the operation of kennels and dealers and the enforcement of sections 347.31 to 347.40 which shall be in addition to rules established herein. The rules adopted by the board must provide for the cost recovery for the activities of the board with respect to licensing, inspection, and enforcement of civil penalties and must provide for cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture Animal Plant Health Inspection Service program and for reference of complaints to local enforcement authorities. Rules must include, but are not limited to,requirements governing the care of dogs and cats, minimum conditions, and maintenance of quarters and kennels, the humane treatment of dogs and cats while in the kennels,maintenance of detailed records showing the person from whom any dog or cat aged over three months has been received, and in the case of a dealer, including address, driver's license number or Social Security number, and to whom it has been transferred, and preservation of the records for a minimum period of two years. The dealer is responsible for making a reasonable attempt to ensure the accuracy of the data collected. A payment from a dealer to a person from whom the dealer buys dogs or cats must be by check, payable only to that person. The check must contain the dealer's name and address. Rob Reynolds • From: LB Johnson [Ibj@johnsonep.com] Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2014 8:18 PM To: Rob Reynolds Subject: Kennel License for Pit-bulls at 9980 Dell Road Dear Chief of Police Rob Reynolds, Shortly you will all receive a letter from me (mailed on Sat. 5/30/14) about my concerns in your possibly granting a kennel license to Mr. Andrew Costigan at 9980 Dell Road. The letter states my and some of my neighbor's reasons for our objections to granting him a license. However, in fairness and in order to be strictly accurate, I would like to correct a statement I make in the letter. I have just learned that contrary to my earlier belief, Mr. Costigan's pit-bulls, of which he now has at least four, and hopes to add a future fifth one, are not ALL rescue dogs. Only two of them are rescue dogs, the other two I have been told were raised from puppies. However, that being said, I still maintain that our neighborhood with grandchildren, children, hikers, bikers, lots of family pets, and an adjacent sheep farm etc. will not benefit from having a neighbor with a kennel license for five of these dogs, especially as they are not securely fenced or contained and they do escape Mr. Costigan's yard without the owner even aware that they are gone. Thank you for allowing me to correct my letter before you have even received it! Linda Johnson Email: Ibliohnsonep.com Phone: 952-829-1787 Mobile: 612-554-4845 1 Rob Reynolds From: LB Johnson [Ibj@johnsonep.com] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 3:45 PM To: Rob Reynolds Subject: RE: Kennel License for Pit-bulls at 9980 Dell Road Dear Chief Reynolds, Thank you again for hearing me out on the phone. I had not received your email acknowledgement before I called you so I must have seemed a bit redundant! Thanks again for your consideration of my concerns. From: Rob Reynolds [mailto:RReynolds@edenprairie.orq] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 9:50 AM To: LB Johnson Cc: Gregory Weber; Jerrad Biggar Subject: RE: Kennel License for Pit-bulls at 9980 Dell Road Good Morning Mrs.Johnson, I just wanted to drop you a quick e-mail to let you know that I did receive both your call and e-mail. I was told that we have received the kennel application you are concerned about and that it is under review. I will look for the letter that outlines your concerns and we will contact you as part of the license review. Thank you, Rob Reynolds 952-949-6205 From: LB Johnson [mailto:lbj@johnsonep.com] Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2014 8:18 PM To: Rob Reynolds Subject: Kennel License for Pit-bulls at 9980 Dell Road Dear Chief of Police Rob Reynolds, Shortly you will all receive a letter from me (mailed on Sat. 5/30/14) about my concerns in your possibly granting a kennel license to Mr. Andrew Costigan at 9980 Dell Road. The letter states my and some of my neighbor's reasons for our objections to granting him a license. However, in fairness and in order to be strictly accurate, I would like to correct a statement I make in the letter. I have just learned that contrary to my earlier belief, Mr. Costigan's pit-bulls, of which he now has at least four, and hopes to add a future fifth one, are not ALL rescue dogs. Only two of them are rescue dogs, the other two I have been told were raised from puppies. However, that being said, I still maintain that our neighborhood with grandchildren, children, hikers, bikers, lots of family pets, and an adjacent sheep farm etc. will not benefit from having a neighbor with a kennel license for five of these dogs, especially as they are not securely fenced or contained and they do escape Mr. Costigan's yard without the owner even aware that they are gone. Thank you for allowing me to correct my letter before you have even received it! Linda Johnson Email: Ibieiohnsonei .com Phone: 952-829-1787 Mobile: 612-554-4845 1 The Yohnsons May 31, 2014 City Council Members City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Council Members, Thank you for taking the time last week to listen to my concerns regarding the application for a kennel license for my neighbor, Andrew Costigan, at 9980 Dell Road, in order for him to own five rescue pit-bulls. I truly appreciate your willingness to listen and your suggestions as to how to express my concerns. As per the direction of Mr. Rick Getschow, City Manager, I have written the enclosed letter explaining my reasons for opposing this license to the Chief of Police, Rob Reynolds, and also sent a copy to Mr. Getschow. I am also enclosing this letter to each of you in order that you may have my concerns in writing and that you may note that all of the neighbors in the area that I have spoken to have said that they also are opposed to the kennel license. Mr. Getschow points out that this opposition does not assure the denial of the license, but it may indicate to you that I am not the sole neighbor concerned about having five rescue pit-bulls in our residential neighborhood and the various reasons why we are concerned. Thank you again for your responsiveness and for taking the time to read these letters. Sincerely, Linda B. Johnson 10020 Dell Road Enclosure: Letter to Chief of Police, Rob Reynolds 10020 Dar Road•Eden Prairie,Winnesota •55347 (tone: 952-829-1787•Ce1L 612-554-4845• J . 952-829-5954 Entai! C6j@jo(nsonep,coat —2— May 31,2014 Other neighbors next to or across the road from Mr. Costigan who have stated to me that they are not in favor of granting the license are as follows: 9 9 To the east, Mr. Bahman Rampour, 9989 Dell Rd., also has two small children, a 3 '/% year old and a 5 year old who will be playing in their front yard and driveway (the same driveway the dog visited last week). To the west, Mr. and Mrs. Dennis Doyle, 9924 Dell Rd., who have property adjoining Mr. Costigan and are selling him the house. They said they are opposed to the license. To the north, Mrs. Mable Marshall, 9905 Dell Rd., runs a large acre farm directly across the road from Mr. Costigan. She raises sheep and they are just about to lamb this week. There is only the dirt road and some old wire fencing between her sheep and Mr. Costigan's yard. She said she was opposed to the license. Further east on Dell Road (the former Turnbull Road): Lynette and Timothy McLaughlin, 9999 Dell Rd., also have children who ride bikes up and down Dell as well as a family pet dog, and they are opposed to the license. Jan and Gary Sotobeer, 9997 Dell Rd., have a small dog and have said they are opposed to the license. Charles and Gayle Demers, 10001 Dell Rd., have a small dog and they have said they are opposed to the license. As you can see, no one I have spoken to near Mr. Costigan's property is in favor of his request for a license. We feel that having four, and the possibility of five, full grown rescue pit-bulls immediately next door — one of which is clearly not friendly towards us whenever we are within 10 feet of our own fence — is a safety hazard in a residential area and trail area with small children and other animals and we do not support the granting of a kennel license to Mr. Costigan. Sincerely, Linda B. Johnson 10020 Dell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55347 952-829-1787 Cc: Rick Getschow, City of Eden Prairie City Manager 10020 Dell Road • Eden Prairie,Minnesota • 55347 Phone: 952-829-1787 • Cell: 612-554-4845 • Fax: 952-829-5954 Email: lbj@johnsonep.com Rob Reynolds From: LB Johnson [Ibj@johnsonep.com] Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2014 5:25 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil; Rick Getschow; Rob Reynolds Subject: Dog Kennel License for 9908 Dell Road Dear Mayor, City Council Members, City Manager, and Chief of Police, I am sorry to send you yet another email on this subject and I apologize for its length, but before you approve or disapprove a dog kennel license for Andrew and Cindy Costigan's five pit bulls at 9908 Dell Road, you should know of their future fencing plans for the five dogs. These fence plans are not adequate to contain these dogs as per the recommendations on pit bull rescue sites as well as pit bull owners' own stated fence failure experiences. In addition, all sites recommend that these dogs be neutered to reduce aggression. Only two of their five dogs are neutered as of this date. Most sites devoted to the responsible care of pit bulls recommend that since these dogs are very strong, very agile and descend from the terrier breed that is known for digging, that fencing be buried substantially into the ground and be at least 6 feet high. Even Dakota Fencing suggested that they bury the fence. Cindy Costigan has also mentioned that in the past, one of her dogs was a "jumper." If that is so,there is also the possibility that one or more of these dogs will jump over a 4 foot or even a 6 foot fence. This is very possible since there is actually a YouTube video online showing a pit bull jumping easily over a 6 foot chain fence as well as sites documenting owners' experiences with this. Some web sites recommend that a true kennel enclosure should be built with a concrete floor and verticle chain link sections down to the concrete floor as well as a chain link roof for the kennel and locks on the entry gates. This prevents the dogs from escaping by digging and jumping out and also prevents anyone or any animal from entering their area. The sites are also quite clear that even with a great fence system and/or kennel, the dogs should never be left out alone. The Costigan's have said that they will only leave the dogs out alone for a few minutes at a time. A few minutes may be all it takes for them to escape. Mr. Costigan, unfortunately, is NOT planning a secure enclosure. He has shown me written plans to install only a 4 foot chain link fence that will butt up next to my 6 foot chain link fence. This fence is to go down to the grass, but not INTO the ground. A large dog of the terrier type would easily be able to dig under it and escape. In addition,4 feet would be easily jumpable for one of these dogs. Also, the section of my fence that he proposes to use as one of his sides, is not designed to be an animal containment section. It was not designed to go right down to the ground, let alone be buried INTO the ground. Therefore, even if he were to install his three sides of the fencing as per recommendation, the side adjacent to my property would not be in compliance with that recommendation. Since my initial call to Animal Control and the visit of one of their dogs to my yard, one of their dogs, by the Costigan's own admission, has actually escaped their current fence system yet again! I did not witness this or I would have called Animal Control. However, I would hope that if this license goes forward, you would require Mr. Costigan to install a more secure kennel fencing system than the one he currently has planned and that you would require that he neuter ALL his dogs since he states that he does not plan to breed them. Thank you again for listening to my concerns. Linda Johnson Email: Ibiejohnsoneri.com Phone: 952-829-1787 Mobile: 612-554-4845 1 CHARLES AND GAYLE DEMERS 10001 DELL ROAD, EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55347 (952) 949-2073 Gor r.R;6 vasL.OM June 6, 2014 The Honorable Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor of Eden Prairie And Members of the Eden Prairie City Council City Center of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Mayor Tyra-Lukens and Members of the City Council: • Our neighborhood has recently been alerted to the application for a Pit Bull kennel license at the residence of Andrew Costigan, 9980 Dell Road. My neighbor, Linda Johnson, has provided correspondence to you and all of us living nearby which persuasively presents several legitimate arguments against the issuance of this license. Almost everyone in our area owns pets or livestock and, to my knowledge, we are all in strong agreement that this kennel license should not be issued. Personally, my husband and I have owned dogs (Cocker Spaniels) for the last 21 years on our property on Dell Road. My sister and her husband owned a Pit Bull for more than a dozen years. I am not "anti" Pit Bull, and I most certainly appreciate the deep bonds we humans develop with our beloved pets. No doubt Mr. Costigan genuinely cares for the welfare of his dogs and has the best of intentions where they are concerned. However, in your deliberation to grant a kennel license to him, there are several very real and substantive issues which must be considered. I have spent a significant amount of time reviewing information on pro-dog websites which reflect strong consensus in their objective evaluations of breed characteristics. One such example is vetstreet.com, a website devoted to promoting pet owner education and well-adjusted, healthy pets. The pure bred American Pit Bull Terrier rates as follows (with the characteristics I consider most relevant to this discussion highlighted): Breed Characteristics Adaptability 5 stars Affection Level 5 stars Apartment Friendly 5 stars Barking Tendencies 3 stars Cat i.riend lv 1 star Child Friendl\ 2 stars Dog Friendly 1 star Exercise Needs 4 stars Health & Grooming 1 star Health Issues 3 stars 1 Intelligence 3 stars Playfulness 5 stars Shedding Level 1 star Social lv;,eds 5 stirs Stranger Friendly 5 stars Territorial. 5 slaty Trainability 2 stars Watchdog Ability 5 stars There is acknowledgement the Pit Bull has an often misunderstood reputation and has the capacity to be a good pet with the right owner who provides the right amount of early socialization, early and ongoing firm training, and lots of attention and love. Nevertheless, the following facts are also presented for potential owners to consider: • "Pit bulls are very people-oriented dogs. but with other dogs and small furry creatures, it's a very different story...If you want a dog you can take to the park who will play nicely with the other pets there, choose a different breed." • "...Even dogs from show backgrounds are far more likely to be fighters than lovers when it comes to other dogs, especially of the same gender. It's best not to keep intact males together or to take these dogs to dog parks where they are allowed to run loose. Whether a [Pit Bull] will get along with other dogs in public varies by individual dog. Some are friendly; others,not so much. And all are likely to view cats and other small furry animals as prey(italics added)". • "They are powerful dogs and can be a challenge to walk on a leash if not well-trained." • Pit bulls are typical terriers who like to dig and pull. • They are very athletic and muscular dogs and they have a very high need for strenuous exercise. • "Pit bulls don't do well if they're left alone for long periods and are not happy as backyard dogs." • "Reputable breeders...look for people who are experienced with large dogs, who have securely fenced yards (italics added) and who understand the responsibilities of caring for a dog with this reputation." • It is widely accepted that these breed-specific traits are going to be exacerbated in dogs that were abused,neglected, have come from fighting backgrounds, or are the result of questionable breeding. Another author's review on the website yourpurebredpuppy.com lists"Animal Aggression" as one of several traits he would be most concerned with in owning a Pit Bull, stating: Most Pit Bull Terriers are aggressive toward other dogs. Many have strong instincts to chase and seize cats and other fleeing creatures, including deer and livestock. If anything goes wrong in the breeding, socializing, training, handling, or management of this breed, it is capable of seriously injuring or killing other animals. So, clearly, our neighborhood concerns about the presence of a kennel containing up to five Pit Bulls are well-founded. My husband and I are especially concerned about the lack of secure 2 a ' fencing on the property to contain the dogs which, from my research, is an undisputed necessity when owning one Pit Bull, much less four or five. Should the dogs wander into the Riley Creek Conservation Area, which is a short trot across the road, they will be very difficult to corral. Having a view of the walking trails from our front porch, I can assure you the likelihood is extremely high of the Pit Bulls encountering not only wildlife but unsuspecting hikers,joggers, and playing children, all in the woods with their dogs. Another major concern for us is the suitability of the current yard to allow for the proper amount and kind of exercise the Pit Bulls require. My sister's Pit Bull experienced rigorous hour-long walks twice a day in mountainous country in California,was managed by owners where one or the other was home 90 percent of the time, and was still a handful (to put it lightly). One home meeting the exercise requirements of up to five Pit Bulls is frankly beyond my comprehension. In considering Mr. Costigan's kennel license request, it would seem prudent to conduct an expert evaluation of the Pit Bulls' ability to receive the needed amount of exercise in a way which is not intrusive or threatening to the neighborhood. Perhaps an on-site examination of the home's location, the kennel and fencing arrangements (or lack thereof). and the access to nearby residential properties and unfenced parkland might be considered by any or all of you. I believe such a visit would go a long way to underscoring what a poor idea the granting of this kennel license would be. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sii cerely, Gayle eMers Cc: Rick Getschow, City Manager John Peters, Animal Control Rob Reynolds, Chief of Police 3 Rob Reynolds From: Rick Getschow Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2014 9:08 AM To: Rob Reynolds Subject: Fwd: Kennel license application for 9980 Dell Rd FYI Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Nancy Tyra-Lukens <NTyra-Lukens@edenprairie.org> Date: June 9, 2014 at 9:31:11 AM CDT To: Rick Getschow<retschow@edenprairie.org> Cc: Rob Reynolds <RReynolds@edenprairie.org> Subject: FW: Kennel license application for 9980 Dell Rd fyi Nancy Tyra-Lukens Mayor, City of Eden Prairie H: (952) 937-1898 W: (952) 949-8412 From: David Petrocchi [david.petrocchi@ey.com] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 8:50 AM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: Kennel license application for 9980 Dell Rd Dear Council Members: I understand that an application has been made by Mr. Costigan for a kennel license to house pit- bulls. I am deeply concerned about the safety of my children and ask that you deny the application. Also, I understand that Mr. Costigan first had the pit-bulls illegally, and now after being cited, is seeking permission. I don't believe that is the way our city licensing rules were designed to operate. Regards, Dave [cid:image001.gif@01 CF83BF.E5066EF0] David Petrocchi I Partner I Upper Midwest Tax Market Segment Leader I Business Tax Services Ernst& Young LLP 220 S 6th Street, STE 1400,Minneapolis, MN 55402,United States of America Office: +1 612 371 6343 I Fax: +1 866 384 0142 david.petrocchi @ey.com<mailto:david.petrocchi@ey.com> Cell: +1 612 801 6176 i CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: July 14, 2014 SECTION: Consent Agenda DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VIII.C. Community Development/Planning Eden Gardens Janet Jeremiah/Julie Klima Requested Action Move to: • Approve 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 8.39 acres and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 8.39 acres; and • Approve the Development Agreement for Eden Gardens. Background Information This is the final approval of the development agreement and plans for a 36 lot and 7 outlot single family lot subdivision. The 120-Day Review Period Expires on August 31, 2014. Attachments 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review 2. Summary Ordinance 3. Development Agreement EDEN GARDENS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 17-2014-PUD-1-2014 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA,REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT,AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH,AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the Rural Zoning District and be placed in the R1-9.5 Zoning District 17-2014-PUD-1-2014 (hereinafter "PUD-1-20 1 4-R1-9.5"). Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Development Agreement dated as of July 14, 2014 entered into between Homestead Partners, and the City of Eden Prairie, (hereinafter"Development Agreement"). The Development Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD-1-2014-R1-9.5, and are hereby made a part hereof. Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-1-2014-R1-9.5 is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-1-2014-R1-9.5 is designed in such a manner to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries. C. The exceptions to the standard requirements of Chapters 11 and 12 of the City Code that are contained in PUD-1-2014-R1-9.5 are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-1-2014-R1-9.5 is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation are feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit. Section 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the Rural Zoning District, and placed in the R1-9.5 Zoning District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development PUD-1-2014-R1-9.5 and the legal descriptions of land in each district referred to in City Code Section 11.03, subdivision 1, subparagraph B, shall be and are amended accordingly. Section 6. City Code Chapter 1 entitled"General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 7. 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 17th day of June, 2014, and finally read and adopted and ordered published in summary form as attached hereto at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 14th day of July, 2014. ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on , 2014. EXHIBIT A Legal Description — Parcel 1: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence north along the east line thereof 914 feet; thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 244 feet, more or less, to the centerline of County Road No. 4; thence northerly along said centerline 116.3 feet; thence westerly 482.6 feet, more or less to a point 1,018.6 feet north of the south line of said Southeast Quarter in a line described as beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 17; thence west along the south line thereof 274 feet; thence deflecting right 91 degrees 58 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 1,018.6 feet; thence south along said line 1,018.6 feet to south line thereof; thence east along said south line 274 feet to point of beginning; excepting therefrom said County Road No. 4; which lies southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 2, FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1 for 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet; thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 36.57 feet; thence South 64 degrees 51 minutes 39 seconds East 50.99 feet; thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 32.54 feet and there terminating; Parcel 2: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet; thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds, 244.00 feet, more or less, to the centerline of County Road No. 4; thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof; thence southerly 146.50 feet; thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning, lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No. 4; which lies northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 2, FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet; thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East, 40.00 feet; thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described; thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet; thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet; thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described, adjoining and southerly of the above described strip, which lies northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the east line of said Tract A, distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with said 50 foot parallel line; thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line, distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described, which lies easterly of Line 2 described below: Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of Said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described; thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly(measured at right angles) of a point on the east line of said Tract A, distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner; thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet; thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A, distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner and there terminating; Parcel 3: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet; thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds, 244.00 feet, more or less, to the centerline of County Road No. 4; thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof; thence southerly 146.50 feet; thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning, lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No. 4; which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below and westerly of Line 2 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 2, FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet; thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East, 40.00 feet; thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described; thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet; thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet; thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described; thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly(measured at right angles) of a point on the east line of said Tract A, distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner; thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet; thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A, distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner, thence run northerly along said east line to a point distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described above; thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line, distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; EDEN GARDENS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 17-2014-PUD-1-2014 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER,AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT,AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99,WHICH,AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows rezoning of land located south of Scenic Heights Road and west of Eden Prairie Road from Rural Zoning District to R1-9.5 Zoning District. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on , 2014. (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) Exhibit A Legal Description Before Final Plat Parcel 1: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence north along the east line thereof 914 feet; thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 244 feet, more or less, to the centerline of County Road No. 4; thence northerly along said centerline 116.3 feet; thence westerly 482.6 feet, more or less to a point 1,018.6 feet north of the south line of said Southeast Quarter in a line described as beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 17; thence west along the south line thereof 274 feet; thence deflecting right 91 degrees 58 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 1,018.6 feet; thence south along said line 1,018.6 feet to south line thereof; thence east along said south line 274 feet to point of beginning; excepting therefrom said County Road No. 4; which lies southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 2, FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1 for 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet; thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 36.57 feet; thence South 64 degrees 51 minutes 39 seconds East 50.99 feet; thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 32.54 feet and there terminating; Parcel 2: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet; thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds, 244.00 feet, more or less, to the centerline of County Road No. 4; thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof; thence southerly 146.50 feet; thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning, lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No. 4; which lies northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 2, FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet; thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East, 40.00 feet; thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described; thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet; thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet; thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described, adjoining and southerly of the above described strip, which lies northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the east line of said Tract A, distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with said 50 foot parallel line; thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line, distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described, which lies easterly of Line 2 described below: Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of Said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described; thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly(measured at right angles) of a point on the east line of said Tract A, distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner; thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet; thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A, distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner and there terminating; Parcel 3: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet; thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds, 244.00 feet, more or less, to the centerline of County Road No. 4; thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof; thence southerly 146.50 feet; thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning, lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No. 4; which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below and westerly of Line 2 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 2, FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet; thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East, 40.00 feet; thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described; thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet; thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet; thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described; thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly(measured at right angles) of a point on the east line of said Tract A, distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner; thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet; thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A, distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner, thence run northerly along said east line to a point distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described above; thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line, distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; Legal Description After Final Plat Eden Gardens, City of Eden Prairie, Hennepin County, Minnesota DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT EDEN GARDE THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (:Agreement") is entered into as of July 14, 2014, by Eden Gardens, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," its successors and assigns, and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City": WITNESSETH: '4111%fr 'EREAS, Developer has applied to City for Guide Plan Change from Low Density Resi. 'al to Medium Density Residential on 8.39 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Revie :.39 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 8.39 acres, Zoning Di' Change from Rural to R1-9.5 Zoning District on 8.39 acres,and Preliminary Plat of 8.39 acres in'. lots and 7 outlots, legally described on Exhibit A (the"Property"); NOW,TH REFORE,in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No. for Guide Plan Change, Resolution No. for Planned Unit Development Concept Review, Ordinance No. for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 8.39 acres, and Resolution No. for Preliminary Plat, Developer agrees to construct, develop and maintain the Property as follows: 1. PLANS: Developer shall develop the Property in conformance with the materials revised and stamp dated April 16, 2014, reviewed and approved by the City Council on June 17, 2014, (hereinafter the "Plans") and identified on Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 1 2. EXHIBIT C: Developer agrees to the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C. 3. BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATIONS: Developer shall obtain written approval from the Watershed District for the basement floor elevations. Provided such approvals are granted Developer may install the basement floor elevations as detailed in the Plans set forth in Exhibit B. The Developer acknowledges that the basement floor elevations on the lots listed below are lower than the City's standard practice. The Developer accepts all responsibility associated with the basement floor elevations and agrees to inform all prospective purchasers of the elevations and the difference from the City's standard practice. • Lots 1-5, Block 3; • Lots 1-5, Block 4; and • Lots 1-2, Block 5 A 4. DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR CODE VIOLATIONS: event of a violation of City Code relating to use of the Land construction thereon or failure to fulfill an obligation imposed upon the Developer pursuant to this Agreement,City shall give 24 hour notice of such violation in order to allow a cure of such violation, provided however, City need not issue a building or occupancy permit for construction or occupancy on the Land while such a violation is continuing, unless waived by City. The existence of violation of City Code or the failure to perform or fulfill an obligation required by thi greement shall be deter d solely and conclusively by the City Manager of the City a designee. 5. DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY FO4ITS CONTRACTORS: Developer shall release-,-defend and indemnify City,its elected and appointed officials,employees and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, complaints, loss, costs (including attorneys' fees), damages and injunctions relating to any acts, failures to act, errors, omissions of Developer or Developer's consultants,contractors,subcontractors,suppliers and age . Developer shall not be released from its responsibilities to release, defend and ind ' because of any inspection, review or approval by City. 6. GREE TURES:The Developer shall install green features and community amenities as depicted on the Exhibit B plans and as described in Exhibit D attached hereto and made a part hereof. Th 'cost of the green features identified in Exhibit D,paragraphs 3 a,b, c, d,h, i,j, 7 and 8 shall not be included in the calculation of the amount of any security required under this Agreement. 7. GRADING, DRAINAGE, AND STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLANS: A. FINAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: Developer agrees that the grading and drainage plan contained in the Plans is conceptual. Prior to the release of a land 2 alteration permit for the Property, Developer shall submit and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of a final grading and drainage plan for the Property. The final grading and drainage plan shall include all wetland information, including wetland boundaries,wetland buffer strips and wetland buffer monument locations;all Stormwater Facilities, such as water quality ponding areas, stormwater detention areas, and stormwater infiltration systems; and any other items required by the application for and release of a land alteration permit. All design calculations for storm water quality and quantity together with a drainage area map shall be submitted with the final grading and drainage plan. Prior to release of the grading bond, Developer shall certify to the City that the Stormwater Facilities conform to the final grading plan and that the Stormwater Facilitiesare functioning in accordance with the approved plans. 411k Developer shall employ the design pr onal who prepared the final grading plan. The design professional shall mon' nstruction for conformance to the approved final grading plan and Stormwate lution Prevention Plan(SWPPP). The design professional shall provide a final report to the City certifying completion of the grading in conformance the approved final grading plan and SWPPP. In addition,the design professional retdined by the Developer to perform the monitoring of the Project shall be responsible for all monitoring, data entry and reporting to the PermiTrack ESC web-based erosion and ediment permit tracking program utilized by the City. B. STORMW TER FACILITY CONSTRUCTION: Stormwater Facilities, including detention basins,retention basins,"Stormwater Infiltration"or"Filtration Systems"(such as rainwater gardens,vegetated swales,infiltration basins,vegetated filters, filter strips, curbless parking islands, parking lot islands with curb-cuts, traffic islands, tree box filters, bioretention systems or infiltration trenches) or "Underground Systems" (such as media filters, underground sand filters, underground vaults,sedimentation chambers,underground infiltration systems,pre- manufactured pipes, modular structures or hydrodynamic separators) shall be maintained by the Developer during construction and for a minimum of two(2) full owing seasons after completion of the development to ensure that soil compaction, ion, clogging, vegetation loss, channelization of flow or accumulation of s nt are not occurring,and thereafter by the Owner of the Property.Planting and Maintenance Plans for the Stormwater Facilities (where appropriate)to ensure that the Stormwater Facilities continue to function as designed in perpetuity must be submitted prior to release of the first building permit for the Development Developer shall employ the design professional who prepared the final grading plan to monitor construction of the Stormwater Facilities for conformance to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency publication entitled"State of Minnesota Storm Water Manual" dated November 2005, the approved final grading plan and the requirements listed herein. All inspections of underground systems shall be performed by personnel that have approved OSHA confined space training. 3 Maintenance techniques must be used during construction to protect the infiltration capacity of all Stormwater Infiltration Systems by limiting soil compaction to the greatest extent possible. This must include delineation of the proposed infiltration system with erosion control fencing prior to construction; installation of the infiltration system using low-impact earth moving equipment; and not allowing equipment,vehicles, supplies or other materials to be stored or allowed in the areas designated for stormwater infiltration during construction. In areas of structural infiltration Developer s• .rior to construction of the infiltration system provide a plan that addresse . onstruction management practices to assure the infiltration system will be fun .1; (ii), erosion control measures; (iii) infiltration capacity; • erformance ifications that the completed infiltration system must e considered fun, •.1 by City and(v) corrective actions that will be to the infiltration system not meet the performance specification. 4 All Stormwater Infiltration Systems must be inspected prior to final grading to ensure that the area is infiltrating as proposed an'.to etermine if corrective measures are required to allow infiltration as proposed. Field verification of post-construction infiltration rates must be provided to the City within 30 days after the first rainfall event of V2 inch or greater after the Stormwater Infiltration Systems become operational. If infiltration rates are reduced a plan to restore adequate infiltration must be provided within 90-days of the field verification test. ' The work required to bring the Stormwater Infiltration System back into compliance be implemented within 60 days of City approval of the plan. Pervious surfaces shall be stabilized with seed and mulch or sod and all impervious surfaces must be completed prior to final grading and planting of the Stormwater Infiltration Systems. Stormwater Infiltratio ystems that are constructed under a building shall be esigned for maintenance access and installed in conformance with the standards fined in The Minnesota Stormwater Manual (November 2005) and/or the Plans. stem shall be kept off-line until construction is complete. Field verification of post-construction infiltration rates must be provided to the City within 30 days after the firs rainfall event of one-half inch or greater following the Storm Water Infiltration Systems becoming operational. If the infiltration rates are reduced by construction,a plan to restore adequate infiltration must be provided within 90-days of the field test C. STORMWATER FACILITY INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE: A Stormwater Maintenance Plan must be provided for operation and maintenance of all Stormwater Facilities to ensure they continue to function as designed in perpetuity prior to issuance of the Land Alteration Permit. The Stormwater Maintenance Plan 4 must identify and protect the design, capacity and functionality of all Stormwater Facilities. The Maintenance Plan must contain at a minimum: the party(s) responsible for maintenance; access plans; inspection frequency; methods used for field verification of infiltration for Stormwater Infiltration Systems;routine and non- routine inspection procedures; sweeping frequency for all parking and road surfaces; plans for restoration of reduced infiltration for Stormwater Infiltration Systems;and plans for replacement of failed systems,all pursuant to and in accordance with Eden Prairie City Code Section 11.55, Subd. 8. During construction and for two years followi pletion of construction, all Stormwater Facilities shall be inspected at a minimum of once annually to determine if the Stormwater Facility(s) is treating stormwater as desi ned and should occur within 72-hours after a rainfall event of one-inch or greate rify infiltration. All Stormwater Facilities shall be kept frebris,litter,invasi nts and sediment. Erosion impairing the function or inte ty of the Stormwater Fa sties,if any,must be corrected and any structural'damage impairing or threatening to impair the function of the Stormwater Facilities must be repaired. The following criteria must be included in the inspec ion: • A storage treatment basin(including retention and detention basins)shall be considered inadequate if sediment has decreased the wet storage volume by 50 per - st or dry storage volume by 25 percent'Of its original design volume. r �. • .rmwa , i filtration System shall be considered inadequate if sediment s accumul. i that impairs or has the potential to impair infiltration of stormwater h 0 • An underground storage chamber shall be considered inadequate if sediment has decreased the storage volume by 50 percent of its original design volume. 11 Based on this inspect' 'f a Stormwater Facility requires cleanout,the Stormwater Facility shall be restore to its original design and/or the infiltration capacity of the nderlying soils must be restored and any surface disturbance must be stabilized in one year of the inspection date. Sedi ebris, litter or vegetation removal in Stormwater Infiltration Systems shall be y hand or with a flat-bottomed shovel or rake during dry periods. Only enough sediment shall be removed as needed to restore hydraulic capacity,leaving as much of the vegetation in place as possible. Any damaged turf or vegetation shall be reseeded or replaced. After the two year period of maintenance,the Owner of the Property shall continue to be responsible for maintenance of the Stormwater Facilities. This shall include inspections at a minimum of once per every five years. Regular maintenance shall be conducted and must include regular sweeping of private streets,parking lots or drive 5 aisles at a minimum of once per year; debris and litter removal;removal of noxious and invasive plants;removal of dead and diseased plants; maintenance of approved vegetation; re-mulching of void areas; replanting or reseeding areas where dead or diseased plants were removed;and removal of sediment build-up. Sediment build-up in above-ground Stormwater Infiltration or Filtration Systems shall be removed by hand. Areas above Underground Systems shall be kept free of structures that would limit access to the System for inspections, maintenance or replacement. D. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTIO N (SWPPP): Prior to issuance of a land alteration permit,Developer shall su mit to the City Engineer and obtain City Engineer's written approval of Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the Property. The SWPPP shall include . ,undary erosion control features, temporary stockpile locations, turf restoration p . •ures, concrete truck washout areas and any other best management practices to . ilized within the Project. Prior to release of the grading bond, Develop: tall complete implementation of the approved SWPPP. 8. HOUSING PROJECT AGRE MENT: The Developer shall adhere to the requirements provided in the Housing Proje ment attached hereto as Exhibit F. 9. INTERIOR NOISE MITIGATION PLAN: The City coissioned a noise study for the project area. Based on the results of the study,prior to issualre of each residential building permit for the lots listed below, Developer shall submit to the City Building Official, and obtain the City Building Official's written approval of plans that establish that each residence is designed,to ensure that the 30 dBA attenuation can be met to ensure compliance with Minnesota Noise Standards. The site shall a(so comply with the HUD Site Acceptability Standards. , Lot 1 Block 1; 411%, 2. Lots 1-5, Block 2; 3. Lots 1-5, Block 3; 4. Lots 5 and 6, Block 4. 10. M ENANCE AGREEMENTS: The Developer shall enter into agreement(s)with the City,i and substance approved by the City,regarding on-street parking maintenance, snow removal,ice control,ownership and maintenance of sidewalks within right-of-way,and infiltration area maintenance. These documents shall be recorded with the final plat. 11. PARK DEDICATION: The park dedication fee for the lots to be sold at market value shall be paid at the City's standard rate and as set forth in Exhibit C. The park dedication fee the lots sold as moderate income units shall be paid as set forth in the Housing Project Agreement. 12. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: The City hereby grants the waivers set forth in the Waiver Matrix, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit G, to the following City Code requirements within the R1-9.5 District through the Planned Unit Development District 6 Review for the Property and incorporates said waivers as part of PUD. The City Code requires: 1. Minimum lot size of 9,500 sq. ft. for all lots. 2. Maximum gross density of 3.5 units per acre to 4.3 units/acre. 3. Minimum lot width of 70 feet for all lots. 4. Minimum lot width at right-of-way of 70 feet for all lots. 5. Lot frontage on public right of way for 18 lots. a. Lots 1 -5, Block 3 b. Lots 1- 10, Block 4 c. Lots 7—9, Block 5 6. Front setback of 30 feet for all lots. 7. Side yard setbacks of 15 feet total; with urn 5 feet age side for all lots. Maximum garage coverage of 7 n the lot for 23 to a. Lots 1-5, Block 2; b. Lots 1-5, Block 3; c. Lots 1-10, Block 4; d. Lots 12-14, Block 5 1 13. RETAINING WALLS: Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for grading or construction on the Property, Developer shall submit to the Chief Building Official, and obtain the Chief Building Official's written approval of detailed plans for the retaining walls identified on the grading plan in the Flans. These plans shall include del . with re to the height,type of materials,and method of construction to be used fo retaining Developer shall co . mplemen . s of the approved retaining wall plan in accordance the terms and 'lions of Exhibit C, attached hereto, prior to issuance of any upancy permit f r th- .erty. aintenance an air of. retaining walls on the Property shall be the responsibility of the loper. 14. SIDEWALK AND T IL CONSTRUCTION: Prior to issuance by City of any building permit on the Proptrrty, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of detailed plans for sidewalks and trails to be constructed on the Property. Prior to release of any portion of the final plat,Developer shall convey to the city easements for such sidewalks and trails in such locations as determined by the City Engineer. Sidewalks and trails shall be conveyed and/or constructed in the following locations: A. Public Sidewalks. The sidewalk along the outer perimeter of Street 1 and the sidewalk along the north side of Street 2 are located in the right of way ("Public Sidewalk"). The Developer shall construct the Public Sidewalk as a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk to be located as depicted in the Plans. The Public Sidewalk shall 7 be publicly owned and maintained. B. Publicly Owned Privately Maintained Sidewalk. The sidewalk along the inner loop of Street 1 is located in the right of way but will be the responsibility of the Developer to maintain ("Publicly Owned Privately Maintained Sidewalk"). Developer shall construct the Publicly Owned Privately Maintained Sidewalk as a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk to be located as depicted in the Plans. The Developer shall enter into an agreement with the C. in form and substance acceptable to the City, regarding the use and main - e of the Publicly Owned Privately Maintained Sidewalk. C. Private Sidewalks. The sidewalks providing access to : 3 and 4 are located on private property ("Private Sidewalk"). Developer sh. instruct the Private Sidewalk as a five-foot wide concrete walk to be located a •'cted in the Plans. The Private sidewalk shall be pri owned and maintaine s the Developer. Developer shall convey an easem o the pub!' use of the Private Sidewalks. D. Trail Easement. Develo er shall convey to the ounty a trail easement on the east side of the Property as led in the Plans for possible future trail construction. After approval by the City, Developer shall file the easements with the Hennepin County Recorder/Registrar of Title as appropriate immediately after the recording of the final plat and prior to recording of any document affecting the property including but not limited to any mortgage granted by the Developer or owners, their successors and/or assigns. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the Property,Developer shall submit to the City Engineer proof that theements have been recorded in the Hennepin County Recorder's Office/Registrar of Titles' Office in accordance with the requirements of this - .graph. `-veloper shall complete i entation of the approved plans in accordance with the terms hibit C prior to 'ssuanc of any occupancy permit for the Property. Bonding in acc. ce with Cit de shall be required for sidewalk construction. 15. SPECIA. 4 SSESSMENT AGREEMENT: Prior to the release of the final plat for the Property,an assessment agreement,in the form and substance as attached in Exhibit E,shall be signed by tire owner(s) of the Property with the City for trunk sewer and water assessments on an assessable area of 8.39 acres in the amount of$60,943.10. 16. STOP SIGN: Upon issuance of the land alteration permit, a 3 way stop sign shall be installed at the intersection of Thatcher Road and Stanley Trail. 17. STREET AND UTILITY PLANS: Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for the construction of streets and utilities for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer,and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of plans for public streets,sanitary 8 sewer, water and storm sewer. Plans for public infrastructures shall be of a plan view and profile on 24 x 36 or 22 x 34 plan sheets consistent with City standards. Prior to release of the Final Plat for the Property, Developer shall furnish to the City Engineer and receive the City Engineer's written approval of a surety equal to 125%of the cost of said improvements. A permit fee of five percent of construction value shall be paid to City by Developer. The Developer shall also be responsible to provide security in the amount of 25%of the cost of public infrastructure upon completion and acceptance of the public infrastructure to serve as a warranty for a period of two years upon acceptance of said public infrastructure by the City. A permit fee of five percent of construction value of the pub is infrastructure shall be paid to City by Developer prior to the release of the Final Plat. esign engineer shall provide daily inspection,certify completion in conformance to ans and specifications and provide record drawings. 18. TREE LOSS - TREE REPLACEMENT: e are 419 diamete es of significant trees on the Property. Tree loss related to de opment on the Property alculated at 419 diameter inches. Tree replacement required are 557 caliper inches. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit for the Property,Developer shall submit to the City Forester and receive the City Forester's written approval of a tree replacement plan for 557 caliper inches. 1 This approved plan shall include replacement trees of a 3-inch diameter minimum size for a shade tree and a 7-foot minimum height for conifer trees. The approved plan shall also provide that, should actual tree loss exceed that calculated herein, Developer shall provide tree replacement 9n a caliper inch per caliper inch basis for such excess loss. Prior to issuance of any gra permit for the Property,Developer shall furnish to the City Planner and receive the City nner's approval of a tree replacement bond equal to 150%of the cost of said improvements as required by City Code. •pe hall complete implementation of the approved tree replacement plan prior to upancy permit issuance. ndscaping or trees plantelk ithin the trail easement adjacent to Eden Prairie Road that are •ved as part of any future trail relocation and/or improvement project will not be replac. •r will compensation be provided. The Homeowners Association Declarations shall inc • . st. ement to this effect. No trees shall • , planted over public sanitary sewer, water, or storm water pipes. 19. HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION. Obligations of the Developer and/or home owners may be assigned to a duly established Home Owner Association;provided,however,if the Home Owner Association ever ceases to operate,fails to fulfil such obligations,or is dissolved,all owners of the Property shall be jointly and severally responsible for all such obligations. 20. HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION DECLARATIONS. Prior to release of the final plat, 9 Developer shall submit to the City Attorney for approval, a copy of proposed Declarations complying with requirements of this Agreement. After approval by the City Attorney the Developer shall file the Declarations with the Hennepin County Recorder's/Registrar of Titles' Office after the Plat and submit evidence of filing to the City Planner. The Declarations shall include a provision that all amendments to the Declarations are subject to City approval. No building permit shall be issued until evidence of filing the Declarations has been provided to the City Planner. <(' %t ° S) 10 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 By Nancy Tyra-Lukens edIts Mayor By Rick Getschow Its City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) °S ) ss. 11 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrum s acknowledged before me this 14th day of July,2014,by Nancy Tyra- Lukens and Rick ow, respectively the Mayor and the City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota icipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation. -411111% S) 10 Notary Public 11 Developer Name, XXX EDEN GARDENS, LLC By Date: Matthew Hanish Vice President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before m day of , 2014, Matthew Hanish, the Vice President, Gardens, L Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the company. Notary Public c: THIS INSTRUMENT WAS TED BY: City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344 12 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT-EDEN GARDENS Parcel 1: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A.That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17,Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota,described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence north along the east line thereof 914 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 244 feet,more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence northerly along said centerline 116.3 feet;thence westerly 482.6 feet, more or less to a point 1,018.6 feet north of the south line of said Southeast Quarter in a line described as beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 17;thence west along the south line thereof 274 feet;thence deflecting right 91 degrees 58 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 1,018.6 feet;thence south along said line 1,018.6 feet to south line thereof;thence east along said south line 274 feet to point of beginning;excepting therefrom said County Road No. 4; which lies southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing,along the north line of said Lot 1 for 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 36.57 feet;thence South 64 degrees 51 minutes 39 seconds East 50.99 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 32.54 feet and there terminating; Parcel 2: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; 13 together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,adjoining and southerly of the above described strip, which lies northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with said 50 foot parallel line;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,which lies easterly of Line 2 described below: Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of Said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner and there terminating; Parcel 3: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below and westerly of Line 2 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner, thence run northerly along said east line to a point distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described above;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; 14 To be platted as: Lot 1, Block 1; Lots 1-5, Block 2; Lots 1-5, Block 3; Lots 1-10, Block 4; Lots 1-15, Block 5; and Outlots A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, Eden Gardens, Hennepin County. <(' %S ° S) 15 EXHIBIT B DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT—EDEN GARDENS Existing Conditions dated 4.11.14 by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Preliminary Plat dated 4/11/14 by Westwood Professional Service Inc" Preliminary Grading, Drainage, & Erosion Control Plan dated 4 by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Preliminary Utility Plan dated 4/11/14 by Westwood Professi al Se Inc. Street Profiles dated 4/11/14 by Westwood Profession 1 Services, Inc. Details dated 4/11/14 by Westwood Professional Se s, Inc. Preliminary Landscape Plan-Tree Preservation d 11/14 by Westwood Pr ssional Services, Inc. Building Elevation Drawings dated 8/6/13 by Whitten Associates, Inc. Building Elevation Drawing dated 8/18/14 by Whitten Associates, Inc. S)N(11111111 16 EXHIBIT C DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT—EDEN GARDENS Prior to release of any building permit, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer for approval two copies of a development plan(1"=100'scale) showing existing and proposed contours,proposed streets,and lot arrangements and size,minimum floor elevations on each lot,preliminary alignment and grades for sanitary sewer,water main,and storm sewer, 100- year flood plain contours, ponding areas, tributary areas t catch basins, arrows showing direction of storm water flow on all lots,location of walk s,and any property deeded to the City. II. Developer shall submit detailed construction an sewer plan e Watershed District for review and approval. Developer shall folio all rules and rec ndations of said Watershed District. III. Developer shall pay cash park fees as to all of the Property required by City Code in effect as of the date of the issuance of eac building permit for construction on the Property. IV. If Developer fails to proceed in accordance with this Agreement within twenty-four (24) months of the date hereof, Developer, for itself, its successors, and assigns, shall not oppose the City's reconsideration and rescission of any Rezoi'iing, Site Plan review and/or Guide Plan review approved in connection with this Agreement,thus restoring the status of the Property b fore the Development Agreement and all approvals listed above were approved. V. Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against the Property and the heir successors and assigns of the Property. VI. e Develope ereby irrevocably nominates, constitutes, and appoints and designates the 'ty as its attorney-in-fact for the sole purpose and right to amend Exhibit A hereto to 'fy the legal description of the Property after platting thereof VII. Deve epresent t it has marketable fee title to the Property, except: INSERT A NAME/COMPANY LISTED IN ANY OWNER'S SUPPLEMENT TO THE DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT) With respect to any interest in all portions of the Property which Developer is required, pursuant to this Agreement, to dedicate or convey to the City (the "Dedicated Property"), Developer represents and warrants as follows now and at the time of dedication or conveyance: A. That Developer has marketable fee title free and clear of all mortgages, liens, and other encumbrances. Prior to final plat approval,Developer shall provide to the City 17 a current title insurance policy insuring such a condition of title. B. That Developer has not used, employed, deposited, stored, disposed of, placed or otherwise allowed to come in or on the Dedicated Property,any hazardous substance, hazardous waste, pollutant, or contaminant, including, but not limited to, those defined in or pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 9601,et. seq.,or Minn. Stat., Sec. 115B.01,et. seq. (such substances, wastes, pollutants, and contaminants hereafter referred to as "Hazardous Substances"); C. That Developer has not allowed any other person to use, employ, deposit, store, dispose of,place or otherwise have,in or on thg Property,any Hazardous Substances. D. That no previous owner, operator or p or of the Property deposited, stored, disposed of, placed or otherwise allo in or on the Pro any hazardous substances. 4 _ Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its successors and assigns, against any and all loss,costs,damage and expense,including reasonable attorneys fees and costs that the City incurs because of the breach of any of the above representations or warranties and/or resulting from or due to the release or threatened release of Hazardous Substances which were, or are claimed or alleged to have been,used, employed, deposited, stored, disposed of, placed, or otherwise located or allowed to be located, in or on the Dedicated Prope by Developer, its employees, agents, contractors or representatives. lk VIII. Developer 1.ckn ledges that Developer is familiar with the requirements of Chapter 11, Zoning,and Chapter 12, Subdivision Regulations,of the City Code and other applicable City ordinances affecting the develop t of the Property. Developer agrees to develop the Property in accordance with the requirements of all applicable City Code requirements and Ordinanc_ IX. 'or to release of the final eveloper shall pay to City fees for the first three(3)years' lighting on the p blic s ets adjacent to the Property(including installation costs, if an , etermined by ctrical power provider), engineering review, and street signs. X. Developer shall submit detailed water main, fire protection, and emergency vehicle access plans to the Fire Marshal for review and approval. Developer shall follow all the recommendations of the Fire Marshal. XI. Developer acknowledges that the rights of City performance of obligations of Developer contemplated in this agreement are special, unique, and of an extraordinary character, and that, in the event that Developer violates, or fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, City may be without an adequate remedy at law. Developer agrees,therefore,that in the event Developer violates,fails,or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, City may, at its option, institute and prosecute an action to specifically enforce such covenant, withhold building permits or 18 rescind or revoke any approvals granted by the City. No remedy conferred in this agreement is intended to be exclusive and each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. The election of anyone or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of any other remedy. XII. Developer shall,prior to the commencement of any improvements,provide written notice to Comcast of the development contemplated by this Development Agreement. Notice shall be sent to Comcast Cable, 9705 Data Park, Minnetonka, Minne*5343. XIII. Prior to building permit issuance,all fees associated with the building permit shall be paid to the Inspections Department,including;Building permit fee,plan check fee,State surcharge, metro system access charge(SAC),City SAC and City water ac harge(WAC),and park dedication. Contact Metropolitan Waste Control to determine th ber of SAC units. XIV. Prior to building permit issuance, except as ierwise authorized in t roved Plans, existing structures, wells and septic systems (if present) shall be proper andoned or removed as required by City ordinance and all permits obtained through the Inspections Department. I XV. Prior to building permit issuance,provide two copies of an approved survey or site plan(1"= 200 scale)showing proposed building location and all proposed streets,with approved street names, lot arrangeme s and property lines. XVI. The City shall ue any building permit for the construction of any building,structure,or improvement o the Property until all uirements listed in this Exhibit C have been satisfactorily addressed by Developer. XVII. No failure of the City to comply wit erm,condition,covenant or agreement herein shall • '••-ct the City to liability for any claim for damages, costs or other financial or pecuniary .rges. No execution on any claim, demand, cause of action or judgment shall be levied on or collected from the general credit, general fund or taxing powers of the City. XVIII. Pn• •ssuance of the first building permit for the Property, Developer shall permanently dema . he location of the boundary of the conservation easement on each lot property line or c• wit14 permanent four-foot tall posts. A 2 '/2 by 6 inch sign or decal reading "Scenic/Conservation Easement Boundary,City of Eden Prairie",will be affixed to the top of the post. XIX. Within 10 days of the approval of the Development Agreement,the Developer shall record the Development Agreement at the County Recorder and/or Registrar of Titles. The final plat shall not be released until proof of filing of the Development Agreement is submitted to the City. XX. The City is hereby granted the option, but not the obligation, to complete or cause completion in whole or part of all of the Developer's obligations under this Agreement for 19 which a bond, letter of credit, cash deposit or other security(hereinafter referred to as the "Security")is required if the Developer defaults with respect to any term or condition in this Agreement for which Security is required and fails to cure such default(s) within ten (10) days after receipt of written notice thereof from the City;provided however if the nature of the cure is such that it is not possible to complete the cure within ten (10) days, it shall be sufficient if the Developer has initiated and is diligently pursuing such cure. The Developer acknowledges that the City does not assume any obligations or duties of the Developer with respect to any such contract agreements unless the City shall a, e in writing to do so. The City may draw down on or make a claim against the Security,as appropriate,upon five (5)business days notice to the Developer,for any violation of the terms of this Agreement or if the Security is allowed to lapse prior to the end o tl require• q . If the obligations for which Security is required are not completed at irty(30)da 'g r to the expiration of the Security and if the Security has not then enewed,replaced . erwise extended beyond the expiration date, the City may a draw down or make . aim against the Security as appropriate. If the Security is drawn down on or a claim is made against the Security, the proceeds shall be used to cure the default(s) and to reimburse the City for all costs and expenses, including attorneys' fee, incurred by the City in enforcing this Agreement. IL XXI. The Developer hereby grants the ty, it's agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the Property to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunctiop with this Agreement. id lk XXII. This Agreement is a contract agreement between the City and the Developer. No provision of this Agreement inures to the benefit of any t ird person,including the public at large,so as to constitute any such person as a third-party neficiary of the Agreement or of any one or more of theterms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action for any person not a party hereto. 414 20 EXHIBIT D Green Features and Sustainable Neighborhood Items 1. Green Path advanced certified homes: efficient windows,insulation improvements,high efficiency HVAC systems,high efficiency appliances and efficient lighting systems,etc. Eden Gardens will be the first development wide effort,in the state,to build all homes to Green Path Advanced Certification. 2. Homes: a. Build all homes to be `solar ready',allowing residents an easy retrofit for solar panels. b. Rough in electric,in garages,required for electric car chargers. c. Offer sun tunnels as an option. d. The model home will have a solar feature installed to display the possible solar options for future residents. The solar feature will consist of either a solar PV panel tricity)or a solar hot water panel system to heat the homes water. Solar opti will be availab 11 homes. e. Use of low VOC paints and use of recycled /products where p 3. Low impact Site development strategies a. Reduce impervious surfaces;narrower ections,in ac dance with the final approved PUD and plat plans b. Reduce stormwater runoff and manage via rain gardens and bio-swales,in accordance with the final approved PUD and pla s.Keep all stormwater mgmt on site;not utilizing MnDOT pond or other regional ponding. c. Reduce storm sewer piping an onding,in accordance e final approved PUD and plat plans. d. Shade streets to minimize the heat island effect. e. Compact D elopment decreases urban sprawl. f. Use of e s(no-mow)in central green space,landscaped outlots and for all lawn areas of all homi lots; liminating dependency on irrigation and minimizing need for mowing. g. Utilization of native landscaping in accordance with City's native plant ordinance throughout development and no plantings iarcontain neonicotanoids.Drought tolerant plantings will require no irrigation;as well as low maintenance needs and costs to the HOA. h. Reduce impervious surfaces through eliminating some alleyways. i. Increase the amount of pervious surfaces.Install pervious surface sidewalks from the driveway to the front door of the model home and provide this as an option on all other units. • Permeable Pavers—install permeable pavers at sidewalk to park shelter to decrease impervious surfaces and allow for groundwater recharge. 4. Site L a. high efficiency LED street lights;limiting light pollution,lowering maintenance and ope final costs for the City. b. Install soar pathway lighting; eliminating the operational costs to the HOA and eliminating infrastructure required in standard practices(trenching for conduits/piping). 5. Site furnishings: install park furniture made of recycled plastics,(ie picnic tables). 6. Community Garden plots:Promotes local food growth and community gathering space. 7. Walkable Streets: minimal distance between the sidewalk and most buildings,sidewalks along 100%of street length,elevated ground floors,low design speeds for most streets,minimal driveway crossings along sidewalks. 8. Neighborhood Connections: connections to existing bike/walking trails and neighborhood sidewalks. Also,no cul-de-sacs are encouraged. 21 9. Community participation:multiple forms of community feedback to guide the project through design,in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. 10. Solar and Green Roofs: Install green roofs on park shelter and garden shed;install solar panels on the park shelter which can be used to power the bollards or other features in the common area.Excess electricity can be sold back to Xcel Energy and the proceeds from the sale can be used to offset Home Owners Association (HOA)costs. 11. Rain Barrels: Install at the park shelter and garden shed to capture excess rainwater and utilize in the garden plots. 12. Tot Lot—provide community gathering space for children 13. Site Signage:Install educational and interactive signage throughout publi paces of the development to inform residents,and community members,of the green strategies used.For example,create a sign by the rain garden that educates the importance and functions of these site features. 1 e will work in partnership with the City,as they continue to educate residents of the importance of wat- •urces,etc. 14. The developer shall provide as an option to potential b rs alloor plan provide I Ile level living design. 15. Increase Green site features/benefits by increasin e storm water infiltration by t .ition of bioswales and increased rain garden area,in acco with the fi proved PUD an. plans. 22 EXHIBIT E DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - EDEN GARDENS AGREEMENT REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS THIS IS AN AGREEMENT MADE THIS day of ,2014,between the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation, (the "City") and a Minnesota (the "Owner"). A. The Owner holds legal and equitable title merry describe as , Hennepiiunty, Minneso ich property is the subject of this Agreement and is hereinafter referred to as the "Property". B. The Owner desires to develop the property in such a manner that relies upon the City's trunk utility system,including trunk sanitary sewers,trunk watermains,wells,elevated storage facilities and a water treatment plant(all of whic ' ereafter referred to as the "Improvement"). C. The parties hereto desire t to an Agreement concerning the financing of the construction of the Improvements all of w will inure to the benefit of the Property. l* AG ENTS IT IS HE GREED as follows: 1. The Owner consents to the levying of assessments against the Property in the amount of $60,923. 0 for the Improvements. The City's assessment r cords for the Property will show the assessments as a"pending assess "until levied. 4 3. e Owner waives notice of any assessment hearing to be held at which hearing or hearings the as ent is to be considered by the City Council and thereafter approved and levied. 4. The Owner concurs that the benefit to the Property by virtue of the Improvements to be constructed exceeds the amount of the assessment to be levied against the Property. The Owner waives all rights it has by virtue of Minnesota Statute 429.081 or otherwise to challenge the amount or validity of the assessments, or the procedures used by the City in apportioning the assessments and hereby releases the City,its officers,agents and employees from any and all liability related to or arising out of the imposition or levying of the assessments. 5. This Agreement shall be effective immediately. 6. This Agreement may not be terminated or amended except in writing executed by 23 both parties hereto,provided however upon the levying of the special assessments contemplated by Paragraph 1 hereof the City may upon request of the owner of the property affected,without the necessity of further City Council approval,unilaterally prepare and provide to the owner for recording a document releasing any property so levied from this Agreement. 7. This Agreement constitutes a lien on the Property in the amount of$60,943.10 until such time as the assessments referred to above are levied. <4c \ %* S) 24 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE A Minnesota Municipal Corporation By: NOT TO BE SIGNED Nancy Tyra-Lukens Its Mayor By: NOT TO BE SIGNED Rick Getschow, Its City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 14 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,2014, by Nancy Tyra-Lukens,the Mayor,and Rick Getschow,the City Manager,of the City of Eden Prairie,a Minnesota municipal corpor ' on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public S) W 25 OWNER A Minnesota By: NOT TO BE SIGNED STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledge re me this f , 2014,by the , a Minnesota , o4alf of the . Vil Notary Public S)< III 26 EXHIBIT F DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT—EDEN GARDENS HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made as of the 14th day of July, 201 and between the Housing Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, a municipal corporation and political subdivision organized and existing under the Constitution and the laws of the State of Minnesota (the "HRA") and Eden Gardens, LLC, a M. nesota limited liability company (the "Developer"), WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. 469.01 the HRA has the authority o complete a housing development project; I WHEREAS,the HRA adopted H.R.A.Resolution No.2014-01 at a duly noticed meeting on July 14,2014. In H.R.A.Resolution No. 2014-01 the HRA found that there is a shortage of decent, safe, and sanitary housing forpersons of moderate income and their families in the City and determined to carry out a housing development project to partially alleviate the shortage (the "Project"); i , WHEREAS,the property on which the Project will be constructed is located at the southwest corner of Eden Prairie Road and Scenic Heights Road as illustrated on attached Exhibit A("Project Area") an' ' described on attached Exhibit B. 'EREAS, t e goals for the Project are to increase environmental sustainability/energy effic and single family housing affordability for moderate income individuals and their families. The int- . the Project is to create an environmentally sustainable single family neighborhood with implemen . ' of"green"measures with 20 of the housing units to be sold to people with moderate incomes as d- . below; WHEREA , to ensure that the housing development project partially alleviates the shortage of moderate ome housing, the HRA in H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 established moderate income and affordability limits for the Project; WHEREAS, based on evidence presented by developers who responded to the Project Request for Proposals, in order to make the Project feasible and to provide the desired moderate income housing,the HRA has determined that 16 of the housing units in the Project may be sold at market rates. The market rate housing units shall be located on Lot 1,Block 1 and Lots 1-15,Block 5,Eden Gardens. The remaining 20 housing units(collectively the"Moderate Income Units")must be sold to people with incomes that fall within the range of the "Moderate Income Limits" (as 27 defined below in Paragraph 1.B hereof) and at prices that fall within the range of"Affordable Housing Prices"(as defined below in Paragraph 1.0 hereof),that are applicable at the time of such sale. The Moderate Income Units shall be located on Lots 1-5,Block 2,Lots 1-5,Block 3,and Lots 1-10, Block 4, Eden Gardens; and WHEREAS, the HRA adopted H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-02 at a duly noticed public hearing on July 14, 2014. In H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-02 the HRA approved the purchase and sale of the Project Area; set the estimated market value of the Project ' ..; and selected Developer to complete the Project subject to the condition that Developer a i' enter into this Housing Project Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and t' tual obligations of the parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the oth: follows: 1. Housing Criteria. The Project shall consist of 36 single family Twenty units shall be Moderate Income Units. The remaining 16 units may be sold at market r. . The size of the 20 Moderate Income Units shall range between 1600 and 2200 square feet above grade and the 16 market rate units shall range between 1600 and 2600 square feet above grade. Floor plans available for potential buyers shall indlude a one-level living floor plan option. The 20 Moderate Income Units shall be priced and sold based on t following calculations: A. Project Feasibility. Based on evidence presented by developers who responded to the Project R uest for Proposals, in orde(to make the Project feasible and to provide the des. oderate income housing, 16 of the housing units in the Project may be sold,at rket rates. The market rate units shall be built on Blocks 1 and 5 as shown on the Preliminary Plat of Eden Gardens. The 20 Moderate Income Units must be sold: (i)to people who qualify under the Moderate Income Limits set forth below in B; and(ii) at the Affordable Housing Prices set forth below in C. Moderate Incomnmits. The U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development annually determines the area median income for Hennepin County("Area Median Income"). Th rea Median Income is published annually in December for use in e following r. The HRA hereby determines that the moderate income limits for Project ( "Moderate Income Limits") shall be 80% to 120% of the Area Median Income. (For example, the Area Median Income for Hennepin County published in December 2013 for use in the year 2014 was $82,900. The moderate income limits for all Moderate Income Units sold in 2014 is $66,320 to $99,480.) C. Affordable Housing Prices. Based upon the Area Median Income the Minnesota Housing Finance Authority annually sets a loan limit for the 11-County Metro("Area Affordable Price"). The Area Affordable Price is published in December for use in the following year. For purposes hereof,the affordable housing prices for persons of moderate income for the Project shall be 80%to 120%of the Area Affordable Price (the "Affordable Housing Prices") (For example, the Area Affordable Price published in December 2013 for use in the year 2014 was$310,000. Consequently, 28 the Affordable Housing Prices for all Moderate Income Units sold in 2014 is $248,000 to $372,000.) 2. Minnesota's Green Path Development Standards. The Developer shall construct the Project in a manner that meets Minnesota's Green Path("Green Path") standards as required in the attached as Exhibit C. 3. Community Involvement. The Developer shall engage community by involving Hennepin Technical College. Specifically, the Developer s volve students through opportunities such as framing a home, learning how `green' mec 1/electrical systems work or learning green techniques used in stormwater management. 4. Sale of the Project Area. For purposes o greement,` ''ncludes any transfer of a housing unit including but not limited to sale, c ance, gift, and inv ry transfer. The Developer may not close on the sale of any M e Income Unit unless a the following conditions have been met: A. All infrastructure including streets, sanitary sewer, water, and storm sewer, but not including landscaping and the final wear course on streets and other items that cannot reasonably be completed due to wi r weather conditions and that do not materially affect the use or function of such it infrastructure, are substantially complete and accepted i writing by the City; 1, B. All pu ace including common areas, parks and community buildings are com and accepted in writing by the HRA; C. The residential structure on the lot be sold has been issued a certificate of occupancy or temporary certificate of occupancy; and The sale has been approved in writing by the HRA prior to closing in order to ensure compliance with the terms of this Agreement. In order to request such approval for the sale of each Moderate Income Unit,Developer, or any subsequent owner that is elling a Moderate Income Unit, shall submit a complete application to the HRA for sale of each Moderate Income Unit in such form and substances as required by t' A .hich shall include at a minimum all information required by the HRA to veri come of the prospective purchaser. Upon receipt of a complete application the HRA shall inform the Developer or other requesting party,in writing and within five business days,whether the application is approved. If the HRA fails to respond to a complete application within five business days,the application will be deemed approved. 5. Initial Sale of Housing Units by Developer. Initial sale of Moderate Income Units by the Developer shall comply with the income and pricing requirements set forth in Paragraph 1. In addition,during the Preference Period,the initial sale of all housing units by the Developer shall give preference to prospective buyers who live or work in the City of Eden Prairie. During the Preference 29 Period, Developer shall market to residents and employees of Eden Prairie businesses and permit those who live or work within the City of Eden Prairie to have the first opportunity to sign a purchase agreement for their desired lot,or if no specific lot is specified,for a lot within the Project. As used herein,the phrase"Preference Period"shall refer to the period of time that elapses between the date hereof and the 180th day after the date of the issuance of the first building permit for the Project. 6. Future Sale of Housing Units. After the initial sale of annoderate Income Unit by the Developer,the seller in any subsequent sale of a Moderate Income Unfit that consists of a"Non- Qualifying Sale"and that is closed within 10 years of the date of the initial sale by the Developer of the subject Moderate Income Unit, shall remit the "Applicable Portion of the Profit" received by such seller in such transaction to the City for reinvestment in low and moderate income housing initiatives. As used herein, the phrase "Non-Qualifying Sale" shall be ed as the sale of a Moderate Income Unit that is closed within 10 year40„e date of the initia f such Moderate Income Unit by the Developer and that is made eithto a buyer that has inc in excess of the Moderate Income Limits or(ii)at a price that is in excess of the Affordable Housing Prices,both as measured in the year in which the closing of such sale of the Moderate Income Unit occurs. The Seller of any Moderate Income Unit may apply to the HRA pursuant to Paragraph 4.D hereof for a determination that a prospective sale'of such Moderate Income Unit shall not constitute a Non- Qualifying Sale. As used herein, the phrase "Applicable Portion of the Profit" shall refer to the portion designated pursuant to the chart set forth below in Paragraph 6.B. A. Profit. The "Profit" from the subsequent sale of a Moderate Income Unit shall be defined as the funds received by the seller from the buyer at the closing of such sale, after deduction of the sum of the following: (i) all costs and fees listed on the settlement statement(which costs shall include any park dedication fee paid pursuant to Paragraph 7 hereof),luding amounts necessary to satisfy any mortgages ed against the property; (ii) the amount of the seller's basis in the Moderate n Unit as of the date of its acquisition thereof; plus (iii) the cost of improv ments made by the seller as defined in IRS publication 523 which increase the seller's basis in thoderate Income Unit. B. emittance. The amount of any"profit"that is required to be remitted to the City by seller of a Moderate Income Unit in a Non-Qualifying Sale shall be as follows: ime elapsed since the date of the Profits to be initial purchase of the housing unit remitted to from the Developer _ City Less than 1 year 90% At least 1 year but less than 2 years _ 80% At least 2 years but less than 3 years 70% At least 3 years but less than 4 years _ 60% At least 4 years but less than 5 years 50% At least 5 years but less than 6 years 40% 30 At least 6 years but less than 7 years 30% At least 7 years but less than 8 years 20% At least 8 years but less than 9 years 10% At least 9 years but less than 10 years 5% Regardless of the number of times a Moderate Income Unit is sold, the requirements of this Paragraph 6 shall apply to any subsequent sale of such Moderate Income Unit that consists of a Non- Qualifying Sale and shall be based on the amount of time that has elapsed from the date of the initial sale of the housing unit by the Developer;provided,however,the pr► isions of this Paragraph 6 shall not be applicable to any sale of any Moderate Income Unit that .t any time subsequent to the 10th anniversary of the closing of the initial sale of such Mo► e Unit by the Developer. 7. Park Dedication Fee. The park dedicat. - of$6,500.01 nit shall be waived for each Moderate Income Unit; provided, howev- .ny closing upon t' e of a Moderate Income Unit in a Non-Qualifying Sale occurs at me within 10 years of th- date of the initial sale of the Moderate Income Unit by the Develo. s e waiver of the park dedication fee for that Moderate Income Unit shall be revoked and such p.r dedication fee in the amount of$6,500.00 shall be due and payable at the time of closing of such Non-Qualifying Sale. 8. Bond. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project Area, Developer shall provide to the HRA a bond equal to$100,000 to secure the Developer's obligations pursuant to this Agreement,including to reimburse the HRA for costs,including reasonable attorney fees,incurred by the HRA in any action to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement(the "Security"). The HRA'may draw down on or make a claim against the Security,as appropriate,upon five(5)business days'notice to the Developer,for any violation of the terms of this Agreement or if the Security is allowed to lapse prior to the of the required term. If the Security has not then been renewed,replaced or otherwise extended beyond the expiration date,the HRA may also draw down or make a claim against the Security as appropriate. If the Security is drawn down on or a claim i - +e against the Security,the proceeds shall be used to cure the default(s)and to reimburse the . or all costs and expenses,including attorneys' fee,incurred by the HRA in enforcing this Agre. 't. Any amount of the Security that is drawn by the HRA shall be held by the HRA in trust and disb. I only if, and to the extent, that the Security may be disbursed hereunder. Developer shall be re I from any further obligation to maintain the Security and all amounts of such Security that en exist shall be released to Developer upon the earlier of the following: (i)the sale of all Moderate Income Units by the Developer; or (ii) the termination of Developer's obligations to sell the Moderate Income Units as set forth in Paragraph 12 below. 9. Developer Warranties. Developer makes the following representations and warranties: A. The Developer is a Minnesota limited liability company,has power to enter into this Agreement and to perform its obligations hereunder and, by doing so, is not in violation of any provisions of its articles of organization, operating agreement or member control agreement or the laws of the State. 31 B. The Developer has obtained funds sufficient for the acquisition or construction of the Project. C. The execution and delivery of this Agreement,the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, and the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement is not prevented,limited by or conflicts with(unless all necessary waivers, consents or the like have been obtained)or results in a breach of, material terms, conditions or provision of any contractual restriction, evidence of indebtedness,agreement or instrument of whatever 'ture to which the Developer is now a party or by which they are bound,or consti. material default under any of the foregoing. 10. City Development Agreement. Prior to • ce of any gr. • or building permits for the Project Area, Developer shall enter into a D ment Agreement the City of Eden Prairie with respect to the Project and such Deve nt Agreement shall be r: .ed against the Project Area. Al 11. Revision of Limits and Prices. If there are no prospective purchasers for any of the Moderate Income Units within six months following the issuance of the first building permit for the Project and upon written request of the Developer, e HRA shall revise the Moderate Income Limits and Affordable Housing Prices. 12. Moderate Income Units. Notwithstanding any 'contrary provision herein, the Developer's obligatio 1 the Moderate Income Units subject to the requirements in Paragraph 1, and the conditions appli able to the Developer's sale of any Moderate Income Units in Paragraph 4, shall terminate upon the earlier of: (i) no Moderate Income Units have sold within 36 months following the issuance of the first building permit for the Project; or(ii)no Moderate Income Units have sold in the-previous 12 months. Developer shall submit to the HRA evidence substantiating such la .f sales and the HRA shall execute an amendment to this Agreement terminating the obli! in Paragraph 1 and conditions in Paragraph 4. Upon such termination,the provisions of Para: q 6 shall be deemed terminated with respect to any unsold Moderate Income Units, the waiver . - .ark dedication fee for unsold Moderate Income Units set forth in Paragraph 7 shall be revoked an. - .ark dedication fee for all unsold Moderate Income Units shall become immediately due and pays► • the Dev er. Any Moderate Income Units which have been sold prior to termination sha .ain ct to Paragraphs 6 and 7. All obligations in this Agreement not specifically amended or to Mated by this Paragraph shall survive, including but not limited to applicable provisions cancerning the remittance of a portion of"Profits"set forth in Paragraph 6 for Moderate Income Units sold prior to such termination. 13. Binding. This Agreement shall be recorded against the Project Area. Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable as real covenants that"run"with the title to all lots within the Project Area, and shall also be enforceable against, and inure to the benefit of the HRA and the Developer; provided, however, and notwithstanding any contrary provision herein, although the provisions of Paragraphs 6 and 7 herein constitute real covenants that run with title to the Moderate Income Units and that are enforceable against future owners of Moderate Income Units 32 to the extent provided therein, Developer shall have no personal obligation to perform any of the covenants of Paragraphs 6 and 7 hereof,provided the Developer is not the seller in any transaction that constitutes a Non-Qualifying sale. 14. Remedies. Developer acknowledges, on its own and for all successors and assigns, that the rights of HRA to perform the obligations of Developer contemplated in this agreement are special,unique, and of an extraordinary character, and that, in the event that Developer violates,or fails,or refuses to perform any covenant,condition,or provision made ' -in,HRA may be without an adequate remedy at law. Developer agrees,therefore,that in the - eveloper violates, fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision ma. ein, HRA may, at its option, institute and prosecute an action to specifically enforce such c• -njoin conduct or activities that violate the terms hereof,withhold building permits,or e .ny of edy available at law or in equity. In the event of any litigation between the H Developer . orce or interpret the provisions hereof in which the HRA is the prevaili , the HRA shall : itled to an award requiring Developer to reimburse the HRA for all o costs and expenses in su ion,including reasonable attorneys' fees. No remedy conferred in this agreement is intended to se exclusive and each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. The election of any one or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of any other remedy. 15. No HRA Liability. No he HRA to comply with any term, condition, covenant or agreement herein shall subje e to liability for any claim for damages, costs or other financial or pecuniary harges. No execution on any claim, 'demand, cause of action or judgment shall be levied ected from the general credit,'general fund or taxing powers of the HRA. 4 16. Recording. This Agreement shall b recorded at the County Recorder and / or Registrar of Titles at the closing of the Developer's purchase of the Project Area from the HRA. This Agreement shall be recorded after the deed from the HRA to Developer and prior to any mortga • sr encumbrances. No land alteration or building permits for the Project Area shall be issu-' proof of filing of the Agreement is submitted to the HRA. Right of Entry. The'*veloper hereby grants to the HRA and the City of Eden Prairie, th- 'ents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the Project Area to perform all w► • d inspections deemed appropriate by the HRA or City in conjunction with this Agreement. 18. No Thi 'arty Beneficiaries. Except with respect to Developer, the HRA, and the covenants hereof that"run"with title to the lots within the Project pursuant to Paragraph 13 hereof, no provision of this Agreement inures to the benefit of any third person,including the public at large, so as to constitute any such person as a third-party beneficiary of the Agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action for any such person. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused these presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid. [signatures on following pages] 33 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By NOT FOR SIGNATURE Nancy Tyra-Lukens Its Chair By NOT FOR SIGNATURE Aesed Rick Getschow Its Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. il COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrum o acknowledged before me this 14th day of July,2014,by Nancy Tyra- Lukens and Rick Getsc ow, respectively the Chair and Executive Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, on behalf of said authority. NOT FOR SIGNATURE Notary Public 34 EDEN GARDENS, LLC By_NOT FOR SIGNATURE Date: Matthew Hanish Vice President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged be e this day of , 2014, Matthew Hanish, the Vice President, of Eden Gard L4rmesota limited liability company, on behalf of the company. NOT FOR SIGNATURE otary Public 404_, I r THIS RUMENT WAS D ED BY: Gregerson, Rosow, Johnson&Nil D 650 Thi ve S, Suite 1600 Minneapo 55376 35 EXHIBIT A TO TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Depiction of Project Area Scenic Heights 14 Scr�ic f ,, +.ts�3c sceri%c rieieyhlsRd Sc •c:o ,ic Heights • Victory Luther$r C-A 0. J -.0 • SJ nl m rj7 i3 M[ILford Dr y ' Milord Dr M i I I o rdr 6r; map data 11.2U7 A cnogle 36 EXHIBIT B TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Legal Description of Project Area Parcel 1 That part of Tract A described below: Tract A.That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17,Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota,described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence north along the east line thereof 914 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 244 feet,more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence northerly along said centerline 116.3 feet;thence westerly 482.6 feet, more or less to a point 1,018.6 feet north of the south line of said Southeast Quarter in a line described as beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 17;thence west along the south line thereof 274 feet;thence deflecting right 91 degrees 58 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 1,018.6 feet;thence south along said line 1,018.6 feet to south line thereof;thence east along said south line 274 feet to point of beginning;excepting therefrom said County Road No. 4; which lies southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing,along the north line of said Lot 1 for 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 36.57 feet;thence South 64 degrees 51 minutes 39 seconds East 50.99 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 32.54 feet and there terminating; Parcel 2: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; 37 together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,adjoining and southerly of the above described strip, which lies northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with said 50 foot parallel line;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,which lies easterly of Line 2 described below: Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of Said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner and there terminating; Parcel 3: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below and westerly of Line 2 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner, thence run northerly along said east line to a point distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described above;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; 38 To be platted as: Lot 1, Block 1; Lots 1-5, Block 2; Lots 1-5, Block 3; Lots 1-10, Block 4; Lots 1-15, Block 5; and Outlots A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, Eden Gardens, Hennepin County. <(' %S ° S) 39 EXHIBIT C TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Green Features and Sustainable Neighborhood Items 1. Green Path advanced certified homes: efficient windows,insulation improvements,high efficiency HVAC systems,high efficiency appliances and efficient lighting systems,etc. Eden Gardens will be the first development wide effort,in the state,to build all homes to Green Path :dvanced Certification. 2. Homes: a. Build all homes to be `solar ready',allowing residents an ea •fit for solar panels. b. Rough in electric,in garages,required for electric car char. c. Offer sun tunnels as an option. d. The model home will have a solar feature installed to display the po - solar options for future residents. The solar feature will consist of eithM a solar PV panel(ele •)or a solar hot water panel system to heat the homes water. Solar opti(ns will be available on a '•es. e. Use of low VOC paints and use of recy led materials/prod where possibl-. 3. Low impact Site development strategies a. Reduce impervious surfaces;narrower street ections,in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans b. Reduce stormwater runoff alid manage via rain gardens and bio-swales,in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans.Kee stormwater mgmt on site;not utilizing MnDOT pond or other regional ponding. c. Reduce storm sewer iping and p 'ng,in accordance with t mal approved PUD and plat plans. A d. Shade str minimize the heat island effect. e. Compact velopment decreases urban sprawl. f. Use of eco-lawns(no-mow)in central green space,landscaped outlots and for all lawn areas of all home lots; eliminating dependency on irrigation and minimizing need for mowing. g. —Utilization of native landscaping in accordance with City's native plant ordinance throughout development and no plantings that contain neonicotanoids.Drought tolerant plantings will require no irrigation;as well as low maintenance needs and costs to the HOA. h. Reduce impervious surfaces through eliminating some alleyways. Increase the amount of perviots surfaces.Install pervious surface sidewalks from the driveway to the front door of the model home and provide this as an option on all other units. j. rmeable Pavers—install permeable pavers at sidewalk to park shelter to decrease impervious es and for groundwater recharge. 4. Site Lighting: c. Install high efficiency LED street lights;limiting light pollution,lowering maintenance and operational costs for the City. d. Install solar pathway lighting;eliminating the operational costs to the HOA and eliminating infrastructure required in standard practices(trenching for conduits/piping). 5. Site furnishings: install park furniture made of recycled plastics,(ie picnic tables). 6. Community Garden plots:Promotes local food growth and community gathering space. 40 7. Walkable Streets: minimal distance between the sidewalk and most buildings,sidewalks along 100%of street length,elevated ground floors,low design speeds for most streets,minimal driveway crossings along sidewalks. 8. Neighborhood Connections: connections to existing bike/walking trails and neighborhood sidewalks. Also,no cul-de-sacs are encouraged. 9. Community participation: multiple forms of community feedback to guide the project through design,in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. 10. Solar and Green Roofs: Install green roofs on park shelter and garden she.• install solar panels on the park shelter which can be used to power the bollards or other features in the c. area.Excess electricity can be sold back to Xcel Energy and the proceeds from the sale can be us, .ffset Home Owners Association (HOA)costs. 11. Rain Barrels: Install at the park shelter and garden shed to cap ce water and utilize in the garden plots. 12. Tot Lot—provide community gathering space for chil 13. Site Signage:Install educational and interactive sig oughout public spaces 6 f the development to inform residents,and community members,of thi gree strategies used.For example,create a sign by the rain garden that educates the importance and functions of these site features. We will work in partnership with the City,as they continue to educate residents of the importance of water resources,etc. 14. The developer shall provide as an option to potential buyers a floor plan providing single level living design. 15. Increase Green site features/benefits b increasing on-site storm water infiltration by the addition of bioswales and increased rain garden area,in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. 41 EXHIBIT G DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT-EDEN GARDENS Eden Gardens EXHIBIT G Preliminary Lot Matrix Parcel Area Report Client:Homestead Partners Project Name: Project P:\0001581.00\dwg\0001581SITE.dwg Description: Report Date:4/1/2014 Prepared by:Westwood Prof.Services Parcel Name Square Feet Acres Lot Width Front Side Setbacks Rear Setback Garage lot Public ROW Setback coverage 141 frontage Block 1 Lot 1 8,236 0.19 55.0 15' 10'west/15 corner 20'14( 0.053 yes Block 2 Lot 1 5,179 0.12 40.0 15' 5'/5'(10'total) 20'141 0.085 yes Block 2 Lot 2 4,282 0.10 40.0 15' 5'/5'(10'total) 20'141 0.103 yes Block 2 Lot 3 4,311 0.10 40.0 15' 5'/5'(10'total) 20'141 0.102 yes Block 2 Lot 4 4,447 0.10 40.0 15' 5'/5'(10'total) 20'14( 0.099 yes Block 2 Lot 5 4,629 0.11 40.0 15' 5'/5'(10'total) 20'NI 0.095 yes Block 3 Lot 1 4,345 0.10 40.0 15'1A 575'(10'total) 20'NI 0.101 no Block 3 Lot 2 4,201 0.10 40.0 15'14 5'/5'(10'total) 20'141 0.105 no Block 3 Lot 3 4,187 0.10 40.0 15'14 575'(10'total) 20'14( 0.105 no Block 3 Lot 4 4,009 0.09 40.0 15'1'1 575'(10'total) 20'14( 0.110 no Block 3 Lot 5 3,978 0.09 40.0 15'141 575'(10'total) 20'NI 0.111 no Block 4 Lot 1 5,292 0.12 50.1 15'121 5'int./15'corner(20'total) 20'I41 0.083 no 1s1 Block 4 Lot 2 4,324 0.10 40.1 15'141 5'/5'(10'total) 20'I41 0.102 no Block 4 Lot 3 4,210 0.10 40.1 15'14 575'(10'total) 20'141 0.105 no Block 4 Lot 4 4,211 0.10 40.1 15'k1 575'(10'total) 20'141 0.104 no Block 4 Lot 5 4,211 0.11 40.1 15'141 5'/5'(10'total) 20'141 0.104 no Block 4 Lot 6 4,211 0.11 40.0 15'PI 5'/5'(10'total) 20'I41 0.104 no Block 4 Lot 7 4,211 0.10 40.0 15'121 5'/5'(10'total) 20'I41 0.104 no Block 4 Lot 8 4,211 0.10 40.0 15'141 575'(10'total) 20'NI 0.104 no Block 4 Lot 9 4,285 0.10 40.0 15'R1 575'(10'total) 20'141 0.103 no Block 4 Lot 10 5,504 0.13 50.1 15' 5'int./15'corner(20'total) 20'441 0.080 no 1s1 Block 5 Lot 1 8,565 0.20 57.5 15'141 3'gar/l0'house(13'total) 32'(varies) 0.051 yes Block 5 Lot 2 7,099 0.16 52.1 15'1a1 3'gar/5'house(8'total) 20'(varies) 0.062 yes Block 5 Lot 3 6,505 0.15 52.1 15'1a1 3'gar/5'house(8'total) 20' 0.068 yes Block 5 Lot 4 8,888 0.20 52.1 15'I'I 3'gar/5'house(8'total) 52' 0.050 yes Block 5 Lot 5 8,282 0.19 52.1 15'131 3'gar/5'house(8'total) 42' 0.053 yes Block 5 Lot 6 8,175 0.19 52.1 15'131 3'gar/5'house(8'total) 20' 0.054 yes Block 5 Lot 7 6,752 0.16 52.1 15'1a1 3'gar/5'house(8'total) 20' 0.065 no Block 5 Lot 8 6,351 0.15 52.1 15'1'1 3'gar/5'house(8'total) 20' 0.069 no Block 5 Lot 9 7,807 0.18 63.1 15'141 3'gar/15'house(18'total) 20' 0.056 no Block 5 Lot 10 7,339 0.17 52.1 15'141 3'gar/5'house(8'total) 20' 0.060 yes Block 5 Lot 11 6,128 0.14 52.1 15'1'1 3'gar/5'house(8'total) 20' 0.072 yes Block 5 Lot 12 5,726 0.13 52.1 15'1'1 3'gar/5'house(8'total) 20' 0.077 yes Block 5 Lot 13 5,747 0.13 52.1 15'141 3'gar/5'house(8'total) 20' 0.077 yes Block 5 Lot 14 5,770 0.13 52.1 15'1a1 3'gar/5'house(8'total) 20' 0.076 yes Block 5 Lot 15 5,990 0.14 55.0 15'1a1 3'gar/5'house(8'total) 20' 0.073 yes Outlot A 7,037 0.16 Outlot B 14,853 0.34 Dutlot C 37,894 0.87 Outlot D 4,660 0.11 Dutlot E 4,482 0.10 Outlot F 23,317 0.54 Outlot G 5,290 0.12 Road Right of Way 65,898 1.51 Total Site Area 8.40 Notes: (1)Garage Size:2 Car/20x22'=440sf (2)Front Setback to private Outlet (3)Front Setback=15'to House/20'to garage (4)Rear Setback of garage to Rear Lot Line(common drive) (5)Public ROW frontage on side lot line only 42 THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344 <(' %* . S) 43 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VIII.D. Randy L. Slick Final Plat Report of Eden Gardens Public Works/Engineering Requested Action Move to: Adopt the resolution approving the final plat of Eden Gardens. Synopsis This proposal is for the plat located in the southwest quadrant of Eden Prairie Road and Scenic Heights Road. The plat consists of 8.39 acres to be platted into 36 single family lots, 7 outlots and right-of-way dedication for street purposes. Background Information The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on June 17, 2104. Second reading of the Rezoning Ordinance and final approval of the Developer's Agreement will be completed on July 14, 2014. Approval of the final plat is subject to the following conditions: • Receipt of engineering fees in the amount of$2,520.00. • Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of$4,757.94. • Receipt of street sign fee in the amount of$1,413.90. • The requirements as set forth in the Developer's Agreement. • Prior to release of the final plat, Developer shall provide to the City a current title insurance policy. • Prior to release of the final plat, Developer shall execute the Special Assessment Agreement for trunk utility improvements in the amount $60,943.10. • Prior to release of the final plat, Developer shall pay to the City 5% of the construction value of the public infrastructure. • Prior to release of the final plat, Developer shall submit to the City Attorney for approval, a copy of proposed Homeowner Association Declarations. • Revision to plat shall include the standard 5' drainage and utility side yard easements on all lots other than those with public infrastructure. • Satisfaction of bonding requirements for the installation of public improvements. • Prior to release of final plat, Developer shall submit a 1"=200' scale reduction of final plat. Attachment • Resolution • Drawing of final plat CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2014- A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF EDEN GARDENS WHEREAS, the plat of Eden Gardens has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder; and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council: A. Plat approval request for Eden Gardens is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the Final Plat Report on this plat dated July 14,2014. B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this resolution to the owners of the subdivision of the above named plat. C. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on July 14, 2014. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen Porta, City Clerk EDEN GARDENS C.R. DOC. NO. J9.R-3814.7 rn weNtrotrii - og Ir1—.• *6�fi. 00 le 1 I <_,•.> r, �;. • C, i ' nl zs I 25 I OULOT A //°-i,iegY� dR 55000 Ne0`3�1 •'E tisso /4 zC al Va N Su• l 1 i I / . .. a e r iP3 �26•r+ b h / 1 i -1 a r. -ev'z'5oT °l::sr an l a>d.* I\ 1 \� q< / �� 6."n�yn, x m° A stcr 1 e .a A-e°5Y.r . . . . e �r xe�zn� . s \ 10484.00 I F; a,%•; ) '; �C; •i i vl 2 j �'°'°'/' ra—A` x°o 7° II f-0E7 -�1 f - r.as �- 1 ' \ ltj CiFs- XJ° \ / /$ / I. . 1 / S I. Z . fr� � 1 6-Pie7,j 6 zevJ I I It %I 1 Z A-9°Svap `` �6TA`4. 6\ i �P` r M1 / 10� <^%. I 5 I p-ram_ " 'w .I I l Iy 1 I i 1 1 " R•• B�y° • -tiba. �. / / /V'P.°� / 0 3 1 1, , ,1,.� n`I 1 113 nIx " QIIIIIIlo, IIj� S 11 �N10 0 4o as r2o • .� 'eXCr'1 / f• ,a f l^ 1/ l$ rvrvl1 .�� 3 I 'gv 2 I I 3 11 1.. 4 1 18 ` I N Scale in feet 0' sal \ (," s°>1 /x 2 / 1$ O hl 1 •��§ a t Iry 1 a {I I 18 1 . 1 I �. �'xn'ifsrt ea 4 .'" 1� / /_� :31 I :< ` g 1� I 1 I 18 1 18 ^' 1 F ° • .w1.ss'z° 1 o'a:4 . Y-,U (- ` _ 1 j 4 41 1 c� "7I " ; I E 81 I $ 11 I_ N o•vs• s1l-- �'I`. II , ��200 oasz A.1 }� .�\ flair -1 � , , i 1 .4q I I I °uya'cl ;t. ov 1 Iy r -fr•1t '>' VEAm"aa. a Wally. " ,� 41.2.-4 l `t, 1 fi,j� La9P35-0 - ,apv .em -- - _- -- _-- - I ... . OU20TD vottemmtun m '�'a^ \ I- "'^ a. ' s • _ •``�4 _' :.1 _ _ .� OU7LOT F t II The south line °/ the Southwest Quarter o/ me _ _ 5°ufehasf Quarter of Section l], rownanlp 116, j� • - •,,,at Wart "`�"� � •«,A, h=,-__ `., K � - - 1 '+ s °named t_ iy}g r1 Ronge2r a bear N 69°12'Ir W. N Z (" __ _ a-z•z°:,a_-:.-'J-'"' a <"� Ji - •_ a,..,.a. . Wry v..mmr-= -- - 111 ••, y • '7.• ` "y _ _ __ •zn12 4a.ia `I ° Dmams 1/2 roan by Is inn w" or set �,C 2 1 n / 2 / arao ran .- ".d / / i / �4y '\ \ `f - _ - n'• j° rota , -- - ,i 1 and marked by License Na. 22021 CT` Id ` g• 1 ms•n}ai rJ¢>) i Zil / ' �?�`$ �-u 1 r — 1 1 1 11 •• Denotes 1/2 inch by 14 inch iron reaar bl • 05' -VI-- --35127-w1 F djyya cm- 1 l 1 1 I 1 found and marked as shorn -� / -_ - / itira,'T� 2u / • � +0 • 'b. \ 15 • `•• r�-aa 1 141219-1 " 1 1 i1N 1 II , s 1 1 rr3 $ /° �. - ''1'-' l I$', l 1 1- 4 1 I'd. 81 I C, - 6 ° ri I ' `. re'zvaz //•7 - ` C - i r r 11 II"t 2 Il 0 3 Il 11.t Il I et I $ Il 11 -- T_ n may/ d / � C( Tfl -. l 1 1 1- • C, 1 1 - 1 I 1 1 z u :' ry azaa ]OZTr 4 - , , ' I 1 r 1 _ I$ • 1 C 1 IG 1 1 1 1 _ Pn �. zaC-4 1' l In- •ze t IB 1 IL l al o i t sar°nYat ,m.sr N 1A 10 1 •I4 1 �c - zzena l 1 _- -1 - N- Li C) H ^' 1 4 • // $ .4't S. lI°_ °n ''5CA\ IL _"Lg_ j E\- -3;2 L-- 4„,„, nao' 2s 4 2I / "� Sep 1 p=rzriso >•- • °•z°,a .•. »F shown '� r Dramaand Utility Easements ore Ihux I aas•.r,er a,,.m �/ zs s br _ __ _ l/ r 1 . • � ,su pT O 9a r L, .x54.57 ' r ` - • 5 Sel°4ry,T T -yr " 1.1 ARm iaa4f A.1' 1Y wra o ; 1 m a a' ; u s I s /4 ^ I � • --�,� `: - --1 i -- 1 11_ II I s� I— a"-, d OU7LOT C "• 1 • 2w71421 8 5=ra*sl2 Iy asy 111 1" II I 1 1 1 3 i, A=a•zvs4'_. v • I St la 1 1� •zYrzl I e 1 �' $7 II Cr -.am ___-1 MOO -7 0% 1 1 _I ip.r I 18, 1 6 SII 10 J L a•°.mv. amnn c...a.er1 la-hie"=--��11 1_ 1 w It II -- - -- - - - - � - - - - C r ms•nbT rw..a J ,� -� 1 I Ig $u I 3 II 1� 4 ll IB 1 - -- - - I I ; 1 • � 11 1 lu 2 Al •1 1 rpp 1 18 11 I I n=,ror4 1 - 1 I Im 1 1 1 rg 1 i 1 1 (No Scala) 8� I 6 tars 11' '•ae .1� r II l 1I g1I II 5 11 1I I` _.a - 1 1I Bah9 3 feet in widen, unless dt eewisc meicdtad, a° .` �° • I 1 I" 1 Dlit? ` --- 1 and adkk,n9 lot Theo, and la oho m width and L °U y�_ � _ `� �m6. / I 1 VI - - � ,era -10 - J I adjoining right-of-way lines «n the plot. ra r mavrvr ,Sra `�• t. \ ° Woos: h v p%6s - • m,y .era • a•�s:- w re.�. o•am�o F 11 • a 1 a5 o, ` - _ • _ ,,5", moat — ve°riraw -- m N89°1Y1rW 2J&59 e2. - L m°•.nor rzo.es a 4 %r u (Sae xee•, ry Z r v050- w �� i s yr� . I , I 1..az 1 1.. '1n er°sYz." 1 .P�• � ,�'= _ cs .ve • T h a I 8 I yO�+ — .ra I" k ° A map ir s 16-14 1 saa•nrz vzaa I ` Ot� 2 W 8 q z 5 an W ch r ° a3 h 1 R 2 N V. ° 6 n ,al i b G8 m ^E x 3 15 A to m o I I 5= ; Iu ^ :I,' a P a N $ L 9 1F `7 % 1 I g $ i Ph i -- ,°aro /.,. ". d vla -u,o L _ -12,_° —sno J e.2,° - 5:.10 Ne9°lrtrw 46.7J1 ` _ Westwood Professional Services, Inc Sheet 1 or 3 sheets CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: IEM NO.: VIII.E. Robert Ellis No-Fault Sewer Backup and Water Public Works/Engineering Main Break Coverage Requested Action Move to: Adopt a resolution authorizing no-fault sewer backup and water main break coverage. Background Information The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust(LMCIT) offers property/casualty member cities "no-fault" sewer backup and water main break coverage. This optional coverage will reimburse a property owner for clean-up costs and damages resulting from a city sewer backup or from a city water main break, irrespective of whether the backup was caused by city negligence. The "no-fault" sewer backup coverage option is intended to: • Reduce health hazards by encouraging property owners to clean-up backups as quickly as possible. • Reduce the frequency and severity of sewer backup lawsuits. • Give cities a way to address problems that can arise when a property owner learns the city and LMCIT won't reimburse for sewer backup damages because the city wasn't negligent and therefore not legally liable. This coverage will reimburse water and sanitary sewer customers for up to $40,000 of clean-up costs and property damages caused by a water main break or sanitary sewer back-up, regardless of whether the city is negligent or otherwise legally liable for damages (subject to certain conditions). The cost of this coverage is $30,612 per year. Attachments • Resolution • No-fault Sewer Backup and Water Main Break Coverage Summary CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2014- _ RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING LIMITED CLEAN UP AND PROPERTY DAMAGE PROTECTION FOR SEWER BACK-UPS AND WATER MAIN BREAKS FOR WATER AND SEWER CUSTOMERS WHEREAS, the Governmental Unit provides water and sanitary sewer services to property within its jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, water main breaks may cause water to enter into property causing damage; and WHEREAS, blockages or other conditions in the Governmental Unit's sanitary sewer lines may cause the back-up of sewage into properties that are connected to those Governmental Unit's sanitary lines; and WHEREAS, water main breaks and sewer back-ups pose a public health and safety concern; and WHEREAS, it is often difficult to determine the exact cause and responsibility for water main breaks and sanitary sewer back-ups, and WHEREAS, the governing body of the Governmental Unit desires to encourage the expeditious clean-up of properties that have encountered damage from water main breaks and sewer back- ups; and WHERAS, the governing body of the Governmental Unit desires to minimize the potential of expensive lawsuits arising out of water main breaks and sanitary sewer back-up claims; and WHEREAS, the Governmental Unit is a member of the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust(LMCIT); and WHEREAS, LMCIT has offered the Governmental Unit limited"no fault" sewer coverage and water main break coverage that will reimburse users of the water and sewer system for certain clean-up costs and property damage regardless of whether the Governmental Unit is at fault. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, as follows: The Governmental Unit, as part of the contract for providing water and sewer services to the customers of the Governmental Unit, and in consideration of the payment of water and sewer bills, agrees to reimburse water and sanitary sewer customers for up to $40,000 of clean-up costs and property damages caused by a water main break or sanitary sewer back-up, regardless of whether the Governmental Unit is negligent or otherwise legally liable for damages, subject to the following conditions: I. Sanitary Sewer Back-Ups. For Sanitary sewer back-ups: A. LMCIT will pay for eligible claims presented by the Governmental Unit for sanitary sewer back-up damage to property of others which was not caused by the Governmental Unit's negligence, if: a. The back-up must have resulted from a condition in the Governmental Unit's sanitary sewer system or lines, and not from a condition in a private line; b. The back-up must not have been caused by catastrophic weather or other events for which Federal Emergency Management Assistance is available; c. The back-up must not have been caused by an interruption in electric power to the Governmental Unit's sewer system or to any Governmental Unit lift station, which continues for more than 72 hours d. The back-up must not have been caused by rainfall or precipitation that would constitute a 100-year storm as determined by the National Weather Service. B. Neither the Governmental Unit nor LMCIT will reimburse any costs which have been or are eligible to be covered under a property owner's own homeowners' or other property insurance, or which would be eligible to be reimbursed under a National Flood Insurance Protection(NFIP)policy, whether or not the property owner actually has NFIP Coverage. C. The maximum amount that the Governmental Unit or LMCIT will reimburse is $40,000 per building, per year. In this regard, a structure or group of structures served by a single connection to the Governmental Unit's sewer system is considered a single building. If a single structure is served by more than one connection to the Governmental Unit's sewer system, the portion of the structure served by each respective connection is considered a separate building. II. Water Main Breaks. For water main breaks: A. LMCIT will pay for claims presented by the Governmental Unit for water main break damage to property of others which was not caused by the Governmental Unit's negligence. B. Neither the Governmental Unit nor LMCIT will pay for damages or expenses for which the property owner has been or is eligible to be reimbursed by any homeowners' or other property insurance. C. The maximum amount that the Governmental Unit or LMCIT will reimburse is $40,000 to any claimant, regardless of the number of occurrences or the number of properties affected. D. Neither the Governmental Unit nor LMCIT will pay more than $250,000 for water main break damages resulting from any single occurrence. All water main break damage which occurs during any period of 72 consecutive hours is deemed to result from a single occurrence. If the total water main break damage for all claimants in a single occurrence exceeds $250,000, the reimbursement to each claimant will be calculated as follows: 1. A preliminary reimbursement figure is established for each claimant, equal to the lesser of the claimant's actual damages or$40,000. 2. The sum of the preliminary reimbursement figures for all claimants will be calculated. 3. Each claimant will be paid a percentage of his or her preliminary reimbursement figure, equal to the percentage calculated by dividing $250,000 by the sum of all claimants' preliminary reimbursement figures. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Governmental Unit, by action of its governing body, caused this Resolution to be approved on July 14, 2014. Eden Prairie City Council Governmental Unit Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen Porta, City Clerk o0 LEAGUE of CONNECTING & INNOVATING MINNESOTA SINCE 1913 CITIES RISK MANAGEMENT INFORMATION OPTIONAL "NO-FAULT" SEWER BACKUP COVERAGE The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust(LMCIT) offers property/casualty member cities "no-fault"sewer backup coverage. This optional coverage will reimburse a property owner for clean-up costs and damages resulting from a city sewer backup or from a city water main break, irrespective of whether the backup was caused by city negligence. The "no-fault" sewer backup coverage option is intended to: • Reduce health hazards by encouraging property owners to clean-up backups as quickly as possible. • Reduce the frequency and severity of sewer backup lawsuits (i.e. property owners may be less inclined to sue if they receive conciliatory treatment at the time of the backup). • Give cities a way to address the sticky political problems that can arise when a property owner learns the city and LMCIT won't reimburse for sewer backup damages because the city wasn't negligent and therefore not legally liable. Many cities and their citizens may fmd this coverage option to be a helpful tool. However, it's also important to realize it's not a complete solution to sewer backup problems, and not every possible backup will be covered. Which sewer backups are covered? The "no-fault" coverage would reimburse the property owner for sewer backup damages or water main breaks, regardless of whether the city was legally liable, if the following conditions are met: • The backup must have resulted from a condition in the city's sewer system or lines. A backup caused by a clog or other problem in the property owner's own line would not be covered. • It's not a situation that is specifically excluded in the coverage. • The coverage limit has not been exceeded. LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 145 UNIVERSITY AVE.WEST PHONE: (651) 281-1200 FAX:(651) 281-1298 INSURANCE TRUST ST. PAUL.MN 55103-2044 TOLL FREE: (800) 925-1122 WEB:WWW.LMC.ORG Sewer Toolkit Other Resources - 14 Which situations are excluded? The "no-fault" coverage will not apply in several "catastrophic"type situations. Specifically, these are: • Any event, weather-related or otherwise, for which FEMA assistance is available; • Any interruption in the electric power supply to the city's sewer system or to any city sewer lift station which continues for more than 72 hours; or • Rainfall or precipitation that exceeds the amount determined by the National Weather Service to constitute a 100-year storm event. What costs would be covered? The coverage would reimburse the property owner for the cost of cleaning up the backup, and for any damage to the property, up to the coverage limit. For purposes of the city's deductibles, claims under the no-fault coverage are treated as liability claims, so the same per-occurrence and/or annual deductibles will apply. However, there are certain costs that would not be reimbursed under the no-fault coverage: • Any costs which have been or are eligible to be covered under the property owner's own homeowner's or other property insurance; and • Any costs that would be eligible to be reimbursed under an NFIP flood insurance policy, whether or not the property owner actually has NFIP coverage. What is the coverage limit? The basic limit is $10,000 per building per year. The city also has options to purchase additional limits of$25,000 or $40,000 per building. For purposes of the limit, a structure or group of structures that is served by a single connection to the city's sewer system will be considered a single building. Only true "no-fault" claims are counted toward the limit. Claims for damages caused by city negligence, for which the city would be legally liable in any case, are not charged against that limit. What does it cost? The rating mechanism has changed effective November 15, 2012. For renewals prior to November 15, 2012, the premium charge was a percentage of the city's municipal liability premium. For renewals on or after November 15, 2012,the charge is based on a per sewer connection basis. To avoid premium shocks for existing members, a transition mechanism has been put into place. This mechanism caps the changes in premiums—the max increase is 30 percent and the max decrease is 10 percent. Sewer Toolkit Other Resources - 15 Limit Pre-11/15/12 11/15/12-13 J 10,000 limit 8.5% of municipal liability premium $1.79 per connection manual rate _ 25,000 limit 10% of municipal liability premium $2.11 per connection manual rate _ 40,000 limit 12.5% of municipal liability premium $2.63 per connection manual rate Because the LMCIT Board's intent is that this coverage be self-supporting, charges will be continually monitored and, if necessary, adjusted in the future. Is every city automatically eligible? No. To be eligible, the city must meet these underwriting criteria: • The city must have a policy and practice of inspecting and cleaning its sewer lines on a reasonable schedule. • If there are any existing problems in the city's system which have caused backups in the past or are likely to cause backups, the city must have and be implementing a plan to address those problems. • The city must have a system and the ability to respond promptly to backups or other sewer problems at any time of the day or week. • The city must have in place an appropriate program to minimize stormwater inflow and infiltration. • The city must have in place a system to maintain records of routine sewer cleaning and maintenance, and of any reported problems and responses. When establishing these criteria, the goal of LMCIT was to focus on reasonableness rather than on creating specific standards. The intent isn't to set an arbitrary requirement that sewers be inspected and cleaned every six months, every three years, every five years, etc. What makes sense in one city with some older and sometimes sagging • clay lines probably wouldn't make sense in a city with More Information newer plastic lines, and vice versa. From the underwriting For assistance in developing sewer standpoint, the real concern is that the city has considered policies, practices, and schedules, its own situation and developed policies, practices, and please see the Sewer Toolkit. schedules that make sense for its own situation. J How would the "no-fault" coverage work if a sewer backup was caused by city negligence, and where the city was legally liable for the resulting damages? If the situation isn't one where the "no-fault" coverage applies, the city's LMCIT liability coverage would respond just as it does now. That is, LMCIT would investigate and if necessary defend the claim on the city's behalf, and would pay the resulting damages if in fact the city is legally liable for those damages. Sewer Toolkit Other Resources - 16 The same would be true for damages that exceed the $10,000 no-fault limit, or for a subrogation claim against the city by the homeowner's insurance company. The city's existing LMCIT liability would respond just as it does now. What's the legal basis for this coverage? Wouldn't it be a gift of public funds to pay for damages the city isn't legally liable for? First, as noted earlier, one goal is to help reduce health hazards by encouraging prompt clean-ups. That's clearly a public purpose and in the public interest. Second, the law and facts surrounding most sewer backup claims are rarely so clear that the liability issue is entirely black and white. There's virtually always a way that a claimant's attorney can make some type of argument for city liability. Having this coverage in place should help eliminate the need to spend public funds on litigation costs in many of these cases. Finally, part of the process for putting the coverage in place is for the city council to pass a formal resolution that makes this no-fault sewer backup protection part of the agreement between the city and the sewer customer. The idea is that by paying their sewer bill, the sewer user is purchasing not just sewer services but also the right to be reimbursed for certain specified sewer backup costs and damages. In other words, the basis for the no-fault payments to the property owner would be the contract between the city and the sewer user. How do we put coverage in place? Contact your LMCIT underwriter for an application. If the c city qualifies for coverage, we'll send the city a formal Your League Resource quote, along with a model resolution. To put coverage in place, the city council must formally pass that resolution, Contact your LMCIT underwriter at and send a copy to LMCIT. 651-281-1200 or 800-925-1122 for more information about the "no- If the city decides to add this coverage, it will also be fault" sewer backup coverage. important to make sure citizens know about it. LMCIT can ` l also provide models for a press release, newsletter article, utility bill insert, etc. What if we decide to discontinue the coverage sometime in the future? Make sure your agent notifies your LMCIT underwriter. In addition, it's important to let your citizens know if and when the coverage is discontinued. The council should formally rescind the resolution that made the no-fault sewer backup protection part of the agreement between the city and the sewer customer. Liam Biever 01/13 Sewer Toolkit Other Resources - 17 COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL COVERAGE No-Fault Sewer Back-up and Water Main Break Coverage Endorsement ($10,000 Limit) Section I, Coverage A, Municipal Liability Coverage, is amended to include no-fault sewer back-up and water main break coverage as outlined below. 1. No-fault sewer back-up coverage a. If all of the following four conditions are met, LMCIT will pay for claims presented by the city for sewer back-up damage to property of others which was not caused by city negligence: (1) The sewer back-up resulted from a condition in the city's sewer system; (2) The sewer back-up was not the result of an obstruction or other condition in sewer pipes or lines which are not part of the city's sewer system or which are not owned or maintained by the city; and (3) The sewer back-up was not caused by or related to a catastrophic incident. (4) The date of the occurrence giving rise to the claim for damages must be on or after the retroactive date shown on this endorsement. b. However,LMCIT will not pay for any damages or expenses: (1) Which are or would be covered under a National Flood Insurance Program flood insurance policy, whether or not such insurance is in effect; or (2) For which the property owner has been reimbursed or is eligible to be reimbursed by any homeowners' or other property insurance. 2. No-fault water main break coverage. LMCIT will pay for claims presented by the city for water main break damage to property of others which was not caused by city negligence. But LMCIT will not pay for any damages or expenses for which the property owner has been or is eligible to be reimbursed by any homeowners' or other property insurance. 3. Definitions For purposes of this endorsement,the following definitions apply. a. Catastrophic incident means any of the following: (1) Any weather-related or other event for which FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Administration) assistance is available; Sewer Toolkit Other Resources - 18 (2) Any interruption in the electric power supply to the city's sewer system or to any city sewer lift station which continues for more than 72 hours; or (3) Rainfall of precipitation which exceeds the amount determined by the National Weather Service to constitute a 100-year storm event. b. Sewer back-up damage means damage to property, including removal and clean-up costs, resulting from a sewer back-up. c. Water main break damage means damage to property, including removal and clean-up costs, resulting from the rupture of a city water main, line, or pipe. 4. Limits a. LMCIT will not pay more than $10,000 for sewer back-up damage to any building under this endorsement, regardless of the number of occurrences or the number of claimants. For purposes of this limit (1) A structure or group of structures served by a single connection to the city's sewer system is considered a single building. (2) If a single structure is served by more than one connection to the city's sewer system, the portion of the structure served by each respective connection is considered a separate building. b. LMCIT will not pay more than $10,000 for water main break damage to any claimant, regardless of the number of occurrences or the number of properties affected. c. LMCIT will not pay more than $250,000 for water main break damage resulting from any single occurrence. All water main break damage which occurs during any period of 72 consecutive hours is deemed to result from a single occurrence. If the total water main break damage for all claimants in a single occurrence exceeds $250,000, the reimbursement to each claimant will be calculated as follows: (1) A preliminary reimbursement figure is established for each claimant, equal to the lesser of the claimant's actual damages or$10,000. (2) The sum of the preliminary reimbursement figures for all claimants will be calculated. (3) Each claimant will be paid a percentage of his or her preliminary reimbursement figure, equal to the percentage calculated by dividing $250,000 by the sum of all claimants' preliminary reimbursement figures. 5. Deductibles The amount LMCIT pays for sewer back-up damages or water main break damage under this endorsement is subject to the Municipal Liability Deductible shown in the Municipal Liability Declarations or the General Annual Aggregate Deductible if any shown in the Common Coverage Declarations. Sewer Toolkit Other Resources - 19 For purposes of the Municipal Liability Deductible, all claims for sewer back-up damages which are covered under this endorsement, which occur within a 72 hour period, and which result from or are related to the same condition or conditions in the city's sewer system are deemed to be a single occurrence; and water main break damage which is covered under this endorsement and which occurs during any period of 72 consecutive hours is deemed to be a single occurrence. 6. Retroactive Date The retroactive date for this endorsement is . All other terms and conditions remain unchanged. Sewer Toolkit Other Resources - 20 COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL COVERAGE No-Fault Sewer Back-up and Water Main Break Coverage Endorsement ($25,000 Limit) Section I, Coverage A, Municipal Liability Coverage, is amended to include no-fault sewer back-up and water main break coverage as outlined below. 1. No-fault sewer back-up coverage a. If all of the following four conditions are met, LMCIT will pay for claims presented by the city for sewer back-up damage to property of others which was not caused by city negligence: (1) The sewer back-up resulted from a condition in the city's sewer system; (2) The sewer back-up was not the result of an obstruction or other condition in sewer pipes or lines which are not part of the city's sewer system or which are not owned or maintained by the city; and (3) The sewer back-up was not caused by or related to a catastrophic incident. (4) The date of the occurrence giving rise to the claim for damages must be on or after the retroactive date shown on this endorsement. b. However,LMCIT will not pay for any damages or expenses: (1) Which are or would be covered under a National Flood Insurance Program flood insurance policy, whether or not such insurance is in effect; or (2) For which the property owner has been reimbursed or is eligible to be reimbursed by any homeowners' or other property insurance. 2. No-fault water main break coverage. LMCIT will pay for claims presented by the city for water main break damage to property of others which was not caused by city negligence. But LMCIT will not pay for any damages or expenses for which the property owner has been or is eligible to be reimbursed by any homeowners' or other property insurance. 3. Definitions For purposes of this endorsement,the following definitions apply. a. Catastrophic incident means any of the following: (1) Any weather-related or other event for which FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Administration) assistance is available; Sewer Toolkit Other Resources - 21 (2) Any interruption in the electric power supply to the city's sewer system or to any city sewer lift station which continues for more than 72 hours; or (3) Rainfall of precipitation which exceeds the amount determined by the National Weather Service to constitute a 100-year storm event. b. Sewer back-up damage means damage to property, including removal and clean-up costs, resulting from a sewer back-up. c. Water main break damage means damage to property, including removal and clean-up costs, resulting from the rupture of a city water main, line, or pipe. 4. Limits a. LMCIT will not pay more than $25,000. for sewer back-up damage to any building under this endorsement, regardless of the number of occurrences or the number of claimants. For purposes of this limit (1) A structure or group of structures served by a single connection to the city's sewer system is considered a single building. (2) If a single structure is served by more than one connection to the city's sewer system, the portion of the structure served by each respective connection is considered a separate building. b. LMCIT will not pay more than $25,000 for water main break damage to any claimant, regardless of the number of occurrences or the number of properties affected. c. LMCIT will not pay more than $250,000 for water main break damage resulting from any single occurrence. All water main break damage which occurs during any period of 72 consecutive hours is deemed to result from a single occurrence. If the total water main break damage for all claimants in a single occurrence exceeds $250,000, the reimbursement to each claimant will be calculated as follows: (1) A preliminary reimbursement figure is established for each claimant, equal to the lesser of the claimant's actual damages or$25,000. (2) The sum of the preliminary reimbursement figures for all claimants will be calculated. (3) Each claimant will be paid a percentage of his or her preliminary reimbursement figure, equal to the percentage calculated by dividing $250,000 by the sum of all claimants' preliminary reimbursement figures. 5. Deductibles The amount LMCIT pays for sewer back-up damages or water main break damage under this endorsement is subject to the Municipal Liability Deductible shown in the Municipal Liability Declarations or the General Annual Aggregate Deductible if any shown in the Common Coverage Declarations. Sewer Toolkit Other Resources - 22 For purposes of the Municipal Liability Deductible, all claims for sewer back-up damages which are covered under this endorsement, which occur within a 72 hour period, and which result from or are related to the same condition or conditions in the city's sewer system are deemed to be a single occurrence; and water main break damage which is covered under this endorsement and which occurs during any period of 72 consecutive hours is deemed to be a single occurrence. 6. Retroactive Date The retroactive date for this endorsement is . All other terms and conditions remain unchanged. Sewer Toolkit Other Resources - 23 COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL COVERAGE No-Fault Sewer Back-up and Water Main Break Coverage Endorsement ($40,000 Limit) Section I, Coverage A, Municipal Liability Coverage, is amended to include no-fault sewer back-up and water main break coverage as outlined below. 1. No-fault sewer back-up coverage a. If all of the following four conditions are met, LMCIT will pay for claims presented by the city for sewer back-up damage to property of others which was not caused by city negligence: (1) The sewer back-up resulted from a condition in the city's sewer system; (2) The sewer back-up was not the result of an obstruction or other condition in sewer pipes or lines which are not part of the city's sewer system or which are not owned or maintained by the city; and (3) The sewer back-up was not caused by or related to a catastrophic incident. (4) The date of the occurrence giving rise to the claim for damages must be on or after the retroactive date shown on this endorsement. b. However,LMCIT will not pay for any damages or expenses: (1) Which are or would be covered under a National Flood Insurance Program flood insurance policy, whether or not such insurance is in effect; or (2) For which the property owner has been reimbursed or is eligible to be reimbursed by any homeowners' or other property insurance. 2. No-fault water main break coverage. LMCIT will pay for claims presented by the city for water main break damage to property of others which was not caused by city negligence. But LMCIT will not pay for any damages or expenses for which the property owner has been or is eligible to be reimbursed by any homeowners' or other property insurance. 3. Definitions For purposes of this endorsement,the following definitions apply. a. Catastrophic incident means any of the following: (1) Any weather-related or other event for which FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Administration) assistance is available; Sewer Toolkit Other Resources - 24 (2) Any interruption in the electric power supply to the city's sewer system or to any city sewer lift station which continues for more than 72 hours; or (3) Rainfall of precipitation which exceeds the amount determined by the National Weather Service to constitute a 100-year storm event. b. Sewer back-up damage means damage to property, including removal and clean-up costs, resulting from a sewer back-up. c. Water main break damage means damage to property, including removal and clean-up costs, resulting from the rupture of a city water main, line, or pipe. 4. Limits a. LMCIT will not pay more than $40,000. for sewer back-up damage to any building under this endorsement, regardless of the number of occurrences or the number of claimants. For purposes of this limit (1) A structure or group of structures served by a single connection to the city's sewer system is considered a single building. (2) If a single structure is served by more than one connection to the city's sewer system, the portion of the structure served by each respective connection is considered a separate building. b. LMCIT will not pay more than $40,000 for water main break damage to any claimant, regardless of the number of occurrences or the number of properties affected. c. LMCIT will not pay more than $250,000 for water main break damage resulting from any single occurrence. All water main break damage which occurs during any period of 72 consecutive hours is deemed to result from a single occurrence. If the total water main break damage for all claimants in a single occurrence exceeds $250,000, the reimbursement to each claimant will be calculated as follows: (1) A preliminary reimbursement figure is established for each claimant, equal to the lesser of the claimant's actual damages or$40,000. (2) The sum of the preliminary reimbursement figures for all claimants will be calculated. (3) Each claimant will be paid a percentage of his or her preliminary reimbursement figure, equal to the percentage calculated by dividing $250,000 by the sum of all claimants' preliminary reimbursement figures. 5. Deductibles The amount LMCIT pays for sewer back-up damages or water main break damage under this endorsement is subject to the Municipal Liability Deductible shown in the Municipal Liability Declarations or the General Annual Aggregate Deductible if any shown in the Common Coverage Declarations. Sewer Toolkit Other Resources - 25 For purposes of the Municipal Liability Deductible, all claims for sewer back-up damages which are covered under this endorsement, which occur within a 72 hour period, and which result from or are related to the same condition or conditions in the city's sewer system are deemed to be a single occurrence; and water main break damage which is covered under this endorsement and which occurs during any period of 72 consecutive hours is deemed to be a single occurrence. 6. Retroactive Date The retroactive date for this endorsement is . All other terms and conditions remain unchanged. Sewer Toolkit Other Resources - 26 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Agenda July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VIII.F. Rick Wahlen Award Contract with Minger Public Works/UtilitiesConstruction, Inc. for the Reconstruction of Lift Station No. 6 Requested Action Move to: Award contract with Minger Construction, Inc. for the reconstruction of Lift Station No. 6 (Red Rock Lift), in the amount of$192,956.75. Synopsis The City of Eden Prairie Utilities Division obtained bids from three competent contractors for reconstructing Lift Station No. 6 at 15688 Village Woods Drive. The low bid was offered by Minger Construction, Inc. Staff recommends the City Council award Improvement Contract No. 147130 to Minger Construction, Inc. in the amount of$192,956.75 to be paid from the wastewater utility fund. Background Information Each year, Eden Prairie Utilities has planned the major maintenance and upgrade of one of our 21 lift stations. Doing this major maintenance work on 21-year schedule ensures the systems are removed, inspected, replaced, and upgraded as necessary on a consistent basis before they have an opportunity to completely fail. Annually, we visit each lift station in the fall to completely go through the mechanical functions of the system and perform any needed repairs to the pumps and controls. This annual preventative maintenance prevents pumping failures and greatly minimizes sewer backups. The 21-year major reconstruction project ensures the concrete, piping, pumps and other appurtenances are replaced and renewed for another 21 years of useful service, and ensures the lift station expands, if necessary, to meet the needs of its supported service area. Sewer system environments are very corrosive and lift stations suffer a great deal of degradation over the years, requiring major component replacement and renewal. All costs for the improvement project will be paid from the wastewater utility fund. Attachment Recommendation Letter with Bid Summary& Bid Tabulation Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture July 7,2014 Mr. Rick Wahlen City of Eden Prairie 14100 Technology Drive Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Re: Construction Bids for Reconstruction of Lift Station No. 6 (Red Rock Lift Station),I.C. #147130 Dear Mr. Wahlen: Bids were received and opened at 10:00 a.m. on Thursday,July 3, 2014 for the above referenced project. The bids are shown on the attached Summary of Bids. The Engineer's Estimate for this project was $149,250.00. The low bidder, Minger Construction, Inc., came in 29% above the Engineer's Estimate with a bid of$192,956.75. Recommendation is made that the City Council awards I.C. #147130 to Minger Construction, Inc. in the amount of $192,956.75. This recommendation considers that the City Council reserves the right to waive minor irregularities and further reserves the right to award the contract in the best interests of the City. Respectfully, Hansen Thorp Pellinen Olson, Inc. Adam Pawelk,P.E. Design Engineer 7510 Market Place Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-829-0700 Enclosures: 952-829-7806 fax Summary of Bids www.htpo.com Bid Tabulation HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON, INC. SUMMARY OF BIDS City of Eden Prairie I.C. #147130 DESCRIPTION: Reconstruction of Lift Station No. 6 (Red Rock Lift Station) BIDS OPENED: July 3, 2014 CONSULTING ENGINEER: Hansen Thorp Pellinen Olson, Inc. CHECKED BY: Hansen Thorp Pellinen Olson, Inc. Bidder Bid Bond Total Bid Minger Construction, Inc. Yes $192,956.75 CCS Contracting, Inc. Yes $195,250.00 PCiRoads, LLC. Yes $306,650.00 Bid Tabulation Reconstruction of Lift Station No. 6 (Red Rock Lift Station) City of Eden Prairie I.C. #147130 Engineer's Estimate Minger Construction,Inc. CCS Contracting,Inc. PCiRoads,LLC. ITEM UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT No. ITEM QTY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAL 1 Mobilization 1 Lump Sum $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 2 Bituminous Pavement Removal 65 Sq.Yd. $10.00 $650.00 $12.00 $780.00 $10.00 $650.00 $45.00 $2,925.00 3 Concrete Curb&Gutter Removal 30 Lin.Ft. $10.00 $300.00 $12.75 $382.50 $15.00 $450.00 $50.00 $1,500.00 4 Tree Removal 2 Each $750.00 $1,500.00 $850.00 $1,700.00 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 5 Remove Lift Station Components 1 Lump Sum $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 6 Tree Protection Fence 90 Lin.Ft. $4.00 $360.00 $3.25 $292.50 $8.00 $720.00 $7.00 $630.00 7 Silt Fence 60 Lin.Ft. $5.00 $300.00 $7.00 $420.00 $7.001 $420.00 $7.00 $420.00 8 Sediment Control Inlet 2 Each $200.00 $400.00 $140.00 $280.00 $75.00 $150.00 $300.00 $600.00 9 Street Sweeping 6 Hours $150.00 $900.00 $145.00 $870.00 $150.00 $900.00 $200.00 $1,200.00 10 Traffic Control 1 Lump Sum $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,750.00 $1,750.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 11 Site Grading 1 Lump Sum $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 12 Wastewater Lift Station(1) 1 Lump Sum $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $112,700.00 $112,700.00 $126,000.00 $126,000.00 $110,000.00 $110,000.00 13 Wet Well Lining 480 Sq.Ft. $50.00 $24,000.00 $47.00 $22,560.00 $50.001 $24,000.00 $185.00 $88,800.00 14 Temporary Sanitary Sewer Bypass 1 Lump Sum $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $24,250.00 $24,250.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 15 Sand-Gravel Material 30 Tons $35.00 $1,050.00 $39.30 $1,179.00 $20.00 $600.00 $100.00 $3,000.00 16 3/4"to 1"Clear Crushed Angular Rock 20 Tons $50.00 $1,000.00 $50.50 $1,010.00 $35.001 $700.00 $120.00 $2,400.00 17 1-1/2"to 3"Clear Crushed Angular Rock 10 Tons $100.00 $1,000.00 $50.50 $505.00 $35.00 $350.00 $180.00 $1,800.00 18 Sod 145 Sq.Yd. $10.00 $1,450.00 $13.25 $1,921.25 $10.00 $1,450.00 $31.00 $4,495.00 19 Concrete Pad 520 Sq.Ft. $12.00 $6,240.00 $8.60 $4,472.00 $18.001 $9,360.00 $11.00 $5,720.00 20 Mountable Concrete Curb&Gutter 30 Lin.Ft. $40.00 $1,200.00 $36.80 $1,104.00 $60.00 $1,800.00 $80.00 $2,400.00 21 Bituminous Pavement Restoration 7 Sq.Yd. $200.00 $1,400.00 $111.50 $780.50 $100.00 $700.00 $180.00 $1,260.00 Total $149,250.00 $192,956.75 $195,250.00 $306,650.00 HTPO 14-024 7/7/2014 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Agenda July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 14-5866 ITEM NO.: VIII.G. Carter Schulze Award Contract to Parrott Contracting Public Works/Engineering Inc. for the Duck Lake Trail Culvert Replacement Requested Action Move to: Award Contract to Parrott Contracting for the Duck Lake Trail Culvert in the amount of $98,865. Synopsis Quotes were received on Monday July 7, 2014 to replace the failing culvert that carries Purgatory Creek under Duck Lake Trail. The cost of the project will be paid out of the stormwater utility fund. The engineering estimate was $121,690. Three quotes were received and are tabulated as follows: Parrott Contracting Inc. $98,865.00 G.F. Jedlicki $148,520.00 Blackstone Contractors $150,289.69 Background Information The corrugated metal culvert installed in the 1970's carrying Purgatory Creek under Duck Lake Trail has deteriorated to the point that the road bed has been compromised and is washing away through holes in the pipe. Following a complaint from a resident about a sink hole along the edge of the road, the utility and engineering department identified this as an urgent problem. The City contracted with HTPO, a consulting firm,to complete a design and create bidding documents to replace the culvert. Attachments • Standard Construction Contract • Quote Tab Standard Construction Contract This Contract ("Contract") is made on the 14th day of July , 2014 , between the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota (hereinafter "City"), whose business address is 8080 Mitchell Road, Eden Prairie, MN 55344, and Parrott Contracting, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation (hereinafter "Contractor") whose business address is 30090 State Hwy 93, Henderson, MN 56044 . Preliminary Statement The City has adopted a policy regarding the selection and hiring of contractors to provide a variety of services for City projects. That policy requires that persons, firms or corporations providing such services enter into written agreements with the City. The purpose of this Contract is to set forth the terms and conditions for the provision of services by Contractor for IC No. 14-5866 Duck Lake Trail Culvert Replacement hereinafter referred to as the "Work". The City and Contractor agree as follows: 1. Scope of Work/Proposal. The Contractor agrees to provide, perform and complete all the provisions of the Work in accordance with Contract Documents. The terms of this Contract shall take precedence over any provisions of the Contractor's proposal and/or general conditions. 2. Time of Commencement and Completion. The Work to be performed under this Contract shall be commenced immediately after execution of this Contract. The Work shall be completed by September 5, 2014. 3. Compensation for Services. City agrees to pay the Contractor a sum of $98,865.00 as full and complete payment for the labor, materials and services rendered pursuant to the Contract Documents. a. Any changes in the scope of the work which may result in an increase to the compensation due the Contractor shall require prior written approval by an authorized representative of the City or by the City Council. The City will not pay additional compensation for services that do not have prior written authorization. b. If Contractor is delayed in performance due to any cause beyond its reasonable control, including but not limited to strikes, riots, fires, acts of God, governmental_ actions, actions of a third party, or actions or inactions of City, the time for performance shall be extended by a period of time lost by reason of the delay. Contractor will be entitled to payment for its reasonable additional charges, if any, due to the delay. 4. Method of Payment. The Contractor shall submit to the City, on a monthly basis, an itemized invoice for services performed under this Contract. Invoices submitted shall be paid in the same manner as other claims made to the City. a. Invoices. Contractor shall verify all statements submitted for payment in compliance with Minnesota Statutes Sections 471.38 and 471.391. For reimbursable expenses, if provided for in Exhibit A, the Contractor shall provide an itemized listing and such documentation as reasonably required by the City. Each invoice shall contain the City's project number and a progress summary showing the original (or amended) amount of the contract, current billing, past payments and unexpended balance of the contract. b. Claims. To receive any payment on this Contract, the invoice or bill must include the following signed and dated statement: "I declare under penalty of perjury that this account, claim, or demand is just and correct and that no part of it has been paid." c. Final Payment. Final payment, constituting the entire unpaid balance of the Contract Sum, shall be paid by the City to the Contractor when the Work has been completed, the Contract fully performed, and the City accepts the Work in writing. The acceptance of final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims by the Contractor except those previously made in writing and identified by the Contractor as unsettled at the time of Application for Final Payment. d. Income Tax Withholding. No final payment shall be made to the Contractor until the Contractor has provided satisfactory evidence to the City that the Contractor and each of its subcontracts has complied with the provisions of Minn. Stat. Section 290.92 relating to withholding of income taxes upon wages. A certificate by the Commissioner of Revenue shall satisfy this requirement. 5. Standard of Care. Contractor shall exercise the same degree of care, skill and diligence in the performance of its services as is ordinarily exercised by members of the profession under similar circumstances in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Contractor shall be liable to the fullest extent permitted under applicable law, without limitation, for any injuries, loss, or damages proximately caused by Contractor's breach of this standard of care. Contractor shall put forth reasonable efforts to complete its duties in a timely manner. Contractor shall not be responsible for delays caused by factors beyond its control or that could not be reasonably foreseen at the time of execution of this Contract. Contractor shall be responsible for costs, delays or damages arising from unreasonable delays in the performance of its duties. 6. Project Manager. The Contractor has designated Dave Parrott to Manage the Work. They shall be assisted by other staff members as necessary to facilitate the completion of the Work in accordance with the terms established herein. Contractor may not remove or replace the designated manager without the approval of the City: 7. Condition and Inspection. All goods and other materials furnished under this Contract shall be new and in current manufacture, unless otherwise specified, and all goods and work shall be of good quality, free from faults and defects and in conformance with this Contract. All goods and work not conforming to these requirements shall be considered defective. Goods shall be subject to inspection and testing by the City. Defective goods or goods not in current manufacture may be returned to the Contractor at the Contractor's expense. 8. Correction of Work. The Contractor shall promptly correct all Work rejected by the City as defective or as failing to conform under this Contract whether observed before or after completion of the Work and whether or not fabricated, installed or completed. The Contractor shall bear all costs of correcting such rejected Work. Duck Lake Trail Culvert Replacement Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 2 of 11 9. Warranty. The Contractor expressly warrants and guarantees to the City that all Work performed and all materials furnished shall be in accord with the Contract and shall be free from defects in materials, workmanship, and operation which appear within a period of one year, or within such longer period as may be prescribed by law or in the terms of the Contract, from the date of City's written acceptance of the Work. The City's rights under the Contractor's warranty are not the City's exclusive remedy. The City shall have all other remedies available under this Contract, at law or in equity. Should any defects develop in the materials, workmanship or operation of the system within the specified period, upon notice from the City, the Contractor agrees, within ten (10). calendar days after receiving written notice and without expense to the City, to repair, replace and in general to perform all necessary corrective Work with regard to the defective or nonconforming Work or materials to the satisfaction of the City. THE FOREGOING SHALL NOT IN ANY MANNER LIMIT THE CITY'S REMEDY OR THE CONTRACTOR'S LIABILITY TO THOSE DEFECTS APPEARING WITHIN THE WARRANTY PERIOD. The Contractor agrees to perform the Work in a manner and at a time so as to minimize any damages sustained by the City and so as to not interfere with or in any way disrupt the operation of the City or the public. The corrective Work referred to above shall include without limitation, (a) the cost of removing the defective or nonconforming Work and materials from the site, (b) the cost of correcting all Work of other Contractors destroyed or damaged by defective or nonconforming Work and materials including the cost of removal of such damaged Work and materials form the site, and (c) the cost of correcting all damages to Work of other Contractors caused by the removal of the defective or nonconforming Work or materials. The Contractor shall post bonds to secure the warranties. 10. Private Property. The Contractor shall not enter upon private property for any purpose without having previously obtained permission from the City. The Contractor shall be responsible for the preservation of, and shall use every precaution to prevent damage to all trees, shrubbery, plants, lawns, fences, culverts, bridges, pavements, driveways, sidewalks, etc.; all water, sewer and gas lines; all conduits; all overhead pole lines or appurtenances thereof; and all other public or private property along or adjacent to the work. 11. Removal of Construction Equipment, Tools and Supplies. At the termination of this Contract, before acceptance of the Work by the City, the Contractor shall remove all of Contractor's equipment, tools and supplies from the property of the City. Should the Contractor fail to remove such equipment, tools and supplies, the City shall have the right to remove them and deduct the cost of removal from any amount owed to Contractor. 12.Suspension of Work by City. The City may at any time suspend the Work, or any part thereof, by giving ten (10) days' notice to the Contractor in writing. The work shall be resumed by the Contractor within ten (10) days after the date fixed in the written notice from the City to the Contractor to resume. If the City's suspension of all or part of the Work causes additional expenses not due to the fault or negligence of the Contractor, the City shall reimburse the Contractor for the additional expense incurred due to suspension of the work. Claims for such compensation, with complete substantiating records, shall be filed with the City within ten (10) days after the date of order to resume Work in order to receive consideration. This paragraph shall not be construed as entitling the Contractor to compensation for delays due to inclement Duck Lake Trail Culvert Replacement Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 3 of 11 weather, failure to furnish additional surety or sureties specified herein, for suspension made at the request of the Contractor, or for any other delay provided for in this Contract. 13. City's Right to Carry Out the Work. If the Contractor defaults or neglects to carry out the Work in accordance with the Contract or fails to perform any provisions of the Contract, the City may, after ten (10) days written notice to the Contractor and without prejudice to any other remedy the City may have, make good such deficiencies. In such case an appropriate Change Order shall be issued deducting from the payment then or thereafter due the Contractor the cost of correcting such deficiencies. If the payments then or thereafter due the Contractor are not sufficient to cover such amount, the Contractor shall pay the difference to the City. 14. City's Right to Terminate Contract and Complete the Work. The City has the right to terminate this Contract for any of the following reasons: a. The Contractor is adjudged bankrupt, makes a general assignment for the benefit of creditors, or becomes insolvent; b. Failure of Contractor to supply adequate properly skilled workmen or proper materials; c. Failure of Contractor to make prompt payment to subcontractor for material or labor; d. Any disregard of laws, ordinances or proper instructions of the City; e. Assignment or work without permission of the City; f. Abandonment of the work by Contractor; g. Failure to meet the work progress schedule set forth in this Contract; h. Unnecessary delay which, in the judgment of the City, will result in the work not being completed in the prescribed time. Termination of the Contract shall be preceded by ten (10) days written notice by the City to the Contractor and its surety stating the grounds for termination and the measures, if any, which must be taken to assure compliance with the Contract. The Contract shall be terminated at the expiration of such ten (10) day period unless the City Council shall withdraw its notice of termination. Upon termination of the Contract by the City, the City may, without prejudice to any other remedy the City may have, take possession of the site and of all materials, equipment, tools, construction equipment and machinery thereon owned by the Contractor and may finish the Work by whatever methods the City may deem expedient at the Contractor's expense. Upon Contract termination, the Contractor shall not be entitled to receive any further payment until the Work is finished. If the unpaid balance of the contract price exceeds the expense of finishing the Work, including compensation for additional managerial and administrative services, the excess shall be paid to the Contractor. If such expense exceeds the unpaid balance, the Contractor shall pay the difference to the City. In the event that the Contractor abandons the Work, fails or refuses to complete the Work or fails to pay just claims for labor or material, the City reserves the right to charge against the Contractor all legal, engineering, or other costs resulting from such abandonment, failure or refusal. Legal costs will include the City's cost of prosecuting or defending any suit in connection with such abandonment, failure or refusal, and non-payment of claims wherein the City is made co-defendant, and the Contractor agrees to pay all costs, including reasonable attorney's fees. Duck Lake Trail Culvert Replacement Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 4 of 11 15. Contractor's Right to Terminate Contract. The Contractor may terminate this Contract upon ten (10) days written notice to the City for any of the following reasons: a. If an order of any court or other public authority caused the Work to be stopped or suspended for a period of 90 days through no act or fault of the Contractor or its employees. b. If the City should fail to pay any undisputed sum owed Contractor within forty-five (45) days after the sum becomes due. 16. Performance and Payment Bonds. The Contractor shall post a Performance and Payment Bond each in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the payments due Contractor to insure the prompt and faithful performance of this Contract by Contractor and to insure prompt payment to the subcontractor and suppliers of the Contractor. The Bonds shall be in a form approved by the City. Contractor shall provide the Bond to the City before commencing work and together with the executed contract document. If the Performance and/or Payment Bond are not submitted as provided herein, this Contract shall be considered void. 17. Subcontractor. The Contractor shall bind every subcontractor and every subcontractor shall agree to be bound by the terms of this Contract as far as applicable to its work, unless specifically noted to the contrary in a subcontract approved in writing as adequate by the City. The Contractor shall pay any subcontractor involved in the performance of this Contract within the ten (10) days of the Contractor's receipt of payment by the City for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. If the Contractor fails within that time to pay the subcontractor any undisputed amount for which the Contractor has received payment by the City, the Contractor shall pay interest to the subcontractor on the unpaid amount at the rate of 1.5 percent per month or any part of a month. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100 or more is $10. For an unpaid balance of less than $100, the Contractor shall pay the actual interest penalty due to the subcontractor. A subcontractor who prevails in a civil action to collect interest penalties from the Contractor shall be awarded its costs and disbursements, including attorney's fees, incurred in bringing the action. 18. Independent Contractor. Contractor is an independent contractor engaged by City to perform the services described herein and as such (i) shall employ such persons as it shall deem necessary and appropriate for the performance of its obligations pursuant to this Contract, who shall be employees, and under the direction, of Contractor and in no respect employees of City, and (ii) shall have no authority to employ persons, or make purchases of equipment on behalf of City, or otherwise bind or obligate City. No statement herein shall be construed so as to find the Contractor an employee of the City. 19. Notice. Required notices to the Contractor shall be in writing, and shall be either hand- delivered to the Contractor, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Contractor by certified mail at the following address: Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand-delivered or mailed to the City by certified mail at the following address: Duck Lake Trail Culvert Replacement Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 5 of 11 City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Notices shall be deemed effective on the date of receipt. Any party may change its address for the service of notice by giving written notice of such change to the other party, in any manner above specified, 10 days prior to the effective date of such change. 20. Insurance. a. General Liability. Prior to starting the Work, Contractor shall procure, maintain and pay for such insurance as will protect against claims or loss which may arise out of operations by Contractor or by any subcontractor or by anyone employed by any of them or by anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable. Such insurance shall include, but not be limited to, minimum coverages and limits of liability specified in this Paragraph, or required by law. b. Contractor shall procure and maintain the following minimum insurance coverages and limits of liability for the Work: Worker's Compensation Statutory Limits Employer's Liability $500,000 each accident $500,000 disease policy limit $500,000 disease each employee Commercial General Liability $1,500,000 property damage and bodily injury per occurrence $2,000,000 general aggregate $2,000,000 Products-Completed Operations Aggregate $100,000 fire legal liability each occurrence $5,000 medical expense Comprehensive Automobile Liability $1,000,000 combined single limit each accident (shall include coverage for all owned, hired and non-owed vehicles.) Umbrella or Excess Liability $1,000,000 c. Commercial General Liability. The Commercial General Liability Policy shall be on ISO form CG 00 01 12 07 or CG 00 01 04 13, or the equivalent. Such insurance shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, independent contractors, products-completed operations, personal and advertising injury, and liability assumed under an insured contract (including the tort liability of another assumed in a business contract). There shall be no endorsement or modification of the Commercial General Liability form arising from pollution, explosion, collapse, underground property damage or work performed by subcontractors. Duck Lake Trail Culvert Replacement Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 6 of 11 d. Contractor shall maintain "stop gap" coverage if Contractor obtains Workers' Compensation coverage from any state fund if Employer's liability coverage is not available. e. All policies, except the Worker's Compensation Policy, shall name the "City of Eden Prairie" as an additional insured on ISO forms CG 20 10 07 04 or CG 20 10 04 13; and CG 20 37 07 04 or CG 20 37 04 13, or their equivalent. f. All policies shall apply on a "per project" basis. g. All polices shall contain a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City. h. All policies shall be primary and non-contributory. i. All polices, except the Worker's Compensation Policy, shall insure the defense and indemnity obligations assumed by Contractor under this Contract. j. Contractor agrees to maintain all coverage required herein throughout the term of the Contract and for a minimum of two (2) years following City's written acceptance of the Work. k. It shall be Contractor's responsibility to pay any retention or deductible for the coveraeges required herein. I. All policies shall contain a provision or endorsement that coverages afforded thereunder shall not be cancelled or non-renewed or restrictive modifications added, without thirty (30) days' prior notice to the City, except that if the cancellation or non- renewal is due to non-payment, the coverages may not be terminated or non- renewed without ten (10) days' prior notice to the City. m. Contractor shall maintain in effect all insurance coverages required under this Paragraph at Contractor's sole expense and with insurance companies licensed to do business in the state in Minnesota and having a current A.M. Best rating of no less than A-, unless specifically accepted by City in writing. n. A copy of the Contractor's Certificate of Insurance which evidences the compliance with this Paragraph, must be filed with City prior to the start °of Contractor's Work. Upon request a copy of the Contractor's insurance declaration page, Rider and/or Endorsement, as applicable shall be provided. Such documents evidencing Insurance shall be in a form acceptable to City and shall provide satisfactory evidence that Contractor has complied with all insurance requirements. Renewal certificates shall be provided to City prior to the expiration date of any of the required policies. City will not be obligated, however, to review such Certificate of Insurance, declaration page, Rider, Endorsement or certificates or other evidence of insurance, or to advise Contractor of any deficiencies in such documents and receipt thereof shall not relieve Contractor from, nor be deemed a waiver of, City's right to enforce the terms of Contractor's obligations hereunder. City reserves the right to examine any policy provided for under this paragraph. o. Effect of Contractor's Failure to Provide Insurance. If Contractor fails to provide the specified insurance, then Contractor will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Duck Lake Trail Culvert Replacement Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 7 of 11 City, the City's officials, agents and employees from any loss, claim, liability and expense (including reasonable attorneys fees and expenses of litigation) to the extent necessary to afford the same protection as would have been provided by the specified insurance. Except to the extent prohibited by law, this indemnity applies regardless of any strict liability or negligence attributable to the City (including sole negligence) and regardless of the extent to which the underlying occurrence (i.e., the event giving rise to a claim which would have been covered by the specified insurance) is attributable to the negligent or otherwise wrongful act or omission (including breach of contract) of Contractor, its subcontractors, agents, employees or delegates. Contractor agrees that this indemnity shall be construed and applied in favor of indemnification. Contractor also agrees that if applicable law limits or precludes any aspect of this indemnity, then the indemnity will be considered limited only to the extent necessary to comply with that applicable law. The stated indemnity continues until all applicable statutes of limitation have run. If a claim arises within the scope of the stated indemnity, the City may require Contractor to: i. Furnish and pay for a surety bond, satisfactory to the City, guaranteeing performance of the indemnity obligation; or ii. Furnish a written acceptance of tender of defense and indemnity from Contractor's insurance company. Contractor will take the action required by the City within fifteen (15) days of receiving notice from the City. 21. Indemnification. Contractor will defend and indemnify City, its officers, agents, and employees and hold them harmless from and against all judgments, claims, damages, costs and expenses, including a reasonable amount as and for its attorney's fees paid, incurred or for which it may be liable resulting from any breach of this Contract by Contractor, its agents, contractors and employees, or any negligent or intentional act or omission performed, taken or not performed or taken by Contractor, its agents, contractors and employees, relative to this Contract. City will indemnify and hold Contractor harmless from and against any loss for injuries or damages arising out of the negligent acts of the City, its officers, agents or employees. 22. Ownership of Documents. All plans, diagrams, analyses, reports and information generated in connection with the performance of the Contract("Information") shall become the property of the City, but Contractor may retain copies of such documents as records of the services provided. The City may use the Information for its purposes and the Contractor also may use the Information for its purposes. Use of the Information for the purposes of the project contemplated by this Contract does not relieve any liability on the part of the Contractor, but any use of the Information by the City or the Contractor beyond the scope of this Contract is without liability to the other, and the party using the Information agrees to defend and indemnify the other from any claims or liability resulting therefrom. 23. Non-Discrimination. During the performance of this Contract, the Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, sexual orientation or age. The Contractor shall post in places available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provision of this non- discrimination clause and stating that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for Duck Lake Trail Culvert Replacement Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 8 of 11 employment. The Contractor shall incorporate the foregoing requirements of this paragraph in all of its subcontracts for program work, and will require all of its subcontractors for such work to incorporate such requirements in all subcontracts for program work. The Contractor further agrees to comply with all aspects of the Minnesota Human Rights Act, Minnesota Statutes 363.01, et. seq., Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. 24. Mediation. Each dispute, claim or controversy arising from or related to this agreement shall be subject to mediation as a condition precedent to initiating arbitration or legal or equitable actions by either party. Unless the parties agree otherwise, the mediation shall be in accordance with the Commercial Mediation Procedures of the American Arbitration Association then currently in effect. A request for mediation shall be filed in writing with the American Arbitration Association and the other party. No arbitration or legal or equitable action may be instituted for a period of 90 days from the filing of the request for mediation unless a longer period of time is provided by agreement of the parties. Cost of mediation shall be shared equally between the parties. Mediation shall be held in the City of Eden Prairie unless another location is mutually agreed upon by the parties. The parties shall memorialize any agreement resulting from the mediation in a mediated settlement agreement, which agreement shall be enforceable as a settlement in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 25. Audit Disclosure and Data Practices. Any reports, information, data, etc. given to, or prepared or assembled by the Contractor under this Contract which the City requests to be kept confidential, shall not be made available to any individual or organization without the City's prior written approval. The books, records, documents and accounting procedures and practices of the Contractor or other parties relevant to this Contract are subject to examination by the City and either the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor for a period of six (6) years after the effective date of this Contract. This Contract is subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practice Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13 (Data Practices Act). All government data, as defined in the Data Practices Act Section 13.02, Subd 7, which is created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by Contractor in performing any of the functions of the City during performance of this Contract is subject to the requirements of the Data Practice Act and Contractor shall comply with those requirements as if it were a government entity. All subcontracts entered into by Contractor in relation to this Contract shall contain similar Data Practices Act compliance language. 26. Rights and Remedies. The duties and obligations imposed by this Contract and the rights and remedies available thereunder shall be in addition to and not a limitation of any duties, obligations, rights and remedies otherwise imposed or available by law. 27. Assignment. Neither party shall assign this Contract, nor any interest arising herein, without the written consent of the other party. 28. Damages. In the event of a breach of the Contract by City, the Contractor shall not be entitled to recover punitive, special or consequential damages or damages for loss of business. 29. Enforcement. The Contractor shall reimburse the City for all costs and expenses, including without limitation, attorneys' fees paid or incurred by the City in connection with the Duck Lake Trail Culvert Replacement Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 9 of 11 enforcement by the City during the term of this Contract or thereafter of any of the rights or remedies of the City under this Contract. 30. Severability The provisions of this Contract are severable. If any portion hereof is, for any reason, held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to law, such decision shall not affect the remaining provisions of this Contract. 31. Entire Agreement. The entire agreement of the parties is contained herein. This Contract supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Any alterations, amendments, deletions, or waivers of the provisions of this Contract shall be valid only when expressed in writing and duly signed by the parties, unless otherwise provided herein. 32. Waiver. No action nor failure to act by the City or the Contractor shall constitute a waiver of any right or duty afforded any of them under the Contract, nor shall any such action or failure to act constitute an approval of or acquiescence in any breach thereunder, except as may be specifically agreed in writing. 33. Governing Law. This Contract shall be controlled by the laws of the State of Minnesota. 34. Conflicts. No salaried officer or employee of the City and no member of the Council of the City shall have a financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Contract. The violation of this provision renders the Contract void. 35. Counterparts. This Contract may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be considered an original. 36. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. In providing services hereunder, the Contractor shall abide by statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations pertaining to the provisions of Work to be provided. Any violation of statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations pertaining to the Work to be provided shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and entitle the City to immediately terminate this Agreement. Duck Lake Trail Culvert Replacement Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 10 of 11 Executed as of the day and year first written above. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE Mayor City Manager CONTRACTOR By: /0e......._ atIl Its: i /4 1 Duck Lake Trail Culvert Replacement Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 11 of 11 Quote Tab for Duck Lake Trail Emergency Culvert Replacement IC No. 14-5866 Engineer's Estimate Parrott Contracting Inc. G.F.Jedlicki,Inc Blackstone Contractors LLC Item No. Item Description Est.Qty Unit Unit Price Total Unit Price Total Unit Price Total Unit Price Total 1 Mobilization 1 Lump Sum $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $4,800.00 $4,800.00$7,300.00 $7,300.00 $23,000.00 $23,000.00 2 Remove Bituminous Pavement 170 S.Y. $8.00 $1,360.00 $4.00 $680.00$7.00 $1,190.00 $6.00 $1,020.00 3 Remove Concrete Curb and Gutter 43 L.F. $10.00 $430.00 $10.00 $430.00$6.00 $258.00 $7.00 $301.00 4 Remove 15"RCP Storm Sewer 45 L.F. $10.00 $450.00 $15.00 $675.00$8.00 $360.00 $10.00 $450.00 5 Remove 42"CMP Culvert 61 L.F. $15.00 $915.00 $15.00 $915.00$36.00 $2,196.00 $65.58 $4,000.38 6 Clearing and Grubbing 0.1 Acre $10,000.00 $1,000.00 $10,000.00 $1,000.00$10,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,500.00 $250.00 7 Dewatering 1 Lump Sum $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $3,900.00 $3,900.00$5,300.00 $5,300.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 8 Temporary Creek Diversion 1 Lump Sum $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00$17,860.00 $17,860.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 9 Construction Fence 180 L.F. $3.00 $540.00 $7.50 $1,350.00$3.00 $540.00 $7.00 $1,260.00 10 Sand-Gravel Material(CV) 500 Ton $25.00 $12,500.00 $13.80 $6,900.00$23.00 $11,500.00 $24.95 $12,475.00 11 Common Borrow(CV) 30 Ton $32.00 $960.00 $13.80 $414.00 $23.00 $690.00 $36.00 $1,080.00 12 Topsoil Borrow(LV) 60 C.Y. $35.00 $2,100.00 $26.00 $1,560.00$30.00 $1,800.00 $54.83 $3,289.80 13 Aggregate Base Class 5 72 Ton $30.00 $2,160.00 $23.50 $1,692.00$34.00 $2,448.00 $41.25 $2,970.00 14 Bituminous Wear Course 14 Ton $200.00 $2,800.00 $160.00 $2,240.00$287.00 $4,018.00 $162.10 $2,269.40 15 Bituminous Base Course 19 Ton $190.00 $3,610.00 $160.00 $3,040.00$287.00 $5,453.00 $162.10 $3,079.90 16 Bituminous Tack Coat 8 Gal $25.00 $200.00 $10.00 $80.00$10.00 $80.00 $11.00 $88.00 17 B618 Curb and Gutter 90 L.F. $40.00 $3,600.00 $75.00 $6,750.00$50.00 $4,500.00 $32.00 $2,880.00 18 Bituminous Curb 60 L.F. $20.00 $1,200.00 $26.00 $1,560.00$25.00 $1,500.00 $15.00 $900.00 19 31"x51"RC Arch Pipe Culvert,Class IV 62 L.F. $225.00 $13,950.00 $162.00 $10,044.00$365.00 $22,630.00 $281.92 $17,479.04 20 31"x51"RC Arch Pipe Apron 2 Each $3,250.00 $6,500.00 $3,700.00 $7,400.00$6,650.00 $13,300.00 $3,437.00 $6,874.00 21 15"RC Pipe Sewer,Class IV 34 L.F. $65.00 $2,210.00 $71.00 $2,414.00$53.00 $1,802.00 $48.88 $1,661.92 22 15"RC Pipe Apron 1 Each $1,250.00 $1,250.00 $1,230.00 $1,230.00$1,800.00 $1,800.00 $800.00 $800.00 23 Connect to Existing Catch Basin 1 Each $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,200.00 $2,200.00$800.00 $800.00 $1,520.00 $1,520.00 24 Remove and Replace 8"DIP Watermain 50 L.F. $65.00 $3,250.00 $88.00 $4,400.00$90.00 $4,500.00 $140.00 $7,000.00 25 8"Gate Valve 1 Each $1500.00 $1,500.00 $1,320.00 $1,320.00 $5,400.00 $5,400.00 $2,075.00 $2,075.00 26 Insulation(4"thick) 240 S.F. $4.50 $1,080.00 $4.50 $1,080.00$5.00 $1,200.00 $2.00 $480.00 27 Pipe Bedding(Binder Stone) 120 Ton $40.00 $4,800.00 $29.00 $3,480.00 $33.00 $3,960.00 $67.00 $8,040.00 28 Riprap,Class IV 85 C.Y. $120.00 $10,200.00 $110.00 $9,350.00$115.00 $9,775.00 $98.75 $8,393.75 29 Riprap,Grouted 10 C.Y. $150.00 $1,500.00 $210.00 $2,100.00$200.00 $2,000.00 $135.00 $1,350.00 30 Boulder Toe Protection 45 L.F. $120.00 $5,400.00 $70.00 $3,150.00$48.00 $2,160.00 $95.00 $4,275.00 31 CIP Concrete Cut Off Wall 2 C.Y. $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $2,000.00 $4,000.00$2,140.00 $4,280.00 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 32 Street Sweeping 6 Hrs $150.00 $900.00 $145.00 $870.00$50.00 $300.00 $110.00 $660.00 33 Filter Log(Straw Bioroll) 400 L.F. $4.00 $1,600.00 $5.00 $2,000.00$6.00 $2,400.00 $6.00 $2,400.00 34 Seed Mix 25-131 0.02 Acre $40,000.00 $800.00 $6,000.00 $120.00$10,000.00 $200.00 $12,000.00 $240.00 35 Seed Mix 34-171 0.12 Acre $10,000.00 $1,200.00 $6,000.00 $720.00$10,000.00 $1,200.00 $8,500.00 $1,020.00 36 Erosion Control Blanket 690 S.Y. $2.50 $1,725.00 $2.90 $2,001.00$3.00 $2,070.00 $1.75 $1,207.50 37 Temporary Rock Check Dam 1 Each $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00$750.00 $750.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 Total Base Bid $121,690.00 $98,865.00 $148,520.00 $150,289.69 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: 13-5838 Approve ITEM NO.: VIII.H. Carter Schulze Additional Design and Construction Phase Services with Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. Public Works/Engineering for Burr Ridge Storm Sewer Improvements Requested Action Move to: Approve additional design and construction phase service budget with Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.(SEH) for Burr Ridge Storm Sewer Improvements in the amount of$107,186.81. Synopsis SEH is requesting a $107,186.81 budget extension to complete emergency design work and construction phase services not originally identified in their May 20, 2014 Professional Services Agreement (Agreement). Since the agreement, the project has experienced major storm related setbacks resulting in design revisions, additional coordination meetings, and additional construction inspection services. Background Information The City approved the Agreement on May 20, 2014 for$72,813.19 due to soil material failing around storm sewer from the bottom of the bluff up to the top of the slope creating a washout between two adjacent houses. On June 13, 2014 the City approved a $20,000 budget extension to SEH due to a June 1, 2014 storm which caused a changed situation to the original project scope. On June 19, 2014 another rain storm event caused further damage and delays to the project pushing what was anticipated to be a July 13 end date to the middle of August. Financial Implications This request for additional compensation increases the agreement amount by$107,186.81 from $92,813.19 to $200,000.00. This project is funded by the storm water utility fund. Attachment SEH Letter J SEH Building a Better World for All of Us® July 8, 2014 RE: Eden Prairie, MN Burr Ridge Storm Sewer Improvements Request for Additional Compensation SEH No. EDENP 128297 14.00 Carter Schulze Project Manager City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Carter: As we discussed at the conclusion of our June 30 meeting at City Center, this letter is our written request to increase the total amount of compensation in our Professional Services Agreement dated May 20, 2014 (Agreement) by$107,186.81 from $92,813.19 to $200,000. The increase is due to changes to our scope from adding emergency design work and providing construction phase services. The following table summarizes how we established our total compensation which should not exceed $200,000. Com Sensation Spent Anticipate Spending Week Per Beginning Week Cumulative Per Week Cumulative Comment 5/11/14 $18,156 $18,156 5/11/14 -Washout No. 2 5/18/14 $17,443 $35,599 5/25/14 $12,441 $48,040 Fee invoiced period ending May 31 6/1/14 $33,579 $81,619 6/1/14 -Washout No. 3 6/8/14 $22,485 $104,104 6/15/and 6/19/14 -Washouts No. 4 and 5 6/15/14 $19,800 $123,904 respectively 6/22/14 $11,855 $135,759 6/29/14 $12,241 $148,000 7/6/14 $10,000 $158,000 7/13/14 $9,000 $167,000 Estimated end of construction 7/20/14 $8,000 $175,000 7/27/14 $7,000 $182,000 Complete construction inspection, construction staking and measurements 8/3/14 $7,000 $189,000 for use in the record drawings, prepare record drawings, review contractor 8/10/14 $7,000 $196,000 applications for payment, and other miscellaneous project closeout activities 8/17/14 $4,000 $200,000 Engineers I Architects I Planners I Scientists Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.,10901 Red Circle Drive,Suite 300, Minnetonka,MN 55343-9302 SEH is 100%employee-owned I sehinc.com I 952.912.2600 I 800.734.6757 I 888.908.8166 fax Carter Schulze July 8, 2014 Page 2 Below is a list of both emergency design work and construction phase service items that were added to our Agreement. 1. Daily emergency coordination with the City's general contractor Northwest Asphalt (NWA) 2. Using fast-track design-build rather than design, bid, build construction method 3. Design revisions made in reaction to conditions created by multiple washouts occurring after the Agreement was signed and repeatedly changing the conditions found during our April 1, 2014 site visit 4. Slope stability analysis 5. Provide assistance to NWA with their design of a grade beam at the top of the May 12 washout secured to the subgrade soils with 'soil nails' 6. Provide design assistance to NWA for the construction of two (2)separate by-pass pumping systems capable of conveying a 10-year Atlas 14 design storm 7. Emergency weekend and evening site coordination meetings with City and NWA staff 8. Daily conference call design meetings that included City and NWA staff 9. Site visits from senior SEH staff 10. Attendance by senior SEH staff at on-site meetings 11. Full time construction inspection services 12. Daily elevation measurements of existing structures to identify vertical movement 13. Topographic surveying well beyond the area washed out during our April 1 site visit 14. Construction staking 15. Sub-consultant providing home condition inspection surveys 16. Sub-consultant providing geotechnical investigations 17. Shop drawing reviews 18. Prepare, print, and distribute nine (9) resident notifications to the neighborhood 19. Verifying NWA's monthly time, equipment, and materials payment requests Below is a (non-exhaustive) list of service items that were not, and are still not, included in the Agreement. 1. Preparing a stabilization, grading, and restoration plan for locations beyond the washed out property line between 11201 and 11211 Burr Ridge Lane and its immediately adjacent street pavement. 2. Designing an increase to the stability of the bluff, at and beyond the property line between 11201 and 11211 Burr Ridge Lane, in excess of existing conditions before the first washout over the existing storm sewer pipe. 3. Designing features to pass runoff to Purgatory Creek during construction around the existing damaged storm sewer pipe, beyond the property line between 11201 and 11211 Burr Ridge Lane and its immediately adjacent pavement, from storm events in excess of a 10-year Atlas 14 design storm. 4. Designing features to pass runoff to Purgatory Creek after construction, beyond the property line between 11201 and 11211 Burr Ridge Lane and its immediately adjacent pavement, from storm events in excess of a 100-year Atlas 14 design storm. Northwest Asphalt estimates their final construction cost to be between $1.0 and $1.3 million. Based on conversations we have had with our Duluth office, who assisted the City of Duluth with the repair of several of their washouts caused by Duluth's June 2012 unusual and extreme storm event, this construction cost fits this Carter Schulze July 8, 2014 Page 3 project's unique circumstances. Subsequently our$200,000 total compensation will likely be about 20% of this project's construction cost. As always, please contact me with questions or comments at 952.912.2611 or ppasko@sehinc.com. Sincerely, SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC. yei-w(744wezr Paul J. Pasko III, PE Client Service Manager c: Chris McKenzie, SEH Sue Mason, SEH Mary Catherine Anglum, SEH Bob Ellis, SEH Aaron Ditzler, SEH p:\ae\e\edenp\128297\1-genl\10-setup-contract\02-contract\eden prairie seh amendment final.docx CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 13-5838 ITEM NO.: VIII.I. Carter Schulze Award Contract to Natural Environments Public Works/Engineering Corp. for 11191 Burr Ridge Ln Rear Yard Erosion Repair Requested Action Move to: Award the contract for the 11191 Burr Ridge Ln Rear Yard Erosion Repair Project to Natural Environments Corporation in the amount of$99,000. Synopsis Damage was caused to the rear yard and landscaping of 11191 Burr Ridge Lane due to heavy rainfall resulting in overflowing roadway drainage. Two contractors provided quotes to work on the project and the lower responsible bidder was selected. Background Information On June 19, 2014, while the Burr Ridge Storm Sewer Repair project was going on adjacent to 11191 Burr Ridge Lane, a heavy rain event occurred which overwhelmed the preventive storm water drainage measures that were in place. This water flowed into the rear yard of 11191 Burr Ridge Lane and caused the slope to fail down to the creek. The damage included washing away a portion of a boulder retaining wall, washing away material held up by the retaining wall, undermining fence footings, and removing slope soil down to the creek bottom. Project Cost Summary The project will be funded through the storm water utility fund. An estimated cost of the project is $99,000. Attachment Contract Standard Construction Contract This Contract ("Contract") is made on the t �� day of 5yA , 20 I tit , between the City of Eden Prairie , Minnesota (hereinafter " City" ) , whose business address is 8080 Mitchell Road , Eden Prairie , MN 55344 , and /Upt'uroa CALA NA %merv43 Cmrp • a Minnesota c i-po'roA+& n ( hereinafter " Contractor") whose business address is / O Noe ®nits ,) _ / Caotden UcA -ey / rigs 5 L �-�/ Preliminary Statement The City has adopted a policy regarding the selection and hiring of contractors to provide a variety of services for City projects . That policy requires that persons , firms or corporations providing such services enter into written agreements with the City. The purpose of this Contract is to set forth the terms and conditions for the provision of services by Contractor for � II9 / Over- Rai d� c � i iZe r &rasfo'n gel "' � hereinafter referred to as the "Work" . The City and Contractor agree as follows : 1 . Scope of Work/Proposal . The Contractor agrees to provide , perform and complete all the provisions of the Work in accordance with attached Exhibit A . The terms of this Contract shall take precedence over any provisions of the Contractor's proposal and/or general conditions . 2 . Time of Commencement and Completion . The Work to be performed under this Contract shall be comme ced immediately after execution of this Contract . The Work shall be completed by .�= ts 't 2t) 3 . Compensation for Services . City agrees to pay the Contractor a not to exceed sum of $ c7NOo1i , e. as full and complete payment for the labor , materials and services rendered pursuant to this Contract and as described in Exhibit A. a. Any changes in the scope of the work which may result in an increase to the compensation due the Contractor shall require prior written approval by an authorized representative of the City or by the City Council . The City will not pay additional compensation for services that do not have prior written authorization . b . If Contractor is delayed in performance due to any cause beyond its reasonable control , including but not limited to strikes , riots , fires , acts of God , governmental actions , actions of a third party, or actions or inactions of City, the time for performance shall be extended by a period of time lost by reason of the delay. Contractor will be entitled to payment for its reasonable additional charges , if any, due to the delay . 4. Method of Payment . The Contractor shall submit to the City, on a monthly basis , an itemized invoice for services performed under this Contract . Invoices submitted shall be paid in the same manner as other claims made to the City. a . Invoices . Contractor shall verify all statements submitted for payment in compliance with Minnesota Statutes Sections 471 . 38 and 471 . 391 . For reimbursable expenses , if provided for in Exhibit A, the Contractor shall provide an itemized listing and such documentation as reasonably required by the City. Each invoice shall contain the City' s project number and a progress summary showing the original (or amended ) amount of the contract, current billing , past payments and unexpended balance of the contract. b . Claims . To receive any payment on this Contract, the invoice or bill must include the following signed and dated statement : " I declare under penalty of perjury that this account, claim , or demand is just and correct and that no part of it has been paid . " c. Final Payment . Final payment, constituting the entire unpaid balance of the Contract Sum , shall be paid by the City to the Contractor when the Work has been completed , the Contract fully performed , and the City accepts the Work in writing . The acceptance of final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims by the Contractor except those previously made in writing and identified by the Contractor as unsettled at the time of Application for Final Payment . d . Income Tax Withholding . No final payment shall be made to the Contractor until the Contractor has provided satisfactory evidence to the City that the Contractor and each of its subcontracts has complied with the provisions of Minn . Stat. Section 290 . 92 relating to withholding of income taxes upon wages . A certificate by the Commissioner of Revenue shall satisfy this requirement . 5 . Standard of Care . Contractor shall exercise the same degree of care , skill and diligence in the performance of its services as is ordinarily exercised by members of the profession under similar circumstances in Hennepin County, Minnesota . Contractor shall be liable to the fullest extent permitted under applicable law, without limitation , for any injuries , loss , or damages proximately caused by Contractor's breach of this standard of care. Contractor shall put forth reasonable efforts to complete its duties in a timely manner. Contractor shall not be responsible for delays caused by factors beyond its control or that could not be reasonably foreseen at the time of execution of this Contract . Contractor shall be responsible for costs , delays or damages arising from unreasonable delays in the performance of its duties . 6 . Protect Manager . The Contractor has designated 1ov Sctae. r-5 to Manage the Work. They shall be assisted by other staff members as necessary to facilitate the completion of the Work in accordance with the terms established herein . Contractor may not remove or replace the designated manager without the approval of the City. 7 . Condition and Inspection . All goods and other materials furnished under this Contract shall be new and in current manufacture , unless otherwise specified , and all goods and work shall be of good quality , free from faults and defects and in conformance with this Contract . All goods and work not conforming to these requirements shall be considered defective . Goods shall be subject to inspection and testing by the City. Defective goods or goods not in current manufacture may be returned to the Contractor at the Contractor's expense . 8 . Correction of Work. The Contractor shall promptly correct all Work rejected by the City as defective or as failing to conform under this Contract whether observed before or after Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 2 of 11 completion of the Work and whether or not fabricated , installed or completed . The Contractor shall bear all costs of correcting such rejected Work. 9 . Warranty. The Contractor expressly warrants and guarantees to the City that all Work performed and all materials furnished shall be in accord with the Contract and shall be free from defects in materials , workmanship , and operation which appear within a period of one year , or within such longer period as may be prescribed by law or in the terms of the Contract , from the date of City' s written acceptance of the Work. The City' s rights under the Contractor's warranty are not the City's exclusive remedy. The City shall have all other remedies available under this Contract , at law or in equity . Should any defects develop in the materials, workmanship or operation of the system within the specified period , upon notice from the City , the Contractor agrees , within ten ( 10) calendar days after receiving written notice and without expense to the City, to repair, replace and in general to perform all necessary corrective Work with regard to the defective or nonconforming Work or materials to the satisfaction of the City . THE FOREGOING SHALL NOT IN ANY MANNER LIMIT THE CITY'S REMEDY OR THE CONTRACTOR ' S LIABILITY TO THOSE DEFECTS APPEARING WITHIN THE WARRANTY PERIOD . The Contractor agrees to perform the Work in a manner and at a time so as to minimize any damages sustained by the City and so as to not interfere with or in any way disrupt the operation of the City or the public . The corrective Work referred to above shall include without limitation , (a) the cost of removing the defective or nonconforming Work and materials from the site , (b) the cost of correcting all Work of other Contractors destroyed or damaged by defective or nonconforming Work and materials including the cost of removal of such damaged Work and materials form the site , and ( c) the cost of correcting all damages to Work of other Contractors caused by the removal of the defective or nonconforming Work or materials . The Contractor shall post bonds to secure the warranties . 10 . Private Property. The Contractor shall not enter upon private property for any purpose without having previously obtained permission from the City . The Contractor shall be responsible for the preservation of, and shall use every precaution to prevent damage to all trees , shrubbery, plants , lawns , fences , culverts, bridges , pavements , driveways , sidewalks , etc. ; all water, sewer and gas lines ; all conduits ; all overhead pole lines or appurtenances thereof ; and all other public or private property along or adjacent to the work . 11 . Removal of Construction Equipment, Tools and Supplies . At the termination of this Contract, before acceptance of the Work by the City, the Contractor shall remove all of Contractor's equipment, tools and supplies from the property of the City. Should the Contractor fail to remove such equipment, tools and supplies , the City shall have the right to remove them and deduct the cost of removal from any amount owed to Contractor. 12 . Suspension of Work by City. The City may at any time suspend the Work, or any part thereof, by giving ten ( 10) days' notice to the Contractor in writing . The work shall be resumed by the Contractor within ten ( 10) days after the date fixed in the written notice from the City to the Contractor to resume . If the City's suspension of all or part of the Work causes additional expenses not due to the fault or negligence of the Contractor, the City shall reimburse the Contractor for the additional expense incurred due to suspension of the work. Claims for such compensation , with complete substantiating records , shall be filed with the City within ten ( 10) Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 3 of 11 days after the date of order to resume Work in order to receive consideration . This paragraph shall not be construed as entitling the Contractor to compensation for delays due to inclement weather, failure to furnish additional surety or sureties specified herein , for suspension made at the request of the Contractor, or for any other delay provided for in this Contract . 13 . City' s Right to Carry Out the Work. If the Contractor defaults or neglects to carry out the Work in accordance with the Contract or fails to perform any provisions of the Contract , the City may , after ten ( 10) days written notice to the Contractor and without prejudice to any other remedy the City may have , make good such deficiencies . In such case an appropriate Change Order shall be issued deducting from the payment then or thereafter due the Contractor the cost of correcting such deficiencies . If the payments then or thereafter due the Contractor are not sufficient to cover such amount, the Contractor shall pay the difference to the City . 14 . City' s Right to Terminate Contract and Complete the Work. The City has the right to terminate this Contract for any of the following reasons : a. The Contractor is adjudged bankrupt, makes a general assignment for the benefit of creditors , or becomes insolvent ; b . Failure of Contractor to supply adequate properly skilled workmen or proper materials ; a Failure of Contractor to make prompt payment to subcontractor for material or labor ; d . Any disregard of laws , ordinances or proper instructions of the City; . e . Assignment or work without permission of the City ; f . Abandonment of the work by Contractor ; g . Failure to meet the work progress schedule set forth in this Contract ; h . Unnecessary delay which , in the judgment of the City, will result in the work not being completed in the prescribed time . Termination of the Contract shall be preceded by ten ( 10) days written notice by the City to the Contractor and its surety stating the grounds for termination and the measures , if any , which must be taken to assure compliance with the Contract . The Contract shall be terminated at the expiration of such ten ( 10) day period unless the City Council shall withdraw its notice of termination . Upon termination of the Contract by the City, the City may , without prejudice to any other remedy the City may have , take possession of the site and of all materials , equipment , tools , construction equipment and machinery thereon owned by the Contractor and may finish the Work by whatever methods the City may deem expedient at the Contractor's expense . Upon Contract termination , the Contractor shall not be entitled to receive any further payment until the Work is finished . If the unpaid balance of the contract price exceeds the expense of finishing the Work, including compensation for additional managerial and administrative services , the excess shall be paid to the Contractor. If such expense exceeds the unpaid balance , the Contractor shall pay the difference to the City. In the event that the Contractor abandons the Work, fails or refuses to complete the Work or fails to pay just claims for labor or material , the City reserves the right to charge against the Contractor all legal , engineering , or other costs resulting from such abandonment, failure or refusal . Legal costs will include the City's cost of prosecuting or defending any suit in connection with such abandonment, failure or refusal , and non-payment of claims wherein the City is made co-defendant, and the Contractor agrees to pay all costs , including reasonable attorney's fees . Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 4 of 11 15 . Contractor's Right to Terminate Contract . The Contractor may terminate this Contract upon ten ( 10) days written notice to the City for any of the following reasons : a. If an order of any court or other public authority caused the Work to be stopped or suspended for a period of 90 days through no act or fault of the Contractor or its employees . b . If the City should fail to pay any undisputed sum owed Contractor within forty-five (45) days after the sum becomes due . 16 . Performance and Payment Bonds . The Contractor shall post a Performance and Payment Bond each in an amount equal to one hundred percent ( 100%) of the payments due Contractor to insure the prompt and faithful performance of this Contract by Contractor and to insure prompt payment to the subcontractor and suppliers of the Contractor. The Bonds shall be in a form approved by the City . Contractor shall provide the Bond to the City before commencing work and together with the executed contract document . If the Performance and/or Payment Bond are not submitted as provided herein , this Contract shall be considered void . [ BONDS ARE REQUIRED FOR A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT THAT IS $100 , 000 OR MORE ; THEY ARE OPTIONAL FOR ANY CONTRACT THAT IS LESS THAN $ 100 , 000] 17 . Subcontractor. The Contractor shall bind every subcontractor and every subcontractor shall agree to be bound by the terms of this Contract as far as applicable to its work, unless specifically noted to the contrary in a subcontract approved in writing as adequate by the City. The Contractor shall pay any subcontractor involved in the performance of this Contract within the ten ( 10) days of the Contractor's receipt of payment by the City for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. If the Contractor fails within that time to pay the subcontractor any undisputed amount for which the Contractor has received payment by the City, the Contractor shall pay interest to the subcontractor on the unpaid amount at the rate of 1 . 5 percent per month or any part of a month . The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $ 100 or more is $ 10 . For an unpaid balance of less than $ 100 , the Contractor shall pay the actual interest penalty due to the subcontractor. A subcontractor who prevails in a civil action to collect interest penalties from the Contractor shall be awarded its costs and disbursements , including attorney's fees , incurred in bringing the action . 18 . Independent Contractor . Contractor is an independent contractor engaged by City to perform the services described herein and as such (i ) shall employ such persons as it shall deem necessary and appropriate for the performance of its obligations pursuant to this Contract , who shall be employees , and under the direction , of Contractor and in no respect employees of City, and ( ii ) shall have no authority to employ persons , or make purchases of equipment on behalf of City, or otherwise bind or obligate City. No statement herein shall be construed so as to find the Contractor an employee of the City. 19 . Notice . Required notices to the Contractor shall be in writing , and shall be either hand- delivered to the Contractor, its employees or agents , or mailed to the Contractor by certified mail at the following address : Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 5 of 11 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand-delivered or mailed to the City by certified mail at the following address : City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie , MN 55344 Notices shall be deemed effective on the date of receipt . Any party may change its address for the service of notice by giving written notice of such change to the other party, in any manner above specified , 10 days prior to the effective date of such change . 20 . Insurance . a . General Liability . Prior to starting the Work, Contractor shall procure , maintain and pay for such insurance as will protect against claims or loss which may arise out of operations by Contractor or by any subcontractor or by anyone employed by any of them or by anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable . Such insurance shall include , but not be limited to , minimum coverages and limits of liability specified in this Paragraph , or required by law. b. Contractor shall procure and maintain the following minimum insurance coverages and limits of liability for the Work : Worker's Compensation Statutory Limits Employer's Liability $500 , 000 each accident $500 , 000 disease policy limit $500 , 000 disease each employee Commercial General Liability $ 1 , 500 , 000 property damage and bodily injury per occurrence $2 , 000 , 000 general aggregate $2 , 000 , 000 Products — Completed Operations Aggregate $ 100 , 000 fire legal liability each occurrence $5 , 000 medical expense Comprehensive Automobile Liability $ 1 , 000 , 000 combined single limit each accident (shall include coverage for all owned , hired and non -owed vehicles . ) Umbrella or Excess Liability $ 1 , 000 , 000 c. Commercial General Liability . The Commercial General Liability Policy shall be on ISO form CG 00 01 12 07 or CG 00 01 04 13 , or the equivalent . Such insurance shall cover liability arising from premises , operations , independent contractors , Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 6 of 11 products- completed operations , personal and advertising injury, and liability assumed under an insured contract ( including the tort liability of another assumed in a business contract) . There shall be no endorsement or modification of the Commercial General Liability form arising from pollution , explosion , collapse , underground property damage or work performed by subcontractors . d . Contractor shall maintain "stop gap" coverage if Contractor obtains Workers' Compensation coverage from any state fund if Employer' s liability coverage is not available . a All policies , except the Worker's Compensation Policy, shall name the "City of Eden Prairie" as an additional insured on ISO forms CG 20 10 07 04 or CG 20 10 04 13 ; and CG 20 37 07 04 or CG 20 37 04 13 , or their equivalent . f. All policies shall apply on a "per project" basis . g . All polices shall contain a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City. h . All policies shall be primary and non - contributory. i . All polices , except the Worker's Compensation Policy, shall insure the defense and indemnity obligations assumed by Contractor under this Contract . j . Contractor agrees to maintain all coverage required herein throughout the term of the Contract and for a minimum of two (2) years following City's written acceptance of the Work. k. It shall be Contractor' s responsibility to pay any retention or deductible for the coveraeges required herein . I . All policies shall contain a provision or endorsement that coverages afforded thereunder shall not be cancelled or non - renewed or restrictive modifications added , without thirty (30) days' prior notice to the City, except that if the cancellation or non - renewal is due to non- payment , the coverages may not be terminated or non - renewed without ten ( 10 ) days' prior notice to the City . m . Contractor shall maintain in effect all insurance coverages required under this Paragraph at Contractor's sole expense and with insurance companies licensed to do business in the state in Minnesota and having a current A. M . Best rating of no less than A- , unless specifically accepted by City in writing . n . A copy of the Contractor' s Certificate of Insurance which evidences the compliance with this Paragraph , must be filed with City prior to the start of Contractor' s Work. Upon request a copy of the Contractor' s insurance declaration page , Rider and/or Endorsement , as applicable shall be provided . Such documents evidencing Insurance shall be in a form acceptable to City and shall provide satisfactory evidence that Contractor has complied with all insurance requirements . Renewal certificates shall be provided to City prior to the expiration date of any of the required policies . City will not be obligated , however , to review such Certificate of Insurance , declaration page , Rider, Endorsement or certificates or other evidence of insurance , or to advise Contractor of any deficiencies in such documents and receipt Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 7 of 11 thereof shall not relieve Contractor from , nor be deemed a waiver of , City's right to e nforce the terms of Contractor's obligations hereunder. City reserves the right to examine any policy provided for under this paragraph . a Effect of Contractor's Failure to Provide Insurance . If Contractor fails to provide the specified insurance , then Contractor will defend , indemnify and hold harmless the City, the City's officials , agents and employees from any loss , claim , liability and expense (including reasonable attorney's fees and expenses of litigation ) to the extent n ecessary to afford the same protection as would have been provided by the specified insurance . Except to the extent prohibited by law, this indemnity applies regardless of any strict liability or negligence attributable to the City ( including sole negligence) and regardless of the extent to which the underlying occurrence ( i . e . , the event giving rise to a claim which would have been covered by the specified insurance) is attributable to the negligent or otherwise wrongful act or omission (including breach of contract) of Contractor, its subcontractors , agents , employees or delegates . Contractor agrees that this indemnity shall be construed and applied in favor of indemnification . Contractor also agrees that if applicable law limits or precludes any aspect of this indemnity , then the indemnity will be considered limited only to the extent necessary to comply with that applicable law. The stated indemnity continues until all applicable statutes of limitation have run . If a claim arises within the scope of the stated indemnity, the City may require Contractor to : i . Furnish and pay for a surety bond , satisfactory to the City, guaranteeing performance of the indemnity obligation ; or ii . Furnish a written acceptance of tender of defense and indemnity from Contractor's insurance company. Contractor will take the action required by the City within fifteen ( 15) days of receiving n otice from the City. 21 . Indemnification . Contractor will defend and indemnify City , its officers, agents , and e mployees and hold them harmless from and against all judgments , claims , damages , costs and expenses , including a reasonable amount as and for its attorney's fees paid , incurred or for which it may be liable resulting from any breach of this Contract by Contractor, its agents , contractors and employees , or any negligent or intentional act or omission performed , taken o r not performed or taken by Contractor, its agents , contractors and employees , relative to this Contract . City will indemnify and hold Contractor harmless from and against any loss for injuries or damages arising out of the negligent acts of the City, its officers , agents or e mployees . 22 . Ownership of Documents . All plans , diagrams , analyses , reports and information generated in connection with the performance of the Contract (" Information ") shall become the property of the City, but Contractor may retain copies of such documents as records of the services provided . The City may use the Information for its purposes and the Contractor also may use the Information for its purposes . Use of the Information for the purposes of the project contemplated by this Contract does not relieve any liability on the part of the Contractor, but any use of the Information by the City or the Contractor beyond the scope of this Contract is without liability to the other, and the party using the Information agrees to defend and indemnify the other from any claims or liability resulting therefrom . Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 8 of 11 23 . Non- Discrimination . During the performance of this Contract , the Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race , color, creed , religion , national origin , sex, marital status , status with regard to public assistance , disability, sexual orientation or age . The Contractor shall post in places available to e mployees and applicants for employment , notices setting forth the provision of this non - discrimination clause and stating that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for e mployment . The Contractor shall incorporate the foregoing requirements of this paragraph in all of its subcontracts for program work, and will require all of its subcontractors for such work to incorporate such requirements in all subcontracts for program work . The Contractor further agrees to comply with all aspects of the Minnesota Human Rights Act, Minnesota Statutes 363 . 01 , et . seq . , Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 . 24 . Mediation . Each dispute , claim or controversy arising from or related to this agreement shall be subject to mediation as a condition precedent to initiating arbitration or legal or equitable actions by either party. Unless the parties agree otherwise , the mediation shall be in accordance with the Commercial Mediation Procedures of the American Arbitration Association then currently in effect. A request for mediation shall be filed in writing with the American Arbitration Association and the other party. No arbitration or legal or equitable action may be instituted for a period of 90 days from the filing of the request for mediation u nless a longer period of time is provided by agreement of the parties . Cost of mediation shall be shared equally between the parties . Mediation shall be held in the City of Eden Prairie unless another location is mutually agreed upon by the parties . The parties shall memorialize any agreement resulting from the mediation in a mediated settlement agreement, which agreement shall be enforceable as a settlement in any court having jurisdiction thereof . 25 . Audit Disclosure and Data Practices . Any reports , information , data, etc. given to , or prepared or assembled by the Contractor under this Contract which the City requests to be kept confidential , shall not be made available to any individual or organization without the City's prior written approval . The books , records , documents and accounting procedures and practices of the Contractor or other parties relevant to this Contract are subject to examination by the City and either the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor for a period of six (6) years after the effective date of this Contract. This Contract is subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practice Act , Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13 ( Data Practices Act) . All government data , as defined in the Data Practices Act Section 13 . 02 , Subd 7 , which is created , collected , received , stored , used , maintained , or disseminated by Contractor in performing any of the functions of the City during performance of this Contract is subject to the requirements of the Data Practice Act and Contractor shall comply with those requirements as if it were a government entity. All subcontracts entered into by Contractor in relation to this Contract shall contain similar Data Practices Act compliance language . 26 . Rights and Remedies . The duties and obligations imposed by this Contract and the rights and remedies available thereunder shall be in addition to and not a limitation of any duties , obligations , rights and remedies otherwise imposed or available by law. 27 . Assignment . Neither party shall assign this Contract , nor any interest arising herein , without the written consent of the other party. Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 9 of 11 28 . Damages . In the event of a breach of the Contract by City, the Contractor shall not be entitled to recover punitive , special or consequential damages or damages for loss of business . 29 . Enforcement . The Contractor shall reimburse the City for all costs and expenses , including without limitation , attorneys' fees paid or incurred by the City in connection with the enforcement by the City during the term of this Contract or thereafter of any of the rights or remedies of the City under this Contract . 30 . Severability. The provisions of this Contract are severable . If any portion hereof is , for any reason , held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to law, such decision shall not affect the remaining provisions of this Contract . 31 . Entire Agreement . The entire agreement of the parties is contained herein . This Contract supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof . Any alterations , amendments , deletions , or waivers of the provisions of this Contract shall be valid only when expressed in writing and duly signed by the parties , unless otherwise provided herein . 32 . Waiver. No action nor failure to act by the City or the Contractor shall constitute a waiver of any right or duty afforded any of them under the Contract , nor shall any such action or failure to act constitute an approval of or acquiescence in any breach thereunder, except as may be specifically agreed in writing . 33 . Governing Law . This Contract shall be controlled by the laws of the State of Minnesota. 34 . Conflicts . No salaried officer or employee of the City and no member of the Council of the City shall have a financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Contract . The violation of this provision renders the Contract void . 35 . Counterparts . This Contract may be executed in multiple counterparts , each of which shall be considered an original . 36 . Compliance with Laws and Regulations . In providing services hereunder, the Contractor shall abide by statutes , ordinances , rules , and regulations pertaining to the provisions of Work to be provided . Any violation of statutes, ordinances , rules and regulations pertaining to the Work to be provided shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and entitle the City to immediately terminate this Agreement. Executed as of the day and year first written above . Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 10 of 11 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE Mayor City Manager CONTRACTOR By : / Its : PPec e&1 Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 11 of 11 Natural Environments Corporation 1lPj '= 1710 Douglas Drive, #206 Golden Valley, MN 55408 0 NEC Phone 4 , Fax Ne aE.,roma� www.naturalenvironmentscorp.com(763) 54 -8002ax (763) 445-2207 info@naturalenvironmentscorp.com July 7, 2014 Exhibit A City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Attn: Carter Schulze Natural Environments Corporation proposes to provide all of the materials and labor to the City of Eden Prairie for work at the Ed Vigil residence. The general scope of the project is to restore the property to the condition that it was in prior to the rain events that caused the damage. Specifications: j Site Construction-Division 2 a) Construct temporary access path to the eroded trench. i) Install a double layer of 3/4"plywood over all of the tree roots along the designated access path. ii) Install fill on the plywood to create a level cross slope for the access path. iii) Install a temporary boulder retaining wall to support the access path. iv) Carefully remove the temporary boulder wall, soil, and plywood after construction is complete. b) Site demolition i) Remove the large felled tree from the eroded trench ii) Remove tree roots and brush that are obstructing the trench in a manner that does not allow its restoration. iii) Dismantle the existing boulder system at the crest of the hill as needed to allow egress to the eroded trench. iv) Remove the minimum amount of trees needed to create the access path. v) Remove the standing tree in the eroded trench that has little soil left under it. c) Excavation and backfilling i) Bench cut the interior of the eroded trench to create level platforms. Keep excavation equipment within the existing eroded trench. ii) Install and compact sand backfill to an elevation within 2' of the finish grade. iii) Excavate the fill that has accumulated at the base of the hill to allow for a suitable rip rap base for the project. iv) Construct a temporary access path at the base of the hill to provide egress for equipment from the bottom up to the standing tree in the trench that is being removed. Remove the soil from the flood plain after construction is complete. d) Rip rap Natural Environments Corporation t� 1=11 1710 Douglas Drive, #206 Golden Valley, MN 55408 0 NEC Phone (763) 544-8002, Fax (763)445-2207 aE.,roma� www.naturalenvironmentscorp.com info@naturalenvironmentscorp.com July 7,2014 i) Install two layers of 8 oz geo- textile fabric in the areas that rip rap is being placed. ii) Install a minimum of 2' of rip rap throughout the eroded trench. iii) Install rip rap as a bulk head near the creek and back into the base of the hill to protect the area from erosion during flooding periods. iv) Install 4' of rock below grade in the area that the retaining wall is to be reconstructed. v) Spread top soil loosely over the top of the newly placed rip rap and cover all exposed surfaces with an erosion control blanket. e) Boulder retaining wall reconstruction i) Reconstruct the fieldstone boulder retaining wall near the crest of the hill. ii) Install an 8oz fabric behind the retaining wall. iii) Install a 4" drain tile with drainage rock and 2 drain outlets. iv) Ensure that there is at least 4' of rock below grade under all of the new retaining wall. v) Install geogrid between the boulders an extending back toward the house to the limits of the eroded space. The geogrid should be placed every 2' in elevation. vi) Fieldstone outcroppings should be replaced at the base of the hill to recapture the original look. f) Misc. eroded hillside repairs i) Use manual labor to repair areas on the hillside that have experienced erosion. ii) Install erosion control blanket and seed with a MNDOT steep slope seed mix. g) Misc. landscaping repairs i) Repair all of the damage to the landscaped areas in the yard. (1) Top dress all of the mulch (2) Replace sand in the greenside bunker (3) Repair minor washouts in the small retaining walls. (4) Repair the fence (5) Ensure that the swing set is safely installed. (6) Repair any washed out polymeric sand in the flagstone joints. (7) Clean the soil and debris from the putting green. h) Erosion control i) Install temporary erosion control measures as needed to protect the property. ii) Install erosion control blankets and MNDOT steep slope seed mix over all areas that have exposed soil. Missed items: Natural Environments Corporation 1��� 1= 1710 Douglas Drive, #206 Golden Valley, MN 55408 0 NEC Phone (763) 544-8002, Fax (763)445-2207 aE.,roma� www.naturalenvironmentscorp.com info@naturalenvironmentscorp.com July 7,2014 The intent of the project is to bring the property back to its previous condition. If items are missing from the above specifications, upon the city's approval, they will be added to the scope of work Schedule and rate breakdown: This work is expected to take about 2 weeks with 5 laborers and one foreman working 50 hrs per week. Natural Environments Corp. will utilize two excavators and two compact tract loaders. The rip rap and sand fill are to be provided by others. All other materials will be provided by Natural Environments Corp. Expected rate breakdown: Laborer $78.00 Excavation foreman w/pickup $109.00 Compact track loader $132.00 Mini excavator with rotator. $154.00 Materials at cost plus 15%. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VIII.J. Paul Sticha, Facilities 2014 Building Envelope Restoration Requested Action Move to: Award the contract for 2014 Building Envelope Restoration to Restoration Systems, Inc., for the base bid, in the amount of$63,135. Synopsis Base Bid Alternate 1 Restoration Systems $63,135.00 $4,800.00 Blackstone Contractors No Bid Western Waterproofing No Bid American Masonry No Bid A.J. Spanjers Company No Bid Total Budgeted $123,000.00 Background Information Plans and specifications for restoration work at 12 City building were prepared by Environmental Process Inc. The work includes caulking, tuck pointing, weather seals, metal repair, brick and block repair or replacement, concrete repair and painting. Five contractors requested plans and specs and indicated they would submit bids. Two contractors attended the pre-bid meeting, and one bid was received. The other four contractors declined to bid, stating they were too busy to prepare proposals or to take on additional work. Staff recommends rejecting the alternate. Attachments Letter of Recommendation for Restoration Systems Bid Tabulation DD r � ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESS, INC. 3 4 Crtt 715 Florida Ave.S.,Suite 111 18382 FM 302,Suite 103 e r_ Golden Valley,MN 55426 Fax: 763-398-0121 Canyon Lake,TX 78133 ti 763-398-3040 Phone: 888-733-3050 830-935-4909 epimpls@go-epi.com www.go-epi.com epitx@go-epi.com June 27, 2014 Mr. Paul Sticha Facilities Manager City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344-4485 Re: City of Eden Prairie 2014 Exterior Building Envelope Maintenance EPI No.: 2014-581 Dear Mr. Sticha: Environmental Process, Inc. (EPI) reviewed the City of Eden Prairie - 2014 Exterior Building Envelope Maintenance project work scope with Mr. Bob Yaritz of Restoration Systems, Inc. and there were no questions. Bob Yaritz indicated that they will be ready to start work as in the tentative schedule or earlier. The work schedule will be discussed at the preconstruction meeting. Restoration Systems, Inc. is based in Chaska, Minnesota. EPI has worked with Restoration Systems, Inc. in the past. Restoration Systems, Inc. successfully completed the City of Eden Prairie—2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013 Exterior Building Envelope Maintenance projects. Based on the review of project work scope with Restoration Systems, Inc. and the fact that they are the low bidder we recommend awarding the project to them. EPI recommends that the base bid cost of $63,135.00 for the 2014 Exterior Building Envelope Maintenance project be accepted from Restoration Systems, Inc. Please call (763) 398-3040 with any questions, comments. Sincerely, ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESS, INC. Denny Langer, PE Project Manager Attachment: Recap of Bids An Equal Opportunity Employer CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 2014 EXTERIOR BUILDING ENVELOPE MAINTENANCE EPI 14-581 RECAP OF BIDS Bid Due Date:Thursday,June 26,2014 Time: 10:00 AM CONTRACTOR BASE BID ALTERNATE G-1 BID AFFIDAVIT Tuckpointing Control Joint/ Caulk Chinking/ Chinking/ Repair/ Replacement (Appendices A-L) (J.R.Cummins BOND OF NON- (CMU/Brick) Expansion door/window, Sealant/ Sealant/ Treat/ of Concrete House Handrail) COLLUSION (Per Linear Ft.) Joint head/jambs/ backer rod backer rod at decayed log Sidewalk/ Replacement sills(Per at horiz.log horiz.log ends Patio(Per (Per Linear Ft.) Linear Ft.) joints(Per cracks (Per Log Square ft.) Linear Ft.) (Per Linear Ends) Ft.) A.J.Spanjers Company,Inc. No Bid I I I American Masonry Restoration No Bid Blackstone Contractors,LLC No Bid Restoration Systems,Inc. $63,135.00 $4,800.00 Yes Yes S7.00 $7.00 S7.00 $10.00 S 10.00 $13.00 $26.00 Western Not Bidding Waterproofing June 23,2014 e-mail CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VIII.K. Paul Sticha, Facilities Solar Panels at the Community Center Requested Action Move to: Award the contract to furnish and install solar panels on the Community Center roof to All Energy Solar in the amount of$63,468. Synopsis City staff received proposals from and interviewed with All Energy Solar, Sundial Solar, Dragonfly Solar and Blue Horizon Energy. Staff concluded that All Energy Solar had the proposal that was most advantageous to the City. Background Information Staff initially received proposals from four contractors for a solar canopy above the visitor parking area at City Center. The goal was to obtain a solar array that was visible to the public and had a viable return on investment; however, we learned that the structure to support the solar panels in the parking lot was as much, or more than, the cost of the panels themselves, and at least doubled the cost of the installation. Contractors suggested roof mounted panels, as the structure to support them is then essentially free. Staff chose the portion of roof at the Community Center that is visible from the second floor above the lobby and from the upper parking lot, so the solar array would be prominent to the public. All Energy Solar presented their proposal to the City Council and staff at the June 17 workshop. The solar array as proposed is a small "display" system that is easily expandable in the future. The array has a payback of about 15 years and the panels are rated at a 30 year life. Attachment Presentation Welcome \I ALL EN 97sGY oaa Overview • Introduction to All Energy Solar • System Cost • Payment Schedule • Project Timeline • Questions �/j ENERGY ritignikerite..; ; PACIFIC (al� moo. CANADIAN b iv R A.ILWA REC(.11%.:rl 0111111111111 e DEPAAIVENt OF I .TUROIL FIESOMIES 407111 .5 41re 2, 4 COURTYARD Ik %:. r 1arrto11 2g14.- ' • L. 'I I r' r r A REVISIONS MEI___ _L214 - \lier_. . :. -- - . ". :r '11'4. - ^ \_ . ' � t • | ii. - ` i1 - § ' ., . \-,|2 • . . - \|| / '% . . ,.. / h. ,� ir ' ` ® ,,x % 4. P •:11 •111111111111111111112,P 57'1 i % - / IC I n ��*N _ ` � : \ . � . -- - /: • • . . .2. . _ I , -An . • / ' ... I / # t../..1.11i1111Ll--rl iiii, - � / /\ * , . . " _® _: . _ r ' H i \ > � __ 1 _ • ' Maga�Emma b © _ , ■ _�.�� _ fa fliiP . , \ �. «--- - - A , • WR6I . _ ' � _ .N. I ,�;;;. Ytit4N Y,tR?E.R tat I II • 4 , i ALL SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PRI CE 1 ENJERG"( losi15OLAR I System I of Solar Panels Inverter System size Type Panel (kW DC) Price Breakdown Roof Mount 3E 410 tenK AC/DC 147 .0 Turnkey Price $63,468.00 Solar Rebate (over 10 yrs) (S37, 08.83) System Additions Federal Tax Credit (30%) $0.00 ' 5 year installation warranty Included • Onine Solar Moriitoring Included Final Price $267259.17 - Onine Horne Moritortig Included 'F 1 Free Clearing Included Proposal for Eden Prairie Community Center Prepared by: Nick Nelson 1152.94113438 1551.334_ 9l patichaaedenprairie.orJ pick nelson allenergyaolar_corn _ ALL RESIDENTIAL CASH FLOW 7' ENJ E R 0 Y I SOLAR ` Years Syst9r113 Cost Solar Rattails. Federal Tax Credit Efoctric Savings Cumulative.Savings 063,4613_40) $3839.60 50.00 $1,328.50 (S58,299.90) $3812.72 $1,376 57 453,106.61) $3736_03 $1,430.52 ($47,892.05) $37 9.63 $1,484_43 442,646_10) $3733 21 $1,540_37 437,374_52) $37 7 06 $1,591142 ($32,069.02) $3681.13 $1,656.65 ($26,729.24) $3656 36 $1,721.16 ($21,352.71) B $3629.76 $1,786.02 ($15,936.91) 9 $3604 37 $1,B553.33 410,47822) 10 $1,92317 (S6,556.05) 11 $1,995.64 (S6,56041) 12 $2,070.85 (S4,409.56) 13 $2,146.89 (S2,340.67) 14 $2,287 ($110.80) 15 $2,313_90 $2 03.11 16 $2,401.10 $4,60421 17 $2,491.59 $7,095_80 12 $2,515.4E1 $9,68128 19 $2,682'92 $12,364_20 20 $2,784.02 $16,141122 25 $ 475.89 . . :...' 65 TOT. :3.468. ,20 5 ,1 9 , 3Q i Proposal far Eden Prairie Community.Gamier Prepared by: Nick Nelson 052.94116439 051.234_5286 p lichaledenprairie.or1 nick.nelson Inallenergyaolar.oam Payment Breakdown • $ 500 . 00 Deposit • $44 , 077 . 60 1st ( Project Approval ) • $ 18 , 890 .40 Final ( Inspection Approval ) Project Timeline • Project Approved By City - End of June • Xcel Interconnection Approved - End of July • Materials Received - End of August • Start Installation - 1st Week of September • Inspection Complete - End of September • Xcel Turns On System - Mid October Questions -..,.__. . , . gr. .-,11 .." . !..,0_,,__,.. , , .._. _ _...„____,_. .1 1 . :7• y' :S I. . Ni f' .r - ti . •Oil •1 16._ IL N.:. :-..nl- A_ \ rt • ... . L, . 010 ` fsaill. ... \1' i 4 , I f �y r If. f I2d1 r ....-.- I PO Standard Construction Contract This Contract ("Contract") is made on the 14th day of July, 2014, between the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota (hereinafter "City"), whose business address is 8080 Mitchell Road, Eden Prairie, MN 55344, and All Energy Solar, a Minnesota Corporation (hereinafter "Contractor") whose business address is 721 West 26th Street, Suite 211, Minneapolis, MN 55405. Preliminary Statement The City has adopted a policy regarding the selection and hiring of contractors to provide a variety of services for City projects. That policy requires that persons, firms or corporations providing such services enter into written agreements with the City. The purpose of this Contract is to set forth the terms and conditions for the provision of services by Contractor for installation of solar panels and lobby kiosk at the Community Center hereinafter referred to as the "Work". The City and Contractor agree as follows: 1. Scope of Work/Proposal. The Contractor agrees to provide, perform and complete all the provisions of the Work in accordance with attached Exhibit A. The terms of this Contract shall take precedence over any provisions of the Contractor's proposal and/or general conditions. 2. Time of Commencement and Completion. The Work to be performed under this Contract shall be commenced immediately after execution of this Contract. The Work shall be completed by December 1, 2014. 3. Compensation for Services. City agrees to pay the Contractor a fixed sum of $63,468 as full and complete payment for the labor, materials and services rendered pursuant to this Contract and as described in Exhibit A. a. Any changes in the scope of the work which may result in an increase to the compensation due the Contractor shall require prior written approval by an authorized representative of the City or by the City Council. The City will not pay additional compensation for services that do not have prior written authorization. b. If Contractor is delayed in performance due to any cause beyond its reasonable control, including but not limited to strikes, riots, fires, acts of God, governmental actions, actions of a third party, or actions or inactions of City, the time for performance shall be extended by a period of time lost by reason of the delay. Contractor will be entitled to payment for its reasonable additional charges, if any, due to the delay. 4. Method of Payment. The Contractor shall submit to the City, on a monthly basis, an itemized invoice for services performed under this Contract. Invoices submitted shall be paid in the same manner as other claims made to the City. a. Invoices. Contractor shall verify all statements submitted for payment in compliance with Minnesota Statutes Sections 471.38 and 471.391. For reimbursable expenses, if provided for in Exhibit A, the Contractor shall provide an itemized listing and such documentation as reasonably required by the City. Each invoice shall contain the City's project number and a progress summary showing the original (or amended) amount of the contract, current billing, past payments and unexpended balance of the contract. b. Claims. To receive any payment on this Contract, the invoice or bill must include the following signed and dated statement: "I declare under penalty of perjury that this account, claim, or demand is just and correct and that no part of it has been paid." c. Final Payment. Final payment, constituting the entire unpaid balance of the Contract Sum, shall be paid by the City to the Contractor when the Work has been completed, the Contract fully performed, and the City accepts the Work in writing. The acceptance of final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims by the Contractor except those previously made in writing and identified by the Contractor as unsettled at the time of Application for Final Payment. d. Income Tax Withholding. No final payment shall be made to the Contractor until the Contractor has provided satisfactory evidence to the City that the Contractor and each of its subcontracts has complied with the provisions of Minn. Stat. Section 290.92 relating to withholding of income taxes upon wages. A certificate by the Commissioner of Revenue shall satisfy this requirement. 5. Standard of Care. Contractor shall exercise the same degree of care, skill and diligence in the performance of its services as is ordinarily exercised by members of the profession under similar circumstances in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Contractor shall be liable to the fullest extent permitted under applicable law, without limitation, for any injuries, loss, or damages proximately caused by Contractor's breach of this standard of care. Contractor shall put forth reasonable efforts to complete its duties in a timely manner. Contractor shall not be responsible for delays caused by factors beyond its control or that could not be reasonably foreseen at the time of execution of this Contract. Contractor shall be responsible for costs, delays or damages arising from unreasonable delays in the performance of its duties. 6. Project Manager. The Contractor has designated Nick Nelson and Michael Allen to Manage the Work. They shall be assisted by other staff members as necessary to facilitate the completion of the Work in accordance with the terms established herein. Contractor may not remove or replace the designated manager without the approval of the City. 7. Condition and Inspection. All goods and other materials furnished under this Contract shall be new and in current manufacture, unless otherwise specified, and all goods and work shall be of good quality, free from faults and defects and in conformance with this Contract. All goods and work not conforming to these requirements shall be considered defective. Goods shall be subject to inspection and testing by the City. Defective goods or goods not in current manufacture may be returned to the Contractor at the Contractor's expense. 8. Correction of Work. The Contractor shall promptly correct all Work rejected by the City as defective or as failing to conform under this Contract whether observed before or after completion of the Work and whether or not fabricated, installed or completed. The Contractor shall bear all costs of correcting such rejected Work. Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 2 of 10 9. Warranty. The Contractor expressly warrants and guarantees to the City that all Work performed and all materials furnished shall be in accord with the Contract and shall be free from defects in materials, workmanship, and operation which appear within a period of one year, or within such longer period as may be prescribed by law or in the terms of the Contract, from the date of City's written acceptance of the Work. The City's rights under the Contractor's warranty are not the City's exclusive remedy. The City shall have all other remedies available under this Contract, at law or in equity. Should any defects develop in the materials, workmanship or operation of the system within the specified period, upon notice from the City, the Contractor agrees, within ten (10) calendar days after receiving written notice and without expense to the City, to repair, replace and in general to perform all necessary corrective Work with regard to the defective or nonconforming Work or materials to the satisfaction of the City. THE FOREGOING SHALL NOT IN ANY MANNER LIMIT THE CITY'S REMEDY OR THE CONTRACTOR'S LIABILITY TO THOSE DEFECTS APPEARING WITHIN THE WARRANTY PERIOD. The Contractor agrees to perform the Work in a manner and at a time so as to minimize any damages sustained by the City and so as to not interfere with or in any way disrupt the operation of the City or the public. The corrective Work referred to above shall include without limitation, (a) the cost of removing the defective or nonconforming Work and materials from the site, (b) the cost of correcting all Work of other Contractors destroyed or damaged by defective or nonconforming Work and materials including the cost of removal of such damaged Work and materials form the site, and (c) the cost of correcting all damages to Work of other Contractors caused by the removal of the defective or nonconforming Work or materials. The Contractor shall post bonds to secure the warranties. 10. Private Property. The Contractor shall not enter upon private property for any purpose without having previously obtained permission from the City. The Contractor shall be responsible for the preservation of, and shall use every precaution to prevent damage to all trees, shrubbery, plants, lawns, fences, culverts, bridges, pavements, driveways, sidewalks, etc.; all water, sewer and gas lines; all conduits; all overhead pole lines or appurtenances thereof; and all other public or private property along or adjacent to the work. 11. Removal of Construction Equipment, Tools and Supplies. At the termination of this Contract, before acceptance of the Work by the City, the Contractor shall remove all of Contractor's equipment, tools and supplies from the property of the City. Should the Contractor fail to remove such equipment, tools and supplies, the City shall have the right to remove them and deduct the cost of removal from any amount owed to Contractor. 12. Suspension of Work by City. The City may at any time suspend the Work, or any part thereof, by giving ten (10) days' notice to the Contractor in writing. The work shall be resumed by the Contractor within ten (10) days after the date fixed in the written notice from the City to the Contractor to resume. If the City's suspension of all or part of the Work causes additional expenses not due to the fault or negligence of the Contractor, the City shall reimburse the Contractor for the additional expense incurred due to suspension of the work. Claims for such compensation, with complete substantiating records, shall be filed with the City within ten (10) days after the date of order to resume Work in order to receive consideration. This paragraph shall not be construed as entitling the Contractor to compensation for delays due to inclement Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 3 of 10 weather, failure to furnish additional surety or sureties specified herein, for suspension made at the request of the Contractor, or for any other delay provided for in this Contract. 13. City's Right to Carry Out the Work. If the Contractor defaults or neglects to carry out the Work in accordance with the Contract or fails to perform any provisions of the Contract, the City may, after ten (10) days written notice to the Contractor and without prejudice to any other remedy the City may have, make good such deficiencies. In such case an appropriate Change Order shall be issued deducting from the payment then or thereafter due the Contractor the cost of correcting such deficiencies. If the payments then or thereafter due the Contractor are not sufficient to cover such amount, the Contractor shall pay the difference to the City. 14. City's Right to Terminate Contract and Complete the Work. The City has the right to terminate this Contract for any of the following reasons: a. The Contractor is adjudged bankrupt, makes a general assignment for the benefit of creditors, or becomes insolvent; b. Failure of Contractor to supply adequate properly skilled workmen or proper materials; c. Failure of Contractor to make prompt payment to subcontractor for material or labor; d. Any disregard of laws, ordinances or proper instructions of the City; e. Assignment or work without permission of the City; f. Abandonment of the work by Contractor; g. Failure to meet the work progress schedule set forth in this Contract; h. Unnecessary delay which, in the judgment of the City, will result in the work not being completed in the prescribed time. Termination of the Contract shall be preceded by ten (10) days written notice by the City to the Contractor and its surety stating the grounds for termination and the measures, if any, which must be taken to assure compliance with the Contract. The Contract shall be terminated at the expiration of such ten (10) day period unless the City Council shall withdraw its notice of termination. Upon termination of the Contract by the City, the City may, without prejudice to any other remedy the City may have, take possession of the site and of all materials, equipment, tools, construction equipment and machinery thereon owned by the Contractor and may finish the Work by whatever methods the City may deem expedient at the Contractor's expense. Upon Contract termination, the Contractor shall not be entitled to receive any further payment until the Work is finished. If the unpaid balance of the contract price exceeds the expense of finishing the Work, including compensation for additional managerial and administrative services, the excess shall be paid to the Contractor. If such expense exceeds the unpaid balance, the Contractor shall pay the difference to the City. In the event that the Contractor abandons the Work, fails or refuses to complete the Work or fails to pay just claims for labor or material, the City reserves the right to charge against the Contractor all legal, engineering, or other costs resulting from such abandonment, failure or refusal. Legal costs will include the City's cost of prosecuting or defending any suit in connection with such abandonment, failure or refusal, and non-payment of claims wherein the City is made co-defendant, and the Contractor agrees to pay all costs, including reasonable attorney's fees. Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 4 of 10 15. Contractor's RiQht to Terminate Contract. The Contractor may terminate this Contract upon ten (10) days written notice to the City for any of the following reasons: a. If an order of any court or other public authority caused the Work to be stopped or suspended for a period of 90 days through no act or fault of the Contractor or its employees. b. If the City should fail to pay any undisputed sum owed Contractor within forty-five (45) days after the sum becomes due. 16. Subcontractor. The Contractor shall bind every subcontractor and every subcontractor shall agree to be bound by the terms of this Contract as far as applicable to its work, unless specifically noted to the contrary in a subcontract approved in writing as adequate by the City. The Contractor shall pay any subcontractor involved in the performance of this Contract within the ten (10) days of the Contractor's receipt of payment by the City for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. If the Contractor fails within that time to pay the subcontractor any undisputed amount for which the Contractor has received payment by the City, the Contractor shall pay interest to the subcontractor on the unpaid amount at the rate of 1.5 percent per month or any part of a month. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100 or more is $10. For an unpaid balance of less than $100, the Contractor shall pay the actual interest penalty due to the subcontractor. A subcontractor who prevails in a civil action to collect interest penalties from the Contractor shall be awarded its costs and disbursements, including attorney's fees, incurred in bringing the action. 17. Independent Contractor. Contractor is an independent contractor engaged by City to perform the services described herein and as such (i) shall employ such persons as it shall deem necessary and appropriate for the performance of its obligations pursuant to this Contract, who shall be employees, and under the direction, of Contractor and in no respect employees of City, and (ii) shall have no authority to employ persons, or make purchases of equipment on behalf of City, or otherwise bind or obligate City. No statement herein shall be construed so as to find the Contractor an employee of the City. 18. Notice. Required notices to the Contractor shall be in writing, and shall be either hand- delivered to the Contractor, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Contractor by certified mail at the following address: Nick Nelson All Energy Solar 721 West 26th Street, Suite 211 Minneapolis, MN 55405 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand-delivered or mailed to the City by certified mail at the following address: Paul Sticha City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Notices shall be deemed effective on the date of receipt. Any party may change its address for the service of notice by giving written notice of such change to the other party, in any manner above specified, 10 days prior to the effective date of such change. Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 5 of 10 19. Insurance. a. General Liability. Prior to starting the Work, Contractor shall procure, maintain and pay for such insurance as will protect against claims or loss which may arise out of operations by Contractor or by any subcontractor or by anyone employed by any of them or by anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable. Such insurance shall include, but not be limited to, minimum coverages and limits of liability specified in this Paragraph, or required by law. b. Contractor shall procure and maintain the following minimum insurance coverages and limits of liability for the Work: Worker's Compensation Statutory Limits Employer's Liability $500,000 each accident $500,000 disease policy limit $500,000 disease each employee Commercial General Liability $1,500,000 property damage and bodily injury per occurrence $2,000,000 general aggregate $2,000,000 Products — Completed Operations Aggregate $100,000 fire legal liability each occurrence $5,000 medical expense Comprehensive Automobile Liability $1,000,000 combined single limit each accident (shall include coverage for all owned, hired and non-owed vehicles.) Umbrella or Excess Liability $1,000,000 c. Commercial General Liability. The Commercial General Liability Policy shall be on ISO form CG 00 01 12 07 or CG 00 01 04 13, or the equivalent. Such insurance shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, independent contractors, products-completed operations, personal and advertising injury, and liability assumed under an insured contract (including the tort liability of another assumed in a business contract). There shall be no endorsement or modification of the Commercial General Liability form arising from pollution, explosion, collapse, underground property damage or work performed by subcontractors. d. Contractor shall maintain "stop gap" coverage if Contractor obtains Workers' Compensation coverage from any state fund if Employer's liability coverage is not available. e. All policies, except the Worker's Compensation Policy, shall name the "City of Eden Prairie" as an additional insured on ISO forms CG 20 10 07 04 or CG 20 10 04 13; and CG 20 37 07 04 or CG 20 37 04 13, or their equivalent. f. All policies shall apply on a "per project" basis. Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 6 of 10 g. All polices shall contain a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City. h. All policies shall be primary and non-contributory. i. All polices, except the Worker's Compensation Policy, shall insure the defense and indemnity obligations assumed by Contractor under this Contract. j. Contractor agrees to maintain all coverage required herein throughout the term of the Contract and for a minimum of two (2) years following City's written acceptance of the Work. k. It shall be Contractor's responsibility to pay any retention or deductible for the coveraeges required herein. I. All policies shall contain a provision or endorsement that coverages afforded thereunder shall not be cancelled or non-renewed or restrictive modifications added, without thirty (30) days' prior notice to the City, except that if the cancellation or non- renewal is due to non-payment, the coverages may not be terminated or non- renewed without ten (10) days' prior notice to the City. m. Contractor shall maintain in effect all insurance coverages required under this Paragraph at Contractor's sole expense and with insurance companies licensed to do business in the state in Minnesota and having a current A.M. Best rating of no less than A-, unless specifically accepted by City in writing. n. A copy of the Contractor's Certificate of Insurance which evidences the compliance with this Paragraph, must be filed with City prior to the start of Contractor's Work. Upon request a copy of the Contractor's insurance declaration page, Rider and/or Endorsement, as applicable shall be provided. Such documents evidencing Insurance shall be in a form acceptable to City and shall provide satisfactory evidence that Contractor has complied with all insurance requirements. Renewal certificates shall be provided to City prior to the expiration date of any of the required policies. City will not be obligated, however, to review such Certificate of Insurance, declaration page, Rider, Endorsement or certificates or other evidence of insurance, or to advise Contractor of any deficiencies in such documents and receipt thereof shall not relieve Contractor from, nor be deemed a waiver of, City's right to enforce the terms of Contractor's obligations hereunder. City reserves the right to examine any policy provided for under this paragraph. o. Effect of Contractor's Failure to Provide Insurance. If Contractor fails to provide the specified insurance, then Contractor will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, the City's officials, agents and employees from any loss, claim, liability and expense (including reasonable attorney's fees and expenses of litigation) to the extent necessary to afford the same protection as would have been provided by the specified insurance. Except to the extent prohibited by law, this indemnity applies regardless of any strict liability or negligence attributable to the City (including sole negligence) and regardless of the extent to which the underlying occurrence (i.e., the event giving rise to a claim which would have been covered by the specified insurance) is attributable to the negligent or otherwise wrongful act or omission (including breach of contract) of Contractor, its subcontractors, agents, employees or delegates. Contractor agrees Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 7 of 10 that this indemnity shall be construed and applied in favor of indemnification. Contractor also agrees that if applicable law limits or precludes any aspect of this indemnity, then the indemnity will be considered limited only to the extent necessary to comply with that applicable law. The stated indemnity continues until all applicable statutes of limitation have run. If a claim arises within the scope of the stated indemnity, the City may require Contractor to: i. Furnish and pay for a surety bond, satisfactory to the City, guaranteeing performance of the indemnity obligation; or ii. Furnish a written acceptance of tender of defense and indemnity from Contractor's insurance company. Contractor will take the action required by the City within fifteen (15) days of receiving notice from the City. 20. Indemnification. Contractor will defend and indemnify City, its officers, agents, and employees and hold them harmless from and against all judgments, claims, damages, costs and expenses, including a reasonable amount as and for its attorney's fees paid, incurred or for which it may be liable resulting from any breach of this Contract by Contractor, its agents, contractors and employees, or any negligent or intentional act or omission performed, taken or not performed or taken by Contractor, its agents, contractors and employees, relative to this Contract. City will indemnify and hold Contractor harmless from and against any loss for injuries or damages arising out of the negligent acts of the City, its officers, agents or employees. 21. Ownership of Documents. All plans, diagrams, analyses, reports and information generated in connection with the performance of the Contract ("Information") shall become the property of the City, but Contractor may retain copies of such documents as records of the services provided. The City may use the Information for its purposes and the Contractor also may use the Information for its purposes. Use of the Information for the purposes of the project contemplated by this Contract does not relieve any liability on the part of the Contractor, but any use of the Information by the City or the Contractor beyond the scope of this Contract is without liability to the other, and the party using the Information agrees to defend and indemnify the other from any claims or liability resulting therefrom. 22. Non-Discrimination. During the performance of this Contract, the Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, sexual orientation or age. The Contractor shall post in places available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provision of this non- discrimination clause and stating that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment. The Contractor shall incorporate the foregoing requirements of this paragraph in all of its subcontracts for program work, and will require all of its subcontractors for such work to incorporate such requirements in all subcontracts for program work. The Contractor further agrees to comply with all aspects of the Minnesota Human Rights Act, Minnesota Statutes 363.01, et. seq., Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. 23. Mediation. Each dispute, claim or controversy arising from or related to this agreement shall be subject to mediation as a condition precedent to initiating arbitration or legal or Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 8 of 10 equitable actions by either party. Unless the parties agree otherwise, the mediation shall be in accordance with the Commercial Mediation Procedures of the American Arbitration Association then currently in effect. A request for mediation shall be filed in writing with the American Arbitration Association and the other party. No arbitration or legal or equitable action may be instituted for a period of 90 days from the filing of the request for mediation unless a longer period of time is provided by agreement of the parties. Cost of mediation shall be shared equally between the parties. Mediation shall be held in the City of Eden Prairie unless another location is mutually agreed upon by the parties. The parties shall memorialize any agreement resulting from the mediation in a mediated settlement agreement, which agreement shall be enforceable as a settlement in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 24. Audit Disclosure and Data Practices. Any reports, information, data, etc. given to, or prepared or assembled by the Contractor under this Contract which the City requests to be kept confidential, shall not be made available to any individual or organization without the City's prior written approval. The books, records, documents and accounting procedures and practices of the Contractor or other parties relevant to this Contract are subject to examination by the City and either the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor for a period of six (6) years after the effective date of this Contract. This Contract is subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practice Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13 (Data Practices Act). All government data, as defined in the Data Practices Act Section 13.02, Subd 7, which is created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by Contractor in performing any of the functions of the City during performance of this Contract is subject to the requirements of the Data Practice Act and Contractor shall comply with those requirements as if it were a government entity. All subcontracts entered into by Contractor in relation to this Contract shall contain similar Data Practices Act compliance language. 25. Rights and Remedies. The duties and obligations imposed by this Contract and the rights and remedies available thereunder shall be in addition to and not a limitation of any duties, obligations, rights and remedies otherwise imposed or available by law. 26. Assignment. Neither party shall assign this Contract, nor any interest arising herein, without the written consent of the other party. 27. Damages. In the event of a breach of the Contract by City, the Contractor shall not be entitled to recover punitive, special or consequential damages or damages for loss of business. 28. Enforcement. The Contractor shall reimburse the City for all costs and expenses, including without limitation, attorneys' fees paid or incurred by the City in connection with the enforcement by the City during the term of this Contract or thereafter of any of the rights or remedies of the City under this Contract. 29. Severability. The provisions of this Contract are severable. If any portion hereof is, for any reason, held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to law, such decision shall not affect the remaining provisions of this Contract. 30. Entire Agreement. The entire agreement of the parties is contained herein. This Contract supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the parties Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 9 of 10 relating to the subject matter hereof. Any alterations, amendments, deletions, or waivers of the provisions of this Contract shall be valid only when expressed in writing and duly signed by the parties, unless otherwise provided herein. 31. Waiver. No action nor failure to act by the City or the Contractor shall constitute a waiver of any right or duty afforded any of them under the Contract, nor shall any such action or failure to act constitute an approval of or acquiescence in any breach thereunder, except as may be specifically agreed in writing. 32. Governing Law. This Contract shall be controlled by the laws of the State of Minnesota. 33. Conflicts. No salaried officer or employee of the City and no member of the Council of the City shall have a financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Contract. The violation of this provision renders the Contract void. 34. Counterparts. This Contract may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be considered an original. 35. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. In providing services hereunder, the Contractor shall abide by statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations pertaining to the provisions of Work to be provided. Any violation of statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations pertaining to the Work to be provided shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and entitle the City to immediately terminate this Agreement. Executed as of the day and year first written above. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE Nancy Tyra Lukens, Its Mayor Rick Getschow, Its City Manager ALL ENERGY SOLAR Michael Allen, Its President Standard Construction Contract 2014.01 Page 10 of 10 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: IEM NO.: VIII.L. Robert Ellis Sign Retroreflectivity Policy Public Works/Engineering Requested Action Move to: Adopt the City of Eden Prairie Sign Retroreflectivity Policy. Background Information The purpose of this policy is to establish how the city will implement an assessment or management method, or combination of methods, to meet the minimum sign retroreflectivity requirements in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD). Substantial conformance with the MN MUTCD is achieved by having a method in place to maintain minimum retroreflectivity levels. Conformance does not require or guarantee that every individual sign in the city will meet or exceed the minimum retroreflective levels at every point in time. The goal of this policy is to improve public safety on the city's streets and roads and prioritize the city's limited resources to replace signs. To meet the city's goal of maintaining sign retroreflectivity above certain levels, the city will maintain a sign inventory of all new or replacement signs installed after the effective date of this policy. The inventory shall indicate the type of sign, its size, the location of the sign, direction the sign is facing, type of post the sign is mounted on, the date of installation or replacement, the type of sheeting material used on the sign face, the expected life of the sheeting material, and any maintenance performed on the sign. Attachment Sign Retroreflectivity Policy City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota Sign Retroreflectivity Policy Article I. Purpose and Goal. The purpose of this policy is to establish how the city will implement a management method to meet the minimum sign retroreflectivity requirements in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD). Substantial conformance with the MN MUTCD is achieved by having a method in place to maintain minimum retroreflectivity levels. Conformance does not require or guarantee that every individual sign in the city will meet or exceed the minimum retroreflective levels at every point in time. The goal of this policy is to improve public safety on the city's streets and roads and prioritize the city's limited resources to replace signs. Article II. Applicable Signs. This policy applies to all city maintained traffic signs in the city except the following: • Parking, Standing, and Stopping signs (R7 and R8 series) • Walking/Hitchhiking/Crossing signs (R9 series, R10-1 through R10-4b) • Adopt-A-Highway signs • All signs with blue (motor services) or brown(recreational)backgrounds • Bikeway signs that are intended for exclusive use by bicyclists or pedestrians The city does not maintain signs for Hennepin County, Minnesota Department of Transportation or Three Rivers Park District trails or roadways. The city does not maintain signs located outside of the public rights-of-way along private driveways or private streets. Article III. Resource Materials The city has reviewed and relied on numerous resources in adopting this policy. These resource materials include, but are not limited to the following: • Methods for Maintaining Traffic Sign Retroreflectivity, Publication No. FHWA-HRT-08- 026, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration(November 2007). • Sign Retroreflectivity Guidebook, Publication No. FHWA-CFL/TD-09-005, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (September 2009). • Sign Retroreflectivity:A Minnesota Toolkit, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Local Road Research Board(June 2010). 1 • Traffic Sign Maintenance/Management Handbook, Report No. 2010RIC10, Version 1.1, Minnesota Department of Transportation(October 2010). • LMCIT Sign Retroreflectivity Memo and Model Policy, League of Minnesota Cities (3rd Edition, January 2014). Article IV. Sign Inventory To meet the city's goal of maintaining sign retroreflectivity above certain levels, the city will maintain a sign inventory of all new or replacement signs installed after the effective date of this policy. The inventory shall indicate the type of sign, its size, the location of the sign, direction the sign is facing, type of post the sign is mounted on, the date of installation or replacement, the type of sheeting material used on the sign face, the expected life of the sheeting material, and any maintenance performed on the sign. Article V. Removal of Signs In recognition of the fact that excess road signs have been shown to reduce the effectiveness of signage, as well as impose an unnecessary financial burden on road authorities, it is the city's policy to remove signs determined to be unnecessary for safety purposes and which are not required to comply with an applicable state or federal statute or regulation. Article VI. Approved Sign Evaluation Method. After reviewing the various methods proposed for sign maintenance, the City adopts the Expected Sign Life method to meet the minimum sign retroreflectivity requirements in the MN MUTCD. Expected Sign Life. The installation date is recorded when a sign is installed, so that the age of any given sign is known. The age of the sign is compared to the expected sign life. The expected sign life is based on manufacturer's warranty and any experience of sign retroreflectivity degradation in the City. Signs older than the expected life will be reviewed using an assessment method and replaced if warranted. Article VII. Sign Replacement. The City hereby establishes the following priority order in which road signs will be replaced: • First priority shall be given to replacing all signs determined not to meet applicable retroreflectivity standards. Top priority shall also be given to replacing missing or damaged signs determined to be of a priority for safety purposes. • Second priority shall be given to signs determined to be marginal in their retroreflectivity evaluation. • Third priority shall be given to all remaining signs as they come to the end of their anticipated service life,become damaged, etc. In addition, within each category above, further priority shall be given to warning and regulatory signs on roads with higher vehicle usage. After the initial replacement of signs as provided for in this Article or the installation of new signs, the City shall, for the purpose of complying with the requirements of the MN MUTCD, maintain minimum retroreflectivity standards, as budgetary factors allow, by replacing signs as they reach the end of the latter of their warranty period or expected life expectancy for the sheeting material used on the sign. Damaged, stolen, or missing signs may be replaced as needed. Article VIII. Modification and Deviation from Policy. The City reserves the right to modify this Sign Retroreflectivity Policy at any time if deemed to be in the best interests of the City based on safety,political and economic considerations. The Director of Public Works, or his or her designee, may authorize a deviation from the implementation of this policy in regard to a particular sign when deemed to be in the best interests of the City based on safety, political and economic considerations. Such deviation shall be documented including the reason for the deviation and other information supporting the deviation. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Public Hearings July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: IX.A. Community Development/Planning Eden Heights East Janet Jeremiah/Julie Klima Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 1.7 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat on 1.7 acres into 4 lots; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Staff and Commission recommendations and Council conditions. Synopsis This is a 4 lot single family subdivision that conforms to the requirements of the R1-13.5 Zoning District and Comprehensive Guide Plan. Background Information The 120-Day Review Period Expires on September 10, 2014. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the project at the June 9, 2014 meeting. Attachments 1. Ordinance 2. Ordinance Summary 3. Resolution—Preliminary Plat 4. Staff Report dated June 22, 2012 5. Location Map 6. Land Use Map 7. Zoning Map 8. Aerial photo 9. Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes dated June 9, 2014 EDEN HEIGHTS EAST CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. -2014 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA,REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT,AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 11 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH,AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the R1-22 District and be placed in the R1-13.5 District. Section 3. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the R1-22 District and shall be included hereafter in the RI-13.5 District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to in City Code Section 11.03, Subdivisionl, Subparagraph B, shall be, and are amended accordingly. Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled"General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Development Agreement dated as of , 2014, entered into between Steward Land Partners LLC and the City of Eden Prairie, and which Agreement are hereby made a part hereof. Section 6. 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 14th day of July, 2014, and finally read and adopted and ordered published in summary form as attached hereto at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of 2014. ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on , 2014. Exhibit A Legal Description Before Final Plat Lot 1, Block 1, Hennepin County Plat No. 2, Hennepin County, Minnesota Legal Description After Final Plat Lots 1-4, Block 1, Eden Heights East, Hennepin County, Minnesota EDEN HEIGHTS EAST CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER,AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT,AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99,WHICH,AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows rezoning of land located south of Pioneer Trail and west of Eden Prairie Road from R1-22 Zoning District to R1-13.5 Zoning District. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on , 2014. (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) Exhibit A Legal Description Before Final Plat Lot 1, Block 1, Hennepin County Plat No. 2, Hennepin County, Minnesota Legal Description After Final Plat Lots 1-4, Block 1, Eden Heights East, Hennepin County, Minnesota CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2014- RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF EDEN HEIGHTS EAST FOR STEWART LAND PARTNERS LLC BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Eden Heights East for Stewart Land Partners LLC stamp dated May 8, 2014 and consisting of 1.7 acres into 4 lots, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, 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 14th day of July 2014. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Julie Klima, Senior Planner DATE: June 6, 2014 SUBJECT: Eden Heights East APPLICANT: Stewart Land Partners LLC OWNERS: Stewart Land Partners LLC LOCATION: Southwest corner of Pioneer Trail and Eden Prairie Road 120 DAY REVIEW: September 10, 2014 REQUEST: • Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 1.7 acres • Preliminary Plat of 1.7 acres into 4 lots BACKGROUND The Comprehensive Guide Plan shows the site and property surrounding it as Low Density Residential for up to 2.5 units per acre. The site is zoned R1-22. Properties to the south and west are zoned R1-13.5. The property to the east is zoned R1-22. The proponent is requesting that the property be rezoned to R1-13.5. PRELIMINARY PLAT This project is the subdivision of 1.7 acres into 4 lots. The preliminary plat shows 4 single-family lots at a gross density of 2.35 units per acre. The lot sizes range from 13,550 sq. ft. to 18,920 sq. ft. The proposed lots meet the lot size requirements. TREE REPLACEMENT There are 15 diameter inches of significant trees on the property. Tree loss is 15 diameter inches, or 100%. The required tree replacement is 20 inches. The plan meets this requirement. The developer will provide financial security for these trees and the tree replacement will occur after the construction of individual homes. STREETS AND UTILITIES The project will utilize the existing sanitary sewer and water in Serenity Lane. These utilities will be extended to serve all 4 lots. Serenity Lane will be extended with a partial cul-de-sac into Staff Report—Eden Heights East June 6, 2014 Page 2 the site for access to the proposed lots. The proponent will dedicate right-of-way to the eastern edge of the property allowing access to be constructed to serve the property to the east when it develops. WATER QUALITY The proposed plan provides the required stormwater treatment, including the use of infiltration basins within the development. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval of the following request: 1. Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 1.7 acres 2. Preliminary Plat of 1.7 acres into 4 lots This is based on plans stamp dated May 8, 2014 and the Staff Report dated June 6, 2014 and the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of the grading permit, the proponent shall: A. Submit a planting plan of the infiltration area for approval. B. Provide written authorization from the property owners of Lot 16, Block 3 and Lot 11, Block 1, Eden Heights Estates allowing for grading encroachment. C. Submit a tree replacement bond, letter of credit, or escrow surety equivalent to 150% of the cost of the landscaping. D. Notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours in advance of grading. E. Install erosion control and tree protection fencing at the grading limits of the property for review and approval by the City. 2. Prior to release of the final plat, the proponent shall: A. Pay all City connection fees. B. A legal mechanism shall be in place to provide the granting of temporary construction easements on Lot 2, Block 1 and Lot 2, Block 2. 3. Prior to the issuance of building permit, the proponent shall: A. Pay the appropriate cash park fees. 4. Acquisition of permits for the project shall be the sole responsibility of the developer/owner. 5. This development will require a Special Assessment agreement for trunk assessments. Staff recommends approval subject to these requirements. Area Location Map - Eden Heights East South of Pioneer Trail & West of Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55347 H • • - iI I I Z 70LALLN L I DULD RD \ L\ol � r AZALEA'TRIL Pioneer Tram l . z ll o s IPURI --- SITE 2 i - I Eden Prairie Road HILLTOP RD N Y5 VALLEY RD 0 205 1, 820 Feet I Guide Plan Map - Eden Heights East SW Corner of Eden Prairie Road and Pioneer Trail Eden Prairie, MN 0 LL:___________i AZ 70 k Pioneer Trail m _Ail __ ---- 111N1d--1 I II ERENIT N II SITE II II Eden Prairie Road ,1111 LOP RD Cit • • - - - . - • l• - - ul • e Plan ap 2000-2030 Rural Residential 0.10 Units/Acre Neighborhood Commercial N Low Density Residential 0-2.5 Units/Acre —i Community Commercial Streams 17.7 Low Density/Public/Open Space - Regional Commercial Principal Arterial —A Minor Arterial - Medium Density residential 2.5-10 Units/Acre Town Center i —B Minor � 't ^ DATE Approved 03-19-03 DATE Revised 12-06-06 1 I Medium Density Residential/Office - Park/Open Space —Major Collector DATE Revised 01-07-05 DATE Revised 03-01-07 DATE Revised 11-07-05 DATE Revised 06-01-07 EDEN I High Density Residential 10-40 Units/Acre Public/Quasi-Public DATE Revised 02-23-06 DATE Revised 10-01-07 Minor Collect or DATE Revised 03-23-06 DATE Revised 03-01-08 nAirport Golf Course DATE Revised 06-23-06 DATE Revised 03-01-09 Office - Church/Cemetary PRAIRIE Y// Office/Industrial Open Water LIVE•WORK•DREAM �� Office/Public/Open Space Right-Of-Way """ "'" """" " •..-�axr4 :;.7 260 130 0 260 Feet - Industrial Zoning Map - Eden Heights East SW Corner of Eden Prairie Rd. and Pioneer Trail Eden Prairie, MN -AI I_ OULD RD n �; AZALE Pioneer Trail I m im , 77 *INERENITY IP ............_„„, ___________ \\ Eden Prairie Road I 1111 HIIIT(WRfn /I City of Eden Prairie Zoning Map i i 1, =Rural -Regional Commercial Shoreland Management Classifications N IM R1-44 One Family-44,000 sf.min. -TC-C I NE I Natural Environment Waters R1-22 One Family-22,000 sf min. -TC-R I RD I Recreational Development Waters R1-13.5 One Family-13,500 sf min. -TC-MU I GD I General Development Waters(Creeks Only) "''I , I I,!. 1.1 R1-9.5 One Family-9,500 sf min. -Industrial Park-2Acre Min, ® 100- Year Floodplain EDEN RM-6.5 Multi-Family-6.7 U.P.A.max. ^Industrial Park-5Acre Min. -RM-2.5 Multi-Family-17.4 U.P.A.max.-General Industrial-5 Acre Min. Up dated through approved Ordinances#26-2008 Office Public Ordinance#33-2001(BFI Addition)approved,but not shown on this map edition PRAIRIE Neighborhood Commercial 1-1 GolfCourse Date:March 1,2009 Community Commercial Water In case of discrepancy related to a toning classitmaaon on this zoning map,the ordinance LIVE•W O A K•D A E AM and attached legal description on file at Eden Paine Ciry Center will prevail. -Highway Commercial I Right of Way -Regional Service Commercial 0 0.05 0.1 Miles .wa,_o...m..��mo..m_. ....g..o.,.,, ..._..a.0.,.m ,..,,mo, Aerial Map Eden Heights East SW Corner of Eden Prairie Road and Pioneer Trail Eden Prairie, MN I Is/ wriffm-41_ 7411k. Ilk& Allem I Plana r'14 ill''4V '6 4 '*i'* ' b,- Z ,.* . ;Tr ,Ip 441111 i lit' ' ' ee t'i. e: °£ e - # ulitill_li '> , lif, 1 40,cvlur, i t i lit I PI mmilz: ma I NEVI _mil :' an itilkik, AZA 1,111111 11111 4' N iSi _ - Pioneer Trail ° A'vs,-Itir. ®� 1111 Z _ � riff R .., w���i�jjyyi��� .. _ T - E RI N'' -Aril l .....1 .� or mi j*U.U1TE '�, _ ���� , � � �. ilmo E ., 1 .4,...ki den Prairie Road Q HII 1 —OP RD Ile a iir_.1,4:,', . \. -...., _. k. VALLEY" RD i I I I I I I I I I ' T ,it ^C' ?II ek, M Ili 1 I I 1 I I / UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY,JUNE 9, 2014 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Jon Stoltz, Travis Wuttke, Steven Frank, Ann Higgins, Mary Egan, Charles Weber, Andrew Pieper STAFF MEMBERS: Julie Klima, City Planner Stu Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources Rod Rue, City Engineer Julie Krull, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL Chair Stoltz called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Frank was absent. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Stoltz said there is a difference between Public Hearing items D and E in the Agenda and Letter of Transmittal; and the meeting with follow the Agenda. MOTION by Wuttke, seconded by Kirk, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 7-0. III. MINUTES A. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 12, 2014 MOTION by Wuttke, seconded by Egan, to approve the minutes. Motion carried 6-0. Stoltz abstained. IV. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS V. PUBLIC MEETINGS VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. EDEN HEIGHTS EAST by Stewart Land Partners LLC June 9, 2014 Page 2 Location: Southwest corner of Pioneer Trail and Eden Prairie Road Contact: Terry Schneider(612) 720-7667 Request for: • Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 1.7 acres • Preliminary Plat on 1.7 acres Stew Stender, of Stewart Land Partners, who is the applicant of this proposal, did the presentation. He said they purchased the two lots last year with the intent to subdivide them. The past two months they have been working with City Staff on this project. Chair Stoltz asked Klima to review the staff report. Klima said City Staff recommends approval of this project. All lots meet the zoning requirements. Chair Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. Wuttke asked Rue about the rain garden in the southwest corner of the property and said he assumes it is a storm water connection between the pond that is south of this property and asked if there was thought of the necessity of a rain water garden in such a close proximity with the grade differential of only 2 feet. He stated there seems like a lot of intrusion on one parcel of land just for a rain water garden and asked if there was any thought given to using the existing pond. Rue said the existing pond is sized to accommodate the drainage and pointed out any new development will have to supply a new infiltration system. There are requirements for such a system and they are rate control, infiltration requirements, and volume control. The existing pond covers two of these but not the third, so that is why the raingarden is included. Chair Stoltz asked the project proponent about the two lots east of the cul-de-sac if they are for future development. Mr. Stender said the lots were for future development. MOTION by Wuttke, seconded by Weber, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. MOTION by Wuttke, seconded by Egan, to recommend approval of the Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 1.7 acres and Preliminary Plat on 1.7acres. Motion carried 7-0. VII. PLANNERS' REPORT June 9, 2014 Page 3 No Planners' report. VIII. MEMBERS' REPORT No Members' report. IX. CONTINUING BUSINESS No continuing business. X. NEW BUSINESS No new business. XI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Weber, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 7-0. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:33 p.m. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Public Hearings July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: IX.B. Community Telecommunications—Verizon Development/Planning Wireless—Combination Light Pole/Cell Janet Jeremiah/Steve Durham Tower at EP High School Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 66.55 acres. Synopsis A proposed 119-foot Verizon Wireless cellular tower will replace an existing 100-foot light pole overlooking the stadium at Eden Prairie High School with a 116' monopole and 3' lightning rod for a total height of 119' to accommodate wireless antenna and a 12'x30' equipment shelter structure. Integration of the telecommunication tower is accomplished by closely replicating the existing light standard using a similar self-weathering brown core-ten steel monopole without constructing a new tower within the immediate vicinity. The purpose of the site plan review is for a cellular tower greater than 80 feet tall. Background City code states that "a tower's setback may be reduced at the sole discretion of the City Council, to allow the integration of a tower into an existing or proposed structure such as a Place of Worship steeple, light standard, power line support device or similar structure. Integration may include replication of the existing or proposed structure by a new structure provided the new structure is substantially similar in design and color to the exiting or proposed structure and extends no more than 20 feet above the highest point of the existing or proposed structure". (Emphasis added). The setback to residential property requires four feet of setback for each foot of tower height for a total setback of 476 feet in this case. The proposal is for a 450' setback from the closet residential lot to the north. The developer seeks the City Council's support for a proposed 450 foot setback. Should the City Council not support this request, the alternative is for the proponet to construct a new tower to accommodate the cell providers capacity needs. Locating a new independent cell tower, resulting in an additional tower structure within the area, would be inconsistent with the intent of the City Code to reduce the number of cell towers. The developer's option integrates the cellular tower with the existing lighting standards on the southwest side of the football field, which best addresses T-Mobile's goal of improvement to its cellular coverage serving the adjacent residential areas. Staff recommends approval of the proponents identified option. The 120-Day Review Period Expires on August 9, 2014. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the project at the June 9, 2014 meeting. Attachments 1. Resolution Site Plan Review 2. Staff Report 3. Location Map 4. Land Use Map 5. Zoning Map 6. Aerial photo 7. Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes 6-9-14 8. Plans dated April 11, 2014 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2014- A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A VERIZON WIRELESS TOWER—EDEN PRAIRIE HIGH SCHOOL BY VERIZON WIRELESS WHEREAS, Verizon Wireless, has applied to exchange of an existing 100' light pole standard for the installation of a 119' cellular tower to accommodate cellular antenna and stadium lighting on the Eden Prairie High School property; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its June 9, 2014 meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and WHEREAS,the City Council did consider and review said application at a public hearing at its July 14, 2014 meeting; and NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: • Site Plan approval be granted to Verizon Wireless based on plans stamp dated April 11, 2014 and Planning Commission Staff Report dated June 6, 2014. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 14th day of July, 2014. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Steve Durham, Planner II DATE: June 6, 2014 SUBJECT: Telecommunication — Verizon light pole tower exchange — Eden Prairie High School APPLICANT: Verizon Wireless c/o Buell Consulting OWNER: Independent School District#272 LOCATION: 17185 Valley View Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 120 DAY REVIEW: Expires August 09, 2014 REQUEST: • Site Plan Review on 66.55 acres for the review of a Telecommunication Tower greater than 80' in height. BACKGROUND Verizon Wireless proposes to replace an existing stadium light pole fixture with a cellular tower to be constructed on the south side of the existing stadium at the Eden Prairie High School football field. The purpose will be to provide improved cellular coverage for the surrounding area inclusive of residential and commercial service. The High School property is guided Public/Open Space and zoned Public. Surrounding land uses are low density single family residential to the north and east; park to the south; and medium density single and multi-family to the west and southwest. SITE PLAN REVIEW A site plan review is required by City Code for any cellular tower greater than 80' in height. The proposed 116-foot cellular tower and 3-foot lightening rod will be used in place of an existing 100-foot stadium light pole fixture on the south side of the football field and stadium. The stadium light fixture will be reestablished at 100-foot height with the cellular antennas placed above the lights. A cellular tower setback from residentially zoned property requires four feet of setback for each foot of tower height up to a maximum height of 150-feet. Based on a total height of 119-foot tower, a setback of 476-feet would be required from any residentially zoned property. The proposed setback from residential property to the east is in excess of 1,450'. The proposed setback from residential property, to the west and southwest, ranges from 750' to 1,450. The proposed setback from the residential property to the north is approximately 450'. The developer seeks the City Council support for the proposed 450'setback from the north residential property versus the required 476'. Staff Report—Telecommunication—Verizon light pole tower exchange—Eden Prairie High School— 17185 Valley View Road June 6, 2014 Page 2 City Code states that a tower's setback may be reduced at the sole discretion of the City Council to allow the integration of tower into an existing or proposed structure such as a Place of Worship steeple, light standard, power line support devise or similar structure. Integration may include replication of the existing or proposed structure by a new structure provided the new structure is substantially similar in design and color to the existing or proposed structure and extends no more than 20 feet above the highest point of the existing or proposed structure. The proposed new tower meets these criteria, A proposed equipment utility building will be established under the bleachers. Exterior building material will be brick and coordinate with the existing high school building brick. Integration of the tower is accomplished by replicating the existing light standard using a similar self-weathering brown corten brown finish steel monopole. The proposed antenna will also be of this brown color to match the pole. The diameter of the new pole will be similar to the diameter of the old light pole standard. Other options to consider would be to locate a proposed new 119-foot cellular tower somewhere in the area that meets the 476' setback somewhere else on the property. Since there are co- location opportunities, this option should not be considered. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT The mechanical equipment is to be located underneath the existing stadium and will be housed in 20' x 30' building. Screening of the building will be provided by the stadium itself The building will meet City Code requirement for exterior building material. SUMMARY The developer's option integrates the proposed cellular tower with and existing light standard of 100', and addresses Verizon Wireless's coverage needs for the adjacent residential areas. City Code was established to encourage integration with existing poles provided the new pole does not exceed 20' above the existing pole. This development proposal also includes space for an additional platform to accommodate antennas below the stadium light. City Council approval of this plan would allow for administrative approval of any additional antenna to be placed on the pole consistent with the requirements of City Code. The developer seeks the City Council support for the proposed 450' setback from residential property to the north versus the required 476'. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the following request: • A Site Plan Review on 66.55 acres. • A review of telecommunication tower greater than 80' in height. Staff Report—Telecommunication—Verizon light pole tower exchange Eden Prairie High School— 17185 Valley View Road June 6, 2014 Page 3 This is based on plans stamp dated April 11, 2014, the staff report dated June 6, 2014 and the following conditions: 1. Prior to Building permit issuance for the property, the proponent shall: A. Apply for and receive approval for a Telecommunication Land Use Permit. B. Obtain a determination from the FAA that the tower is able to be constructed in accordance with recommendations from the FAA, or otherwise not considered an obstruction. C. Obtain the appropriate building permits 2. Any future installation of additional antenna shall comply with the requirements of the City Code. Area Location Map - Telecommunication Verizon Wireless - Light Pole tower exchange at Eden Prairie High School . Address: 17185 Valley View Road, Eden Prairie, MN 55346 7P., --- ITO IIIIIIMI_____Numw-4-- miummilim AS' AIM' 1111 ----- FiViir Eno c'ay I lai 1 p 1;4 •lbir.r.i p I 1 „ti •tir Per iii. I No ‘ ,., ' 74-- ., / Eden Prairie Road p -1 1 1roma _ I ill1. .:i /� I - 0. Approximate location of existing light pole/ .► � J'� � �� proposed combination light pole/cell tower. ,$ MI NMI r,gdat 0 II-V(, ,- Milm H f&" IP C 11 I (`R F S F.# :r. ■ • 4 of _ rAffmr" ? o' 4WA emir#* rAkrliw IIV s. ** °,-, gig_ IIVW ' N• ' -- INOWIllingli st* - 672_ Es 01 iglu - mi **A - - . P" riti I I - 1111111 -1 •� , ---70. : W / I 1 III 11( I!- ISIIII �� r' W Fshrn-rF nR C � I1 ke, Valley View Road — - OE r• ' ,114 , - . i .;_r,„ •. ritS • , ■ Z R l7Nl I• #,- , . mpg, - Y 5 �% •,••� HWY 5 � ,4011116 �.. 1 940 1,880 Feed Li I li AIN ST_ F�rA\ I I TEI+Irbti4bk1111 1 Ii l �m ,; Guide Plan Map - Telecommunication - Verizon Wireless Lightpole Tower exchange @ Eden Prairie High School 17185 Valley View Road, Eden Prairie, MN �C © . ► Lake ` PV /OWWV mma9No in 7 :.ii: 4 ��� na..,II0_ oi 116woulifi I . .. .4. *4.,* Itiontrim-1-1 . ....,-. . ♦ ■ I. • � Eden Pralrle Road mm .....3� 94k.1: 1 ah famoneir, ......" A -,' mim• p IIIIIVAIIIIP.P 11111 �� Valle View Road iaiiii _ y Er is IN wirilAW 4411 i,4 4'4-+ -, •!)'' ' ma.. 1.00M1 lit& /*OW 1111MONIMINIS a+r pLy . .ra - Imo mismillski 1 pi *mom sow .Nmom IN low �r 16W1.NrII.1111111111WIME 111 !� Approximate location of existing light pole/ 1 III , . = Round proposed combination light pole/cell tower - -1-1I0- If.iltl.•w, al 671101 Lake , iiruII !WS u�i■11I ■ T.....mU U III Na -l1-I a n 11. CPVr,irvridrnWPM � "H r ii1 T4T R F O IIIIIIIEIII 0ET`ill ;►�[ :a �., � e _ r� aura 4 lirigri7Wirint•i. i-WA SEM" Rural Residential 0.10 Units/Acre Neighborhood Commercial N Low Density Residential 0-2.5 Units/Acre —i Community Commercial Streams 17.7 Low Density/Public/Open Space - Regional Commercial Principal Arterial —A Minor Arterial - Medium Density residential 2.5-10 Units/Acre Town Center i —B Minor Arterial ' 't ^ DATE Approved 03-19-03 DATE Revised 12-06-06 1 I Medium Density Residential/Office - Park/Open Space —Major Collector DATE Revised 01-07-05 DATE Revised 0-01-07 DATE Revised 02-03-06 DATE Revised -01-07 EDEN IHigh Density Residential 10-40 Units/Acre Public/Quasi-Public DATE Revised 02-23-06 DATE Revised 10-01-078 Minor Collector DATE Revised 03-23-06 DATE Revised 03-01-08 Airport Golf Course DATE Revised 06-23-06 DATE Revised 03-01-09 Office - Church/Cemetary PRAIRIE Y// Office/Industrial Open Water LIVE•WORK•DREAM f�� Office/Public/Open Space Right-Of-Way 910 455 M 0 ogamm�Me mo1.m_o.„®1�XnpneB1 1 ~ 910 Feet - Industrial Zoning Map - Telecommunication Verizon Wireless Light Pole Tower exchange @ Eden Prairie High School 17185 Valley View Road, Eden Prairie, MN 6,... ,_ ( r- --- ------ 1 - RDNNA ..z. illi 1 \ filigillilliklX4 PER OR RD .� V il gellt.. 01111111111‘. 1 1 IN i ***At07 mg viill rErs i.. „,,,,, ,• ._i__ 1 IIW ii mai raft I Fr) _.410 ‘011111 own 011 l a War 4\ ills '©MI Eden Prairie Road s -L it _.21 in 104'0 NW* Al/O M �I • r------------\Pc.,.. . r. 'S-4 OFMN,NN) Approximate location of existing light pole/ AUGU' ALN Iproposed combination light pole /cell tower. :`" RD FRA OJ Nig 0 _ -� Z I — I I/ N ¢ _) , , m z }_ iii s a .. . VVFSTGA F �; Y � m I I I I • 41% ------ "110 Oda 111 Valley View Road II we. re ' • z WES—GATE TFL WI.111111111 .I Will WOO laftA,. / I l TI-IFR WAY L ii .iMgr Ilia III . ZJDJ wity, Airr/ MAIN ., ,i, J DI r %Al .-Ano. i_rmiit: ...A 11.41"."..........Erg I I 1 k ilirP1 et WOO -k- • -,,,.. - • iv .- S 4 illelli A gims. 0 :.l „' N (I t li illi u1 _.„,iR' ne w( nor,l Rural -Regional Commercial Shoreland Management Classifications N R1-44 One Family-44,000 sf.min. I-1 TC-C Town Center Commercial 1 NE 1 Natural Environment Waters R1-22 One Family-22,000 sf min. n TC-R Town Center Residential ® Recreational Development Waters R1-13.5 One Family-13,500 sf min. al TC-MU Town Center Mixed Use 1 GD 1 General Development Waters(Creeks Only) 1111A R1-9.5 One Family-9,500 sf min. Industrial Park-2 Acre Min, 100- Year Floodplain EDEN RM-6.5 Multi-Family-6.7 U.P.A.max. Industrial Park- 5 Acre Min. Up dated through approved Ordinances#19-2013 -RM-2.5 Multi-Family-17.4 U.P.A.max. 1.1r1 General Industrial-5 Acre Min. Ordinance#33-2001(BFI Addition)approved,but not shown on this map edition PRAIRIE Office Public Date:March 1,2014 Neighborhood Commercial Golf Course In case of discrepancy related to a zoning classification on this zoning map,the Ordinance LIVE•WORK•DREAM and attached legal description on file at Eden Prairie City Center will prevail. -Community Commercial Water 1 —I I I -Highway Commercial Right of Way0 0.075 0.15 0.3 Miles 9 Y 9 a°�n o,E°.•Pa•a°..°i.,o,.•v°.m.o.,, -Regional Service Commercial ed e n p ra i ri e.o rg ---•°•-- M.°==..,.a:M=271 Aerial View Verizon Wireless Lightpole Tower exchange at Eden Prairie High School, 17185 Valley View Road , Eden Prairie, MN ;, — -- * 4 ,, L °1IJ ' I- I �, . i Eden Prairie . Road 10 till 1*$ 1 \ I 11V- M' LA-D iCji. i N HII I RFS , *tip ./. . 4, , , _ -, _ l , O S --I I L L r.. • t 7, _ tt. ram- . - ,. rr. � ... -:• '-. zr 4.4 , Approximate location of existing light pole/ o ji, - proposed combination light pole/cell tower '4 `4440 ,. - [ 1 . '' .. ,7" ' I ( A ,ir_ _ A , II 4. ,.� Irq v i E W R D .,ram ° ,. A LEY - Valley View Road may.., - i ,,. - 4 � Y ,� IIII, , ct WFSrrATIF nEl , _ __dm 0,,,,,,..4 c 41tWi •# '4 7,_17:-,.!,r'-'r.'44 4,-, , , iiit R nF I if I ,{,. 2� , �► z WES GATE ilia A I �-, I IJTHFR 1AIIW UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY,JUNE 9, 2014 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Jon Stoltz, Travis Wuttke, Steven Frank, Ann Higgins, Mary Egan, Charles Weber, Andrew Pieper STAFF MEMBERS: Julie Klima, City Planner Stu Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources Rod Rue, City Engineer Julie Krull, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL Chair Stoltz called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Frank was absent. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Stoltz said there is a difference between Public Hearing items D and E in the Agenda and Letter of Transmittal; and the meeting with follow the Agenda. MOTION by Wuttke, seconded by Kirk, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 7-0. III. MINUTES A. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 12, 2014 MOTION by Wuttke, seconded by Egan, to approve the minutes. Motion carried 6-0. Stoltz abstained. IV. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS V. PUBLIC MEETINGS VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS June 9, 2014 Page 2 A. TELECOMMUNICATIONIS -Verizon Wireless—Combination Light Pole/Cell Tower at Eden Prairie High School by Verizon Wireless Location: 17185 Valley View Road Contact: Paul Harrington at Buell Consulting, Inc. (612) 810-8174 Request for: • Site Plan Review on 67.33 acres. Replacement of a 100' light pole overlooking stadium with a 116' monopole and 3' lightening rod for a total height of 119' to accommodate wireless antenna and a12' x 30' equipment shelter structure. Paul Harrington, representing Verizon Wireless, presented the proposal. He stated they want to replace the existing stadium light pole fixture with a cellular tower to be constructed on the south side of the stadium at the Eden Prairie High School football field. The 116 foot cellular tower and 3 foot lightening rod would be used in place of the existing 100 foot stadium light pole. This tower will provide improved cellular coverage for the surrounding area. Chair Stoltz asked Klima to review the staff report. Klima said, as the project proponent stated, they want to accommodate replacement and staff is for approval. Kirk said he needed some clarification on the request of this project. Is the site plan review on 67.33, as the agenda and transmittal form state, or is it 66.55, which is what is in the staff report. Klima said she will clarify this before it goes to the City Council. Wuttke asked what the height is of the T-Mobile monopole that is located on the northeastern side of the property. Klima said T-Mobile went through the same process a few years ago as Verizon is currently going through and their tower is approximately 120 feet. Wuttke commented the Verizon tower will then be 119 feet overall. Klima concurred; it was 119 feet in height. Chair Stoltz said it was his understanding the ventilation system is underneath the bleachers. He asked if this will affect the people sitting in the bleachers. Mr. Harrington said there will be no exhaust coming out of this. The only time exhaust would come up through the bleachers would be if the generator would be on for more than 8 hours, and we would receive notice prior to that happening. Pieper asked if it was common for two carriers to be so close to each other. Klima said it was not uncommon for two carriers to be so close to each other and for that matter it is common to see it around churches or schools. June 9, 2014 Page 3 Wuttke asked if there was fencing around this structure. Mr. Harrington said there is a chain link fence around the building,plus it is locked. Chair Stoltz asked where the monopole was compared to the citizens. Mr. Harrington said the monopole is away from the bleachers. Egan asked if additional equipment would fit in the area. Mr. Harrington said there is additional space if opportunities arise. Egan asked if that was up to the school. Mr. Harrington said it was up to the school because they control the ground space. Chair Stoltz opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. MOTION by Higgins, seconded by Egan, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. MOTION by Higgins, seconded by Egan, to recommend approval of the Site Plan Review on 67.33 acres and replacement of a 100' light pole overlooking stadium with a 116' monopole and 3' lightening rod for a total height of 119' to accommodate wireless antenna and a 12' x 30' equipment shelter structure. Motion carried 7-0. VII. PLANNERS' REPORT No Planners' report. VIII. MEMBERS' REPORT No Members' report. IX. CONTINUING BUSINESS No continuing business. X. NEW BUSINESS No new business. XI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Weber, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 7-0. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:33 p.m. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Payment of Claims July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: X. Sue Kotchevar, Office of the Payment of Claims City Manager/Finance Requested Action Move to: Approve the Payment of Claims as submitted (roll call vote) Synopsis Checks 232763 —233267 Wire Transfers 1007728— 1007985 Wire Transfers 5074 5100 May Purchasing Card Report City of Eden Prairie Council Check Summary 7/14/2014 Division Amount Division Amount General 121,457 315 Economic Development 20,550 100 City Manager 224 502 Park Development 10,438 101 Legislative 1,029 509 CIP Fund 153,000 102 Legal Counsel 36,729 512 CIP Trails 8,635 110 City Clerk 902 525 Flying Cloud Dr Improvements -565 111 Customer Service 8,723 526 Transportation Fund 692 112 Human Resources 215 527 CIP-Leasing Costs 14,181 113 Communications 13,860 528 Shady Oak Rd-CR 61 North 353,485 114 Benefits&Training 12,201 529 Shady Oak Rd-CR 61 South 127,144 130 Assessing 194 530 Pool Upgrade/Expansion 271,890 131 Finance 782 531 Eden Prairie Road 8,057 132 Housing and Community Services 4,594 533 Homeowner Improvement Area 7,509 133 Planning 1,658 Total Capital Project Funds 975,015 136 Public Safety Communications 10,852 137 Economic Development 195 601 Prairie Village Liquor 250,343 138 Community Development Admin. 98 602 Den Road Liquor 391,529 150 Park Administration 97 603 Prairie View Liquor 271,246 151 Park Maintenance 88,270 605 Den Road Building 7,043 153 Organized Athletics 830 701 Water Fund 661,660 154 Community Center 52,156 702 Sewer Fund 330,662 155 Beaches 3,815 703 Storm Drainage Fund 306,149 156 Youth Programs 23,230 Total Enterprise Funds 2,218,632 157 Special Events 19,054 158 Senior Center 6,149 316 WAFTA 612 159 Recreation Administration 92 803 Escrow Fund 8,628 160 Therapeutic Recreation 1,838 807 Benefits Fund 1,060,038 161 Oak Point Pool 28 810 Workers Comp Insurance 174,601 162 Arts 13,226 811 Property Insurance 2,941 163 Outdoor Center 3,784 812 Fleet Internal Service 231,374 164 Park Rental Facilities 30 813 IT Internal Service 83,868 168 Arts Center 3,104 815 Facilites Operating ISF 67,236 180 Police 72,507 816 Facilites City Center ISF 117,621 183 Emergency Preparedness 92 817 Facilites Comm.Center ISF 86,314 184 Fire 57,703 1,833,232 186 Inspections 3,473 200 Engineering 1,972 Report Total 5,821,733 201 Street Maintenance 88,538 202 Street Lighting 69,408 Total General Funds 723,107 301 CDBG 66,501 303 Cemetary Operation 2,438 304 Senior Board 165 308 E-911 307 309 DWI Forfeiture 76 312 Recycle Rebate 110 Total Special Revenue Funds 69,597 433 2007A Facility Lease-3rd Rink 2,150 Total Debt Service Funds 2,150 City of Eden Prairie Council Check Register 7/14/2014 Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 1007970 365,550 RICE LAKE CONSTRUCTION GROUP Improvement Contracts Water Capital Wells 3&4 Improvements 232956 319,777 PGJ PROPERTIES LLC&MJJ PROPERTIES,LLC Right of Way&Easement Shady Oak Rd-CR 61 North Easement-Shady Oak Project 233092 288,827 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVI MCES User Fee Sewer Utility-General Monthly MCES Fee 5096 257,988 CERIDIAN Federal Taxes Withheld Health and Benefits Taxes Withheld 233267 247,259 RJM CONSTRUCTION INC Other Contracted Services Pool Upgrade/Expansion Aquatics Addition 5079 242,365 CERIDIAN Federal Taxes Withheld Health and Benefits Taxes Withheld 233151 241,133 HEALTHPARTNERS Accounts Receivable Health and Benefits Health/Dental Premium 1007985 229,836 NORTHWEST ASPHALT Improvement Contracts Storm Drainage Emergency Repair-Burr Ridge 232942 174,601 LEAGUE MN CITIES INS TRUST Workers Comp Insurance Workers Comp Insurance Workers Comp Premium 5082 148,762 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION PERA Health and Benefits PERA 5099 144,544 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION PERA Health and Benefits PERA 5074 129,131 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE Sales Tax Payable Facilities Operating ISF Sales&Use Taxes 233101 127,023 NELSON AUTO CENTER,INC Autos Public Works New Vehicles 233264 105,393 WOODDALE CHURCH Right of Way&Easement Shady Oak Rd-CR 61 South Easement-Shady Oak Project 1007775 89,960 XCEL ENERGY Electric City Hall-CAM 232904 86,500 ARVIG CONSTRUCTION Other Hardware CIP-Bonds 1007825 75,613 XCEL ENERGY Electric Flying Cloud Off Leash Park 1007869 66,047 E H RENNER&SONS Other Contracted Services Water Wells 5090 57,533 US BANK Repair&Maint. Supplies Fire 233243 55,450 SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC Design&Engineering Eden Prairie Road 232887 55,000 WEST HENNEPIN AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND TR Refunds CDBG-Public Service 232999 52,317 AAA STRIPING SERVICE CO Contracted Striping Traffic Signs 233198 51,023 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233078 49,373 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 1007880 47,468 GREGERSON ROSOW JOHNSON&NILAN LTD Legal Escrow 232937 42,372 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 232820 41,378 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 233011 36,000 ARVIG CONSTRUCTION Other Hardware CIP-Bonds 1007902 34,758 SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC Other Contracted Services Shady Oak Rd-CR 61 North 1007959 33,691 J&D WINDOW CLEANING Maintenance Contracts Facilities Operating ISF 1007905 31,099 STREICHERS Clothing&Uniforms Police 1007961 27,576 LOGIS LOGIS IT Operating 232890 27,080 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232952 25,226 NELSON AUTO CENTER,INC Autos Capital Maint.&Reinvestment 233148 25,205 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233184 24,631 HAMMEL,GREEN AND ABRAHAMSON Design&Engineering Pool Upgrade/Expansion 233133 24,140 STERLING FENCE INC Other Contracted Services Homeward Hills Park 232840 23,931 NELSON AUTO CENTER,INC Autos Police 1007818 22,911 THORPE DISTRIBUTING Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 233210 22,753 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY Motor Fuels Fleet Operating 5081 22,523 ING Deferred Compensation General Fund 232891 22,329 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 5098 22,259 ING Deferred Compensation General Fund 232970 21,890 SOUTHERN WINE&SPIRITS OF MN Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 233002 21,562 ABM JANITORIALSERVICES-NORTH CENTRAL INC Janitor Service City Center Operations 233147 21,541 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232990 21,139 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 1007867 20,952 DIVERSE BUILDING MAINTENANCE Janitor Service Arts Center 233263 20,486 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 1007752 20,252 DIVERSE BUILDING MAINTENANCE Janitor Service Arts Center 232868 19,867 SOUTHERN WINE&SPIRITS OF MN Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 233246 18,989 SOUTHERN WINE&SPIRITS OF MN Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 1007855 18,355 ADVANCED ENGINEERING&ENVIRONMENTAL SE Design&Engineering Sewer Liftstation 233077 18,249 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING MINNESOTA Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 232926 17,794 FLEET MAINTENANCE INC Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Operating 233262 17,741 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232819 17,669 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING MINNESOTA Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 1007768 17,359 THORPE DISTRIBUTING Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 233115 17,023 PRAIRIE PARTNERS SIX LLP Waste Disposal Prairie Village Liquor Store 232944 16,735 LOESCH SHEET METAL\PIPING SPECIALIST INC Other Contracted Services Fleet Operating 232957 15,693 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 1007956 15,625 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY Computers IT Operating 5080 15,508 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 Deferred Compensation General Fund 1007973 15,438 THORPE DISTRIBUTING Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 1007940 15,370 CENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES INC Gas Water Treatment Plant 5097 15,164 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 Deferred Compensation General Fund 233197 15,042 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING MINNESOTA Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233016 15,000 BAKER Other Contracted Services Economic Development Fund 5076 14,811 RADIANT SYSTEMS Bank and Service Charges Prairie View Liquor Store 232936 14,399 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING MINNESOTA Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233212 14,228 METERING&TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS Merchandise for Resale Water Metering 1007968 14,085 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY Capital Under$25,000 Public Works/Parks 232951 13,792 MOELTER GRAIN INC Lime Residual Removal Water Treatment Plant 1007906 13,788 THORPE DISTRIBUTING Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 233116 13,280 PRAIRIEVIEW RETAIL LLC Building Rental Prairie View Liquor Store 233034 13,075 COMMERCIAL DOOR SYSTEMS INC Building Repair&Maint. Utility Operations-General 1007881 13,032 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON Other Contracted Services Storm Drainage 5089 12,971 LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA Life Insurance EE/ER Health and Benefits 233127 12,067 SOUTHERN WINE&SPIRITS OF MN Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 1007873 12,029 ESS BROTHERS&SONS INC Equipment Parts Sewer System Maintenance 233213 11,884 MIDSTATES EQUIPMENT&SUPPLY Crack Filling Street Maintenance 232930 11,783 GRAYMONT Treatment Chemicals Water Treatment Plant 233058 11,751 GRAYMONT Treatment Chemicals Water Treatment Plant 1007830 11,638 DAY DISTRIBUTING Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232991 11,494 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 5077 11,207 US BANK-CREDIT CARD MERCHANT ONLY Bank and Service Charges Finance 232852 11,065 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 1007753 10,956 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANCE INC Equipment Repair&Maint Fire 1007918 10,663 DAY DISTRIBUTING Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233259 10,394 WELSH COMPANIES Other Contracted Services CIP-Leasing Costs 233225 10,367 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233111 9,871 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232924 9,573 FINLEY BROS INC Other Contracted Services Round Lake Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 5088 9,143 GENESIS EMPLOYEE BENEFITS,INC HSA Health and Benefits 1007903 9,015 ST CROIX ENVIRONMENTAL INC OCS-Well Field Mgmt Water Wells 233234 8,971 PROP Refunds CDBG-Public Service 233204 8,918 LAVAN FLOOR COVERING Contract Svcs-General Bldg Park Shelters 1007802 8,660 ESS BROTHERS&SONS INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Sewer System Maintenance 5083 8,603 GENESIS EMPLOYEE BENEFITS,INC HSA General Fund 1007729 8,504 DAY DISTRIBUTING Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 233176 8,501 FIRE CATT LLC Other Contracted Services Fire 1007882 8,097 HAWKINS INC Treatment Chemicals Water Treatment Plant 233181 7,932 GRAYMONT Treatment Chemicals Water Treatment Plant 232931 7,900 HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 232806 7,876 GRAYMONT Treatment Chemicals Water Treatment Plant 232794 7,547 EATS Operating Supplies Garden Room Repairs 233236 7,509 RAINBOW PEST EXPERTS Other Contracted Services Homeowner Improvement Area 1007914 7,463 XCEL ENERGY Electric Traffic Signals 1007888 7,386 METRO SALES INCORPORATED* Equipment Repair&Maint IT Operating 1007872 7,212 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANCE INC Repair&Maint. Supplies Fire 233252 7,095 THYMES TWO INC Contract Svcs-General Bldg Den Bldg.-CAM 233141 6,750 VISION INTERNET PROVIDERS INC Other Contracted Services Communications 232927 6,736 FOOD SERVICE WAREHOUSE.COM Capital Under$25,000 General Fund 233033 6,705 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO Repair&Maint. Supplies CIP Trails 233110 6,377 PAUSTIS&SONS COMPANY Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232940 6,366 KODIAK CUSTOM LETTERING INC Clothing&Uniforms Community Center Admin 5100 6,365 GENESIS EMPLOYEE BENEFITS,INC HRA Health and Benefits 1007886 6,277 LOVEGREEN INDUSTRIAL SERVICES INC Equipment Repair&Maint Water Treatment Plant 232964 6,250 RIGHTLINE DESIGN LLC Other Contracted Services Communications 1007781 6,232 DAY DISTRIBUTING Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232986 6,213 VERIZON WIRELESS Software IT Operating 1007796 6,196 BIFFS INC Waste Disposal Park Maintenance 233177 6,116 FIRE SAFETY USA INC Equipment Parts Fire 232932 6,021 HOHENSTEINS INC Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232889 6,008 WINE MERCHANTS INC Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 1007892 6,000 NEW WORLD SYSTEMS Software IT Operating 232883 5,803 WAI NANI SURF&PADDLE Capital Under$25,000 Fitness Classes 233041 5,750 DICK WHITBECK MUSIC INC Other Contracted Services July 4th Celebration 5085 5,500 GEMSA LOAN SERVICES CAPITAL MARKETS Right of Way&Easement Shady Oak Rd-CR 61 North 233178 5,500 G B LEIGHTON INC Other Contracted Services July 4th Celebration 232849 5,446 PAUSTIS&SONS COMPANY Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 1007853 5,380 WENCK ASSOCIATES INC Design&Engineering Storm Drainage 233146 5,374 WINE MERCHANTS INC Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 1007837 5,352 LEGACY GYMNASTICS Instructor Service Lesson Skills Development 1007737 5,307 LEGACY GYMNASTICS Instructor Service Lesson Skills Development 233218 5,148 MINNESOTA SAFETY SERVICES LLC Instructor Service Pool Lessons 233123 5,129 SAFETY SIGNS Other Rentals Sewer System Maintenance 233015 5,055 AVR INC Repair&Maint. Supplies Storm Drainage 233260 5,000 WILLIAM H HENNEY Right of Way&Easement Shady Oak Rd-CR 61 North 232968 4,867 SIGNSOURCE Contract Svcs-General Bldg Police City Center 1007852 4,686 VINOCOPIA Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 233226 4,558 PHYSIO CONTROL INC EMS Supplies Fire Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 1007749 4,521 CERIDIAN Ceridian IT Operating 233170 4,474 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC Improvement Contracts CIP Trails 1007910 4,457 VAN PAPER COMPANY Cleaning Supplies Fitness/Conference-Cmty Ctr 1007735 4,330 GREENSIDE INC Contract Svcs-Asphalt/Concrt Senior Center 1007745 4,092 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS INC. Waste Disposal City Hall-CAM 233227 4,080 PINE PRODUCTS INC Landscape Materials/Supp Park Maintenance 232777 4,048 BOLTON&MENK INC Conference/Training Engineering 1007794 4,017 A-SCAPE INC Contract Svcs-Lawn Maint. Arts Center 232989 4,011 WINE MERCHANTS INC Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 1007871 4,000 EF JOHNSON Equipment Repair&Maint Public Safety Communications 232955 3,937 PAUSTIS&SONS COMPANY Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 232884 3,914 WARNING LITES Seal Coating Street Maintenance 1007799 3,868 CENTERPOINT ENERGY Gas Water Treatment Plant 232834 3,862 MINNESOTA PIPE AND EQUIPMENT* Equipment Parts Water System Maintenance 1007765 3,859 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY Maintenance Contracts City Hall-CAM 1007904 3,825 STAR TRIBUNE MEDIA COMPANY LLC Employment Advertising Organizational Services 233026 3,823 CARVER COUNTY LICENSE CENTER Machinery&Equipment Police 232814 3,750 1ND SCHOOL DISTRICT 272 Other Contracted Services Housing and Community Service 233138 3,750 TWIN CITIES FANTASY FACTORY LLC Other Contracted Services July 4th Celebration 1007823 3,720 WINE COMPANY,THE Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233072 3,663 INNOVATIVE GRAPHICS Clothing&Uniforms Teen Programs 233069 3,610 IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS Other Contracted Services Sewer Accounting 232855 3,595 POVOLNY SPECIALTIES INC Building Repair&Maint. Capital Maint.&Reinvestment 1007771 3,560 WALL TRENDS INC Contract Svcs-Gen.Bldg Ice Arena Maintenance 233040 3,550 DAVID BRASLAU ASSOCIATES INC Other Contracted Services Economic Development Fund 1007747 3,520 BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY Other Contracted Services Storm Drainage 1007814 3,488 PIONEER MANUFACTURING COMPANY Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 1007895 3,488 PIONEER MANUFACTURING COMPANY Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 232906 3,444 AVR INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Lake Eden Park 1007866 3,364 CERIDIAN Ceridian IT Operating 232769 3,342 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 233200 3,324 KELLY GREEN IRRIGATION Other Contracted Services Shady Oak Rd-CR 61 North 232810 3,246 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE Board of Prisoner Police 1007736 3,205 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES/LESCO Repair&Maint. Supplies Park Maintenance 233161 3,204 AVR INC Repair&Maint. Supplies Storm Drainage 233103 3,194 NORTHLAND BUSINESS SYSTEMS, INC Software Maintenance IT Operating 1007807 3,180 JEFFERSON FIRE&SAFETY INC Small Tools Fire 232832 3,168 MHSRC/RANGE Training Supplies Police 233223 3,162 PAUSTIS&SONS COMPANY Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 232802 3,110 FLEET MAINTENANCE INC Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Operating 1007972 3,059 STREICHERS Clothing&Uniforms Police 233114 3,000 POSTAGE BY PHONE RESERVE ACCOUNT Postage Customer Service 233066 2,979 HOHENSTEINS INC Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 1007984 2,967 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY Equipment Parts Water Treatment Plant 1007964 2,919 NEW WORLD SYSTEMS Software IT Operating 1007935 2,902 VINOCOPIA Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 1007896 2,895 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY Contract Svcs-Electrical City Center Operations 1007834 2,830 GREENSIDE INC Contract Svcs-Lawn Maint. Fire Station#1 233128 2,811 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING-CLASSIFIED Advertising Den Road Liquor Store Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 232812 2,805 HOHENSTEINS INC Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232886 2,787 WELSH COMPANIES Other Contracted Services CIP-Leasing Costs 1007770 2,773 VAN PAPER COMPANY Cleaning Supplies Prairie View Liquor Store 1007819 2,717 TRANE U.S.INC Supplies-HVAC City Hall-CAM 233163 2,716 BEST BUY Supplies-General Building City Center Operations 233113 2,703 PLASTIC BAG MART Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 232950 2,700 MN TACTICAL OFFICERS ASSOCIATION Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 233003 2,652 ABSOLUTE RAIN INC. Contract Svcs-Lawn Maint. Fire Station#1 1007936 2,647 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY Office Supplies Customer Service 1007913 2,611 WM MUELLER AND SONS INC Gravel Sewer System Maintenance 1007938 2,605 BELLBOY CORPORATION Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 232771 2,593 AVR INC Improvement Contracts Storm Drainage 233062 2,567 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE Board of Prisoner Police 232836 2,567 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE Electric Riley Lake 233126 2,500 SLAMHAMMER SOUND CO,INC Other Contracted Services July 4th Celebration 1007805 2,459 HAWKINS INC Treatment Chemicals Water Treatment Plant 233245 2,400 SOUTHDALE YMCA-CHILD CARE Refunds CDBG-Public Service 1007971 2,388 SHI CORP Miscellaneous IT Operating 1007767 2,350 STREICHERS Autos Police 1007822 2,336 VTI Equipment Repair&Maint Fire Station#1 232865 2,309 SILVER STAR INDUSTRIES Autos Police 233045 2,261 DSO ARCHITECTURE INC Contract Svcs-General Bldg Public Works/Parks 1007793 2,256 VINOCOPIA Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 1007759 2,210 METRO ELEVATOR INC Contract Svcs-Elevator City Hall-CAM 1007979 2,206 WINE COMPANY,THE Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233183 2,175 HALF PINT HORSE FOUNDATION Instructor Service Outdoor Center 233143 2,150 WELLS FARGO BANK MINNESOTA NA Paying Agent 2007A Facility Lease-3rd Rink 233261 2,132 WINE MERCHANTS INC Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233159 2,073 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 232919 2,057 CURRAN,LORI AND DENNIS Design&Engineering Storm Drainage 232911 2,051 BSN SPORTS Operating Supplies Lesson Skills Development 233191 2,040 HOHENSTEINS INC Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232881 2,040 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Clothing&Uniforms Police 1007957 2,028 IDEAL SERVICE INC Equipment Parts Water Wells 1007836 2,021 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES/LESCO Repair&Maint. Supplies Park Maintenance 232838 2,000 MRA-THE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION Other Contracted Services Organizational Services 233266 2,000 ZACHMAN,JAMES A Other Contracted Services Economic Development Fund 1007762 1,988 MPX GROUP,THE Printing Senior Center Admin 233057 1,969 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL OCS-Leak Detection Utility Operations-General 1007864 1,955 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. Miscellaneous IT Operating 1007795 1,948 BELLBOY CORPORATION Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 1007950 1,944 FILTRATION SYSTEMS Supplies-HVAC City Hall-CAM 1007773 1,907 WINE COMPANY,THE Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 233237 1,876 RICHFIELD BLACKTOP&CONCRETE Equipment Repair&Maint Water System Maintenance 1007966 1,875 OSI BATTERIES INC Equipment Repair&Maint Public Safety Communications 5091 1,850 GENESIS EMPLOYEE BENEFITS,INC Other Contracted Services Health and Benefits 1007953 1,846 GRAINGER Safety Supplies City Hall-CAM 1007859 1,845 BELLBOY CORPORATION Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 233106 1,776 OUTDOOR ENVIRONMENTS INC Other Contracted Services Park Maintenance Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 5092 1,762 GENESIS EMPLOYEE BENEFITS,INC Other Contracted Services Health and Benefits 1007930 1,754 PAUL'S TWO-WAY RADIO Other Contracted Services Public Safety Communications 233173 1,750 DIETHELM,TAMMY L Other Contracted Services Pleasant Hill Cemetery 1007960 1,741 KIDCREATE STUDIO Instructor Service Preschool Events 232778 1,711 CARVER COUNTY LICENSE CENTER Autos Fleet Operating 1007728 1,705 BOUNDLESS NETWORK Operating Supplies Facilities Staff 233172 1,675 CRETEX SPECIALTY PRODUCTS Repair&Maint. Supplies Sewer System Maintenance 233251 1,662 STATE OF MINNESOTA Autos Police 1007887 1,647 MENARDS Repair&Maint. Supplies Park Maintenance 233199 1,626 KEEPERS Protective Clothing Fire 1007760 1,612 MINNESOTA NATIVE LANDSCAPES Building Repair&Maint. Utility Operations-General 1007954 1,604 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON Other Contracted Services Storm Drainage 232874 1,590 STATE OF MINNESOTA Autos Police 5086 1,586 GENESIS EMPLOYEE BENEFITS,INC Other Contracted Services Health and Benefits 1007748 1,558 BELLBOY CORPORATION Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 232892 1,543 WOLF MOTOR CO INC Insurance Property Insurance 232843 1,542 NUSS TRUCK GROUP INC Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 233157 1,540 AFTER BURNER AUTO BODY Operating Supplies Fire 233022 1,518 BUSINESS IMPACT GROUP Fire Prevention Supplies Fire 1007967 1,517 PETERSON BROS ROOFING AND CONSTRUCTION I Supplies-Roof Fire Station#4 233014 1,509 AUTHENTIC EDGE LLC Other Contracted Services Organizational Services 232953 1,508 NORTHERN LIGHTS DISPLAY Printing Arts Center 232929 1,506 GRAPE BEGINNINGS Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232979 1,490 TECH SALES CO Process Control Equipment Water Treatment Plant 233214 1,478 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COMPANY Liquor Product Received Concessions 1007785 1,448 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES/LESCO Repair&Maint. Supplies Park Maintenance 232922 1,435 EARL F ANDERSEN INC Signs Traffic Signs 233167 1,429 CLIMB THEATRE Instructor Service Safety Camp 232872 1,426 STAPLES ADVANTAGE Office Supplies City Center Operations 233249 1,419 STAPLES ADVANTAGE Office Supplies Police 1007757 1,411 HORIZON COMMERCIAL POOL SUPPLY Supplies-Pool Pool Maintenance 232972 1,404 SPARTAN STAFFING LLC Other Contracted Services Park Maintenance 233162 1,403 BERNICK'S WINE Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 232818 1,400 JANETSKI,BETH Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 233142 1,400 WARHOL,MELISSA Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 232949 1,400 MINNESOTA PIPE AND EQUIPMENT* Equipment Parts Water System Maintenance 1007824 1,398 WM MUELLER AND SONS INC Patching Asphalt Sewer System Maintenance 1007977 1,390 WALL TRENDS INC Contract Svcs-Gen.Bldg City Center Operations 1007857 1,360 A-SCAPE INC Contract Svcs-Lawn Maint Fire Station#4 233247 1,353 SPARTAN STAFFING LLC Other Contracted Services Park Maintenance 232869 1,335 SPARTAN STAFFING LLC Other Contracted Services Park Maintenance 1007838 1,334 LYNDALE PLANT SERVICES Contract Svcs-Int.Landscape City Hall-CAM 232948 1,327 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COMPANY Liquor Product Received Concessions 232765 1,316 ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS FURNITURE INC Supplies-General Building Housing and Human Svcs 1007860 1,299 BIFFS INC Waste Disposal Park Maintenance 232798 1,291 EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGY INC Autos Police 233105 1,257 OLSEN'S EMBROIDERY/COMPANY Clothing&Uniforms Utility Operations-General 232941 1,233 LEAGUE MN CITIES INS TRUST Insurance Property Insurance 1007743 1,228 USA MOBILITY WIRELESS INC Pager&Cell Phone IT Operating Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 233075 1,215 INTERTECH INC Other Contracted Services IT Operating 1007777 1,202 ADAMS PEST CONTROL INC Contract Svcs-Pest Control Cummins Grill House 1007804 1,197 GRAINGER Operating Supplies 3rd Sheet of Ice 233186 1,186 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD Repair&Maint. Supplies Storm Drainage 1007744 1,170 VINOCOPIA Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 1007912 1,168 WINE COMPANY,THE Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232893 1,144 WOLVERINE BUILDING GROUP Reimbursement-legal notices Escrow 232920 1,140 DAVE'S FLOOR SANDING&INSTALLING INC Contract Svcs-General Bldg Fitness/Conference-Cmty Ctr 233129 1,123 SPARTAN STAFFING LLC Other Contracted Services Park Maintenance 233154 1,120 AAA LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS INC Repair&Maint. Supplies Utility Operations-General 1007763 1,081 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 233018 1,075 BLOOMINGTON,CITY OF Kennel Services Animal Control 232775 1,072 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY Merchandise for Resale Concessions 233174 1,071 E A SWEEN COMPANY Merchandise for Resale Concessions 232898 1,069 3D SPECIALTIES Signs Traffic Signs 233160 1,061 ARVIG CONSTRUCTION Wireless Subscription IT Operating 233085 1,055 LEIFELD FRAMING Operating Supplies Fire 233175 1,040 ENTERPRISE NETWORK SYSTEMS INC Contract Svcs-Electrical Fire Station#1 233208 1,025 MACPHAIL CENTER FOR MUSIC Other Contracted Services New Adaptive 232910 1,022 BOURGET IMPORTS Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 232908 1,015 BERNICK'S WINE Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233100 1,000 MN DNR ECOLOGICAL AND WATER RESOURCES Licenses,Permits,Taxes Storm Drainage 232826 995 LANO EQUIPMENT INC Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Operating 233231 991 PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC Other Contracted Services Storm Drainage 233190 989 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Operating Supplies-Escrow Planning 232768 964 APRES Other Rentals Special Events Admin 1007813 930 PETERSON BROS ROOFING AND CONSTRUCTION I Contract Svcs-Roof City Hall-CAM 1007980 929 WM MUELLER AND SONS INC Seal Coating Street Maintenance 1007851 917 TWIN CITY SEED CO Landscape Materials/Supp Staring Lake 1007766 913 RENDERS INC Chemicals Park Maintenance 1007806 911 HOBART Contract Svcs-Garden Romm Garden Room Repairs 233008 905 AMERIPRIDE LINEN&APPAREL SERVICES Janitor Service Den Road Liquor Store 233135 900 TORRES-PENA,DONNA Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 233244 895 SOUTH METRO PUBLIC SAFETY TRAINING FACIL Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 233196 891 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING Union Dues Withheld General Fund 233073 885 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING Union Dues Withheld General Fund 233074 885 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING Union Dues Withheld General Fund 1007947 884 FASTSIGNS Operating Supplies Round Lake Beach 232782 876 CLEAR RIVER BEVERAGE CO Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 5075 876 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE Motor Fuels Fleet Operating 232988 875 W L HALL CO Contract Svcs-General Bldg City Hall-CAM 233067 869 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Small Tools Prairie Village Liquor Store 233038 868 DALE GREEN COMPANY,THE Repair&Maint. Supplies Storm Drainage 232935 857 JANETSKI,BETH Operating Supplies Summer Theatre 232954 856 OLSEN'S EMBROIDERY/COMPANY Clothing&Uniforms Police 233158 855 AMERIPRIDE LINEN&APPAREL SERVICES Janitor Service Den Road Liquor Store 233061 851 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD Equipment Parts Water System Maintenance 232813 850 HOUTZ,STEPHEN J Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 233102 848 NEW BRIGHTON FORD Equipment Parts Fleet Operating Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 233255 835 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Operating Supplies Police 233017 835 BARTON SAND&GRAVEL CO Repair&Maint. Supplies Storm Drainage 232917 823 CONTINENTAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT Supplies-Fire/Life/Safety Ice Arena Maintenance 1007831 823 FASTENAL COMPANY Safety Supplies Fleet Operating 1007772 817 WATSON CO INC,THE Merchandise for Resale Concessions 232841 810 NORTH AMERICAN SAFETY INC Signs Traffic Signs 233216 804 MIDWEST OVERHEAD CRANE Maintenance Contracts Water Treatment Plant 232987 800 VERLEY,TARYN Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 233242 800 SAYIBU,FATAWU Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 1007803 795 FASTSIGNS Operating Supplies Community Center Admin 233156 791 AERO DRAPERY AND BLIND Contract Svcs-General Bldg Fitness/Conference-Cmty Ctr 233050 785 FIRE SAFETY USA INC Small Tools Fire 1007900 778 SIRCHIE FINGER PRINT LABORATORIES Operating Supplies Police 1007908 773 US HEALTH WORKS MEDICAL GRP MN,PC Employment Support Test Organizational Services 233039 773 DAVANNI'S PIZZA Merchandise for Resale Concessions 232815 771 INDEED BREWING COMPANY LLC Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 1007832 767 FLEETPRIDE INC Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 233088 750 MARTIN-MCALLISTER Other Contracted Services Police 232878 738 TALKPOINT TECHNOLOGIES INC Equipment Repair&Maint Public Safety Communications 1007911 735 WALL TRENDS INC Contract Svcs-Gen.Bldg City Center Operations 1007835 735 HIRSHFIELD'S Repair&Maint. Supplies Water Distribution 233093 720 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COMPANY Liquor Product Received Concessions 233091 720 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS Special Event Fees Trips 233053 718 FLYING CLOUD T/S#U70 Waste Disposal Park Maintenance 232971 713 SOUTHWEST TRANSIT Outside Water Sales Escrow 233108 709 OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY EMS Supplies Fire 233149 700 WRIGHT,ELISA Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 233207 700 LOS ALEGRES BAILADORES Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 233120 697 ROBERT C VOGEL Other Contracted Services Heritage Preservation 1007879 694 GRAINGER Safety Supplies Facilities Operating ISF 232983 689 TRUE FABRICATIONS Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 1007783 687 EXTREME BEVERAGE Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 1007941 684 CONCRETE CUTTING&CORING INC Equipment Parts Street Maintenance 233217 681 MINNESOTA PIPE AND EQUIPMENT* Equipment Parts Water System Maintenance 1007786 679 JOHN HENRY FOSTER MINNESOTA INC Maintenance Contracts Water Treatment Plant 233168 667 COMMERCIAL DOOR SYSTEMS INC Improvement Contracts Utility Operations-General 1007946 665 ETHANOL PRODUCTS LLC Treatment Chemicals Water Treatment Plant 1007758 656 MENARDS Building Repair&Maint. City Center Operations 1007820 655 US HEALTH WORKS MEDICAL GRP MN,PC Employment Support Test Organizational Services 1007858 653 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS INC. Waste Disposal Public Works/Parks 1007875 644 FILTRATION SYSTEMS Supplies-HVAC Facilities Operating ISF 1007926 642 MICHAELSON,ELIZABETH H Clothing&Uniforms General Fund 1007733 635 FLEETPRIDE INC Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 233046 630 DYNAMIC IMAGING SYSTEMS INC Software Maintenance IT Operating 233228 628 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 232947 625 MERRY BOBB MUSIC INC Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 1007921 616 HACH COMPANY Laboratory Chemicals Water Treatment Plant 233024 612 CAMPBELL KNUTSON,P.A. Legal WAFTA 232797 600 EDINA,CITY OF Other Contracted Services Communications Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 1007955 600 HD SUPPLY FACILITIES MAINTENANCE Supplies-General Bldg Arts Center 1007801 594 DAIKIN APPLIED Contract Svcs-HVAC City Center Operations 1007943 584 DAIKIN APPLIED Supplies-HVAC City Hall-CAM 233010 582 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232939 582 KENDELL DOORS&HARDWARE INC Supplies-Security Den Road Building 233241 580 SAILING-CENTRAL LLC Instructor Service Lesson Skills Development 233071 576 INFRATECH Repair&Maint. Supplies Utility Operations-General 1007952 567 GOVDELIVERY Software Maintenance IT Operating 1007847 564 SHAMROCK GROUP,INC-ACE ICE Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232901 560 AMAZING ATHLETES OF SOUTHWEST METRO Instructor Service Preschool Events 233188 554 HENNEPIN COUNTY I/T DEPT Equipment Repair&Maint Public Safety Communications 232880 554 TURFWERKS Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 232961 552 PRICKETT,WILLIAM Clothing&Uniforms Inspections-Administration 233209 551 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 232900 550 ALISCO MUSIC LLC Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 233230 550 POPE DOUGLAS SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT Other Contracted Services Police 233201 548 KODIAK CUSTOM LETTERING INC Clothing&Uniforms General Fund 1007850 543 THE OASIS GROUP Employee Assistance Organizational Services 1007934 543 THE OASIS GROUP Employee Assistance Organizational Services 233112 534 PITNEY BOWES Postage Customer Service 1007817 532 STREICHERS Clothing&Uniforms Police 232925 530 FIRE SAFETY USA INC Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 5078 527 CERIDIAN Garnishment Withheld General Fund 1007769 525 US HEALTH WORKS MEDICAL GRP MN,PC Employment Support Test Organizational Services 233107 522 OUTDOORS AGAIN INC Other Contracted Services Park Maintenance 1007833 519 GEIS,ROB Operating Supplies Safety Camp 232784 518 COSTCO Operating Supplies Parks Administration 232903 516 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233257 515 UNIVERSAL ATHLETIC SERVICES INC Awards Volleyball 1007925 508 METROPOLITAN FORD Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Operating 233047 501 E A SWEEN COMPANY Merchandise for Resale Concessions 232839 500 MRPA Other Contracted Services Community Center Admin 232995 500 3RD LAIR Other Contracted Services July 4th Celebration 233064 500 HENNEPIN COUNTY UT DEPT Software Maintenance IT Operating 233180 499 GRAPE BEGINNINGS Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 232958 482 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 232788 480 DAVIS,TRACY Deposits-P&R Refunds Community Center Admin 233080 480 KODIAK CUSTOM LETTERING INC Clothing&Uniforms Pool Lessons 232808 478 GYM WORKS Repair&Maint. Supplies General Fund 233027 476 CENTURYLINK Telephone IT Operating 233006 461 AFPS DBA LIFE SUPPORT INNOVATIONS Safety Supplies Arts 232796 448 EDEN PRAIRIE ROTARY CLUB Miscellaneous Administration 1007919 446 EXTREME BEVERAGE Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 1007821 443 VAN PAPER COMPANY Cleaning Supplies City Hall-CAM 1007939 441 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC EMS Supplies Fire 1007933 441 SHAMROCK GROUP,INC-ACE ICE Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 232780 440 CENTURYLINK Wireless Subscription IT Telephone 1007894 438 PARLEY LAKE WINERY Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 232934 437 ITL PATCH COMPANY INC Clothing&Uniforms Police Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 1007862 437 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC EMS Supplies Fire 1007983 436 ZIEGLER INC Equipment Repair&Maint Park Maintenance 1007751 434 CUSTOM HOSE TECH Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 233165 434 BROTHERS FIRE PROTECTION Contract Svcs-Fire/Life/Safe Public Works/Parks 233089 433 MASTER CRAFT LABELS INC Operating Supplies Den Road Liquor Store 233130 432 SPORTS UNLIMITED Instructor Service Camps 1007856 431 AMERITRAK Other Contracted Services Snow&Ice Control 1007843 431 NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 233063 425 HENNEPIN COUNTY FIRE CHIEF ASSOCIATION Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 1007942 418 CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORPORATION Cleaning Supplies Utility Operations-General 1007916 415 DANHAUSER,LINDSEY Mileage&Parking General Fund 233012 414 ASPEN MILLS Clothing&Uniforms Fire 1007841 405 MINNESOTA NATIVE LANDSCAPES Other Contracted Services Storm Drainage 1007978 405 WATSON CO INC,THE Merchandise for Resale Concessions 233028 402 CLEAR RIVER BEVERAGE CO Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232776 401 BLOOMINGTON SECURITY SOLUTIONS Contract Svcs-Security Park Shelters 232774 400 BELLAND,BRIANNA M Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 233221 400 NORTH STAR PUMP SERVICE Equipment Repair&Maint Sewer Liftstation 233125 400 SILVER STAR INDUSTRIES Autos Police 232862 390 SAVATREE Other Contracted Services Tree Removal 233025 389 CAPREF EDEN PRAIRIE LLC Building Rental Housing and Community Service 232899 389 AIR CORPS LLC Mechanical Permits General Fund 232923 386 EMERGENCY RESPONSE SOLUTIONS Operating Supplies Fire 1007958 385 INTERSTATE POWER SYSTEMS INC Repair&Maint. Supplies Water Wells 1007982 383 ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS INC. Equipment Parts Park Maintenance 232763 380 AARP DRIVERS SAFETY Other Contracted Services Senior Center Programs 233121 375 ROOT 0 MATIC Equipment Repair&Maint Sewer System Maintenance 233205 375 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES Conference/Training City Council 232799 372 EULL'S MANUFACTURING CO INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Storm Drainage 233132 368 STAPLES ADVANTAGE Office Supplies Customer Service 1007828 360 BERTELSON TOTAL OFFICE SOLUTIONS Office Supplies Utility Operations-General 233086 359 LORENZ LUBRICANT COMPANY Lubricants&Additives Fleet Operating 1007963 356 METRO ELEVATOR INC Contract Svcs-Elevator City Hall-CAM 233076 356 ITL PATCH COMPANY INC Operating Supplies Police 1007883 355 JEFFERSON FIRE&SAFETY INC Protective Clothing Fire 1007756 353 GRAINGER Supplies-HVAC City Hall-CAM 1007791 353 SHAMROCK GROUP,INC-ACE ICE Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 232967 353 SHINGOBEE Fire Hydrant Permits Escrow 232822 350 KEEPERS Training Supplies Police 232909 349 BLOOMINGTON SECURITY SOLUTIONS Operating Supplies Public Works/Parks 1007739 348 PARK SUPPLY OF AMERICA INC Supplies-HVAC Den Road Liquor Store 1007774 348 WM MUELLER AND SONS INC Patching Asphalt Street Maintenance 1007734 345 GREATAMERICA FINANCIAL SVCS Postage Customer Service 232842 345 NORTH STAR PUMP SERVICE Equipment Repair&Maint Sewer Liftstation 233239 345 RIGHTWAY GLASS INC Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Operating 232943 342 LIONS TAP Operating Supplies Fire 233019 341 BOURGET IMPORTS Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233229 338 PIRTEK PLYMOUTH Equipment Repair&Maint Sewer System Maintenance 1007754 337 FEDEX KINKO'S OFFICE AND PRINT SERVICES Office Supplies Utility Operations-General Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 233235 334 RADIO TECHNOLOGY INC Equipment Repair&Maint Public Safety Communications 1007810 331 MN SUPPLY Equipment Testing/Cert. Fleet Operating 1007738 330 METROPOLITAN FORD Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 233079 330 KEEPERS Clothing&Uniforms Fire 233202 325 KROOG,RACHAEL Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 232938 322 KEEPERS Clothing&Uniforms Fire 232856 321 REPLENEX Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 233119 321 QUALITY REFRIGERATION Equipment Repair&Maint Concessions 233134 318 STEWART LAND PARTNERS LLC Reimbursement Escrow 233258 317 VERIZON WIRELESS Telephone Park Maintenance 233021 308 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC Landscape Materials/Supp Park Maintenance 232833 300 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCE Other Rentals Staring Lake 233137 300 TRESIDDER,JEFFREY Operating Supplies Fire 233070 297 INDEED BREWING COMPANY LLC Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233265 296 XTREME INTEGRATION Other Contracted Services IT Operating 233094 295 MILIO'S SANDWICHES Merchandise for Resale Concessions 233222 293 NORTHERN AIR CORPORATION Contract Svcs-HVAC Fitness/Conference-Cmty Ctr 233185 291 HAYEN,LINDA Capital Under$25,000 Summer Theatre 233087 285 MARCO INC Equipment Repair&Maint IT Telephone 232992 285 SCOTT COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE Deposits Escrow 233004 284 ACCELERATED TECHNOLOGIES LLC Video&Photo Supplies Fitness Classes 233152 280 PETTY CASH Mileage&Parking Recycle Rebate 233155 280 AARP DRIVERS SAFETY Other Contracted Services Senior Center Programs 232897 278 PETTY CASH Mileage&Parking Park Maintenance 1007815 277 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Operating 1007981 276 XCEL ENERGY Electric Forest Hills Park 233020 275 BROTHERS FIRE PROTECTION Contract Svcs-Fire/Life/Sfty City Hall-CAM 1007870 264 EDEN PRAIRIE FIREFIGHTER'S RELIEF ASSOC Union Dues Withheld General Fund 1007839 264 METROPOLITAN FORD Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 1007969 261 REINDERS INC Chemicals Park Maintenance 233082 260 LAKE MONSTER BREWING Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 1007893 259 NUCO2 INC Supplies-Pool Pool Maintenance 233037 254 CUB FOODS EDEN PRAIRIE Employee Award Police 1007732 251 FASTENAL COMPANY Equipment Parts Park Maintenance 233099 250 MINNESOTA WANNER COMPANY Equipment Repair&Maint Sewer System Maintenance 5087 250 GENESIS EMPLOYEE BENEFITS,INC HSA General Fund 1007798 249 CBIZ BENEFITS&INSURANCE SERVICES INC Other Contracted Services Organizational Services 232876 248 SUPERIOR STRIPING INC Contract Svcs-Asphalt/Concr. Senior Center 233097 247 MINNESOTA PRINT MANAGEMENT LLC Office Supplies Customer Service 233068 246 HOMESTEAD PARTNERS Reimbursement Escrow 233044 245 DRAMATISTS PLAY SERVICE INC Licenses,Permits,Taxes Theatre Initiative 1007780 242 CLAREY'S SAFETY EQUIPMENT Office Supplies Fire 1007962 241 MENARDS Supplies-General Bldg Water System Maintenance 233007 240 ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS FURNITURE INC Supplies-General Bldg Fire Station#1 233211 236 MARCO INC Other Contracted Services IT Telephone 1007889 236 MINNESOTA ROADWAYS CO Patching Asphalt Street Maintenance 232994 230 STEEN,JILLIAN Deposits Escrow 1007840 230 MILLARD,CHRIS Travel Expense Police 1007816 229 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY Machinery&Equipment Public Works/Parks Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 232962 229 PRINT SOURCE MINNESOTA Printing Summer Theatre 232816 226 J H LARSON COMPANY Repair&Maint. Supplies Park Maintenance 232978 225 SUPERIOR STRIPING INC Building Repair&Maint. Utility Operations-General 233150 225 XTREME INTEGRATION Inside Equipment Repair&Main IT Operating 1007899 224 SCHWAB VOLLHABER LUBRATT SERVICE CORO Supplies-HVAC City Hall-CAM 232824 224 LAKE COUNTRY DOOR LLC Contract Svcs-General Bldg Public Works/Parks 232914 221 COMCAST Cable TV Fire 1007731 221 EXTREME BEVERAGE Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233032 220 COMCAST Wireless Subscription IT Operating 232789 219 DIRECTV Cable TV Community Center Admin 233164 219 BOURGET IMPORTS Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 233193 219 HYDRO-VAC INC Equipment Repair&Maint Sewer System Maintenance 233179 217 GE CAPITAL Other Rentals IT Operating 233192 216 HOTSY MINNESOTA Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Operating 233215 212 MIDWEST LOCK&SAFE Contract Svcs-Ice Rink Ice Arena Maintenance 232982 210 TOUCHPOINT LOGIC LLC Other Contracted Services Communications 233029 210 COGNITIVE VENTURES CHANHASSEN LLC Other Contracted Services Senior Center Programs 233238 210 RICK'S PLUMBING SERVICES LLC Equipment Repair&Maint Water System Maintenance 1007929 210 NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 1007788 208 PARK SUPPLY OF AMERICA INC Supplies-Plumbing City Hall-CAM 5095 207 CERIDIAN Garnishment Withheld General Fund 1007922 206 HENDRICKSON,MOLLY Mileage&Parking Tree Disease 232960 204 PRAHA DISTRIBUTING Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232902 202 AMERIPRIDE LINEN&APPAREL SERVICES Janitor Service Prairie View Liquor Store 232959 200 PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY CONCERT BAND Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 233096 200 MINNESOTA FIRE SERVICE CERTIFICATION BOA Employment Support Test Fire 233145 197 WILLIAMS,SHARI Deposits-P&R Refunds Community Center Admin 232783 195 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC Operating Supplies Street Maintenance 1007854 195 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 233171 194 CONTECH ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS LLC Equipment Parts Storm Drainage 1007742 194 SHAMROCK GROUP,INC-ACE ICE Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 232773 190 BCA/CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRAINING&EDUCATIO Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 233117 187 PROP United Way Withheld General Fund 233118 187 PROP United Way Withheld General Fund 233233 187 PROP United Way Withheld General Fund 232866 181 SMI AWARDS Operating Supplies Police 233206 180 LIBERTY TIRE RECYCLING LLC Waste Disposal Fleet Operating 233049 180 FIRE ENGINEERING MAGAZINE Dues&Subscriptions Fire 1007740 175 QUALITY PROPANE Motor Fuels Ice Arena Maintenance 233195 175 INFORMATION POLICY ANALYSIS Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 1007907 173 TRANE U.S.INC Supplies-HVAC City Center Operations 233131 172 ST LOUIS PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT Other Rentals Police 233048 172 ERICKSON,DEBRA Deposits-P&R Refunds Community Center Admin 233059 171 GULBRANSON,JIM&MANDY Other Contracted Services Park Maintenance 233054 171 FORMS&SYSTEMS OF MINNESOTA Printing Police 232795 170 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Miscellaneous Economic Development 1007965 170 NORCOSTCO Clothing&Uniforms General Fund 232984 166 TURFWERKS Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 233187 165 HENDERSON,THOMAS Travel Expense Police Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 1007924 165 JOHNSTON,ROB Travel Expense Police 1007792 165 URBINA,JAIME Mileage&Parking Prairie Village Liquor Store 1007776 164 ZIEGLER INC Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 233055 161 GEAR WASH LLC Protective Clothing Fire 1007779 161 BOUNDLESS NETWORK Operating Supplies Day Care 1007885 158 LEROY JOB TRUCKING INC Other Contracted Services Animal Control 1007890 156 MOTOROLA Equipment Repair&Maint Public Safety Communications 232912 154 COMCAST Cable TV Fire 233042 154 DIRECTV Other Contracted Services Community Center Admin 1007750 153 CITI-CARGO&STORAGE CO,INC Other Rentals Summer Theatre 232793 150 DUCHON,REBECCA Other Contracted Services Therapeutic Rec Admin 233060 150 HAWKINS,MICHELLE Refunds Environmental Education 1007884 150 KIDCREATE STUDIO Special Event Fees Arts 1007909 150 USA SECURITY Maintenance Contracts Water Treatment Plant 232913 149 COMCAST Cable TV Fire 232916 149 COMCAST Cable TV Fire 1007846 148 SCHULZE,CARTER Mileage&Parking Engineering 232963 148 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION Pension-PERA Day Care 1007877 144 GINA MARIAS INC Operating Supplies Fire 1007949 138 FERRELLGAS Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 233194 138 INDEED BREWING COMPANY LLC Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 1007829 138 CAHILL,AMANDA Operating Supplies Tennis 233043 134 DOMACE VINO Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 232766 133 AMERIPRIDE LINEN&APPAREL SERVICES Janitor Service Prairie Village Liquor Store 1007861 132 BOBBY&STEVE'S AUTO WORLD EDEN PRAIRIE Equipment Repair&Maint Police 1007945 132 EDEN PRAIRIE FIREFIGHTER'S RELIEF ASSOC Union Dues Withheld General Fund 232825 130 LAKE MONSTER BREWING Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 233203 130 LAKE MONSTER BREWING Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 233035 129 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARITIES OF MINNESOTA United Way Withheld General Fund 233036 129 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARITIES OF MINNESOTA United Way Withheld General Fund 233169 129 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARITIES OF MINNESOTA United Way Withheld General Fund 233090 127 MATSON HOLDINGS INC Small Tools Fleet Operating 232921 125 DODGE OF BURNSVILLE Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Operating 5093 125 GENESIS EMPLOYEE BENEFITS,INC Other Contracted Services Health and Benefits 232811 125 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Operating Supplies-Escrow Planning 1007844 124 PROSOURCE SUPPLY Cleaning Supplies Fitness/Conference-Cmty Ctr 1007842 124 MUNOZ,CESAR Postage Police 233248 120 SQUARE CUT Instructor Service Senior Center Programs 1007812 120 PARLEY LAKE WINERY Liquor Product Received Prairie View Liquor Store 232985 120 UNIVERSAL ATHLETIC SERVICES INC Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 233224 120 PETSMART Canine Supplies Police 1007845 120 QUALITY PROPANE Motor Fuels Ice Arena Maintenance 233166 119 CENTURYLINK Telephone IT Telephone 1007897 118 PREMIUM WATERS INC Other Contracted Services Fire 233136 118 TRANSUNION RISK&ALTERNATIVE DATA Other Contracted Services Police 1007975 117 VAN PAPER COMPANY Cleaning Supplies Park Shelters 5084 116 OPTUM HEALTH Other Contracted Services Health and Benefits 232977 115 SUNDERMAN,ANNA Refunds Environmental Education 232993 115 SCOTT COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE Deposits Escrow Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 1007848 114 SHRED-IT USA MINNEAPOLIS Waste Disposal City Center Operations 1007891 114 NEW FRANCE WINE COMPANY Liquor Product Received Prairie Village Liquor Store 232928 113 G&K SERVICES-MPLS INDUSTRIAL Other Contracted Services Park Maintenance 1007755 112 FERRELLGAS Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 233056 112 GOODRICH,BETH Refunds Environmental Education 1007974 110 US HEALTH WORKS MEDICAL GRP MN,PC Employment Support Test Organizational Services 1007809 110 MENARDS Small Tools Street Maintenance 232845 109 OLSEN COMPANIES Repair&Maint. Supplies Sewer System Maintenance 1007901 108 SPRINT Computers IT Operating 1007741 108 SAMS,JOHN Mileage&Parking Assessing 233189 108 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Other Contracted Services Engineering 1007898 108 PRINTERS SERVICE INC Contract Svcs-Ice Rink Ice Arena Maintenance 1007874 102 FERRELLGAS Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 232853 102 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 1007730 101 ELLIS,ROBERT Mileage&Parking Engineering 232835 101 MINNESOTA PRINT MANAGEMENT LLC Office Supplies Customer Service 232803 100 FREYTAG,KATHRYN Refunds Environmental Education 232894 100 YUSUF,ABDI Refunds Environmental Education 232945 100 MAUNU,CAROLYN Refunds Environmental Education 232965 100 RUHL,BRAD Refunds Environmental Education 232969 100 SKEELS,SARA Refunds Environmental Education 233001 100 AARP DRIVERS SAFETY Other Contracted Services Senior Center Programs 233081 100 KUHN,JANE Refunds Environmental Education 233083 100 LAKE SUPERIOR COLLEGE Conference/Training Fire 1007761 100 MINNESOTA RECREATION&PARK ASSOCIATION Advertising Community Center Admin 233122 99 ROSEMOUNT SAW&TOOL CO Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Operating 1007863 99 BOYER TRUCKS Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 232781 98 CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK Conference/Training Athletic Programs Admin 233124 98 SCHIMELPFENIG,MICHAEL Refunds Environmental Education 1007948 95 FEDEX Postage Human Resources 233144 93 WHEELER LUMBER LLC Operating Supplies Traffic Signs 1007746 93 ATLANTIC TACTICAL Clothing&Uniforms Police 1007927 91 MPX GROUP,THE Printing Fire 233023 90 CALIFORNIA CONTRACTORS SUPPLIES INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Sewer System Maintenance 232785 86 CUSHMAN MOTOR COMPANY INC. Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 232870 85 SPORTS PRO LLC Equipment Repair&Maint Police 1007932 84 QUALITY PROPANE Motor Fuels Ice Arena Maintenance 1007931 84 PUNTON,JASON Mileage&Parking Water Treatment Plant 232905 81 AT&T MOBILITY Pager&Cell Phone Water System Maintenance 232980 80 TMS JOHNSON Supplies-Pool Pool Maintenance 1007826 80 ADAMS PEST CONTROL INC Contract Svcs-Pest Control Historical Buildings 1007937 78 A-SCAPE INC Contract Svcs-Lawn Maint. Fire Station#5 233139 76 UNITED WAY United Way Withheld General Fund 233140 76 UNITED WAY United Way Withheld General Fund 233256 76 UNITED WAY United Way Withheld General Fund 233065 76 HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPT Other Contracted Services Engineering 232907 75 BCA/CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRAINING&EDUCATIO Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 5094 74 VANCO SERVICES Miscellaneous Community Center Admin 1007917 73 DAVIS,HEATHER Mileage&Parking Athletic Programs Admin Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 1007764 72 NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 1007790 71 ROSE,ALECIA Mileage&Parking Human Resources 232975 71 STEEN,JILLIAN Deposits Escrow 1007923 70 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES/LESCO Repair&Maint. Supplies Park Maintenance 232850 70 PEARSON,SARAH Refunds Environmental Education 232882 70 UNIVERSAL ATHLETIC SERVICES INC Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 232804 70 G&K SERVICES-MPLS INDUSTRIAL Cleaning Supplies Utility Operations-General 232918 70 CROWN MARKING INC Office Supplies Police 1007787 69 MPX GROUP,THE Printing Police 233109 67 PALAMARCHUK,VALENTYNA Deposits-P&R Refunds Community Center Admin 232790 66 DISPLAY SALES Supplies-General Bldg Park Shelters 232973 65 SPORTS PRO LLC Equipment Repair&Maint Police 1007778 64 ALBERT,MICHAEL Mileage&Parking Water Treatment Plant 232847 64 PAPCO INC Janitor Service Fitness/Conference-Cmty Ctr 1007789 64 QUALITY PROPANE Motor Fuels Ice Arena Maintenance 232896 60 ZIMMERMAN,EDUARDO Deposits-P&R Refunds Community Center Admin 1007951 58 GINA MARIAS INC Operating Supplies Reserves 1007849 57 STOVRING,LESLIE Operating Supplies Recycle Rebate 232933 56 IEDITWEB INC Contract Svcs-Garden Romm Garden Room Repairs 1007868 55 DMX MUSIC Other Contracted Services Prairie Village Liquor Store 1007811 55 OSI BATTERIES INC Office Supplies Police 1007878 54 GRAFIX SHOPPE Autos Police 233182 53 GS DIRECT Operating Supplies Engineering 232801 50 FELTON,CHRIS Refunds Environmental Education 232998 50 AAA LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS INC Landscape Materials/Supp Water System Maintenance 1007928 50 MY CABLE MART Miscellaneous IT Operating 1007915 49 CAMPBELL,MARK E Mileage&Parking Tennis 1007976 48 VTI Equipment Repair&Maint Public Safety Communications 232996 48 440400-NCPERS MINNESOTA PERA Health and Benefits 232997 48 440400-NCPERS MINNESOTA PERA Health and Benefits 233153 48 440400-NCPERS MINNESOTA PERA Health and Benefits 233104 47 OLSEN COMPANIES Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 1007797 45 CAWLEY COMPANY,THE Clothing&Uniforms Den Road Liquor Store 232976 45 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 233253 44 TURFWERKS Repair&Maint.Supplies Street Maintenance 1007827 43 BATTERIES PLUS Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 232854 42 PITZL,ANGELA Deposits-P&R Refunds Community Center Admin 1007800 42 CONCRETE CUTTING&CORING INC Operating Supplies Street Maintenance 232767 40 ANDERSON,JOAN C&DAVID Deposits Community Center Admin 232786 40 DAVIS,JOHN&DONNA Deposits Community Center Admin 232792 40 DOUGLAS,JEREMY&TEILA Deposits Community Center Admin 232800 40 FALTINSON,JULILE Deposits Community Center Admin 232809 40 HALBAKKEN,SUSAN Deposits Community Center Admin 232828 40 LOBITZ,ROGER AND KAREN Deposits Community Center Admin 232857 40 RIEGERT,DESIREE Deposits Community Center Admin 232858 40 ROTH,ERIC&RENEE PETROSKI Deposits Community Center Admin 232860 40 RYSKI,RANDALL&CONSTANCE Deposits Community Center Admin 233052 40 FLYING CLOUD ANIMAL HOSPITAL Other Contracted Services Animal Control 1007876 39 GARTNER REFRIGERATION&MFG INC Repair&Maint-Ice Rink 3rd Sheet of Ice Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 232966 38 SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION Conference/Training Engineering 233030 36 COMCAST Cable TV Fire 232864 30 SCHREIER,SCOTT Deposits-P&R Refunds Community Center Admin 1007808 30 LUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES INC Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 1007782 28 DOHERTY,KRISTEN Operating Supplies Summer Theatre 232946 25 MEMA Conference/Training Utility Operations-General 233009 25 APA MINNESOTA Employment Advertising Organizational Services 233254 25 TWIN CITIES BUSINESS MONTHLY Dues&Subscriptions Economic Development 233084 24 LARKSTUR ENGINEERING&SUPPLY INC Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 1007865 24 CENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES INC Gas Public Works/Parks 233095 23 MINN OFFICE OF ENTERPRISE TECHNOLOGY Other Contracted Services Police 233013 22 AT&T MOBILITY Pager&Cell Phone Park Maintenance 232873 21 STATE OF MINNESOTA Miscellaneous DWI Forfeiture 232974 21 STATE OF MINNESOTA Miscellaneous DWI Forfeiture 233250 21 STATE OF MINNESOTA Miscellaneous DWI Forfeiture 1007784 20 FASTENAL COMPANY Equipment Repair&Maint Water Treatment Plant 232764 20 ALDRITT,JACKIE Deposits Community Center Admin 232770 20 ASSOCIATION OF RECYCLING MANAGERS Dues&Subscriptions Recycle Rebate 232779 20 CASE,RICHARD Deposits Community Center Admin 232787 20 DAVIS,SANDRA Deposits Community Center Admin 232791 20 DORSEN,DINAH Deposits Community Center Admin 232805 20 GARZON,JUAN Deposits Community Center Admin 232807 20 GUBA,LEROY Deposits Community Center Admin 232817 20 JACOBSON,CHRISTINE Deposits Community Center Admin 232821 20 JULLIE,JOE Deposits Community Center Admin 232823 20 KOPEL,CORY Deposits Community Center Admin 232827 20 LARSON,DOROTHY Deposits Community Center Admin 232829 20 MARTIN,CRAIG Deposits Community Center Admin 232830 20 MATSON HOLDINGS INC Small Tools Fleet Operating 232831 20 MESHBESHER,MARLEE Deposits Community Center Admin 232837 20 MN PRIMA Tuition Reimbursement/School Water Treatment Plant 232844 20 OLMSTEAD,JACKIE L Deposits Community Center Admin 232848 20 PARNES,GARY Deposits Community Center Admire 232851 20 PETRESCU,DANIELA Deposits Community Center Admin 232859 20 RYLANDER,AMY Deposits Community Center Admin 232861 20 SANDEEN,JAYSON Deposits Community Center Admin 232863 20 SCHAAF,GEORGE Deposits Community Center Admin 232867 20 SOLEM,SANDRA Deposits Community Center Admin 232871 20 STAHL,PAT Deposits Community Center Admin 232875 20 STEELE,YVONNE Deposits Community Center Admin 232877 20 SWARTOUT,CYNTHIA Deposits Community Center Admin 232885 20 WEBER,ERIN Deposits Community Center Admin 232888 20 WILKINSON,SUSAN Deposits Community Center Admin 232895 20 ZHANG,QIN Deposits Community Center Admin 233232 20 PROGRESSIVE BAPTIST CHURCH Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 233240 18 SAFEGUARD PROPERTIES AR Utility Water Enterprise Fund 233219 17 MINNESOTA TROPHIES&GIFTS Operating Supplies Police 232772 17 BANNIE,SHARON Deposits-P&R Refunds Community Center Admin 232846 15 OLSEN'S EMBROIDERY/COMPANY Clothing&Uniforms Police Check# Amount Supplier/Explanation Account Description Business Unit Explanation 1007944 14 DMX MUSIC Other Contracted Services Den Road Liquor Store 233005 14 ADESA MPLS Miscellaneous DWI Forfeiture 1007920 13 FASTENAL COMPANY Repair&Maint.Supplies Storm Drainage 233051 13 FISERV INC Bank and Service Charges Water Accounting 232981 11 TOSTENSON,AARON Deposits Escrow 233220 10 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUIPMENT CO Equipment Repair&Maint Round Lake 232879 10 TRUE FABRICATIONS Liquor Product Received Den Road Liquor Store 233098 9 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE Electric Riley Creek Woods 233031 4 COMCAST Cable TV Fire 232915 2 COMCAST Other Contracted Services Police 5,821,733 Grand Total City of Eden Prairie Purchasing Card Payment Report May Purchases Amount Explanation Vendor Account Description Business Unit 12 US-garden tanks MENARDS Repair&Maint.Supplies Park Maintenance 37 US-trail MENARDS Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 16 US-trails/graffiti MENARDS Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 15 US-wash bay MENARDS Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 10 US-landscape fertilizer HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Chemicals Park Maintenance 116 US-peat for soil MENARDS Landscape Materials/Supp Park Maintenance 100 US-shrubs MENARDS Landscape Materials/Supp Park Maintenance 45 US-potting soil MENARDS Landscape Materials/Supp Park Maintenance 145 US-peat for soil MENARDS Landscape Materials/Supp Park Maintenance 33 US-annuals BACHMANS CREDIT DEPT Landscape Materials/Supp Park Maintenance 325 US-equip repair MN MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT INC Equipment Repair&Maint Park Maintenance 4 US-drainage MENARDS Repair&Maint.Supplies Park Maintenance 2 US-hose clamp/fittings NAPA AUTO PARTS Repair&Maint.Supplies Sewer System Maintenance 11 US-parts CONCRETE CUTTING&CORING INC Equipment Parts Sewer System Maintenance 390 US-wall mount/monitor BEST BUY Repair&Maint.Supplies Public Works/Parks 14 US-Drivers safety KOWALSKI'S MARKET Operating Supplies Senior Center Programs 102 US-Drivers safety BAKERS SQUARE Operating Supplies General Fund 102 US-coffee supplies COFFEE WHOLESALE Operating Supplies Senior Board 47 US-Sr awareness events RADERMACHERS Operating Supplies Senior Center Programs 99 US-red hat trip AMERICAN SWEDISH INSTITUTE,TH Special Event Fees Red Hat 1,176 US-sr awareness dinner ANNIE'S CAFE Operating Supplies Senior Center Programs 23 US-sr awareness PARTY CITY Operating Supplies Senior Board 200 US-housing tour CRUMB GOURMET DELI Operating Supplies Trips 19 US-supplies WALMART COMMUNITY Operating Supplies Senior Center Programs 5 US-office supplies WALMART COMMUNITY Office Supplies Senior Center Admin 98 US-staff training CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK Conference/Training Senior Center Admin -5 US-return WALMART COMMUNITY Office Supplies Senior Center Admin -19 US-return WALMART COMMUNITY Operating Supplies Senior Center Programs 5 US-office supplies WALMART COMMUNITY Office Supplies Senior Center Admin 19 US-supplies WALMART COMMUNITY Operating Supplies Senior Center Programs 461 US-trip LADY ELEGANTS TEA ROOM Special Event Fees Red Hat 81 US-board and comm banquet EXECUTIVE OCEAN Awards City Council 12 US-supplies WALMART COMMUNITY Operating Supplies Senior Center Admin 40 US-party decorations PARTY CITY Special Event Fees Senior Board 29 US-irr repair MENARDS Repair&Maint.Supplies Water System Maintenance 202 US-plants around water plant BACHMANS CREDIT DEPT Repair&Maint.Supplies Utility Operations-General 10 US-water conf meal GRAND ELY LODGE Travel Expense Water Enterprise Fund 10 US-water conf meal GRAND ELY LODGE Travel Expense Water Treatment Plant 25 US-water conf meal GRAND ELY LODGE Travel Expense Water Treatment Plant 189 US-lab supplies MENARDS Lab Supplies Water Treatment Plant 19 US-shop supplies/irr MENARDS Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 33 US-elec supplies MENARDS Building Repair&Maint. Park Maintenance 16 US-supplies-CC MENARDS Safety Supplies Park Maintenance 167 US-core drill rental CROWN RENTAL Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant 113 US-drain valves MENARDS Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant Amount Explanation Vendor Account Description Business Unit 279 US-Tree-smith-douglas more hou WILSONS NURSERY INC Landscape Materials/Supp Douglas More House 40 US-annual membership MN SOCIETY OF ARBORICULTURE Dues&Subscriptions Tree Disease 6 US-parking STANDARD PARKING Mileage&Parking Tree Disease 75 US-interviews CRUMB GOURMET DELI Operating Supplies Fire 14 US-leg mtg CAPITOL CAFE Operating Supplies Fire 7 US-leg mtg CAPITOL CAFE Operating Supplies Fire 6 US-leg mtg STANDARD PARKING Operating Supplies Fire 84 US-business meeting LINEN TABLECLOTH Operating Supplies Fire 855 US-business meeting MY M&M'S Operating Supplies Fire 25 US-café food WALMART COMMUNITY Merchandise for Resale Concessions 8 US-café food RAINBOW FOODS INC. Merchandise for Resale Concessions 10 US-café food FRATTALONE CO Merchandise for Resale Concessions 136 US-café food WALMART COMMUNITY Merchandise for Resale Concessions 28 US-operating-café GENERAL PARTS Operating Supplies Concessions 32 US-café food RAINBOW FOODS INC. Merchandise for Resale Concessions 62 US-café food WALMART COMMUNITY Merchandise for Resale Concessions 44 US-café food WALMART COMMUNITY Merchandise for Resale Concessions 31 US-floats-beth WALMART COMMUNITY Operating Supplies Aquatics&Fitness Admin 109 US-park event license HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Licenses,Permits,Taxes,Fees Concessions 17 US-café food BRUEGGERS BAGEL Merchandise for Resale Concessions 33 US-café food WALMART COMMUNITY Merchandise for Resale Concessions 55 US-café food RAINBOW FOODS INC. Merchandise for Resale Concessions 222 US-café food WALMART COMMUNITY Merchandise for Resale Concessions 872 US-operating-café US FOOD CULINARY EQUIPMENT&S Operating Supplies Concessions 45 US-café food RAINBOW FOODS INC. Merchandise for Resale Concessions 141 US-café food WALMART COMMUNITY Merchandise for Resale Concessions 17 US-pop/supplies CUB FOODS EDEN PRAIRIE Operating Supplies Aquatics&Fitness Admin 54 US-café food CUB FOODS EDEN PRAIRIE Merchandise for Resale Concessions 21 US-café food RAINBOW FOODS INC. Merchandise for Resale Concessions 44 US-café food WALMART COMMUNITY Merchandise for Resale Concessions 19 US-office supplies OFFICEMAX CREDIT PLAN Office Supplies Water Treatment Plant 58 US-garden hose MENARDS Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant 37 US-excel energy savings trng JIMMY JOHNS Training Supplies Water Treatment Plant 199 US-Fred Pryor subscription FRED PRYOR SEMINARS Training Supplies Water Treatment Plant -16 US-return supplies TARGET Operating Supplies Special Events(CC) 95 US-admin supplies ID WHOLESALER Operating Supplies Community Center Admin 413 US-playground parts PLAY AND PARK STRUCTURES Equipment Repair&Maint Staring Lake 2 US-parking-legislative work STANDARD PARKING Operating Supplies Fire 75 US-safety camp breakfast A PINE RESTAURANT Operating Supplies Fire 59 US-safety camp RED LAKE NATION FUELS Operating Supplies Fire 108 US-safety camp GRIZZLY'S GRILL Operating Supplies Fire 44 US-safety camp WARRIORS RESTAURANT Operating Supplies General Fund 6 US-legislative work STANDARD PARKING Operating Supplies Fire 6 US-legislative work STANDARD PARKING Operating Supplies Fire 8 US-legislative work CAPITOL CAFE Operating Supplies General Fund 6 US-legislative work STANDARD PARKING Operating Supplies Fire 6 US-legislative work STANDARD PARKING Operating Supplies Fire 6 US-meeting STANDARD PARKING Operating Supplies Fire 600 US-ipads for engineering BEST BUY Computers Storm Drainage Amount Explanation Vendor Account Description Business Unit 320 US-ipad cases AMAZON.COM Operating Supplies Storm Drainage 80 US-ipad cases AMAZON.COM Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 1,134 US-printers EPCC AMAZON.COM Computers IT Operating 79 US-software subscription MICROSOFT CORPORATE Software IT Operating 11 US-evemote premium ITUNES STORE Software IT Operating 80 US-software NCHSOFTEARE.COM Software IT Operating 116 US-ipad battery/case AMAZON.COM Miscellaneous IT Operating 20 US-ipad travel charger AMAZON.COM Miscellaneous IT Operating 26 US-monitor risers AMAZON.COM Miscellaneous IT Operating 628 US-training books IT GOVERNANCE Conference/Training IT Operating 271 US-swipe card readers AMAZON.COM Computers IT Operating 30 US-CC personal use T Gasparick US BANK Deposits Escrow 152 US-blades for scag MN MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT INC Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 50 US-P10 workshop HENNEPIN HEALTH FOUNDATION Conference/Training Communications 20 US-lts name tags OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN Operating Supplies Ice Rink#1 72 US-computer forensics storage MICRO CENTER A/R Miscellaneous IT Operating 360 US-forensic software PARABEN CORPORATION Miscellaneous IT Operating 99 US-computer forensics evidence MICRO CENTER A/R Miscellaneous IT Operating 54 US-irrigation MENARDS Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 165 US-nfpa membership dues NFPA Dues&Subscriptions Fire 1,166 US-nfpa membership dues NFPA Dues&Subscriptions Fire 66 US-riley shed MENARDS Building Materials Riley Lake 38 US-riley shed MENARDS Building Materials Riley Lake 120 US-riley shed MENARDS Building Materials Riley Lake 56 US-riley shed LYMAN LUMBER COMPANY Building Materials Riley Lake 227 US-lets go fishing-Riley MENARDS Building Materials Riley Lake 191 US-bang boards-outdoor ctr MENARDS Building Materials Outdoor Center 47 US-riley shed MENARDS Building Materials Riley Lake 93 US-disc golf MENARDS Landscape Materials/Supp Staring Lake 23 US-forms for pads at Riley MENARDS Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 129 US-beaches GANDER MOUNTAIN Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 17 US-beaches MENARDS Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 25 US-handle strap POWER SYSTEMS Operating Supplies Fitness Center 39 US-sound belt AMAZON.COM Operating Supplies Fitness Classes 194 US-group fitness SWIMOUTLET.COM Operating Supplies Fitness Classes 265 US-refund WAYFAIR Deposits Escrow -265 US-refund WAYFAIR Deposits Escrow 399 US-party/tot gym supplies PAYPAL INC Operating Supplies Day Care 9 US-round lake op HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Operating Supplies Round Lake Beach 66 US-operating supplies OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN Operating Supplies Community Center Admin 69 US-yoga WALMART COMMUNITY Operating Supplies Specialty Fitness Programs 41 US-party supplies ORIENTAL TRADING Operating Supplies Round Lake Beach 165 US-conf MINNESOTA SAFETY COUNCIL Conference/Training Property Insurance 7 US-retirement party-franzen/ta CUB FOODS EDEN PRAIRIE Employee Award Organizational Services 445 US-Job posting-public works INDEED INC Employment Advertising Organizational Services 275 US-conf NAHRO Conference/Training Housing and Community Service 22 US-conf TRAVEL INSURANCE Conference/Training Housing and Community Service 364 US-conf DELTA AIR Conference/Training Housing and Community Service 14 US-somali moms TARGET Operating Supplies Housing and Community Service Amount Explanation Vendor Account Description Business Unit 10 US-HRDC&Hennepin Tech GLBT a EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL Conference/Training Housing and Community Service 30 US-training EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL Conference/Training Housing and Community Service 25 US-municipal advisor rule GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS AS Conference/Training Finance 7,089 US-Apr14 Bldg surchgs DEPT OF LABOR&INDUSTRY Building Surcharge General Fund 647 US-Apr14 Bldg surchgs DEPT OF LABOR&INDUSTRY Mechanical Surcharge General Fund 760 US-Apr14 Bldg surchgs DEPT OF LABOR&INDUSTRY Plumbing Surcharge General Fund -170 US-Apr14 Bldg surchgs DEPT OF LABOR&INDUSTRY Other Revenue General Fund 179 US-Counterpoint gateway NCR SPECIALTY Bank and Service Charges Prairie Village Liquor Store 319 US-Counterpoint gateway NCR SPECIALTY Bank and Service Charges Den Road Liquor Store 209 US-Counterpoint gateway NCR SPECIALTY Bank and Service Charges Prairie View Liquor Store 130 US-GFOA GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS AS Conference/Training Finance 30 US-K Caliri MNGFOA training GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS AS Conference/Training Finance 505 US-GFOA GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS AS Awards Finance 30 US-ebook gfoa GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS AS Training Supplies Finance 30 US-ebook gfoa GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS AS Training Supplies Finance 40 US-UB recurring PAYPAL INC Bank and Service Charges Utility Operations-General 20 US-epermit web security PAYPAL INC Equipment Repair&Maint IT Operating 60 US-UB online PAYPAL INC Bank and Service Charges Utility Operations-General 144 US-pickleball PICKLEBALLCENTRAL.COM Operating Supplies Pickleball 1,557 US-café fridge US FOOD CULINARY EQUIPMENT&S Capital Under$25,000 Concessions 30 US-pickleball box supplies MENARDS Operating Supplies Park Facilities 32 US-water conf meal GRAND ELY LODGE Operating Supplies Water Enterprise Fund 167 US-sod HAAG COMPANIES Landscape Materials/Supp Street Maintenance 167 US-sod HAAG COMPANIES Landscape Materials/Supp Street Maintenance 57 US-sod HAAG COMPANIES Landscape Materials/Supp Street Maintenance 79 US-sod HAAG COMPANIES Landscape Materials/Supp Street Maintenance 25 US-ULI housing summit URBAN LAND INSTITUTE Conference/Training Community Development Admin. 35 US-ULI housing summit URBAN LAND INSTITUTE Conference/Training Community Development Admin. 513 US-conf MNSCU MRTC Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 17 US-supplies GOOGLE PLAY Operating Supplies Fire 18 US-cards CURRENT Office Supplies Utility Operations-General 52 US-plant at water plant BACHMANS CREDIT DEPT Repair&Maint.Supplies Utility Operations-General 243 US-council workshop JIMMY JOHNS Miscellaneous City Council 97 US-sunshine fund-Koivumaki FLOWERSHOPNETWORK.COM Deposits Escrow 880 US-retirement gifts HALLMARK INSIGHTS Employee Award Organizational Services 38 US-SLUC luncheon-J Klima SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION Miscellaneous Community Development Admin. 76 US-SLUC luncheon-Lotthammer/Bo SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION Miscellaneous Parks Administration 264 US-council workshop RUBY TUESDAY Miscellaneous City Council 67 US-Sunshine fund-M Schmidt BACHMANS CREDIT DEPT Deposits Escrow 101 US-Sunshine Fund-Gustad FLOWERSHOPNETWORK.COM Deposits Escrow 93 US-sunshine fund-Holman SAMPSON FUNERAL HOME Deposits Escrow 38 US-fitness AMERICAN RED CROSS Conference/Training Fitness Classes 210 US-aquatics AMERICAN RED CROSS Conference/Training Pool Operations 51 US-team building WALGREEN'S#5080 Operating Supplies Pool Operations 23 US-team building WALGREEN'S#5080 Operating Supplies Pool Operations 138 US-supplies STAYWELL Operating Supplies Pool Lessons 297 US-aquatics AMERICAN RED CROSS Conference/Training Pool Operations 212 US-first aid FIRST AID CPR Safety Supplies Pool Operations 791 US-rescue tube LIFEGUARD STORE INC,THE Operating Supplies Pool Operations Amount Explanation Vendor Account Description Business Unit 47 US-rd lake party supplies ORIENTAL TRADING Operating Supplies Round Lake Beach 608 US-safety supplies ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE Safety Supplies Community Center Admin 28 US-supplies TARGET Operating Supplies Oak Point Lessons 54 US-beach supplies GANDER MOUNTAIN Operating Supplies Riley Lake Beach 10 US-supplies WALGREEN'S#5080 Operating Supplies Community Center Admin 79 US-supplies OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN Operating Supplies Community Center Admin 35 US-team building WALGREEN'S#5080 Operating Supplies Pool Operations 38 US-fitness AMERICAN RED CROSS Conference/Training Fitness Classes 35 US-customer service AMERICAN RED CROSS Conference/Training Community Center Admin 35 US-sarah swanson AMERICAN RED CROSS Conference/Training Fitness Classes 35 US-kristen doherty AMERICAN RED CROSS Conference/Training Recreation Admin 38 US-camps AMERICAN RED CROSS Conference/Training Recreation Admin 19 US-camps AMERICAN RED CROSS Conference/Training Recreation Admin 19 US-fitness AMERICAN RED CROSS Conference/Training Fitness Classes 19 US-customer service AMERICAN RED CROSS Conference/Training Community Center Admin 11 US-supplies PARTY CITY Operating Supplies Day Care 38 US-supplies S&S WORLDWIDE Operating Supplies Day Care 186 US-supplies ORIENTAL TRADING Operating Supplies Round Lake Beach 43 US-supplies BABIES R US Operating Supplies Day Care 27 US-supplies AMAZON.COM Operating Supplies Birthday Parties 10 US-supplies PARTY CITY Operating Supplies Round Lake Beach 99 US-supplies DISCOUNT SCHOOL SUPPLY Operating Supplies Round Lake Beach 115 US-ram mounts for truck NATIONAL PRODUCTS INC Small Tools Fire 113 US-fuel SUPERAMERICA Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 75 US-fuel RED LAKE NATION FUELS Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 87 US-fuel SUPERAMERICA Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire -230 US-supplies AREOFEU LTEE Small Tools Fire 260 US-supplies AREOFEU LTEE Small Tools Fire 43 US-kitchen supplies TARGET Operating Supplies Fire 1,288 US-rescue kit NORTH AMERICAN RESCUE Conference/Training Fire 43 US-Shop Supplies HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Repair&Maint.Supplies Sewer System Maintenance 25 US-baggage fee DELTA AIR Travel Expense City Clerk 22 US-11mc conf CAPITAL GRILLE Conference/Training City Clerk 183 US-K Porta CC to be reimbursed HYATT HOTELS Deposits Escrow 38 US-11mc conf MOLLY COOLS SEAFOOD TAVERN Conference/Training City Clerk 18 US-11mc conf HILTON HOTELS Conference/Training City Clerk 25 US-baggage fee DELTA AIR Travel Expense City Clerk 763 US-11mc conf HILTON HOTELS Conference/Training City Clerk 5 US-11mc conf SSP AMERICA Conference/Training City Clerk 6 US-training election RAINBOW FOODS INC. Operating Supplies General Fund 14 US-storm project-edenvale HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Repair&Maint.Supplies Storm Drainage 66 US-Burr Ridge incident MCDONALDS Operating Supplies Police 400 US-EP road 01-5537 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AG Licenses,Permits,Taxes,Fees Eden Prairie Road 135 US-PE license renewal-Carter BOARD OF AELSLAGID Licenses,Permits,Taxes,Fees Engineering 44 US-software ITUNES STORE Software Environmental Education 76 US-vending supplies SPORTS WORLD USA INC Merchandise for Resale Concessions 6 US-rink bleacher supplies CUB FOODS EDEN PRAIRIE Operating Supplies Ice Rink#1 7 US-skate sharp supplies HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Operating Supplies Ice Rink#1 25 US-vending mach lock LIEBERMAN COMPANIES INC Operating Supplies Concessions Amount Explanation Vendor Account Description Business Unit 27 US-light stickey PAYPAL INC Operating Supplies Fleet Operating 175 US-trailer hitch pinto BURNSVILLE TRAILER HITCH Equipment Parts Fleet Operating 464 US-rerod for cb's STORMS WELDING&MFG INC. Repair&Maint.Supplies Storm Drainage 3,452 US-dishwasher FOOD SERVICE WAREHOUSE.COM Repair&Maint.Supplies Fitness/Conference-Cmty Ctr 268 US-supplies BEST BUY Repair&Maint.Supplies Police City Center 22 US-arts in the park supplies OFFICEMAX CREDIT PLAN Operating Supplies Arts in the Park 13 US-scripts DRAMATISTS PLAY SERVICE INC Operating Supplies Theatre Initiative 85 US-arts in the park supplies PARTY CITY Operating Supplies Arts in the Park 83 US-arts in the park supplies MICHAELS-THE ARTS&CRAFTS S Operating Supplies Arts in the Park 36 US-cords for movie projector MONOPRICE Operating Supplies Arts 5 US-parking for meeting MINNEAPOLIS INSTITUTE OF ARTS, Mileage&Parking Arts Center 33 US-team training DAVANNI'S PIZZA Safety Supplies Community Center Admin 9 US-office supplies WALGREEN'S#5080 Operating Supplies Community Center Admin 375 US-scheduling software NIMBLE SCHEDULE Other Contracted Services Community Center Admin 50 US-training-D buswell MAAO Conference/Training Assessing 14 US-reserve calendar CALENDAR WIZ Operating Supplies Reserves 1,439 US-investigations gps BEST BUY Capital Under$25,000 Police 536 US-cameras NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE Office Supplies Utility Operations-General 269 US-software TECHSMITH CORPORATION Training Supplies Utility Operations-General 64 US-wireless headset BEST BUY Operating Supplies Water Metering 76 US-birding trip TARGET Operating Supplies Outdoor Center 904 US-birding trip AUDUBON INN Operating Supplies Outdoor Center 66 US-birding trip HWY 21 BP Operating Supplies Outdoor Center 260 US-birding trip HORICON MARSH BOAT TOURS Operating Supplies Outdoor Center 76 US-birding trip EXXON Operating Supplies Outdoor Center 103 US-birding trip NOLA NORTH GRILLE Operating Supplies Outdoor Center 46 US-critter food PETCO Operating Supplies Outdoor Center 12 US-critter food PETCO Operating Supplies Outdoor Center 32 US-critter food MILLS FLEET FARM Operating Supplies Outdoor Center 34 US-critter food PETCO Operating Supplies Outdoor Center 9 US-concrete tube HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 381 US-pump for splash pad PREMIER POOL AND SPA Operating Supplies Round Lake 27 US-backpack sprayer MENARDS Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 12 US-phone st 2 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Equipment Repair&Maint Public Safety Communications -35 US-return supplies TIGERDIRECT.COM Equipment Repair&Maint Public Safety Communications -35 US-return supplies TIGERDIRECT.COM Equipment Repair&Maint Public Safety Communications 9 US-mailing supplies UPS STORE,THE Equipment Repair&Maint Public Safety Communications 295 US-training class EVENTBRITE Conference/Training Public Safety Communications 493 US-trng-Kapaun/Rohde DOUBLETREE HOTEL Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 99 US-training-Spaulding SKILLPATH SEMINARS Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 34 US-Lunch-well 12 rehab project DOMINO'S PIZZA Miscellaneous Utility Operations-General 27 US-new wall clock OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN Operating Supplies Den Road Liquor Store 48 US-supplies HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Operating Supplies Den Road Liquor Store 100 US-transport evidence to alexa SPEEDSTOP Motor Fuels Fleet Operating 22 US-training PAYPAL INC Conference/Training Youth Programs Admin 19 US-tennis grand opening PINNACLE PROMOTIONS Operating Supplies Tennis 2,130 US-archery equipment SCHEELS MANKATO Operating Supplies Lesson Skills Development 76 US-supplies ARCHER FULL THROTTLE Operating Supplies Lesson Skills Development 177 US-tennis banners FASTSIGNS Operating Supplies Tennis Amount Explanation Vendor Account Description Business Unit 11 US-archery WALMART COMMUNITY Operating Supplies Lesson Skills Development 13 US-staff training TARGET Operating Supplies Youth Programs Admin 37 US-camp supplies WALMART COMMUNITY Operating Supplies Youth Programs Admin 73 US-camp supplies OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN Operating Supplies Youth Programs Admin 15 US-tennis registration USTA Conference/Training Tennis 15 US-tennis workshop USTA Conference/Training Tennis 15 US-tennis workshop USTA Conference/Training Tennis 15 US-tennis workshop USTA Conference/Training Tennis 15 US-tennis workshop USTA Conference/Training Tennis 15 US-tennis workshop USTA Conference/Training Tennis 15 US-tennis workshop USTA Conference/Training Tennis 29 US-camp supplies MICHAELS-THE ARTS&CRAFTS S Operating Supplies Playgrounds 5 US-club 204 supplies TARGET Operating Supplies New Adaptive 50 US-club 204 program DAVANNI'S PIZZA Operating Supplies New Adaptive 5 US-club 204 supplies EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER Operating Supplies New Adaptive 24 US-young athletes supplies RAINBOW FOODS INC. Operating Supplies New Adaptive 30 US-staff training supplies EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER Operating Supplies Playgrounds 30 US-staff training supplies EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER Operating Supplies Therapeutic Rec Admin 90 US-splash time supplies TARGET Operating Supplies Special Initiatives 136 US-teen camp supplies S&S WORLDWIDE Operating Supplies New Adaptive 55 US-playground camp supplies S&S WORLDWIDE Operating Supplies Playgrounds 6 US-parking STANDARD PARKING Mileage&Parking Fire 193 US-voice recorders for investi BEST BUY Fire Prevention Supplies Fire 69 US-nozzle forward training BLACK BEAR LODGE AND SALOON Conference/Training Fire 59 US-fuel for training HOLIDAY STATION STORES INC Operating Supplies Fire 106 US-ray mccormick training SUPER 8 Conference/Training Fire 32 US-office supplies OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN Office Supplies Fire 924 US-group fitness supplies SILVERSNEAKERS FITNESS PROGRAM Operating Supplies Fitness Classes 189 US-fitness supplies AV NOW,INC Operating Supplies Fitness Classes 17 US-mailed patrons phone back UPS STORE,THE Operating Supplies Aquatics&Fitness Admin 224 US-staff meeting GINA MARIAS INC Operating Supplies General Fund 250 US-monthly licensing SCW FITNESS Licenses,Permits,Taxes,Fees Fitness Classes 418 US-rd lake kayaks WALMART COMMUNITY Operating Supplies Round Lake Beach 676 US-rd lake supplies GANDER MOUNTAIN Operating Supplies Round Lake Beach 151 US-supplies OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN Office Supplies Den Road Liquor Store 16 US-supplies MENARDS Cleaning Supplies Wine Club 3 US-supplies WALMART COMMUNITY Office Supplies Wine Club 25 US-license HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Licenses,Permits,Taxes,Fees Wine Club 22 US-K9 equip RAY ALLEN MANUFACTURING CO INC Canine Supplies Police 29 US-K9 equip ECOLLAR TECHNOLOGIES INC Canine Supplies Police 1,166 US-headsets-radio equip TACTICAL COMMAND INDUSTRIES, Capital Under$25,000 Fire 57,533 Report Total CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Ordinances and Resolutions July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: XI.A. Robert Ellis, Public Works Southwest Light Rail Transit Municipal Director Consent Resolution Requested Action Move to: Adopt the resolution approving the physical design component of the preliminary design plans for the Southwest Light Rail Project within the City of Eden Prairie. Synopsis The Metropolitan Council has established an alignment in the form of municipal consent plans for the Southwest Light Rail Transit which will operate from downtown Minneapolis through the communities of St. Louis Park, Hopkins, Minnetonka, and Eden Prairie. The proposed alignment includes 16 new stations and approximately 16 miles of double track. It will be part of an integrated system of transitways,including connections to the Green Line in St. Paul,the METRO Blue Line,the Northstar Commuter Rail line,bus routes and proposed future transitways. The total project cost of$1.7 billion will be funded through a mix of federal, state and local sources, with federal funds making up approximately half the total. Background Information The City of Eden Prairie is required under Minn. Stat. 473.3994 to host a public hearing concerning the physical design components of the Southwest Light Rail Transit plans. That hearing was held at the May 20, 2014 City Council Meeting. If the city disapproves the plans it must describe specific amendments to the plans that, if adopted, would cause the local unit to withdraw its disapproval. Failure to approve or disapprove the plans in writing prior to July 15, 2014, is deemed to be an approval unless an extension of time is agreed to by the city and the responsible authority. Electronic copies of the municipal consent plans can be found on the project's website at SWLRT.ORG. Attachments Municipal Consent Resolution Public Comments Submitted via E-mail or Letter(available as a separate document) CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2014- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PHYSICAL DESIGN COMPONENT OF THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLANS FOR THE SOUTHWEST LIGHT RAIL PROJECT WITHIN THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE. WHEREAS, The Governor designated the Metropolitan Council ("Council") as the responsible authority for the Southwest Light Rail Transit Project ("Project"), which makes it responsible for the planning, designing, acquiring, constructing and equipping the Project; and WHEREAS, the Project is now in the preliminary design phase; and WHEREAS, the design at this phase is approximately 15 percent complete; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 473.3994 allows cities and counties along a proposed light rail route to provide input to the Council on the physical design component of the preliminary design plans; and WHEREAS, on April 22, 2014, the Council submitted the physical design component of the preliminary design plan ("Plans") to the governing body of each statutory and home rule charter city, county and town in which the route is proposed to be located; and WHEREAS, public hearings are then required, which the City of Eden Prairie held on June 17, 2014; and WHEREAS, within 45 days of a joint hearing held by the Council and the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority("HCRRA"), which was held on May 29, 2014, the City of Eden Prairie must review and approve or disapprove the Plans for the route to be located in the City of Eden Prairie; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 473.3994 provides that "a local unit of government that disapproves the plans shall describe specific amendments to the plans that, if adopted, would cause the local unit to withdraw its disapproval;" and WHEREAS, approval or disapproval by the City of Eden Prairie is part of the statutory preliminary design process; and WHEREAS, City staff has reviewed the Plans and developed a report pertaining to these Plans and has made its recommendations; and WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie will work with the Council throughout the design and construction process; and WHEREAS, a Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement is being prepared to evaluate among other matters the potential impacts of the alignment between the proposed 101727764v2 Southwest Station and Mitchell Station along Technology Drive and the City will have an opportunity to comment on the analysis once it is published for public comment; and WHEREAS, the Council and its staff continue to work with SouthWest Transit (SWT) on the development of an agreement pertaining to understandings, goals, and potential future agreements between the Council and SWT relating to the co-location of the Council's proposed Southwest Light Rail Transit Project with SWT's existing operations at SouthWest Station located in Eden Prairie, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie desires that the Council and its staff continue to work with the City of Eden Prairie staff to evaluate terms identified below as Locally Requested Capital Investment ("LRCIs") recognizing that the implementation of this investment will require the identification of funding during the advanced design of the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL FINDS, DETERMINES, AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS: 1. The City of Eden Prairie provides its municipal approval of the Plans pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 473.3994 consistent with the above. 2. The City of Eden Prairie staff are directed to submit the City of Eden Prairie's approval to the Metropolitan Council. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City identifies the following issues as outstanding and declares that this consent is granted based on the City's full faith and trust in the Metropolitan Council's commitment to arrive at resolution satisfactory to the City on the following issues which are not included or have not been satisfactorily addressed in the preliminary design plan submission: 1. Locate the 160 space parking facility in close proximity to Town Center Station which will be provided by beginning of revenue service. 2. Minimize disruption to businesses, residents, SouthWest Transit services, vehicular traffic and pedestrian traffic during construction through innovative practices. 3. Provide strong communication with the public during design and construction that is visual, timely, reliable, and easily understood. 4. Seek guidance and input from the City of Eden Prairie Parks, Recreation, Arts and Natural Resources Commission on the incorporation of public art into the project. 5. Complete the agreement between the Council and SouthWest Transit pertaining to understandings, goals, and potential future agreements relating to the co-location of the Council's proposed Southwest Light Rail Transit Project with SWT's existing operations at SouthWest Station located in Eden Prairie, Minnesota. 2 101727764v2 BE IF FURTHER RESOLVED that Council and its staff continue to work with the City of Eden Prairie staff to evaluate as the following "LRCIs" recognizing that the implementation of this investment will require the identification of project funding during the advanced design of the project: 1. Town Center Station being constructed as a side running platform. 2. Design and construction of a north-south road from Town Center Station to Singletree Lane. 3. Construction of a trail from Prairie Center Drive and the Highway 212 off ramp to the SouthWest Station. 4. Grading and installation of a trail adjacent to the tracks from City West Station south towards Shady Oak Road. 5. Enhance and improve the park like setting along Technology Drive and Prairie Center Drive. 6. Modification of the grade separated crossing of Valley View Road such that it minimizes LRT travel time through the elimination of sharp curves. 7. Rounded, fluted and tubular catenary poles throughout Eden Prairie. 8. Direct fixation or embedded track at appropriate locations in Eden Prairie. 9. Alternative materials for fencing, bridge railings and similar appurtenances at appropriate locations in Eden Prairie along with agreements for long term maintenance. ADOPTED by the City Council on July 14, 2014. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk 3 101727764v2 Robert Ellis From: Aaron Sawyer[me©aarondevon.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 10:16 PM To: swirl Subject: I Oppose The Light Rail I oppose the proposed light rail line through Eden Prairie and encourage you to vote NO on municipal consent. 13700 Valley View Rd Apt. 340 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Aaron D. Sawyer T: 952-412-6490 E: me a(�aarondevon.com i Robert Ellis From: Bradley J Gunn [bjg@mgmllp.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 12:41 PM To: swirl Cc: Mike Ascher Subject: Public comments from Brunswick Corporation Attachments: administrator@mgmllp.com_20140523_134155.pdf Attached please find Brunswick Corporation's comments regarding the proposed Southwest LRT project. Bradley J. Gunn, Esq. MALKERSON GUNN MARTIN LLP 220 South Sixth Street, Suite 1900 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Direct Dial 612.455.66401 Fax 612.344.1414 brad.gunn@imgmllp.com I www.mgmllp.com The information contained in this message is attorney-client privileged and confidential information intended only for use of the individual or entity to which it was intended to be sent. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any dissemination,distribution,or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,please immediately notify us by telephone at 612.344.1111 or reply e-mail communication and delete the original message. Thank you. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: As required by U.S.Treasury Regulations governing tax practice,you are hereby advised that any written tax advice contained herein was not written or intended to be used(and cannot be used)by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under the U.S.Internal Reven 2 MALKERSON GUNN MARTIN LLP 1900 U . S . BANK PLAZA SOUTH TOWER 220 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE 612-344. 1 1 1 1 FACSIMILE 612-344- 1 4 1 4 Bradley J. Gunn, Esq. 612.455.6640 brad.gunn@mgmllp.com May 23, 2014 The Honorable Nancy Tyra-Lukens and Members of the City Council City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Southwest LRT alignment and station location Brunswick Corporation Dear Mayor Tyra-Lukens and Council Members: Our office represents Brunswick Corporation, which is the owner of the Brunswick Zone located at 12200 Singletree Lane, in connection with the proposed Southwest LRT project. We do not object to the construction of the project itself,but we do question the need for a transit station behind Brunswick's property. It is our understanding that our neighbors also oppose a station at this location, and it is difficult to imagine that there will be any significant user demand in this immediate area. In addition,the construction of a station behind Brunswick raises several concerns: • Brunswick would lose approximately 24 crab apple trees and evergreen shrubs. • The transfer and dumpster pad would need to be relocated. • There is no parking provided at the proposed station, so riders would presumably park in Brunswick's parking lot. • There is no rest room provided at the proposed station, so riders would presumably use Brunswick's restrooms. • The construction of the station is likely to result in the loss of valuable parking spaces during the period of construction. • Passengers walking over and along Brunswick's property raises liability concerns. For these reasons, we request that if the City consents to the Southwest LRT project, that such consent be conditioned upon the elimination of the transit station behind Brunswick. 166013 Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, re, J -^' - . c\s„...,_ Bradley J. Gunn BJG/jlm cc: Michael R. Ascher 166013 TM Twi nVV est CHAMBER OF COMMERCE June 5, 2014 City of Eden Prairie Robert Ellis City of Eden Prairie Public Works Director 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Subject: Municipal Consent-Southwest Light Rail Line Mr. Ellis: Last March,TwinWest Chamber of Commerce sent a letter to Metropolitan Council Chair Sue Haigh expressing our support for the Southwest Light Rail line and its continued progress. The benefits of the Southwest line are extensive and provide the catalyst for economic growth all along the corridor. Throughout the long,public process for this phase of development of the Southwest Line,our support has not wavered. TwinWest views this project as vital to helping support the 60,000 jobs that are projected to grow in this corridor over the next two decades. This line will help connect employers with employees from all parts of the metro area;those going into the city and those commuting out of the city to jobs along the corridor. The Southwest Line will facilitate development opportunities that may not exist without this transit option. We ask that you continue to support this project by granting municipal consent. Though the decision you are making is local,the impact of the Southwest Line is far greater and will impact future generations. It is vital to the continued growth and competitiveness of the region. Sincerely, N,.....„L .4.1-k.. /(A--: Brad Meier, President TwinWest Chamber of Commerce Cc: City of Hopkins City of St. Louis Park City of Minnetonka Hennepin County Southwest LRT Project Office 10700 Old County Road 15, Suite 170• Plymouth, MN 55441 Phone: (763)450-2220• Fax: (763)450-2221 •www.twinwest.com Robert Ellis From: BuckeyeTed@aol.com Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 4:26 PM To: swift Subject: SWLRT I and many many others do not want light rail in Eden Prairie, period. I have been a resident here since 1991. There is no good reason to replace the successful bus service we have now. None. NO LIGHT RAIL...I vote NO, NO, NO. Ted Pegram 3 Robert Ellis From: CDeJarlais@bachmans.com Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 3:18 PM To: David Lindahl; Nancy Tyra-Lukens; Robert Ellis; Rick Getschow; GRP-AIICouncil Cc: DBachman@bachmans.com Subject: Light Rail/Bachman's Attachments: To Nyquist re EP Light Rail and Slope Slide in June 2013.pdf Good afternoon, Dale Bachman has asked me to forward the attached to all of you (he also delivered copies of this letter to Eden Prairie City Hall this afternoon) reiterating Bachman's concern relative to the proposed building of LRT on property adjacent to that of Bachman's and Costco. It is Dale's hope that you will have an opportunity to review this information prior to the meeting at 7:00 p.m. tomorrow, Tuesday, May 20. Thank you. (See attached file: To Nyquist re EP Light Rail and Slope Slide in June 2013.pdf) Cherie DeJarlais Bachman's Executive Offices Phone: 612-861-7661 Fax: 612-861-7745 4 -1 r May 8, 2014 Mr. Daren Nyquist Public Outreach Coordinator Southwest LRT Project Office 6465 Wayzata Blvd, Suite 500 St. Louis Park, MN 55426 Dear Mr. Nyquist: The purpose of this letter is to share our comments and concerns in advance of the Eden Prairie City Council Public hearing on preliminary design plans for the Southwest Light Rail Transit(Green Line Extension) Project. I previously shared these concerns with the Eden Prairie City Council in a letter dated August 9, 2013. We continue to be concerned about the feasibility of engineering LRT operations along the steep slope between Bachman's and Costco's storm water pond. We have expressed concerns about the pond since it was designed in 2004. Our engineering firm tells us that the pond has a maximum capacity of approximately 2.3 million gallons of water. On July 13, 2013, following a heavy rain event, we experienced a failure/slide on the steep slope. It appears that due to lack of proper maintenance and monitoring of the pond,wild animals, possibly muskrats,tunneled along the pond wall and day-lighted this tunneling on the steep slope. When the pond reached a certain level following a heavy rain event,the pond discharged down the steep slope creating a mudslide onto Bachman's property and beyond. We are very fortunate that the failure we experienced was not worse than it was. We continue to be concerned about what is being done to prevent this from happening again. We were assured when the pond was first constructed that it was properly engineered and permitted. We now know what wild animals, along with significant rain, can do to compromise proper engineering and permitting. We are concerned about the feasibility of introducing LRT operations onto the steep slope adjacent to the Costco storm water pond. If, for whatever reason, the plans to locate the tracks and LRT operations along the steep slope between Bachman's and Costco are not feasible, we favor the north side of Technology Drive alignment. The north side of Technology Drive option appears to be the lowest cost alternative. We believe a tunnel under Prairie Center Drive would be a better long-term solution than a bridge over Prairie Center Drive so close to the Veterans War Memorial/Purgatory Creek Park area. We would be willing to operate with a Prairie Center Drive closure for a construction season to achieve the Technology Drive alternative. Thank you for your attention to these comments and concerns. Sincerely, cm S-- Dale L. Bachman Chairman /Chief Executive Officer cc: The Honorable Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens Council Members: Brad Aho, Ron Case, Sherry Butcher Wickstrom, and Kathy Nelson Rick Getschow David Lindahl City of Eden Prairie Public Works 4,01 5.y,?_.'Aio ..>'+. y✓';==s <.,C -.$s_$, t v;3$i ,�.s},at x .§d., •,::.,' J-fi.f§r ;' xi2 �- S 6e11.1 °,J '.-)cchi-n(t._.,,...:)m BACHMAN'S EDEN PRAIRIE RETAIL STORE SLOPE FAILURE / SLIDE JUNE 13, 2013 From Bachman's property looking From the Costco property looking up the slope toward the Costco down the slope at Bachman's storm water pond area. property. Robert Ellis From: Cheryl Boldon [stmcompany@qwestoffice.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 2:07 PM To: Robert Ellis; susan.haigh@metc.state.mn.us; katie.rodriguez@metc.state.mn.us; Iona.schreiber@metc.state.mn.us;jennifer.munt@metc.state.mn.us; gary.vaneyll@metc.state.mn.us; steve.elkins@metc.state.mn.us; james.brimeyer@metc.state.mn.us; gary.cunningham@metc.state.mn.us; adam.duininck@metc.state.mn.us; edward.reynoso@metc.state.mn.us; john.doan@metc.state.mn.us; sandy.rummel@metc.state.mn.us; harry.melander@metc.state.mn.us; richard.kramer@metc.state.mn.us; jon.commers@metc.state.mn.us; steven.chavez@metc.state.mn.us; wendy.wulff@metc.state.mn.us Cc: jonmat@charter.net; sdukes@rubytuesday.com; 'John Nicklow'; bwoelfel@rubytuesday.com; santorinimpls@msn.com; rcc50401@yahoo.com;james_collins@anchorlink.com; amy_muchow@anchorlink.com Subject: Geo-Tech Expert Comments on LRT Attachments: Kwasny Ietter0001.pdf Dear Robert Ellis and Met Council Members: Attached is a letter by Bill Kwasney, stating the necessity for specific items that must be done during the construction of the ramp and LRT line in,through and around SouthWest Station Center. Mr. Kwasny is a recognized Geo-Tech expert and his recommendations for what must happen during construction must be strictly adhered to. Additionally, millions of dollars must be set aside for the resulting damages that will occur. Regards, &ewe 4, 'o€d Trustee,Snyder Trust Chief Manager,SouthWest Station,LLC&SouthWest Station Mgmt., LLC 7887 Fuller Road, Suite 117 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Tel (952)934-4135 Fax (952)934-4419 stmcompanv@qwestoffice.net 1 CRL ASSOCIATES, LLC r r 18118 24TH AVENUE NORTH PLYMOUTH, MN 55447 PHONE: 763-473-7583 11 . E-MAIL: WKWASNY@AOL.COM June 10,2014 Ms. Cheryl Boldon Chief Manager South West Station,LLC 7887 Fuller Road, Suite 117 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Re: Planned LRT construction South West Station Eden Prairie, Minnesota CRL Project No. 14-134 Dear Ms. Boldon: ` In the course of our meeting at the site on June 9,2014,you described the planned construction of the LRT in and around South West Station, starting in 2016. I Have written the following comments on the issues we discussed about this construction. - It is likely that the LRT construction will include driven pile foundations because of the deep organic soils on the site, and ground vibrations will be generated during the pile driving, as well as during the compaction of fill/backfill. I recommend that you request that the LRT provide full-time vibration monitoring with multiple seismographs in and around the structures you manage during pile driving and compaction operations. - It is also likely that dewatering will be required for some of the LRT construction due to the shallow groundwater table on the site. Dewatering causes increased vertical stress on underground elements such as pile-supported utility lines, and increased dragdown forces on building piles, if the zone of influence of the dewatering extends out to such structures. The dewatering can also cause settlement of pavements and sidewalks. I recommend that you request the LRT to assess the potential effects of dewatering on your underground utility lines,buildings, and pavements and sidewalks before dewatering is initiated. If their assessment indicates that damage could occur,the dewatering method should be modified to prevent damage. - I recommend that you request the LRT to perform Pre-Construction Condition Surveys (PCCSs)for all of your buildings,pavements, sidewalks, and underground utilities in the time frame of 30 to 45 days before the construction is started. The PCCSs should be carried out by a firm with experience in this facet of engineering. You should request that . Ms. Cheryl Boldon South West Station, LLC Comments re LRT Construction CRL Contract No 14-134 June 10,2014 • Page The PCCSs wilt document the baseline condition of the structures before the construct- ion is started, so comparisons can be made if it appears that the work has caused damage. Please contact us if you have questions on these issues. 4 7 Respectfully yours, CRLiAssociates,LLCM' • li?/.1 (01,,,, / Wi rani C. Kvilas P E. , President Licensed Professional Engineer; mnesota Robert Ellis From: Cheryl Boldon [stmcompany@gwestoffice.net] Sent: Friday, June 06, 2014 4:20 PM To: Robert Ellis Subject: 05/29/2014 LRT Hearing Comments Attachments: LRT Robert Ellis Met Public Hearing 05-29-2014 Comments.docx; Parking Allied SW Station Proposal 6.5.14.pdf; LRT Braun 2.jpg; LRT Braun.jpg; LRT Braun 1.JPG Dear Mr. Ellis, Attached is my Public Hearing LRT comments, parking monitoring contract, and photos related to the problems encountered from minor soil testing. Regards, &tele 4, Eaedoo Trustee, Snyder Trust Chief Manager, South West Station,LLC&South West Station Mgmt., LLC 7887 Fuller Road, Suite 117 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Tel (952)934-4135 Fax(952)934-4419 stmcompany@qwestoffice.net 5 June 5, 2014 Sent via U.S. certified mail& email for convenience Robert Ellis City of Eden Prairie Public Works Director 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: May 29. 2014 Public Hearing Comments on Proposed LRT at SouthWest Station Center Dear Mr. Ellis: As Chief Manager for SouthWest Station Management, LLC, and SouthWest Station, LLC, I represent their respective interests in the proposed Southwest Transitway LRT line. The proposed devastating LRT plan is fiscally irresponsible given the initial 1.7 billion dollar price tag along with permanent subsidy at the rate of$6.00 per rider per trip (present day value). This also assumes that the rider actually pays in the first place, since there is no person tasked to enforce payment. Should reason falter and the LRT plan be implemented,then SouthWest Station Center (SWSC)must be protected at all costs. From a pragmatic perspective, SWSC is assuming LRT will become a reality. As such, we have grave concerns regarding construction staging due to the significant problems already experienced with some minor soil testing that occurred last month (photos attached) and the required parking monitoring for transit violators (contract attached) at SWSC. In fact, I told the Braun Intertec workers to "cease and desist", and they refused. I then asked them to remove their vehicle and equipment from SMTC private property, and still they refused. As such, I was forced to call the Police, and then the workers left prior to police arrival. Please give careful and thoughtful consideration to how you can possibly build this huge ramp and LRT line without illegally poaching private property. It cannot be done! Both of these will be further addressed under their respective headings of Monitored Parking and Construction Plan. The damage to SWSC due to soil subsidence must be carefully understood, investigated and significant dollars put aside for the resulting damages. To give you a real-life example outside of SWSC: Kare 11 broke the"Massive Eden Prairie Sinkhole" story which resulted from a collapsed sewer line (http://www.karel l.com/story/weather/weather-stories/2014/06/01/storm- sewer-failure-causes-massive-sinkhole-in-eden-prairie/9845059/). SWSC and Southwest Metro Transit Center are quite familiar with collapsed water and sewer lines (see item 12 for details). For the past 7 years, both the City of Eden Prairie and SWSC has argued that SouthWest Station cannot be the end of the line. Even the governor supports Mitchell Road as the end of the line. Now we finally have agreement on that front. So when the costs rise as they will most undoubtedly do, the Mitchell Road Station cannot be removed as a cost saving measure. SWSC cannot be the end of the line. We do, however,prefer the plan where Culvers is taken rather than Anchor Bank and Ruby Tuesday from a center perspective. We also prefer the larger size ramp as that will assist when the LRT ramp reaches capacity, which it most assuredly will.NEVER forget the SouthWest Metro Transit ramp was built into obsolescence the moment it was constructed, as it failed to properly address the number of actual riders it would have. Presently, overflow riders park at St. Andrews church and are shuttled back to SouthWest Metro Transit. Unfortunately, many transit riders prefer to poach in our private surface parking spaces, requiring us to monitor transit rider violators. The larger ramp will bring increased problems along with increased monitoring demands, and this will not be tolerated. But, without hesitation, I must stress that SWSC is NOT able to handle increased parking demands or another ramp! Regardless, I do not understand how the Met Council or the City of Eden Prairie can in good conscience add yet another even larger, unmonitored ramp to one of the most difficult parking sites in the metro area. The Met Council's website even states, "SouthWest Station has significant parking issues". Therefore, the Met Council must be very cautious in how they proceed. If we are to coexist, then we all need to be good neighbors; presently that relationship does not exist. To that end, let me enumerate some of the costly problems that require mitigation and compensation with the proposed LRT plan at SWSC: We demand a certified national shopping center consultant paid for by the Met Council but selected by SWSC be hired to assess and quantify the catastrophic devaluation of every SWSC Planned Unit Development(PUD) parcel caused by LRT, including but not limited to: 1. Monitored Parking. 2. Security. 3. Lost parking. 4. Lost Visibility. 5. Lost Identity. 6. Lost Aesthetics. 7. Loss of Financial Participation. 8. Ramp Size. 9. Ingress and Egress. 10. Construction Plan. 11. Ramp Snow. 12. Soil Subsidence. 13. Taking. 1. Monitored Parking. Who from the transit center will monitor where their LRT and bus riders park? It is a significant problem already, and with LRT the problem will grow exponentially. This is important because our only way to prevent transit riders from poaching SWSC surface parking spaces is by booting. Unfortunately, the City of Eden Prairie told SWSC and our booting company, Bobbie and Steve's Auto World,that if any more booting occurred at SWSC, the City of Eden Prairie would create a law disallowing booting. In other words,the City of Eden Prairie took away property rights by preventing said booting,thus hamstringing our ability to protect private property. This is yet another example of government's abuse of power. As such, we demand that Southwest Transitway and SouthWest Metro Transit properly monitor where their riders park by: A. Posting visible signage wherever possible and necessary in SWSC's sole discretion to help transit enforcement. B. Hiring a transit staff person (possibly a City of Eden Prairie Police Officer), who must be assigned to monitor where their riders park throughout the day, starting early in the morning when the riders first start violating. C. Hiring an outside Parking Enforcement Company (contract hereto attached) at an annual cost of$58,560.00 who would provide one staff person for a 6-hour window per their assessment of the increased LRT poaching demands. D. Insisting the City of Eden Prairie give SWSC and Bobby & Steve's Auto World a legally binding agreement,providing the ability to permanently boot and tow. E. Adequately enforcing transit rider parking by transit-monitoring to SWSC's satisfaction. Otherwise, both Southwest Transitway and SouthWest Metro Transit are violating SWSC's property rights, which is in essence a taking of SWSC private PUD parking spaces. As such, we will hold both entities accountable for the resulting damages. 2. Security. It is a proven fact that crime rises where LRT lines run, due to criminals having an easy and cheap way to move about freely. We all know what happened to Mall of America. Well, the same thing has happened around the country after subway, train and LRT lines have been added. A. We demand Southwest Transitway and SouthWest Metro Transit properly monitor the security of SWSC by having 24-hour security or a City of Eden Prairie Police Officer on site. 3. Lost Parking. We, as participants of the SouthWest Station PUD, expect appropriate compensation related to lost parking. The damage this will have on SWSC as a whole will be extensive and very costly to mitigate. Every single outlot owner in SWSC (including Ruby Tuesday, Anchor Bank, and SouthWest Station, LLC Retail Tract) knows the effects will be devastating. A. Every outlot owner expects compensation for the taking of Culver's parking lot as part of the PUD. This lost parking will be especially damaging to the retail tract, due to its close proximity. During a 15-minute timeframe, I counted four people walking from the retail tract after having parked in Culver's lot. B. Even though ramp parking would not adequately restore our lost Culver's parking spaces (as surface parking is far more valuable, desirable, and accessible than ramp parking could ever be), we do expect first level ramp parking for SWSC employees and patrons alike as partial compensation. It is a proven fact that customers do not like parking underneath a ramp for safety and practicality, but we must have parking replacement to help mitigate loss. C. Regardless of signage, customers are not going to assume they can park underneath the ramp, as the ramp is for transit riders only! We already know signage does not work well, as we have been trying for a decade to stop bus transit riders from parking in SWSC surface lots to no avail. Additionally, SouthWest Metro Transit has refused to replace the signage, preventing parking poachers, on the ramp that had existed for years. Thus, monetary compensation and adequate signage will be essential. D. Loss of parking in the West entranceway alongside the pond and Sawatdee must be compensated for. Every single parking stall in the surface lots is critical to the future viability of SWSC restaurants. Presently up to five cars park there and visit the retail tract building. 4. Lost Visibility. As far as I can see, neither the "Center Bridge" nor the "West Bridge" provides adequate visibility for SWSC. All SWSC PUD parcel owners must be adequately compensated for lost visibility due to the following: A. Presently, we have 30,000 cars that pass by daily on Prairie Center Drive and significantly greater numbers on Highway 5. The City of Eden Prairie argues that Technology Drive is a main thorough fare so the impact is minimal. While we concur that Technology Drive's traffic already benefits us, I fail to see how this has anything to do with the lost key visibility on Highway 5 and Prairie Center Drive! This lost visibility would be catastrophic and extremely costly as SWSC becomes a center on a side street, rather than a center on one of the busiest intersections in the State of Minnesota. B. With the LRT line running behind Anchor Bank, we lose total visibility on Highway 5 and most of our center's visibility from Prairie Center Drive.Now, all that will be seen is an even larger and more unsightly parking ramp and bridge. We demand signage on the ramp facing Highway 5 which will provide minor mitigation, but it cannot in any way replace actual center visibility! We need written guarantees that the signage does not have to meet code, will be paid for by Southwest Transitway, and will meet with SWSC's design approval. C. With the line crossing in front of Ruby Tuesday, we lose nearly all of our visibility from Prairie Center Drive. What is seen is a horrifically large and unsightly LRT bridge and pylon support beams. D. Our main center signage is at the intersection of Prairie Center Drive and Technology Drive. The LRT line is proposed to go overhead at that point with huge cement pylons coming down at that intersection which will completely obstruct and obliterate our center's main focal point and visibility. E. The darkness created underneath the bridge will obscure our main SWSC monument signage and the beautiful shrubbery and flowers. As such, we demand new center monument signage and foliage at SWSC sole discretion, regardless if it violates code and at a cost born by Southwest Transitway. F. With elevation changes of the LRT line, we will lose key visibility from Prairie Center Drive. Nothing will be seen until one reaches Santorini, further down on Technology Drive, a side street with limited traffic. 5. Lost Identity. With all the proposed changes, SWSC will cease to exist as we know it. We demand compensation for the impacts of the center's lost identity. A. Loss of signage visibility at intersection of Prairie Center Drive and Technology. B. Loss of our premier entranceway with huge evergreens valued at$30,000 a piece-- not to mention the loss of all the plants and flowers. C. Loss of identity at our main entranceway, due to enlarging it for transit's benefit. D. Loss of any real identity at the intersection of Prairie Center Drive and Technology. 6. Lost Aesthetics. The serenity and beauty will be forever lost, and all SWSC PUD parcel owners must be compensated. A. SWSC won the STARR award for Design and Aesthetics in 2003. With the proposed LRT changes, SWSC will no longer be the beautiful center everyone has come to know and love. B. The new, unsightly ramp will be 117% larger than current ramp, completely, destroying SWSC's looks and appeal. C. The lost SWSC building (Culvers) will completely change SWSC as an entity, especially with the confusing traffic patterns and increased non-SWSC, transit traffic. D. Lost trees and green space due to the construction of the line and ramps. E. SWSC is a center of restaurants with outdoor seating. Who is going to choose to come to the center to eat outside with the noise and vibrations? No one will come to center once the beauty and tranquility are lost. 7. Lost Financial Participation. We as participants of the SouthWest Station PUD expect appropriate compensation related to lost financial participation by Culvers. A. The Declaration requires Culvers to pay to SouthWest Station Management its 14.6% prorata share of Common Area expenses along with an additional 8% management/administration fee. Presently, Culvers pays $1500 per month. B. With expanded entranceways and parcel size, we would expect Southwest Transitway and SouthWest Metro Transit to pay its prorata share of all expenses, and in addition be 100% responsible for the West entranceway, as it is being designed to benefit transit only, with limited and convoluted access to SWSC. 8. Ramp Size. A. The size of the ramp must be carefully weighed against proposed ridership and access to SWSC. It is truly insane to operate under the idea that SWSC can handle either 1400 or 1950 cars barreling out of the ramp at the end of the day! B. SWSC site cannot support an additional 450 or 1050-car ramp. If this is to be even remotely feasible,there needs to be transit access off of and onto Highway 5 and a SWSC entrance off of Prairie Center Drive to partially reduce the resulting increased traffic burdens. 9. Ingress and Egress. A. Traffic patterns must be carefully and cautiously reviewed. B. The loop around the proposed new ramp seems quite confusing. Additionally, it provides reduced access to SWSC which will require compensation. C. We also disagree with the assessment that the East entranceway needs another lane in, as it really needs another lane out. We request two exits turning left and one exit right turn only. D. The two ramps need to be combined for easy parking access for transit riders. E. The lunch hour is the busiest for SWSC, but the dinner hour is the busiest for traffic due to all the cars barreling out of the ramp between 4-6p.m. This puts an unbearable burden on the traffic flow into the businesses of the PUD that actually pay for the East entranceway. As such, we expect Southwest Transitway and SouthWest Metro Transit to pay for their prorata share of the East entranceway. F. East entranceway exit light should turn green more quickly. It needs a timing change at once, especially for the evening rush-hour transit riders! G. The City of Eden Prairie has said the West entrance into SWSC will need to be changed to allow better ingress and egress. The way the center flows now is already too much for that entranceway to handle. H. There should be access to and from transit off of Highway 5 to reduce the increased SWSC traffic congestion due to the increased ramp size. I. There must be access to SWSC off of Prairie Center Drive to help mitigate damages as a result of traffic constraints and center congestion due to increased transit parkers. 10. Construction Plan. The Met Council must understand the construction impacts on the businesses and center as a whole along with compensation for negative impacts: A. There is no room for construction staging without taking customer/employee parking along the way. We expect a plan that does not interfere with SWSC businesses or its PUD parking. Attached are photos showing Met Council contracted engineers violating our private property rights by backing up their truck onto private property and working on private property. If a simple test cannot be completed without violating private property rights, how can anyone realistically expect the actual construction to occur without significantly greater violations! Construction Vehicle Parking must be monitored at all times. Regardless of what contractors are told,they will use the path of least resistance. We run into this frequently with SouthWest Metro Transit service vendors already. B. Access to SWSC is critical during the entire time of construction. We expect open access 100% of the time without exception. C. We expect compensation to Dickey's, Sawatdee, Caribou, Chipotle,Noodles, Ruby Tuesday, Anchor Bank, and Santorini who will be negatively impacted by this project. Neither Dickeys nor Sawatdee will survive construction without assistance. This project will put them out of business. This must be prevented at all costs. D. We will not tolerate any use of a"detour" sign, as the resulting damage would be catastrophic. E. Access to the center must be easy and simple at all times, or there will be significant damages. F. SWSC needs to understand how the LRT line accesses the ramp to determine if this will cause additional problems. Please provide this information. 11. Snow. A. We expect compensation if it is the intention of SouthWest Metro Transit and Southwest Transitway to continue to dump its snow off the ramp onto our private PUD surface parking lot. B. SouthWest Metro Transit and Southwest Transitway need to ensure that the snow displaced by the line will not cause problems for SWSC. C. We also want to ensure that the snow above and below the line on MNDot's land does not melt into Anchor Bank's drive-up Teller lane and freeze, causing treacherous conditions. This will require a seasonal monitoring plan. 12. Soil Subsidence! Significant sinking issues have occurred as follows: A. When the city dug on Technology Drive directly adjacent to the retail tract,part of the retail tract parcel sunk 21/2 feet! B. When the city dug on Prairie Center Drive directly adjacent to Krispy Kreme's parcel, their sewer line collapsed. C. SouthWest Metro Transit has had to rebuild their sewer and water lines, even though they were engineered and piled. Still, they collapsed TWICE! D. SWSC retail tract has had to rebuild its sewer and water lines already, as well. E. SouthWest Metro Transit knows firsthand how badly the soil subsidence will impact the site, as they have sunk as much as three feet in areas of their property. Do not underestimate the damages caused by the soil subsidence during construction of both the LRT line and ramp. F. There needs to be at least one million dollars set aside to deal with the resulting sinking issues due to the construction of the ramp and LRT line combined with dewatering during the project. 13. Taking. The LRT line at SWSC is a taking without just compensation. A. The line will run every 7 minutes directly adjacent to Ruby Tuesday's outdoor seating. Obviously, this will result in a taking of their outdoor seating area, as their patrons will be unwilling to sit outside due to the noise, vibration, darkness, and bridge placement...overhead. B. The damages and resulting losses unless mitigated and compensated as outlined above, represent a taking of private property. SouthWest Station Center cannot support a 1400 or 1950-car ramp, which is just another form of taking, as it will permanently and forever change the value, access, identity, serenity, visibility, stability, parking, financial participation, and aesthetics of the center. Please hire a national shopping center expert to assess and quantify damages, and then take careful consideration when developing the final LRT plan at SouthWest Station Center. Regards, etelte, 4, Fotdo 2 Cheryl L. Boldon, Chief Manager ALLIED PARKING, INC. June 5, 2014 Cheryl L. Bo!don Trustee, Snyder Trust Chief Manager, SouthWest Station,LLC & SouthWest Station Mgmt., LLC 7887 Fuller Road, Suite 117 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Company History, Parking Issues Relating to Transient Station & Proposed LRT Impact at parking lot located 12500-13250 Technology Drive, Eden Prairie, MN Dear Cheryl: After visiting and consulting with property management staff on site at the addresses above, it is apparent that the pressure of Southwest Transient Station Parking Ramp1s users which consist of daily bus and University of Minnesota Students are exceeding the capacity and or improperly using the parking spaces provided. The 100%occupancy of the Parking Ramp is forcing late arrival overflow to park in the parking lot not affiliated with the Transit Station. This is resulting in inadequate parking to be available for the entire parking lot common area as covered under the Declaration of Reciprocal Easements Covenants Conditions and Restrictions. The parking spaces in the lot are for the use of the tenants in the buildings, including: Caribou Coffee, Ruby Tuesdays, Culvers,Anchor Bank, Noodles, Snyder Properties Trust, and Chipotle. We observed pressure on the parking lot in our walk through and your team has consistently observed abuse of the parking in the parking lot. The lot is used by customers of Metro Transit, thereby creating a shortfall of space available for the retailers. You expressed concern related to future Light Rail use. Even with the planned additional parking structure, the pressures on the existing parking will continue and expand with the conversion to a light rail station. All existing light rail lines have had tremendous success and for the most part exceeded expectations for ridership. In anticipation of greater stress on the parking lot,Allied Parking can provide an oversight and enforcement service for you and your tenants. We would provide staffing of a Customer Service Representative from 7:00 am to 1:00 pm Monday—Friday to facilitate the proper utilization of parking. The rate for the Customer Service Representative is$26.00 per hour based on the proposed staffing hours. Additionally Allied charges a management fee of$1,500 per month. Any additional signage or equipment required will be passed through to you at our BOO SOUTH NINTH STREET, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55404-1205 [612] 332-03S1 'FAX i6121 332-0248 cost. Should the staffing hour's or scope of the project change there may be an adjustment in our rates. We would work with your team to develop the best approach to deter improper use, starting with our Customer Service Representative encouraging violators to remove their cars. I have attached a list of various other services Allied Parking has to offer. ABOUT Allied Parking Inc. Allied Parking is a parking management firm, which has been in business for over 50 years. We lease, manage and own properties in the Minneapolis and St. Paul area. We are highly qualified with over 25 properties in our management portfolio and parking spaces in excess of 15,000, located within the Twin Cities area. We have experience in all types of parking to include:valet, pay on foot, surface lot, cashiered and attended parking ramps with bar code and magnetic stripe technology, hands free contract access systems, and most others. We currently operate several facilities that are either partially or fully automated. Our company is skilled and knowledgeable with not only the general principals of parking but excellent marketing, project management, consulting, and cost analysis abilities. We have recently completed consulting projects with United Properties and Steven Scott Management where their issues were very similar with the ones you are experiencing at Technology Drive. We were successful in keeping their problems under control, and would be happy to put you in touch with our contacts there, to discuss our services and solutions we were able to provide. It was a pleasure meeting with Vicky Chancellor and speaking with you as well. Please feel free to contact us with any questions you might have. We look forward to working with you on improving your parking operations. Sin ly, nk.-. E'e Brian Maupin General Manager of Operations Robert Ellis From: Cheryl Boldon [stmcompany@gwestoffice.net] Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 10:49 AM To: Robert Ellis Subject: Public Hearing Comments Attachments: LRT Public Comments 04-23-2014.docx Hi Mr. Ellis: I am attaching a letter for the Public Hearing Comments next month. Regards, &age 4. $'aed 4 Trustee, Snyder Trust Chief Manager, SouthWest Station,LLC&SouthWest Station Mgmt., LLC 7887 Fuller Road, Suite 117 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Tel (952)934-4135 Fax(952)934-4419 stmcompany@qwestoffice.net 6 YouaWest Ytatio/r iie youagst cS atiorr Nafrvellrerrt, i2'C Cheryl L. Boldon, Chief Manager 7887 Fuller Road, Suite 117 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 April 24, 2014 Sent via U.S. certified mail & email for convenience Robert Ellis City of Eden Prairie Public Works Director 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Public Hearing Comments on Proposed Plan for LRT at SouthWest Station Center Dear Met Council Officials: As Chief Manager for SouthWest Station Management, LLC, and SouthWest Station, LLC, I represent their respective interests in the proposed Southwest Transitway LRT line. So before you vote on this devastating LRT plan, please give careful consideration to the cost of the proposed 1.63 billion dollar LRT plan and the fact that it will be forever subsidized by the county and state at the rate of$6.00 per rider per trip (present day value). This is also assuming that the rider actually pays in the first place, since there is no person tasked to enforce payment. Should reason falter and the LRT plan be approved, then SouthWest Station Center (SWSC) would insist that Mitchell Road be the end of the line, not SouthWest Station as proposed. For the past 7 years, both the City of Eden Prairie and SWSC has argued that SouthWest Station cannot be the end of the line. Even the governor supports Mitchell Road as the end of the line. I fully understand the additional cost constraints due to the 100 million dollar freight realignment, but expect the Met Council to come up with other cost saving alternatives rather than to continue moving forward on a plan that will destroy SWSC. We do, however, prefer the plan where Culvers is taken rather than Anchor Bank and Ruby Tuesday from a center perspective. We also prefer the larger size ramp as that will assist when the LRT ramp reaches capacity, which it most assuredly will.NEVER forget the SouthWest Metro Transit ramp was built into obsolescence the moment it was constructed, as it failed to properly address the number of actual riders it would have. Presently, overflow riders park at St. Andrews church and are shuttled back to SouthWest Metro Transit. Unfortunately, many transit riders prefer to poach in our private surface parking spaces, requiring us to monitor transit rider violators. The larger ramp will bring increased problems along with increased monitoring demands, and this will not be tolerated. But, without hesitation, I must stress that SWSC is NOT able to handle increased parking demands or another ramp. Regardless, I do not understand how the Met Council or the City of Eden Prairie can in good conscience add yet another even larger, unmonitored ramp to one of the most difficult parking sites in the metro area. The Met Council's website even states, "SouthWest Station has significant parking issues". Therefore, the Met Council must be very cautious in how they proceed. If we are to coexist, then we all need to be good neighbors;presently that relationship does not exist. To that end, let me enumerate some of the costly problems that require mitigation and compensation with the proposed LRT plan at SWSC: 1. Assess and Quantify Damages and Possible Mitigations. We demand a certified national shopping center consultant—paid for by the Met Council but selected by SWSC be hired to assess and quantify the catastrophic devaluation of every SWSC Planned Unit Development(PUD)parcel caused by LRT, including but not limited to: A. Monitored Parking. B. Security. C. Lost parking. D. Lost Visibility. E. Lost Identity. F. Lost Aesthetics. G. Loss of Financial Participation. H. Ramp Size. I. Ingress and Egress. J. Construction Plan. K. Ramp Snow. L. Soil Subsidence. M. Taking. 2. Monitored Parking. Who from the transit center will monitor where their LRT and bus riders park? It is a significant problem already, and with LRT the problem will grow exponentially. This is important because our only way to prevent transit riders from poaching SWSC surface parking spaces is by booting. Unfortunately, the City of Eden Prairie told SWSC and our booting company, Bobbie and Steve's Auto World, that if any more booting occurred at SWSC, the City of Eden Prairie would create a law disallowing booting. In other words, the City of Eden Prairie took away property rights by preventing said booting, thus hamstringing our ability to protect private property. This is yet another example of government's abuse of power. As such, we demand that Southwest Transitway and SouthWest Metro Transit properly monitor where their riders park by: A. Posting visible signage wherever possible and necessary in SWSC's sole discretion to help transit enforcement. B. Hiring a transit staff person (possibly a City of Eden Prairie Police Officer), who must be assigned to monitor where their riders park throughout the day, starting early in the morning when the riders first start violating. C. Insisting the City of Eden Prairie give SWSC and Bobby & Steve's Auto World a legally binding agreement, providing the ability to permanently boot and tow. D. Adequately enforcing transit rider parking by self-monitoring to SWSC's satisfaction. Otherwise, both Southwest Transitway and SouthWest Metro Transit are violating SWSC's property rights, which is in essence a taking of SWSC private PUD parking spaces. As such, we will hold both entities accountable for the resulting damages. 3. Security. It is a proven fact that crime rises where LRT lines run, due to criminals having an easy and cheap way to move about freely. We all know what happened to Mall of America. Well, the same thing has happened around the country after subway,train and LRT lines have been added. A. We demand Southwest Transitway and SouthWest Metro Transit properly monitor the security of SWSC by having 24-hour security or a City of Eden Prairie Police Officer on site. 4. Lost Parking. We, as participants of the SouthWest Station PUD, expect appropriate compensation related to lost parking. The damage this will have on SWSC as a whole will be extensive and very costly to mitigate. Every single outlot owner in SWSC (including Ruby Tuesday, Anchor Bank, and SouthWest Station, LLC Retail Tract) knows the effects will be devastating. A. Every outlot owner expects compensation for the taking of Culver's parking lot as part of the PUD. This lost parking will be especially damaging to the retail tract, due to its close proximity. B. Even though ramp parking would not adequately restore our lost Culver's parking spaces (as surface parking is far more valuable, desirable, and accessible than ramp parking could ever be), we do expect first level ramp parking for SWSC employees and patrons alike as partial compensation. It is a proven fact that customers do not like parking underneath a ramp for safety and practicality, but we must have parking replacement to help mitigate loss. C. Regardless of signage, customers are not going to assume they can park underneath the ramp, as the ramp is for transit riders only! We already know signage does not work well, as we have been trying for a decade to stop bus transit riders from parking in SWSC surface lots to no avail. Additionally, SouthWest Metro Transit has refused to replace the signage, preventing parking poachers, on the ramp that had existed for years. Thus, monetary compensation and adequate signage will be essential. D. Loss of parking in the West entranceway alongside the pond and Sawatdee must be compensated for. Every single parking stall in the surface lots is critical to the future viability of SWSC restaurants. Presently up to five cars park there and visit the retail tract building. 5. Lost Visibility. As far as I can see, neither the "Center Bridge"nor the "West Bridge" provides adequate visibility for SWSC. All SWSC PUD parcel owners must be adequately compensated for lost visibility due to the following: A. Presently, we have 30,000 cars that pass by daily on Prairie Center Drive and significantly greater numbers on Highway 5. The City of Eden Prairie argues that Technology Drive is a main thorough fare so the impact is minimal. While we concur that Technology Drive's traffic already benefits us, I fail to see how this has anything to do with the lost key visibility on Highway 5 and Prairie Center Drive! This lost visibility would be catastrophic and extremely costly as SWSC becomes a center on a side street, rather than a center on one of the busiest intersections in the State of Minnesota. B. With the LRT line running behind Anchor Bank, we lose total visibility on Highway 5 and most of our center's visibility from Prairie Center Drive.Now, all that will be seen is an even larger and more unsightly parking ramp and bridge. We demand signage on the ramp facing Highway 5 which will provide minor mitigation, but it cannot in any way replace actual center visibility! We need written guarantees that the signage does not have to meet code, will be paid for by Southwest Transitway, and will meet with SWSC's design approval. C. With the line crossing in front of Ruby Tuesday, we lose nearly all of our visibility from Prairie Center Drive. What is seen is a horrifically large and unsightly LRT bridge and pylon support beams. D. Our main center signage is at the intersection of Prairie Center Drive and Technology Drive. The LRT line is proposed to go overhead at that point with huge cement pylons coming down at that intersection which will completely obstruct and obliterate our center's main focal point and visibility. E. The darkness created underneath the bridge will obscure our main SWSC monument signage and the beautiful shrubbery and flowers. As such, we demand new center monument signage and foliage at SWSC sole discretion, regardless if it violates code and at a cost born by Southwest Transitway. F. With elevation changes of the LRT line, we will lose key visibility from Prairie Center Drive. Nothing will be seen until one reaches Santorini, further down on Technology Drive, a side street with limited traffic. 6. Lost Identity. With all the proposed changes, SWSC will cease to exist as we know it. We demand compensation for the impacts of the center's lost identity. A. Loss of signage visibility at intersection of Prairie Center Drive and Technology. B. Loss of our premier entranceway with huge evergreens valued at$30,000 a piece-- not to mention the loss of all the plants and flowers. C. Loss of identity at our main entranceway, due to enlarging it for transit's benefit. D. Loss of any real identity at the intersection of Prairie Center Drive and Technology. 7. Lost Aesthetics. The serenity and beauty will be forever lost, and all SWSC PUD parcel owners must be compensated. A. SWSC won the STARR award for Design and Aesthetics in 2003. With the proposed LRT changes, SWSC will no longer be the beautiful center everyone has come to know and love. B. The new, unsightly ramp will be 117% larger than current ramp, completely destroying SWSC's looks and appeal. C. The lost SWSC building (Culvers)will completely change SWSC as an entity, especially with the confusing traffic patterns and increased non-SWSC, transit traffic. D. Lost trees and green space due to the construction of the line and ramps. E. SWSC is a center of restaurants with outdoor seating. Who is going to choose to come to the center to eat outside with the noise and vibrations? No one will come to center once the beauty and tranquility are lost. 8. Lost Financial Participation. We as participants of the SouthWest Station PUD expect appropriate compensation related to lost financial participation by Culvers. A. The Declaration requires Culvers to pay to SouthWest Station Management its 14.6% prorata share of Common Area expenses along with an additional 8% management/administration fee. Presently, Culvers pays $1500 per month. B. With expanded entranceways and parcel size,we would expect Southwest Transitway and SouthWest Metro Transit to pay its prorata share of all expenses, and in addition be 100% responsible for the West entranceway, as it is being designed to benefit transit only, with limited and convoluted access to SWSC. 9. Ramp Size. A. The size of the ramp must be carefully weighed against proposed ridership and access to SWSC. It is truly insane to operate under the idea that SWSC can handle 1950 cars barreling out of the ramp at the end of the day! B. SWSC site cannot support an additional 1050-car ramp. If this is to be even remotely feasible,there needs to be transit access off of and onto Highway 5 and a SWSC entrance off of Prairie Center Drive to partially reduce the resulting increased traffic burdens. 10. Ingress and Egress. A. Traffic patterns must be carefully and cautiously reviewed. B. The loop around the proposed new ramp seems quite confusing. Additionally, it provides reduced access to SWSC which will require compensation. C. We also disagree with the assessment that the East entranceway needs another lane in, as it really needs another lane out. We request two exits turning left and one exit right turn only. D. The two ramps need to be combined for easy parking access for transit riders. E. The lunch hour is the busiest for SWSC, but the dinner hour is the busiest for traffic due to all the cars barreling out of the ramp between 4-6p.m. This puts an unbearable burden on the traffic flow into the businesses of the PUD that actually pay for the East entranceway. As such, we expect Southwest Transitway and SouthWest Metro Transit to pay for their prorata share of the East entranceway. F. East entranceway exit light should turn green more quickly. It needs a timing change at once, especially for the evening rush-hour transit riders! G. The City of Eden Prairie has said the West entrance into SWSC will need to be changed to allow better ingress and egress. The way the center flows now is already too much for that entranceway to handle. H. There should be access to and from transit off of Highway 5 to reduce the increased SWSC traffic congestion due to the increased ramp size. I. There must be access to SWSC off of Prairie Center Drive to help mitigate damages as a result of traffic constraints and center congestion due to increased transit parkers. 11. Construction Plan. The Met Council must understand the construction impacts on the businesses and center as a whole along with compensation for negative impacts: A. There is no room for construction staging without taking customer/employee parking along the way. We expect a plan that does not interfere with SWSC businesses or its PUD parking. As such, no plan should be voted on until it is understood how the construction can actually take place without destroying businesses in the process. B. Construction Vehicle Parking must be monitored at all times. Regardless of what contractors are told, they will use the path of least resistance. We run into this frequently with SouthWest Metro Transit service vendors already. C. Access to SWSC is critical during the entire time of construction. We expect open access 100% of the time without exception. D. We expect compensation to Dickey's, Sawatdee, Caribou, Chipotle,Noodles, Ruby Tuesday, Anchor Bank, and Santorini who will be negatively impacted by this project. Neither Dickeys nor Sawatdee will survive construction without assistance. With the cold winter, neither Dickeys nor Sawatdee is currently paying rent. Both are severely in arrears. As such, this project will put them out of business. This must be prevented at all costs. E. We will not tolerate any use of a"detour" sign, as the resulting damage would be catastrophic. F. Access to the center must be easy and simple at all times, or there will be significant damages. G. SWSC needs to understand how the LRT line accesses the ramp to determine if this will cause additional problems. Please provide this information. 12. Snow. A. We expect compensation if it is the intention of SouthWest Metro Transit and Southwest Transitway to continue to dump its snow off the ramp onto our private PUD surface parking lot. B. SouthWest Metro Transit and Southwest Transitway need to ensure that the snow displaced by the line will not cause problems for SWSC. C. We also want to ensure that the snow above and below the line on MNDot's land does not melt into Anchor Bank's drive-up Teller lane and freeze, causing treacherous conditions. This will require a seasonal monitoring plan. 13. Soil Subsidence! Significant sinking issues have occurred as follows: A. When the city dug on Technology Drive directly adjacent to the retail tract, part of the retail tract parcel sunk 21/4 feet! B. When the city dug on Prairie Center Drive directly adjacent to Krispy Kreme's parcel, their sewer line collapsed. C. SouthWest Metro Transit has had to rebuild their sewer and water lines, even though they were engineered and piled. Still, they collapsed TWICE! D. SWSC retail tract has had to rebuild its sewer and water lines already, as well. E. SouthWest Metro Transit knows firsthand how badly the soil subsidence will impact the site, as they have sunk as much as three feet in areas of their property. Do not underestimate the damages caused by the soil subsidence during construction of both the LRT line and ramp. F. There needs to be at least one million dollars set aside to deal with the resulting sinking issues due to the construction of the ramp and LRT line combined with dewatering during the project. 14. Taking. The LRT line at SWSC is a taking without just compensation. A. The line will run every 7 minutes directly adjacent to Ruby Tuesday's outdoor seating. Obviously, this will result in a taking of their outdoor seating area, as their patrons will be unwilling to sit outside due to the noise, vibration, darkness, and bridge placement...overhead. B. The damages and resulting losses unless mitigated and compensated as outlined above,represent a taking of private property. SouthWest Station Center cannot support a 1950-car ramp, which is just another form of taking, as it will permanently and forever change the value, access, identity, serenity, visibility, stability, parking, financial participation, and aesthetics of the center. Please hire a national shopping center expert to assess and quantify damages, and then take careful consideration when developing the final LRT plan at SouthWest Station Center. Regards, ee Fotioa Cheryl L. Boldon, Chief Manager e'ez ye 4, 'o€doo, e/4447/144149e4 .Soufnaot.Sta tioa, 4-de .SouaVe,at.Station, 71Zagagem , 4 Cie 7g1(7 ce.elet goad, Suite 117 5de0 7)aaGiie, 7yr72 55344 March 19, 2014 Sent via email for speedy delivery and U.S. certified mail Met Council c/o Daren Nyquist—Public Outreach Coordinator Southwest LRT Project Office 6465 Wayzata Blvd, Suite 500 St. Louis Park, MN 55426 Re: Met Council Vote on Proposed Plan for LRT at SouthWest Station Center Dear Met Council Officials: As Chief Manager for SouthWest Station Management, LLC, and SouthWest Station, LLC, I represent their respective interests in the proposed Southwest Transitway LRT line. So before you vote on this devastating LRT plan,please give careful consideration to the cost of the proposed 1.63 billion dollar LRT plan and the fact that it will be forever subsidized by the county and state at the rate of$6.00 per rider per trip (present day value). This is also assuming that the rider actually pays in the first place, since there is no person tasked to enforce payment. Should reason falter and the LRT plan be approved,then SouthWest Station Center(SWSC)would insist that Mitchell Road be the end of the line,not SouthWest Station as proposed. For the past 7 years, both the City of Eden Prairie and SWSC has argued that SouthWest Station cannot be the end of the line. Even the governor supports Mitchell Road as the end of the line. I fully understand the additional cost constraints due to the 100 million dollar freight realignment, but expect the Met Council to come up with other cost saving alternatives rather than to continue moving forward on a plan that will destroy SWSC. We do,however, prefer the plan where Culvers is taken rather than Anchor Bank and Ruby Tuesday from a center perspective. We also prefer the larger size ramp as that will assist when the LRT line reaches capacity, which it most assuredly will. NEVER forget the SouthWest Metro Transit ramp was built into obsolescence the moment it was constructed, as it failed to properly address the number of actual riders it would have. Presently, overflow riders park at St. Andrews church and are shuttled back to SouthWest Metro Transit. Unfortunately, many transit riders prefer to poach in our private surface parking spaces, requiring us to monitor transit rider violators. The larger ramp will bring increased problems along with increased monitoring demands, and this will not be tolerated. But, without hesitation, I must stress that SWSC is NOT able to handle increased parking demands or another ramp. D. Insisting the City of Eden Prairie give SWSC and Bobby& Steve's Auto World a legally binding agreement,providing the ability to permanently boot and tow. E. Adequately enforcing transit rider parking to SWSC's satisfaction. Otherwise, both Southwest Transitway and SouthWest Metro Transit are violating SWSC's property rights, which is in essence a taking of SWSC private PUD parking spaces. As such, we will hold both entities accountable for the resulting damages. 3. Security. It is a proven fact that crime rises where LRT lines run, due to criminals having an easy and cheap way to move about freely. We all know what happened to Mall of America. Well,the same thing has happened around the country after subway,train and LRT lines have been added. A. We demand Southwest Transitway and SouthWest Metro Transit properly monitor the security of SWSC by having 24-hour security or a City of Eden Prairie Police Officer on site. 4. Lost Parking. We as participants of the SouthWest Station PUD expect appropriate compensation related to lost parking. The damage this will have on SWSC as a whole will be extensive and very costly to mitigate. Every single outlot owner in SWSC (including Ruby Tuesday, Anchor Bank, SouthWest Station, LLC Retail Tract) knows the effects will be devastating. A. Every outlot owner expects compensation for the taking of Culver's parking lot as part of the PUD. This lost parking will be especially damaging to the retail tract, due to its close proximity. B. Even though ramp parking would not adequately restore our lost Culvers parking spaces (as surface parking is far more valuable, desirable, and accessible than ramp parking could ever be), we do expect first level ramp parking for SWSC employees and patrons alike as partial compensation. It is a proven fact that customers do not like parking underneath a ramp for safety and practicality, but we must have parking replacement to help mitigate loss. C. Regardless of signage, customers are not going to assume they can park underneath the ramp, as the ramp is for transit riders only! We already know signage does not work, as we have been trying for a decade to stop bus transit riders from parking in SWSC surface lots to no avail. Additionally, SouthWest Metro Transit has refused to replace the signage,preventing parking poachers, on the ramp that has existed there for years. Thus, monetary compensation and adequate signage will be essential. D. Loss of parking in the West entranceway alongside the pond and Sawatdee must be compensated for. Every single parking stall in the surface lots is critical to the future viability of SWSC restaurants. Presently up to five cars park there and visit the retail tract building. 5. Lost Visibility. As far as I can see, neither the"Center Bridge" nor the "West Bridge" provides adequate visibility for SWSC. All SWSC PUD parcel owners must be adequately compensated for lost visibility due to the following: A. Presently, we have 30,000 cars that pass by daily on Prairie Center Drive and significantly greater numbers on Highway 5. The City of Eden Prairie argues that Technology Drive is a main thorough fare so the impact is minimal. While we concur E. SWSC is a center of restaurants with outdoor seating. Who is going to choose to come to the center to eat outside with the noise and vibrations? No one will come to center once the beauty and tranquility are lost. 8. Lost Financial Participation. We as participants of the SouthWest Station PUD expect appropriate compensation related to lost financial participation by Culvers. A. The Declaration requires Culvers to pay to SouthWest Station Management its 14.6% prorata share of Common Area expenses along with an additional 8% management/administration fee. Presently, Culvers pays $1500 per month. B. With expanded entranceways and parcel size, we would expect Southwest Transitway and SouthWest Metro Transit to pay its prorata share of all expenses, and in addition be 100%responsible for the West entranceway, as it is being designed to benefit transit only, with limited and convoluted access to SWSC. 9. Ramp Size. A. The size of the ramp must be carefully weighed against proposed ridership and access to SWSC. It is truly insane to operate under the idea that SWSC can handle 1950 cars barreling out of the ramp at the end of the day! B. SWSC site cannot support an additional 1050-car ramp. If this is to be even remotely feasible, there needs to be transit access off of and onto Highway 5 and a SWSC entrance off of Prairie Center Drive to partially reduce the resulting increased traffic burdens. 10. Ingress and Egress. A. Traffic patterns must be carefully and cautiously reviewed. C. The loop around the proposed new ramp seems quite confusing. Additionally, it provides reduced access to SWSC which will require compensation. D. We also disagree with the assessment that the East entranceway needs another lane in, as it really needs another lane out. We request two exits turning left and one exit right turn only. E. The two ramps need to be combined for easy parking access for transit riders. F. The lunch hour is the busiest for SWSC, but the dinner hour is the busiest for traffic due to all the cars barreling out of the ramp between 4-6p.m. This puts an unbearable burden on the traffic flow into the businesses of the PUD that actually pay for the East entranceway. As such, we expect Southwest Transitway and SouthWest Metro Transit to pay for their prorata share of the East entranceway. G. East entranceway exit light should turn green more quickly. It needs a timing change at once, especially for the evening rush-hour transit riders! H. The City of Eden Prairie has said the West entrance into SWSC will need to be changed to allow better ingress and egress. The way the center flows now is already too much for that entranceway to handle. I. There should be access to and from transit off of Highway 5 to reduce the increased SWSC traffic congestion due to the increased ramp size. J. There must be access to SWSC off of Prairie Center Drive to help mitigate damages as a result of traffic constraints and center congestion due to increased transit parkers. underestimate the damages caused by the soil subsidence during construction of both the LRT line and ramp. F. There needs to be at least one million dollars set aside to deal with resulting sinking issues due to the construction of the ramp and LRT line combined with dewatering during the project. 14. 15. Taking. The LRT line at SWSC is a taking without just compensation. A. The line will run every 7 minutes directly adjacent to Ruby Tuesday's outdoor seating. Obviously, this will result in a taking of their outdoor seating area, as their patrons will be unwilling to sit outside due to the noise, vibration, darkness, and bridge placement...overhead. B. The damages and resulting losses unless mitigated and compensated as outlined above, represent a taking of private property. SouthWest Station Center cannot support a 1950-car ramp, which is just another form of taking, as it will permanently and forever change the value, access, identity, serenity, visibility, stability, parking, financial participation, and aesthetics of the center. Please hire a national shopping center expert to assess and quantify damages, and then take careful consideration when developing the final LRT plan at SouthWest Station Center. Regards, &Mgt 4 601d00 Cheryl L. Boldon, Chief Manager Robert Ellis From: Christina Sluka [christina.sluka@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 8:08 AM To: swlrt Subject: Please NO light rail To whom it may concern: I oppose the proposed light rail line through Eden Prairie and encourage you to vote NO on municipal consent. Thanks, Christina Sluka David Sluka 11442 Burr Ridge Lane Eden Prairie,MN 55347 952-223-1531 Sent from my iPad Robert Ellis From: CraigsListReplyKen [Craigslistreplyken@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 9:32 AM To: Robert Ellis Subject: Comments regarding SWLRT Preliminary Design prior to municipal consent(correction to#5) April 21, 2014 Mr. Ellis, Per the Metropolitan Council's "Guide to the Municipal Consent Process" and the Preliminary Design Plans of the SWLRT that I studied online and at the Hennepin County Library in Eden Prairie, I am submitting the following comments: 1. First, allow me to say how impressed I am with the amount of work that went into the SWLRT Preliminary Design Plans. I spent about three hours reviewing Segments 1 and 1A, and maybe another twenty minutes reviewing Segment 2. I am appreciative of how local traffic concerns have been addressed where necessary, and how our prized walking trails have been preserved. 2. I have been hopeful of a grade separation at Technology Drive and Flying Cloud Drive in the form of a bridge. The elevation at that intersection is about 900 feet above sea level. It is 916 feet just south of the Residence Inn, so going westbound the SWLRT already has a 16-foot height advantage. I'm not sure, however, how much clearance is required for a grade-separation bridge, but I'm sure it is much more. My guess is that city engineers and SWLRT project office staff have gone over this a thousand times and still have not been able to find a good way to make it work. 3. I would like to formerly state an objection to having the SWLRT take priority at the grade crossing at Flying Cloud Drive and Technology Drive. I strongly urge the City of Eden Prairie withhold its municipal consent on the project unless the final design of the project provides for what I understand is called "run with the signal" (where the trains yield to vehicular traffic per the existing traffic signals) at that location. This seems to be the very kind of intersection where people get killed when they lose patience and try to beat the train. 4. Failing that, I believe there should be another eastbound lane available on Technology Drive well before its intersection with Flying Cloud Drive. Today eastbound traffic backs up significantly on Technology Drive at Flying Cloud Drive during peak hours even without a train delay. The Preliminary Plans show only one eastbound lane that finally opens to three lanes at approximately where the turn-in to IHOP/Extended Stay America is located (West Segment 1, Page 61, or W1-CIV-PPFL-015). Per page 62 in Segment 1 (or W1-CIV-PPFL-016) there is to be a new left turn lane onto northbound Flying Cloud Drive, a through lane to the eastbound on-ramp to 1-494, and a right turn lane to southbound Flying Cloud Drive. While that is an improvement over today, in my opinion it is still not enough to support the new at-grade crossing that will be at that intersection. I believe the backups will be compounded by the advent of intersection closures every time a SWLRT train passes, on average every five minutes. The preliminary design shows two westbound lanes on Technology Drive from Flying Cloud to accommodate the two left turn lanes on northbound Flying Cloud Drive to westbound Technology Drive, presumably to handle backed-up Flying Cloud to Technology Drive traffic waiting for trains to 8 cross. Is there a way to widen Technology Drive to handle yet one additional eastbound traffic lane from approximately STA 120+00 to STA 127+00 (Segment 1, page 61)? 5. Since the small strip mall at Flying Cloud Drive and Eden Road (FedEx-Kinkos) is likely to be taken, I wonder if the curve of the LRT line at that location can be made even a little wider than it already has (compared to the original concept plans from a year ago). This should help cut down on the amount of noise generated from steel flanges on steel wheels scraping against the inside of the steel rails. 6. I understand there may be discussion of adding a signal that is not on the Preliminary Design Plans at the new enhanced intersection near Culvers at Southwest Station. Today the intersection is right-in/right-out only, but the new intersection will be fully functional from both eastbound and westbound drivers on Technology Drive. There are already three (3) new stoplights planned for the section of Technology Drive between Mitchell Road and Prairie Center Drive. One more might be simply unbearable. Those who have driven north or south along Hiawatha Avenue next to where the Blue LRT line operates will understand. The number and duration of stops along that stretch of road can be infuriating. 7. I believe it is imperative that we get the word out to the community via the local newspapers of the SWLRT impact on Eden Prairie as soon as possible. Provide as many details as one reasonably can. It would be very helpful if the "Route Visualization" video on the Metropolitan Council website was also updated (http://www.metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Projects/Current-Projects/Southwest- LRT/Route.aspx). The municipal consent public hearing is currently on the schedule for May 20, 2014, less than a month away. 8. As an interested observer of the SWLRT project, I must say how impressed I am with the outstanding professional staff at the City of Eden Prairie. In reviewing the technical drawings it is obvious that without your diligence, thoroughness and persistence, things could be much worse. For example, the original locally preferred route (over a year ago) had a grade crossing at the confluence of Valley View Road, Flying Cloud Drive and Prairie Center Drive. That would have been absolutely disastrous. Your most current design calls for a bridge over those roadways instead. There are many, many other examples. I'd like to extend my best wishes and sincerest appreciation to the fine staff in the areas of Engineering (specifically you, Mr. Ellis, and Randy Newton), Planning (Mike Franzen and Regina Rojas), Economic Development (David Lindahl), Community Development (Janet Jeremiah), Parks and Recreation (Jay Lotthammer), to the city manager, Rick Getschow; and to the many others involved at the city and the SWLRT Project Office. Nice work! Thank you so much for your time and consideration. Ken Higginbotham 14151 Vale Court 9 Eden Prairie, MN 55346 io Robert Ellis From: CraigsListReplyKen [Craigslistreplyken@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 8:02 AM To: Robert Ellis Subject: Correction to SWLRT comments Hi Robert. I found a potential error in the wording of my previous comments relating to the curve at Flying Cloud Drive and Eden Road (my item #5). I used the words, "I wonder if the radius of the LRT turn can be reduced a little more than it already has" when in fact I meant that the radius should be increased to make for a wider turn at that point. Would you like me to send a correction, or do you think the project office will understand my intent from the original e-mail? It was good to see you again last night at the City Council workshop. All the best. Ken Higginbotham 14151 Vale Court Eden Prairie, MN 55346 952.937-2666 home 612.839-3853 cell Robert Ellis From: CraigsListReplyKen [Craigslistreplyken@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2014 4:42 PM To: Robert Ellis Subject: Comments regarding SWLRT Preliminary Design prior to municipal consent April 21, 2014 Mr. Ellis, Per the Metropolitan Council's "Guide to the Municipal Consent Process" and the Preliminary Design Plans of the SWLRT that I studied online and at the Hennepin County Library in Eden Prairie, I am submitting the following comments: 1. First, allow me to say how impressed I am with the amount of work that went into the SWLRT Preliminary Design Plans. I spent about three hours reviewing Segments 1 and 1A, and maybe another twenty minutes reviewing Segment 2. I am appreciative of how local traffic concerns have been addressed where necessary, and how our prized walking trails have been preserved. 2. I have been hopeful of a grade separation at Technology Drive and Flying Cloud Drive in the form of a bridge. The elevation at that intersection is about 900 feet above sea level. It is 916 feet just south of the Residence Inn, so going westbound the SWLRT already has a 16-foot height advantage. I'm not sure, however, how much clearance is required for a grade-separation bridge, but I'm sure it is much more. My guess is that city engineers and SWLRT project office staff have gone over this a thousand times and still have not been able to find a good way to make it work. 3. I would like to formerly state an objection to having the SWLRT take priority at the grade crossing at Flying Cloud Drive and Technology Drive. I strongly urge the City of Eden Prairie withhold its municipal consent on the project unless the final design of the project provides for what I understand is called "run with the signal" (where the trains yield to vehicular traffic per the existing traffic signals) at that location. This seems to be the very kind of intersection where people get killed when they lose patience and try to beat the train. 4. Failing that, I believe there should be another eastbound lane available on Technology Drive well before its intersection with Flying Cloud Drive. Today eastbound traffic backs up significantly on Technology Drive at Flying Cloud Drive during peak hours even without a train delay. The Preliminary Plans show only one eastbound lane that finally opens to three lanes at approximately where the turn-in to IHOP/Extended Stay America is located (West Segment 1, Page 61, or Wl-CIV-PPFL-015). Per page 62 in Segment 1 (or W1-CIV-PPFL-016) there is to be a new left turn lane onto northbound Flying Cloud Drive, a through lane to the eastbound on-ramp to I-494, and a right turn lane to southbound Flying Cloud Drive. While that is an improvement over today, in my opinion it is still not enough to support the new at-grade crossing that will be at that intersection. I believe the backups will be compounded by the advent of intersection closures every time a SWLRT train passes, on average every five minutes. The preliminary design shows two westbound lanes on Technology Drive from Flying Cloud to accommodate the two left turn lanes on northbound Flying Cloud Drive to westbound Technology Drive, presumably to handle backed-up Flying Cloud to Technology Drive traffic waiting for trains to 12 cross. Is there a way to widen Technology Drive to handle yet one additional eastbound traffic lane from approximately STA 120+00 to STA 127+00 (Segment 1, page 61)? 5. Since the small strip mall at Flying Cloud Drive and Eden Road (FedEx-Kinkos) is likely to be taken, I wonder if the radius of the LRT turn can be reduced a little more than it already has. This should help cut down on the amount of noise generated from steel flanges on steel wheels scraping against the inside of the steel rails. 6. I understand there may be discussion of adding a signal that is not on the Preliminary Design Plans at the new enhanced intersection near Culvers at Southwest Station. Today the intersection is right-in/right-out only, but the new intersection will be fully functional from both eastbound and westbound drivers on Technology Drive. There are already three (3) new stoplights planned for the section of Technology Drive between Mitchell Road and Prairie Center Drive. One more might be simply unbearable. Those who have driven north or south along Hiawatha Avenue next to where the Blue LRT line operates will understand. The number and duration of stops along that stretch of road can be infuriating. 7. I believe it is imperative that we get the word out to the community via the local newspapers of the SWLRT impact on Eden Prairie as soon as possible. Provide as many details as one reasonably can. It would be very helpful if the "Route Visualization" video on the Metropolitan Council website was also updated (http://www.metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Projects/Current-Projects/Southwest- LRT/Route.aspx). The municipal consent public hearing is currently on the schedule for May 20, 2014, less than a month away. 8. As an interested observer of the SWLRT project, I must say how impressed I am with the outstanding professional staff at the City of Eden Prairie. In reviewing the technical drawings it is obvious that without your diligence, thoroughness and persistence, things could be much worse. For example, the original locally preferred route (over a year ago) had a grade crossing at the confluence of Valley View Road, Flying Cloud Drive and Prairie Center Drive. That would have been absolutely disastrous. Your most current design calls for a bridge over those roadways instead. There are many, many other examples. I'd like to extend my best wishes and sincerest appreciation to the fine staff in the areas of Engineering (specifically you, Mr. Ellis, and Randy Newton), Planning (Mike Franzen and Regina Rojas), Economic Development (David Lindahl), Community Development (Janet Jeremiah), Parks and Recreation (Jay Lotthammer), to the city manager, Rick Getschow; and to the many others involved at the city and the SWLRT Project Office. Nice work! Thank you so much for your time and consideration. Ken Higginbotham 14151 Vale Court Eden Prairie, MN 55346 13 Robert Ellis From: David Johnson [davidmichaeljohnson@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 3:49 PM To: swift Subject: Light Rail Transit Correspondence Attachments: City of Eden Praire City Council.docx City of Eden Prairie, City Council Honorable Ms. Nancy Tyra-Lukens- Mayor Council Members Ms. Kathy Nelson, Mr. Ron Case, Ms. Sherry Butcher Wickstrom, Mr. Brad Aho Friday, May 23, 2014 Dear Mayor Tyra-Lukens and Eden Prairie City Council, I appreciate all the work that is being done on the ambitious plan of extending the Light Rail to the South West Station, and now on to Mitchell Road. I had no problem with the original plan. I thought it was a good plan. However, the new plan, which was contrived to placate Costco's lawyers, sends the light rail too close to my nice home. Regrettably this will create a noisy, unsightly, and potentially dangerous condition for approximately 400 residents of the South West Station Condominiums. And it will adversely impact the federally protected marsh lands across the street, on the South side of Technology Drive. Bald eagles nest there. My daughter watches them from the windows. That lake/marsh is one of the last semi-pristine parcels of land in Eden Prairie. The visual materials, including the drawings, and computer animated flyover that the Light Rail office has made available are incorrect, incomplete and downright deceptive. They have offered no correct, readable renderings to the residents of Eden Prairie, especially the residents of South West Station Condominiums, most of whom cannot visually conceive what elevated train track structures running so close to their homes will look and sound like. I know. I've seen them. They are unsightly, and the trains shake the ground. Additionally we are missing an environmental impact study, especially for the federally protected marshlands on the south side of Technology drive. You are not ready to close the "Comments Period". Technically You Are Not Even Ready To Start The Comments Period. For these reasons, I cannot allow this to happen. The Light Rail system is best suited for commuters traveling between 4 and 20 miles to and from work. It should not run through housing developments. It should run next to, or down the middle of the highway. Please re-route the light rail back down the middle of route 212. 14 You can put the parking stations closer in and connect them with enclosed walk-ways, but the trains need to be away from where people are living. I would like to hear back from you very soon saying that you are postponing this until it can be properly reviewed by all those who will be affected. It will be more expensive to change later; and may I assure you, I am as determined as Costco's lawyers not to have this train running so close to my home. Thank you very much. Sincerely, David M.Johnson Southwest Station Condominiums 15 City of Eden Prairie, City Council Honorable Ms. Nancy Tyra-Lukens - Mayor Council Members Ms. Kathy Nelson, Mr. Ron Case, Ms. Sherry Butcher Wickstrom, Mr. Brad Aho Friday, May 23, 2014 Dear Mayor Tyra-Lukens and Eden Prairie City Council, I appreciate all the work that is being done on the ambitious plan of extending the Light Rail to the South West Station, and now on to Mitchell Road. I had no problem with the original plan. I thought it was a good plan. However, the new plan, which was contrived to placate Costco's lawyers, sends the light rail too close to my nice home. Regrettably this will create a noisy, unsightly, and potentially dangerous condition for approximately 400 residents of the South West Station Condominiums. And it will adversely impact the federally protected marsh lands across the street, on the South side of Technology Drive. Bald Eagles nest there. My daughter watches them from the windows. That lake/marsh is one of the last semi-pristine parcels of land in Eden Prairie. The visual materials, including the drawings, and computer animated flyover that the Light Rail office has made available are incorrect, incomplete and downright deceptive. They have offered no correct, readable renderings to the residents of Eden Prairie, especially the residents of South West Station Condominiums, most of whom cannot visually conceive what elevated train track structures running so close to their homes will look and sound like. I know. I've seen them. They are unsightly, and the trains shake the ground. Additionally we are missing an environmental impact study, especially for the federally protected marshlands on the south side of Technology drive. You are not ready to close the "Comments Period". Technically You Are Not Even Ready To Start The Comments Period. For these reasons, I cannot allow this to happen. The Light Rail system is best suited for commuters traveling between 4 and 20 miles to and from work. It should not run through housing developments. It should run next to, or down the middle of the highway. Please re- route the light rail back down the middle of route 212. You can put the parking stations closer in and connect them with enclosed walk-ways, but the trains need to be away from where people are living. I would like to hear back from you very soon saying that you are postponing this until it can be properly reviewed by all those who will be affected. It will be very expensive to change later; and may I assure you, I am as determined as Costco's lawyers not to have this train running so close to my home. Thank you very much. Sincerely, David M. Johnson Southwest Station Condominiums FRASER May 27, 2014 Special needs*Bright futures. Mr. David Lindahl Economic Development Manager City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Route of SW/LRT in Eden Prairie: Concerns of Fraser Dear Mr. Lindahl, I am writing as the President and CEO of Fraser, a nonprofit agency well known for providing • services to children with autism and other developmental disabilities. We operate a clinic for children with severe autism at 6458 City West Parkway, part of the Prime Tech Office Park in Eden Prairie. Fraser is nationally known for its work serving children with autism. At our clinic in Eden Prairie, we serve more than 400 clients, all of whom must face the severe difficulties of autism. I have worked with such children for more than 30 years and am very familiar with their problems. Children with autism are highly sensitive to, and often disrupted by, large, noisy moving objects. If the SW/LRT is placed along the west side of Highway 212 near our building at 6458 City West Parkway, I believe our therapeutic services and the behavior of the children will be disrupted. Also disturbing to our children will be the flickering light caused by elevated trains in front of our building and adjacent to our playground. There is no good way for us to remedy these critical problems. But there is a good remedy available to the Met Council: build the SW/LRT along the east side of Highway 212 away from our building. I understand that is where the LRT was originally planned to be. This is where it logically should be located. Locating the SW/LRT along the east side of Highway 212 will eliminate the concerns of Fraser and provide a long-term stable environment for our clients. I urge you to voice the City's preference for SW/LRT to be placed on the east side of Highway 212. Sincerely, 6Cni' \,qt ne S. Cross President and CEO Fraser School • Fraser Behavioral and Mental Health • Fraser Residential Living • Fraser Pediatric Therapy Fraser Home&Community Supports • The Fraser Institute 2400 West 64th Street,Minneapolis,MN 55423 • Tel:612.861,1688 • Fax:612.861.6050 • www.fraser.org Robert Ellis From: dazarian1@comcast.net Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 1:11 PM To: swift Subject: Comments regarding SWLRT in Eden Prairie SWLRT in Eden Prairie is NOT good for Eden Prairie. You will forever ruin our beautiful city by building this eyesore monstrosity. 1) We do not have the population density for it to succeed. 2) Light Rail is inflexible and breaks down in icy and cold weather. 3) We already have an award-winning Southwest Transit Bus system in place that will be able to get commuters closer to their destination and faster than they can with light rail transit. 4) Eden Prairie will no longer be the beautiful serene community it is known to be. Instead we will have a tangle of wires lacing through the LRT route and loud clanging bells ringing through our city every 7 minutes for 21 hours of the day. 5) Light Rail will make getting around Eden Prairie impossible. When the light rail came to Hiawatha Avenue, the commute times of vehicle traffic increased 20 to 40 minutes because vehicles have to wait for traffic signals timed to coordinate with the light rail trains. 6) Light Rail is EXPENSIVE. It will cost $1.7 Billion dollars to build the SWLRT. This doesn't count operation and maintenance costs. Nationally, taxpayers pay for 70.9% of all operational costs of light rail transit. 7) Light Rail has to be rebuilt or replaced every 30 years at a cost equal to or greater than the cost to originally build the system. 8) It would be cheaper to buy every commuter who will use the SWLRT a Prius every 5 years and still have money left over for taxi or bus service. 9) Light Rail Transit is the #2 DEADLIEST mode of transportation behind motorcycles, according to the May 2014 issue of Car and Driver Magazine. There have already been 10 deaths on the Hiawatha Line since 2004. 10) Eden Prairie Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens is a member of the Metropolitan Council's "Corridors of Opportunity" committee. Eden Prairie is one of the 5 cities that will be giving municipal consent to the SWLRT -- and the "Corridors of Opportunity" is a committee that is in favor of light rail transit. I feel it is a huge conflict of interest that the Mayor of Eden Prairie will be deciding on whether or not to have light rail transit running through her town while sitting on this committee at the same time. http://www.corridorsofopportunity.orq/partners/leadership. Mayor Tyra-Lukens needs to recuse herself from the Eden Prairie Municipal Consent Vote". I have attended numerous meetings regarding the light rail (especially the SWLRT project) over the last several years and all the information that I have received tells me one thing. Light Rail Transit is NOT being built to benefit commuters and low-income people. If it were, then the stations would have been better planned in areas that best serve the needs of these people instead of through affluent and low-densely populated areas in the Twin Cities. SAY NO TO SWLRT! Donna Azarian Eden Prairie Resident 17 Robert Ellis From: dazarian1@comcast.net Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 8:15 AM To: swift Subject: Fwd: Light Rail Transit in Eden Prairie To Whom It May Concern, I would like to express my concern regarding the Eden Prairie "Municipal Consent" vote that will be taking place on June 17th, 2014 regarding SWLRT running through Eden Prairie. I am greatly concerned that since Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens is a member of the Metropolitan Council's "Corridors of Opportunity" Committee, it presents a conflict of interest, since it is the Metropolitan Council, is pushing Light Rail upon the Twin Cities. I feel it would be a tremendous conflict of interest if Mayor Tyra-Lukens is allowed to vote for the SWLRT Municipal Consent, because of her involvement with the Corridors of Opportunity Committee. I strongly feel that Mayor Tyra- Lukens should recuse herself from the Municipal Consent vote, because of her involvement with this committee. I look forward to your response regarding this important issue. Sincerely, Donna Azarian Eden Prairie Resident 9068 Waverly Court Eden Prairie, MN 55347 18 Robert Ellis From: E. Fabel [fabele@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 7:16 PM To: swlrt Subject: SWLRT I am extremely against the SWLRT! I agree with the quote by Steve Smith in the EP News"If I wanted to live in Minneapolis, I'd live in Minneapolis" I choose to raise my children in EP because it's close to the city WITHOUT being a big city. I don't want it to grow. I like the quiet and safety of EP and knowing my kids are safe here playing outside. I don't want the noise. I am already dealing with increased airport noise and traffic I do NOT want more city in my suburb. I am from Chicago and this is starting to remind my of the SouthWest side and Midway airport area. We DON"T need SWLRT, it will drain our finances to support it and maintain it and it will not help our community as much as staying with the already proven, clean, quiet, buses. Have a Happy Day!! Liz Fabel 19 Robert Ellis From: Ed Flaherty[Ed.Flaherty@lariatcompanies.com] Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 2:36 PM To: editor@edenprairienews.com Cc: swift Subject: SWLRT will hurt Eden Prairie Letter to the Editor. I agree with Donna Azarian. This is another case of the bureaucrats making an argument because THEY WANT LRT, not because it's cost effective. When the Blue Line from St. Cloud was analyzed after start up and ridership fell way short of projections (so now us taxpayers are stuck with their incompetence) what did they do? They spent$12M on a transit station in Ramsey (more tax dollars) to "induce people to 'TRY' the train." They thought a nice train station might get people to the train. This is the kind of circular/fuzzy thinking that goes on. The post mortem analysis made by one tax payer said that based on the total capital budget of that project, we taxpayers could have bought every rider a new Cadillac every three years and still have 50% of the project cost not spent. This deal is the same—only a different location. People make their own choices. You can't legislature people's behavior! Most people DRIVE. Government belong in Parks, Pipes(Sewer/Water) and Police. The rest they need to stay out of. Ed Flaherty Eden Prairie, MN 20 Robert Ellis From: Elaine Wedel [eewedel@usfamily.net] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 11:21 AM To: swirt Subject: Light rail I oppose the light rail running through Eden Prairie. It will tear up our city and decrease the home values of those living near the LRT. There are also safety and noise issues. Purgatory Park with natural wildlife will be destroyed. The cost is way too much for the benefits. Leave our city as it is. We can increase the bus line for way less money. Vote No and do what is right for the taxpayer. Thank you! Elaine Wedel @9039 Gould Road EP 55347 Sent from my iPad 21 Robert Ellis From: ephopek@gmail.com Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 4:55 PM To: swirl I vote no to having light rail come to Eden Prairie. Hope Kennedy Sent from my iPhone 22 Robert Ellis From: Fred [eplwr@usfamily.net] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 11:22 PM To: swift Subject: A copy of my address to the City Councel Dear City Council Members, I'm attaching a copy of my address to you on Tues. night. I hope you will vote against this project. Fred Koppelman 23 Robert Ellis From: GARY KATI SIMONS [gksimons5@msn.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 3:42 PM To: swift Subject: Southwest Transit LRT Dear Eden Prairie City Council, Thank you for providing an opportunity to comment on the proposed LRT from Eden Prairie to downtown Minneapolis. And thank you for providing a very comprehensive assessment of all the implications of this signficant project. It is clear that considerable time and effort has gone into the analysis and publication of this review. I am an Eden Prairie resident who commutes daily to work in Bloomington. I am also a frequent user of the Regional trail between Eden Prairie and the Uptown area, mostly for evening or weekend biking. My comment is around the need for additional transit options between Eden Prairie and downtown. The morning commute going East on either 494 or Crosstown (62) is very congested. Travel speeds seldom reach 50 mph and are more commonly slow and go or stop and go. A slight reduction in traffic levels can substantially improved the commute speed. This was evident during the depths of the recession in 2009, when traffic volume dropped about 5% and speeds increased significantly. Since then the traffic has been building and despite major road renovations (Crosstown commons and 494/169 interchange), the commuting speeds continue to fall. The proposed LRT is clearly a potential solution to redirect some of the traffic during peak commute times. I don't know if the current analysis takes into account the improved travel time on 494/crosstown if some of the vehicle trips are redirected to the LRT, but if it does not, it should. With the anticipated poplulation growth in the Southwest metro, its inevitable that the existing road infrastructure does not have capacity. The no build option in the environmental impact statement doesn't appear to predict the costs associated with additional lanes for the Crosstown or 494. With increasing population and trips from the Southwest metro to downtown, it would seem likely that additional lanes would eventually be needed to alleviate the impending gridlock. Given the limited land available on Crosstown between Highways 169 and 35W, the cost to complete such a project would be substantial. The opposition to such a project would also be significant. I encourage the City Council to proceed with the Southwest Transit LRT. This community needs to continue to improve its transit options. Relying on roads alone, whether for cars or buses, is not sufficient. As our population and vehicle trips increase, we will need to have many options for transportation. Incorporating LRT into the metro area's infrastructure is a move in that direction. LRT would also provide an important reverse commute capability that doesn't exist today. Regards, Gary Simons 7024 Tartan Curve Eden Prairie, MN 55346 24 Robert Ellis From: Gene Sipprell [sipp0041@umn.edu] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 3:55 PM To: swift Subject: oppose light rail I oppose the proposed light rail line through Eden Prairie and encourage you to vote NO on municipal consent. Please do not support this legislation. Chaplain Rev. Dr. Gene Sipprell 17734 Sheffield Lane,Eden Prairie, MN 55346 26 Robert Ellis From: glennandsharon@juno.com Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 11:10 PM To: swift Subject: Vote no on SWLRT Municipal consent I oppose the proposed light rail line through Eden Prairie and encourage you to vote NO on municipal consent. In addition to many other arguments, the demographics make this unsupportable financially. Let's learn from other cities like ours that have failed to make LRT financially supportable. Unlike buses whose routes can be adapted, this locks in permanently at exorbitant expense. The future for cities with lower population densities is battery powered vehicles, not iron rails. There is an historical reason why trolleys became extinct in the Twin Cities. Glenn Bratt 11315 Lanewood Circle Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Fast, Secure, NetZero 4G Mobile Broadband. Try it. http://www.netzero.net/?refcd=NZINTISP0512T4GOUT2 27 Robert Ellis From: Grier, Maren [MGrier@Briggs.com] Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 5:05 PM To: Robert Ellis Cc: nalrae.succio@hennepin.us; swlrt@metrotransit.org; Rick Getschow; bcoffey@costco.com; jfrank@costco.com; tjohnson@tjdesignitd.com; Steve.Chelesnik@emerson.com; Perry, Jack Y. Subject: Comments on Southwest Light Rail Attachments: 88398284_comment letter_20140516165822.pdf Mr. Ellis: Please see the attached Southwest Light Rail comment letter. Best regards, Maren F.Grier Attorney BRIGGS. 'r+c a M>O R A N$ Briggs and Morgan, P.A. Direct 612.977.8829 Fax 612.977.8650 mgrier(albriggs.com 2200 IDS Center I 80 South 8th Street I Minneapolis, MN 55402 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail communication and any attached documentation may be privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure and is intended only for the use of the designated recipient(s). It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized person. The use, distribution, transmittal or re-transmittal by an unintended recipient of this communication is strictly prohibited without our express approval in writing or by e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail,please delete it from your system without copying it and notify the above sender so that our e-mail address may be corrected. Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient is not a waiver of any attorney- client or work-product privilege. 28 8000 IDS Center B R IG 80 South Street Minneapolis MN 55402-2157 tel 612.977.8400 B�R I +'".z G 5 n N D M O Ft G A N fax 612.977.8650 May 16, 2014 Jack Y.Perry (612)977-8497 jpeny@briggs.com VIA E-MAIL AND U.S. MAIL Robert Ellis (rellis@edenprairie.org) City of Eden Prairie Public Works Director 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Re: SW LRT's Proposed West Segment 1 and Town Center Station Dear Mr. Ellis: This letter is being sent on behalf of Costco Wholesale (Costco) and Emerson Process Management/Rosemount (Emerson) in support of the plans for the Southwest Light Rail (SW LRT) that were approved by the Metropolitan Council (Met Council) and submitted pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 473.3994 to various cities, including the City of Eden Prairie (City), for "municipal consent." Costco and Emerson specifically voice their support for the Met Council-approved "West Segment 1," which includes SW LRT's Southwest Station and Eden Prairie Town Center Station, which has been relocated from the north side of Costco's property along Technology Drive (as depicted in the draft environmental impact study (DEIS)) to the south side of Costco's and Emerson's Eden Prairie properties (West Segment 1). Throughout the SW LRT planning process, Costco and Emerson have repeatedly voiced their objections to the DEIS-proposed location of the Town Center Station. As previously identified by Costco and Emerson, there are at least two insurmountable problems that would result from locating the Town Center Station on the north side of Costco's property along Technology Drive. Attachs. A-B. First, the stated vision and purpose for the Town Center Station—namely, that it be a walkable transit center that is accessible by transit-dependent riders and pedestrians—would be subverted as that area is neither walkable nor near City's actual "town center." And, second, the DEIS-proposed location of the Town Center Station would result in substantial adverse impact to Emerson and would cause the Minn. Stat. § 117.186, subd. 2- defined "business destruction" of Costco, making Met Council and HCRRA liable to Costco for not only the fair value of the real estate taken, but also for the "loss of going concern" of Costco's Eden Prairie business (a number in excess of$100,000,000). The plans for SW LRT's West Segment 1, particularly the relocation of the Town Center Station to the south side of Costco's and Emerson's Eden Prairie properties, in many ways resolve the problems posed by the original DEIS-proposed location for that transit station. First, to the south of the new Town Center Station location are apartment buildings, restaurants, the Briggs and Morgan,Professional Association Minneapolis 15t.Paul I www.briggs.com Member-Lex Mundl,a Global Association of Independent Law Firms BRIGGS AND MORGAN Robert Ellis (rellis@edenprairie.org) May 16, 2014 Page 2 Eden Prairie Mall, and other shopping and entertainment facilities. Thus, in this location the Town Center Station is walkable, accessible from the south to pedestrians and transit dependent riders, and in City's actual "town center." Second, while the Met Council and Hennepin Regional Railroad Authority will still to be required to pay Costco and Emerson the fair value of the property that will be taken in connection with construction of SW LRT and the Town Center Station, they will no longer be liable to Costco for its Minn. Stat. § 117.186, subd. 2-defined "business destruction." And, as a result, the Met Council-approved West Segment 1 could save the SW LRT project in excess of$100,000,000.1 City, too, has previously recognized the problems inherent in locating the Town Center station on the north side of Costco's property along Technology Drive and has, like Costco and Emerson, voiced its objection to the DEIS-proposed location for this transit station. Indeed, in its DEIS comment letter, City noted that "[i]n order to better serve the Eden Prairie Town Center and Eden Prairie Center, the feasibility of a more centrally located and walkable Town Center Station needs to be evaluated during the Preliminary Engineering process." Attach. C. Met Council heard City loud and clear and consistent with City's request, considered alternative locations for the Town Center Station during the preliminary engineering process. This process culminated in the plans for the Met Council-approved West Segment 1, including the relocation of the Town Center Station to City's actual "town center." City has already expressed its approval of the Met Council-approved West Segment 1. In fact, at the September 4, 2013 Southwest Corridor Management Committee, City Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens advocated for the Eden Prairie alignment depicted in the plans for SW LRT's West Segment, 1. Attach. D. Because it is City's preferred alignment and resolves in many ways the problems that would result from the DEIS-proposed Town Center Station location, City should give its "municipal consent" to the Met Council-approved SW LRT West Segment 1. Costco and Emerson appreciate the opportunity to comment, and respectfully request City's consideration of their position. ' To clarify,Costco and Emerson support the new Town Center Station location as currently designed--namely,as a kiss and ride transit station. This design is consistent with the vision and purpose for the Town Center Station. A park and ride, on the other hand, would likely be incredibly disruptive to the business activities of both Costco and Emerson. Emerson, in particular, would be significantly adversely impacted and would not support a park and ride or public access to the Town Center Station of any kind across its property. BRIGGS AND MORGAN Robert Ellis (rellis@edenprairie.org) May 16, 2014 Page 3 Ji Y. Pcrr JYP/aw cc: M. Grier J. Frank, Costco (via email) T. Johnson, Costco (via email) B. Coffey, Costco (via email) S. Chelesnik,Emerson(via email) R. Getschow(via email) 6237258v2 22 IDS Center 80 uth 8th Street B R I G G S Minnnueaap lis MN 55402-2157 „13'R I G,G 5 A N D SM fi G.A fVgx; fe'6112 97788650 Jack V.Perry December 18, 2012 (612)977-8497 jperry@briggs,com VIA E-MAIL AND U.S. MAIL Peter McLaughlin Chair, Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority 300 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55487-0241 Re: Southwest Transitway DEIS Dear Chair McLaughlin: This letter is being sent on behalf of Costco Wholesale (Costco) and Emerson Process Management/Rosemount (Emerson). This letter is being sent to you as the Chair of the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA), which is the lead state agency under the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act (MERA) for the preparation of the Southwest Transitway's (or SW LRT) October 2012 Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). This letter is also being copied to the Metropolitan Council (Met Council), which is the lead for the preparation of the SW LRT's Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). Costco and Emerson begin by thanking you for the opportunity to comment on the DEIS at the November 29, 2012 public hearing in Eden Prairie. And Costco and Emerson hereby submit their joint written comments on the DEIS. These written comments are consistent with their oral comments on November 29, 2012. OVERVIEW Other than their narrow objection to the proposed route of the SW LRT in City along Technology Drive, including the proposed location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property (Narrow Objection), Costco and Emerson are very much supportive of the SW LRT. Costco and Emerson have, in fact, been meeting with representatives of the City of Eden Prairie (City) for the past several months in order to address their Narrow Objection without compromising or delaying the success of the SW LRT, The seven-step basis for Costco and Emerson's Narrow Objection is set forth below. City has been receptive to Costco and Emerson's Narrow Objection, Indeed City has from May 18, 2010 to the present continuously supported Costco and Emerson's Narrow Objection by requesting that HCRRA and Met Council "evaluate alternatives" to the proposed route of the SW LRT in City along Technology Drive, including the proposed location of the ATTACHMENT A Briggs and Morgan;professional Association Minneapolis I'St.Paul I www.t nlggs,coln Member-Lex Mundi,a Global Association of independent Law Finns BRIGGS AND MORGAN Peter McLaughlin December 18, 2012 Page 2 Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property. City has had periodic meetings with HCRRA and Met Council representatives, and their representatives have assured City that they would, in fact, evalute such alternatives as part of the SW LRT's Preliminary Engineering process, These assurances from HCRRA and Met Council's representatives are reflected in City's December 4, 2012 "[g]eneral [c]omments" to the DEIS. 12/4/12 City's DEIS comment letter at 1 ¶¶ 1-2 (emphasis added). SEVEN-STEP BASIS FOR COSTCO AND EMERSON'S NARROW OBJECTION STEP NO. 1: City is to have a say in the decisions regarding the proposed SW LRT which affect City. a. HCRRA and Met Council have repeatedly and emphatically assured the six local municipalities that are being asked to "host" the proposed SW LRT (i.e., City, Edina, Hopkins, Minneapolis, Minnetonka and St. Louis Park) that they are, in exchange, entitled to provide input regarding, and ultimately the discretion to approve or deny, the route for the SW LRT, including the location of the transit stations within their borders. b. City is, more specifically, a "participating agency" in the SW LRT project. c. And 23 U.S.C. § 139 provides that City, as a "participating agency," is permitted to (1) assist the project sponsor in determining the range of alternatives to be considered in a project's DEIS and (2) identify, as early as practicable, any issues of concern regarding the project's potential impacts. STEP NO. 2: HCRRA and Met Council ultimately need City to issue the necessary local land use approvals for the route of the SW LRT in City, including the location of the transit stations within City. a. City is statutorily charged with the responsibility to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of its citizens. b. City thus has broad discretion to act so as to protect its citizens. The location of the route of the SW LRT in City, including the location of the transit stations within City, will have a significant impact on the public health, safety and general welfare of its citizens. d. City thus has broad discretion to approve or deny the required land use approvals for the proposed route of the SW LRT in City, including the proposed location of the transit stations within City. BRIGGS AND MORGAN Peter McLaughlin December 18,2012 Page 3 STEP NO. 3: City has continuously expressed its objection to the proposed route of the SW LRT in City along Technology Drive, including the proposed location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property. a. On May 18, 2010, the Eden Prairie City Council passed Resolution No. 2010-40, which (1) expressed concern regarding the potential adverse environmental and economic impact of the proposed route of the SW LRT in City along Technology Drive, including the proposed location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property, and (2) asked HCRRA and Met Council to (a) "evaluate alternatives" and (b) "find solutions for mitigating impacts of the proposed LRT on the businesses." b. As reflected in HCRRA and Met Council's February 21, 2012 Request for Proposals (RFP), City has continued to insist that an "alternatives analysis . . . be done for the . . . Town Center station in Eden Prairie." (Emphasis added). e. On November 20, 2012, the Eden Prairie City Council authorized its City Manager to submit City's comments to the DEIS. d. On December 4, 2012, City's City Manager submitted, among other comments, City's following two "[g]eneral [c]omments" to the DEIS: 1) The City of Eden Prairie continues to support Alternative 3A as the preferred alternative as it serves the Major Center Area and Golden Triangle Area and provides the best opportunities for development, redevelopment, and economic development. Alternative 3A clearly has the highest ridership potential and the greatest positive economic impact to Eden Prairie and the region primarily due to its close proximity to existing and future job concentrations. However this alternative could be further improved in these respects by moving the Town Center Station closer to the Town et.mter or the Eden Prairie Center. 2) In order to better serve the Eden Prairie Town Center and Eden Prairie Center the ILasil)ilit _of a more- centrally located and walkable Town Center__Station needs to he evaluated during the Preliminary Engineering process. Attached for reference are several concept location areas for the proposed Town Center Station that should be considered. 12/4/12 City's DEIS comment letter at 1 1111 1-2 (emphasis added). e. In response to City's continuous insistence that an "alternatives analysis . be done for the . . . Town Center station in Eden Prairie," HCRRA and Met Council have through their representatives represented their willingness to evaluate, as part of the Preliminary Engineering process, alternatives to the proposed route of the SW LRT in BRIGGS• AND MORGAN Peter McLaughlin December 18,2012 Page 4 City along Technology Drive, including the proposed location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property, f. As reflected in Figures 1 and 4 of the DEIS, HCRRA and Met Council have already identified and conducted some preliminary analysis of alternatives to the Town Center transit station in City. STEP NO. 4: City has compelling land use concerns with the proposed route of the SW LRT in City along Technology Drive, including the proposed location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property. a. As reflected in City's May 18, 2010 resolution and December 4, 2012 DEIS comment letter, as well as HCRRA and Met Council's February 21, 2012 RFP, the primary purpose and need for the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station is to provide transportation to transit-dependent riders and pedestrians; it is not to be designed as a park and ride. b, The "Station Vision" for the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station is as follows: Station Vision • A vibrant mixed use district dominated by retail and residential uses. This idea builds on and enhances the efforts of the 2007 Major Center Area study and seeks to create a walkable transit village that is well served by multiple modes of transit while accommodating service and personal vehicle circulation and parking. • Vertical mixed-use development of no fewer than 3 stories and no more than 5 stories for the majority of parcels. Rooftop decks should be allowed in excess of these heights. • Land use near the station should be higher density and should include higher-intensity multi-story mixed-use comprised of offices and multi-family residences. Ground floor uses should be active and connected to the pedestrian environment. (Underlining in original; italics added). c. The proposed route of the SW LRT in City along Technology Drive, including the proposed location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property, would not serve the above-stated purpose and need for the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station; it is not near transit-dependent riders or pedestrians. BRIGGS AND MORGAN Peter McLaughlin December 18, 2012 Page 5 (1) Costco's property is guided and zoned as "Regional Commercial," which is defined by City as follows: Regional Commercial: This category is located in areas where one or more of the following characteristics are present: a) large sites are available to provide locations for major shopping centers which serve a wider region than the City itself; b) relatively large sites for sales and service operations that are not typically found in shopping center structures and attract little or no pedestrian traffic; and c) sites to provide limited sales and service operations that are oriented and directly related to highway or freeway uses, tourists and travelers. Corresponding zoning districts are the C- Reg, C-Reg-Ser and the C-Hwy districts. Site coverage is .20-.40 (Underlining in original; bold and italics added). (2) in contrast,the "Town Center" zone is defined by City as follows: Town Center This category designates the land use for a mixed-use downtown area to be located near the center of the Major Center Area. The 120 acre area is to be redeveloped over time into a compact, walkable, vibrant, pedestrian oriented area. The Town Centers a result of a history of planning dating hack to the 1970's and the adoption of the 2006 Major Center Area (MCA) Study and Plan. The focus of the MCA Study is on creating a concentrated pedestrian (nut transit oriented development area. that has a srrppOrt rye tttt of higher intensity land uses (retail, s-t vu'e, a ffirc, housing, path, hospitality, and entertainment), consist of vurticni mixed use buildings (i.e: Office or housing over shops and restaurants) and the nearby housing will be higher density than typically found found in other pauts ul` the City. Futi e transit services (light rail and bus) will help ensure convenient access and mobility Parking will be in parking structlres 'and on-street with limited use or surface parking lots. (Future buildings will ft•ont on a street with a lively and active street life. Parks, trails, landscaped streets and plazas will add green space and recreation amenities to the area. The redevelopment will be designed to support Eden Prairies' community health, active living and sustainability goals. In order to limit traffic congestion, development intensity in .the balance of the MCA will he lower than in the Town Center, See the Town Center Land Use Plan and the Major Center Area Study for further information. Corresponding zoning is the TC - Town BRIGGS AND MORGAN Peter McLaughlin December 18, 2012 Page 6 Center Mixed Use District. Residential is 45-75 du per acre, Commercial is .20-.40. (Bold in original; underlining and italics added). (3) City's "Major Center Area" is further defined as follows: Development patterns should continue as they have throughout most of the area abutting the outer ring road of Prairie Center Drive and Valley View Drive. A compact, walkable Town Center should_be created, that would cluster around Siillzletree Lane and ldlcwild Lake. liWen Pniiric's highest development densities should be found within the Town Center. Organized by a new grid system of streets and urban amenities, the Town Center should emphasize residential, retail and mixed-use development • types. (Emphasis added). STEP NO. 5: City has compelling economic concerns with the proposed route of the SW LRT along Technology Drive, including the proposed location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property. a. The proposed route of the SW LRT in City along Technology Drive, including the proposed location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property, would result in the partial taking of Costco and Emerson's property on Technology Drive, for which HCRRA and Met Council would be liable. (1) HCRRA and Met Council will be liable to Costco and Emerson for the "fair market value" of the real estate being taken from Costco. b. The proposed route of the SW LRT in City along Technology Drive, including the proposed location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property, would result in the Minn. Stat. § 117.186, subd. 2-defined "business destruction" of Costco for which HCRRA and Met Council would be liable for its § 117.186-provided for "loss of going concern" (i,e., the "fair value" of its Eden Prairie business)and substantial adverse impact for Emerson. (1) Per the DEIS, the proposed location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property will take numerous parking spaces from and dramatically delay the access to and from Costco's convenience-based gas station, thereby causing the complete "business destruction" of this integral component of the store. Id., subd. 2. BRIGGS AND MORGAN Peter McLaughlin December 18, 2012 Page 7 (2) Costco's convenience-based gas station is an integral component to its entire Eden Prairie store, Indeed, 10 years ago Costco refused to build on another parcel just south of the Eden Prairie Center Mall because its convenience gas station component could not be accommodated there. (3) HCRRA and Met Council would clearly not be able to meet one of its statutorily-prescribed affirmative defenses under § 117.186, subd. 2 — notably, the subd. 2(2)-required showing that "the loss can be reasonably prevented [(a)] by relocating the business . . . in [(i)] the same [(i.e., 'on-site')] or [(ii)] a similar and reasonably suitable location as the property that was taken [(i.e., 'off-site')] or [(b)] by loking_steps and adopting procedures that a reasonably prudent person of a similar age and under similar circumstances as the owner, would take and adopt in preserving the going concern of the business." (Emphasis and bracketed information added). (4) HCRRA and Met Council would be liable for Costco's § 117.186 "loss of going concern." (5) Costco's "loss of going concern" would be in excess of $100,000,000. STEP NO. 6: There appears to be at least one alternative to the proposed route of the SW LRT in City along Technology Drive, including the location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property, that better advances not only (1) the purpose and need for this transit station to the SW LRT but also (2) City's land use objectives without subjecting HCRRA and Met Council to such extreme statutory liability under § 117.186. a. One alternative route for the SW LRT in City is along Singletree Lane, including the location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on City owned property near the intersection of Singletree Lane and Prairie Center Drive. b. This alternative would appear to much better serve the purpose and need for this segment of the SW LRT because it would be closer to transit-dependent riders and pedestrians. c. This alternative would be consistent with the description of the transit station at issue as the "Eden Prairie Town Center" transit station, which came about because it was initially proposed to be located near the "Town Center." d. This alternative would be consistent with City's land use objectives, which includes "transit facilities" within this "Town Center" designated area. e. This alternative would minimize the takings liabilities because the transit station would be located on public property. BRIGGS AND MORGAN Peter McLaughlin December 18, 2012 Page 8 f. But neither this alternative route for the SW LRT in City along Singletree Lane nor any other alternative to the proposed route along Technology Drive has yet been evaluated by HCRRA or Met Council. STEP NO. 7: There is still adequate time to conduct the requested alternative analysis without delaying the project. a. HCRRA and Met Council do not anticipate completion of the requisite engineering for the Project until 2014. b. Six months is adequate time to evaluate the above-discussed alternative routes of the SW LRT in City along, among others, Singletree Lane, including the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station near the intersection of Singletree Lane and Prairie Center Drive, c. As has been explained by HCRRA and Met Council's representatives, the existing proposed route of the SW LRT in City along Technology Drive, including the proposed location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property, was adopted as a mere "placeholder" so that the proposal could move forward with environmental review; it was, per I-ICRRA and Met Council's representatives, NEVER intended to be a permanent or binding part of the overall SW LRT. CONCLUSION Costco and Emerson appreciate HCRRA and Met Council's consideration of their Narrow Objection, And they, as supported by City, reset itlulty request that tic'RR\ and Met Council agree to evaluate, as part of the Preliminary Engineering process, the laird use. and economic impacts of alternative routes of the SW LRT in City tilong Technology Drive, including the location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property — notably, the alternative route of the SW LRT in City along Singletree Lane, including the location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on City-owned property near the intersection of Singletree Lane and Prairie Center Drive. To the extent, however, that HCRRA and Met Council either will not look at alternatives or do so but conclude that the alternatives are inferior, Costco and Emerson have several more objections as it relates to the proposed route for the SW LRT along Technology Drive, including the proposed location of the Eden Prairie Town Center transit station on Costco's property, But they have shared those concerns with City on multiple occasions. And, out of respect for the expressed willingness from HCRRA and Met Council, through their representatives, to perform an alternative analysis for this portion of the route as part of the Preliminary Engineering process, they will not repeat those concerns here. BRIGGS AND MORGAN Peter McLaughlin December 18, 2012 Page 9 Please contact me (612-977-8497) or Steve Chelesnik (952-828-3303), who is the Vice President & General Counsel of Emerson Process Management, with any questions and/or concerns, " *, +S'inceIe`y, �'. crry / AND Steven Chelesnik Vice President& General Counsel,Emerson Process Management JYP/kg cc: HCRRA(swcorridor@co.hennepin.mn.us) Hennepin County Housing, Community Work&Transit 701 Fourth Avenue South, Ste. 400 Minneapolis, MN 55415 B FI G G S 2200 IDS Center 80 South 8th Street Minneapolis MN 55402-2157 "" M ji N te1612,9778400 fax 612.977,8650 October 21, 2013 Jack Y.Perry (612)977-8497 jperry@briggs,com VIA EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL Daren Nyquist(Daren.Nyquist@metrotransit.com) Metropolitan Council 390 N, Robert Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Re: SW LRT's proposed Eden Prairie alignment Dear Council Members: This letter is sent on behalf of Costco Wholesale (Costco) and Emerson Processing Management/Rosemount (Emerson). This letter is being sent to express Costco's and Emerson's support for the Southwest Corridor Management Committee's (Committee) September 4, 2013 recommendation that the Metropolitan Council (Met Council) approve the "Mitchell Station & Comp Plan Station via Technology Drive" route for the Southwest Light Rail's (SW LRT) "Eden Prairie Alignment," including the relocation of the Town Center Station (Comp Plan Alignment). The Comp Plan Alignment is depicted in yellow on Attach. A. For at least three reasons, the Comp Plan Alignment and the proposed relocation of the Town Center Station off of Costco's property and closer to the City of Eden Prairie's(City) actual "town center" will further the stated purpose and vision for the Town Center Station, as well as promote both the short-term and the long-term success of SW LRT. REASON NO, 1: Compatibility with the stated vision and purpose for the Town Center Station The Committee-recommended Comp Plan Alignment and the proposed relocation of the Town Center Station closer to City's "town center" is compatible with the stated purpose and vision for the Town Center Station—namely, that it be a walkable transit center that is accessible to transit-dependent riders and pedestrians, Attach. B at 4. It has been widely acknowledged that locating the Town Center Station on or near Costco's property (as depicted in the DEIS) would subvert, rather than promote, this purpose and vision. Indeed, the DEIS's proposed Town Center Station is located in an area that is neither walkable nor near City's actual "town center." Id at 4-5. By moving the Town Center transit station closer to both City's businesses (notably, the Eden Prairie Mall) and residents, the Committee-recommended Comp Plan Alignment ensures its accessibility to transit-dependent riders and pedestrians, thereby ensuring SW LRT's long-term success. Briggs and Morgan,Professional Association Minneapolis St Paul I wwwbriggs.com Member•Lex Mundl,a Global Association of Independent Law Firms ATTACHMENT B BRIGGS AND MORGAN Daren Nyquist(Daren.Nyquist@metrotransit.com) October 21, 2013 Page 2 REASON NO. 2: The Comp Plan Alignment is City's "preferred alternative" Following its vote on the SW LRT route, Met Council must seek municipal consent and approval pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 473.3994. Recognizing its incompatibility with the stated purpose and vision for the Town Center Station, City has continuously expressed its objection to the DEIS's so-called "Locally Preferred Alternative," and specifically to the proposed location of the Town Center Station on or near Costco's property. Attach. B at 2-4. The Comp Plan Alignment is City's actual "preferred alternative." Indeed City Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens advocated for the Comp Plan Alignment at the Committee's September 4,2013 meeting. Attach. C. To ensure both the short-term and long-term success of the SW LRT project, Met Council should approve the City-preferred Comp Plan Alignment. REASON NO. 3: Relocating Town Center Station will have both short-term and long-term financial benefits In contrast to the other major proposed adjustment to SW LRT (i.e, the proposed routing of SW LRT through tunnels under the Kenilworth Corridor) the Comp Plan Alignment will result in cost savings for the SW LRT project, The projected $30-$35 million cost increase attributed to the Comp Plan Alignment fails to account for Costco's statutorily-authorized claim for "loss of going concern" in excess of$100 million if the Town Center Station were located on Costco's property. This "loss of going concern" would be recoverable from Met Council and the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority (HCCRA). Attach. B at 6-7. Taking into account Met Council and 1ICRRA's potential liability to Costco if Met Council were to proceed with the DEIS's so-called "Locally Preferred Alternative," the Comp Plan Alignment will result in short-term cost savings of at least$65 million. SW LRT will likewise realize long-term financial benefits as a result of the Comp Plan Alignment and relocation of the Town Center Station, Significantly, the relocation of the Town Center transit station closer City's businesses and residents will surely result in increased ridership and, as a result, long-term financial success. Costco and Emerson respectfully request Met Council's consideration of their position. Sincerely; Jael(Y. Perry BRIGGS AND MORGAN Daren Nyquist(Daren.Nyquist@metrotransit.com) October 21, 2013 Page 3 JYP Attachments cc: J. Frank, Costco T. Johnson, Costco S. Chelesnik,Emerson 5723695v1 December 4, 2012 EDEN Hennepin County PRAIRIE Housing, Community Works &Transit ll:E•Wonk•WiEnst ATTN: Southwest Transitway OFC 952 949 8300 701 Fourth Avenue South, Suite 400 FAX 952 949 8390TDD 952 949 8399 Minneapolis, MN 55415 8080 Mitchell Rd Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 SUBJECT: Southwest LRT DEIS Comments edenprairle.arq To Whom It May Concern: The City of Eden Prairie has reviewed the Southwest Transitway Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS). We appreciate the opportunity to review the DEIS and respectfully submit the following comments, which were approved at the November 15, 2012, City Council meeting(resolution attached), for consideration: General Comments 1) The City of Eden Prairie continues to support Alternative 3A as the preferred alternative as it serves the Major Center Area and Golden Triangle Area and provides the best opportunities for development, redevelopment, and economic development. Alternative 3A clearly has the highest ridership potential and the greatest positive economic impact to Eden Prairie and the region primarily due to its close proximity to existing and future job concentrations. However this alternative could be further improved in these respects by moving the Town Center Station closer to the Town Center or the Eden Prairie Center. 2) In order to better serve the Eden Prairie Town Center and Eden Prairie Center the feasibility of a more centrally located and walkable Town Center Station needs to be evaluated during the Preliminary Engineering process. Attached for reference are several concept location areas for the proposed Town Center Station that should be considered. 3) Consistent with the statements included in the Operations and Maintenance Facility Site Evaluation memorandum(Appendix H of the DEIS), a more thorough and full evaluation of the Southwest LRT line and all potential Operations and Maintenance Facilities (OMF)must occur before the OMF is sited. The evaluation must include all potential sites along the line and not just the sites included in the DEIS OMF documentation. The siting of the OMF must take into account and minimize impacts to local businesses, tax capacity, station area transit oriented development, and adjacent land uses. Furthermore construction and operation of the OMF must meet all applicable zoning codes, building codes and other city requirements for the City in which it is placed. ATTACHMENT C Southwest LRT DEIS Comments December 4, 2012 Page 2 of 7 4) The selection of the location, size and type(at-grade, structured, mix-used, etc.) of the park and ride facilities is a critical issue which must be closely coordinated with the City of Eden Prairie. The City believes there is significant opportunity to improve on the siting and size of the Park and Ride locations shown in the conceptual engineering drawings. In particular the City has the following park and ride related comments: • The City's preference is to minimize parking at the Town Center Station. This station is envisioned to be centrally located and walkable to a number of retail and residential properties. In addition, it is anticipated that the park and ride demand at this station can be shifted to adjacent stations. • The City would also prefer to minimize the size of the park and ride at the Golden Triangle Station as these additional trips could be better allocated to future development. • The use of the existing Southwest Station Park and Ride must be coordinated with Southwest Transit. This is a large existing park and ride facility and any potential changes in service could affect the available parking supply. • In order to accommodate and allow for station area development all larger park and ride facilities should be built as structured parking. Also,joint development opportunities should be explored at these locations. • In all cases the size of the facility must be balanced with parking demand to assure adequate parking supply for Park and Ride users and to avoid potential parking overflow issues that would impact adjacent businesses or residential neighborhoods. 5) The design of the Southwest LRT must complement and be coordinated with the services offered by Southwest Transit. Future Southwest Transit operations are critical to the design and operation of the Southwest LRT line. Southwest Transit needs to be an active partner in the Preliminary Engineering process. 6) The LRT crossing of Valley View Road at Flying Cloud Drive should be converted to a grade separated crossing. The Valley View Road corridor is a major artery serving Eden Prairie's Golden Triangle and Major Center areas which provides critical access to both I-494 and Highway 212. The operation of this corridor is extremely dependant on and sensitive to effective traffic signal coordination. The traffic analysis included in DEIS indicated failing operations along this corridor making it an inappropriate location for an at-grade LRT crossing. 7) Similarly the City of Eden Prairie has significant concerns about the impacts of an at- grade crossing of Mitchell Road. Mitchell Road is a major north-south artery through Eden Prairie providing access to both Highway 5 and Highway 212. Effective signal coordination is critical to the operation of this corridor. The impacts of this proposed at-grade crossing must be fully evaluated based on actual proposed LRT operating characteristics to determine the true impacts of an at-grade crossing in this location. In addition proposed development in the area including the impacts of the Mitchell Road station and park and ride must be accounted for. Southwest LRT DEIS Comments December 4, 2012 Page 3 of 7 8) The location, placement, and screening of the Traction Power Sub-Stations (TPSS) and other signal cabinets must be closely coordinated with the City of Eden Prairie. This equipment must be located, screened, and designed as appropriate to avoid impacts to existing and future developments. 9) The project must evaluate alternatives and determine solutions for mitigating design and construction impacts of the project on all businesses, residents, and properties along the corridor. Detail Comments 1) Section 3.1.2.2 (Segment) - DEIS states that the selected parcels on the south side of Technology Drive near Southwest Station are zoned Office. These parcels are zoned I- 2. 2) Section 3,1.5.2 (Operations and Maintenance Facility) - School District land use adjacent to Wallace Road is zoned Public/Quasi Public. 3) Section 4.1.3.6 (Groundwater Sensitivity) - Tritium has been identified within the City's groundwater system which leaves most of our groundwater system as vulnerable and highly sensitive. The Emergency Management Zone has been mapped for our Wellhead Protection Plan and should be evaluated for the DEIS as this extends beyond the areas referenced in the document. 4) Section 4.1.5.2 (Groundwater) - The document states that groundwater contamination from construction related spills is likely to affect the water table in areas of high and very high sensitivity as identified in Section 4.1.3. This section should be updated to reference the City's local information on sensitivity. 5) Section 4.2.1 (Legal and Regulatory Overview) - The regulations referenced should include the State's Nondegradation Rules, NPDES regulations and the local stormwater rules 6) Section 4.2.1 (Legal and Regulatory Overview) - Table 4.2-1 should be updated to include the information that Nine Mile Creek Watershed District (NMCWD) has Wetland Conservation Act and Stormwater permitting authority within their District. 7) Section 4.2.1.6 (Local: Watershed Districts) - The information within this section should be updated to include NMCWD permitting authorities. 8) Section 4.2.2.2 (Wetlands, Streams and Lakes) - The document could provide more accurate information regarding potential impacts by using the City's wetland mapping. This could then be used to calculate a more accurate representation of wetland impacts for the remaining sections (such as 4.23.5). For example, a wetland is located within the vicinity of the proposed OMF 2. Southwest LRT DEIS Comments December 4, 2012 Page 4of7 9) Section 4.10 (Electromagnetic Interference and Utilities) - Short and long term impacts to public utilities must be minimized and mitigated by the project. These utilities provide critical public service which must be maintained at all times. 10) Section 4 (General) — The proposed Alternative 3A alignment passes immediately adjacent to the Eden Prairie Water Plant, The potential effects of vibration and stray current on the facility including the underground storage tanks, collector lines and distribution lines will need to be evaluated and if necessary mitigated. In addition the drive aisle around the outside of the facility is critical to the efficient use of the facility and must be maintained. 11) Section 6.2.2.3 (Traffic Signal Priority and Preemption) — The information in this section indicates that both traffic signal priority and preemption will be used at LRT at- grade crossings. The impacts of these proposed operations must be fully evaluated based on actual proposed LRT operating characteristics to determine the impacts and appropriate mitigation of the proposed at-grade crossings. 12) Section 6.2.2.3 (Intersection LOS Analysis)—This section indicates that the key periods of operational analysis are the AM and PM peak hours. In some locations the noon time rush may be as significant and should be evaluated as well. This is the case in the Eden Prairie Major Center Area(general area bounded by the Prairie Center Drive/Valley View Road ring road). 13) Section 6.2.2.3 (Intersection LOS Analysis)—The Traffic Study included in the appendix indicated that the same growth rate was used for traffic projections throughout the corridor. The proposed LRT project spans a large geographical area with a range of development patterns. Given these differences separate growth rates should be developed for each roadway corridor. 14) Section 6.2,2.3 (Intersection LOS Analysis)—The operational analysis in this section indicates failing operations in the Highway 212 /Valley View Road interchange area. The operation of this corridor is extremely dependant on and sensitive to effective traffic signal coordination and any implementation of traffic signal priority or preemption is expected to significantly impact its operation. These factors make the Valley View Road crossing an inappropriate location for an at-grade LRT crossing. 15) Section 6.2.2.3 (Intersection LOS Analysis)—The proposed grade crossing of Mitchell Road must be fully evaluated to determine its true impacts. The methodology used in the DEIS traffic analysis assumed standard priority/preemption impacts to the Mitchell Road traffic signals which may or may not be consistent with what will be required by LRT operations. In addition the analysis must take into account the proposed development in the area including the Mitchell Road station and park and ride, impacts to effective signal coordination which is critical to the operation of the corridor, and impacts to emergency vehicle pre-emption and operation due to its frequent use and the close proximity of both the police and fire stations. Southwest LRT DEIS Comments December 4, 2012 Page 5 of 7 16) Section 6.2.2.3 (Intersection LOS Analysis) — Eagle Ridge Academy school is located at 7255 Flying Cloud Drive immediately adjacent to the proposed LRT crossing of Flying Cloud Drive. The traffic characteristics of this site including the morning and afternoon vehicle queuing need to be accounted for in evaluating and designing the proposed at-grade crossing. 17) Section 6.2.2.4 (Transit Station Access)—The DEIS includes no analysis of the traffic impacts of the proposed stations and park and ride facilities. These facilities must be evaluated to determine the impacts and the appropriate mitigations. 18) Section 6.2.2.4 (Transit Station Access)—The existing Southwest Station commercial site and park and ride currently experiences on-site congestion at peak times that occasionally impacts Technology Drive. Any proposed expansion to this site needs to evaluate both the public street and on-site impacts. 19) Section 6.2.2.5 (Operations and Maintenance Facility)—The section on OMF 3 fails to indicate the long term effects this proposed location will have on development and redevelopment in the Mitchell Road station area. These impacts are in direct conflict with Goal 5 of the project"Support Economic Development". The section also fails to indicate the likely long term wetlands impacts and the expected heavy use of Wallace Road during construction. 20) Section 6.2.2.5 (Operations and Maintenance Facility)—The DEIS includes no analysis of the traffic impacts of the proposed Operations and Maintenance facility. This facility must be evaluated to determine its traffic impacts and any appropriate mitigations. 21) Section 6.2.2.6 (Building Facility Access)—This section does not indicate that the bus access ramps to/ from Highway 212 and Southwest Station are anticipated to be impacted. 22) Section 6.2.3 (Short-Term Construction Effects)—Temporary construction impacts must be evaluated and to the extent possible minimized and mitigated. This includes providing viable access to all properties at all times. In particular construction options and techniques for the proposed tunnels and grade crossings must be fully evaluated and coordinated with the City. Also viable access will need to be provided to all properties at all times. 23) Section 6.3.1.4(Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities)—Short and long term impacts to the Minnesota River Bluffs LRT Regional Trail must be minimized and mitigated in order to maintain the use of the trail both during and after construction of the LRT. 24) Section 6 (General)—A north-south trail running adjacent to the proposed LRT line and connecting Valley View Road and Shady Oak Road should be evaluated during project development. The trail would improve trail and sidewalk connectivity and would enhance pedestrian and bike access to the Golden Triangle station. Southwest LRT DEIS Comments December 4, 2012 Page 6 of 7 25) Section 6(General)- As currently shown the Town Center Station may require that a new access point to/from the south be developed. This access point will provide a secondary access to Technology Drive businesses both during and after construction. The access will also provide an important and direct connection to the Town Center, 26) Table 9.4 (Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions)—The City of Eden Prairie is currently proceeding with improvements to Shady Oak Road (County Road 61) between and including the interchange at Highways 62 and 212. The northern phase of the project is currently under construction. Construction of the southern phase is expected to start in 2014 or 2015. The proposed LRT alignment passes through the Shady Oak project just to the east of the Highway 212 interchange. The Southwest LRT project will need to continue to work cooperatively with the City and other project partners to assure that design and construction issues are appropriately coordinated and to keep the Shady Oak Road project on schedule. In addition in order to limit the combined construction impacts of the projects potential options for accelerating portions of the Southwest LRT project should be investigated. 27) Table 9.4 (Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions)—Improvements to Highway 5 and Highway 212 between their merge and I-494 should be included in this table. This segment of roadway is currently congested and potential improvements should be considered. The Southwest LRT project needs to work in coordination with MnDOT to assure that the project does not create a significant impediment to the future improvements along Highway 5 and Highway 212. 28) Section 9.6.11.4 (Water Resources Mitigation) -The use of mitigation bank credits for permanent impacts to wetlands is proposed. This would result in impacts to the immediate watershed where the impacts are located as no mitigation bank credits are available here. The document should state that they will evaluate the immediate watershed and determine if there are potential mitigation opportunities that could be developed that would provide mitigation credits and reduce impacts to the local biota. 29) Table 12.2-2 (Preliminary List of Required Permits) -Add Nine Mile Creek Watershed District to table for Sediment/Erosion Control Permits and Wetland Conservation Act Permit. 30) Appendix F (Conceptual Engineering Drawings).—The existing Lone Oak Center development(southwest quadrant of Highway 212/Mitchell Road interchange) is not shown on the plans. This development needs to be accounted for in the design and development of the project. 31) Appendix F (Conceptual Engineering Drawings)—The existing Gander Mountain development(north side of Technology Drive between Prairie Center Drive and Flying Cloud Drive) is not shown on the plans. This development needs to be accounted for in the design and development of the project. Southwest LRT DEIS Comments December 4, 2012 Page 7 of 7 32) Appendix F (Conceptual Engineering Drawings)—The United Health Group development(southeast quadrant of Highway 62/Shady Oak Road interchange) is not shown on the plans. This development needs to be accounted for in the design and development of the project. 33) Appendix 1-1 (Soil, Groundwater, and Dewatering Conditions— 8th page)-Not all residents in the area are on municipal water. Properties on Willow Creek Road and Willowwood (area west of Highway 212) are served by wells. There may also be some private irrigation wells. Sincerely, 1\1, Rick Getschow City Manager Attachments CC: Mayor and City Council CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.2012-161 SUBMIT COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT(DEIS) FOR THE SOUTHWEST TRANSITWAY WHEREAS,the Southwest Transitway is a proposed 15-mile light-rail line serving Eden Prairie, Minnetonka,Hopkins, St.Louis Park and Minneapolis;and WHEREAS,the Federal and state environmental rules require that an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)be prepared for the proposed Southwest Transitway project. The EIS process includes the preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS), which must be made available for public review and comment;and WHEREAS,the Southwest Transitway Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS)is available for public comment through December 11,2012;and WHEREAS,the City Council appreciates the opportunity to review the DEIS and desires to respectfully submit comments on the DEIS. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the Eden Prairie City Council authorizes the City Manager to submit comments on the DEIS consistent with the November 15,2012 draft comment letter during the DEIS public comment period. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on November 20,2012. Na cy, a- ens, ay r ATTEST: Ka een orta,City Clerk Southwest Transitway Town Center Station Location Considerations General • The feasibility of more centrally located and walkable Town Center Station should be evaluated during the Preliminary Engineering Process • Minimize Town Center Station parking. If possible re-allocate parking to Southwest Station and Mitchell Road. Location Priorities • Walkability to Housing and Employment(Ridership Potential) • Close proximity to Eden Prairie Center. Station within 1/4 mile to a mall entrance. • Maximize potential redevelopment and reinvestment opportunities. — Considered recent investments in area • Separation from Southwest Station LRT Station • Acceptable traffic impacts of track alignment Potential MCA Station Locations Location A — Town Center • Guide Plan Approved Town Center Location • Close proximity to existing and future housing and employment densities • Potential for planned re-development • Walkable to Eden Prairie Center(across Flying Cloud Dr) • Anticipated Moderate Track Alignment Impacts Location B — EPC Northeast • Close proximity to Eden Prairie Center • Potential for re-development • Walkable to existing and future housing and employment uses in Town Center(across Flying Cloud Dr) • Anticipated Moderate Track Alignment Impacts Location C — MCA South • Close proximity to Presbyterian Homes and walkable to residential uses south of MCA (across Prairie Center Dr) • Walkable to housing and employment uses in Town Center • Walkable to Eden Prairie Center(across Flying Cloud Dr) • Potential for re-development • Anticipated High Track Alignment Impacts 8, a Q ,t'v. a 1L11 ry N N o v. “ z d 1 O 0) m . LI W Q s z+ o i z coJ L. N N N Q kt u a N z o z i . 0 o Metropolitan Council St.Louis Park Recreation Center.3700 Monterrey Drive,St.Louis Park 55416 Meeting of the Southwest Corridor Management Committee September 4,2013 Members Present Susan Haigh,Chair Jan Callison James Hovland Brian Lamb Lisa Weik Terry Schneider Cheryl Youakim Gail Dorfman Peter Wagenius Peter McLaughlin Jake Spano Bill James Nancy Tyra-Lukens Jim Brimeyer Kathy Nelson Scott McBride Members Absent Mayor Rybak Jeff Jacobs Keith Bogut 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Susan Haigh called the September 4,2013 meeting of the Southwest Corridor Management Committee to order at 9:40am at the St.Louis Park Recreation Center Chair Haigh thanked all those who are attending these meetings and have submitted comments. We continue to narrow the alternatives,so we can get to a final project scope and budget and we will have a couple more meetings for that discussion. This is an important project for your communities,the local neighborhoods, the region, and for jobs. This project will have 30,000 daily riders and provide access for people around the region to jobs and provide an opportunity to grow the system. It is really important to get this project right on all of the issues, whether it is mitigating impacts to neighboring homes and businesses, the environment, and design to provide growth and development. Hennepin County has asked if we would do another analysis on freight rail in St.Louis Park and engage an expert to do that work. We are prepared to do that,however it will take another week or two to get that information. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES No Minutes to approve. 3. SWCMC MEMBER DISCUSSION OF"BIG THREE" OPTIONS AND PROJECT BUDGET Mr. Jim Alexander gave an overview of the"Big Three"options: Eden Prairie Alignment,OMF, and Freight Rail. • TI#1 —Eden Prairie Alignment: Mr.Alexander presented aerial maps for the three candidates still on the table. o Mitchell Station and Comp Plan Station via Technology Drive—cost: $195-$205 million o Mitchell Station and Singletree Station via Technology Drive—cost: $195-$205 million 1 ATTACHMENT D o Mitchell Station and Singletree Station via Trunk Highway 212 Frontage—cost: $195-$205 million Mr. Alexander presented strengths and weaknesses for each of the three options. Mr. Alexander said we are working with the watershed district and the city regarding possible impact concerns with Purgatory Creek's flood plain. Chair Haigh asked Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens to give the City of Eden Prairie's perspective on the three alternatives. Mayor Tyra-Lukens said of the three alternatives, the city definitely prefers the Comp Plan for many reasons. There are some difficulties with it but,we hope to address the project office regarding the fact that this goes very close to a Gateway City Plaza Park and also along a sensitive wetland area. The strengths of that alignment outweigh some of the challenges that we have ahead, We think the Singletree station location is problematic. While it might not have any greater construction impact than the other alternatives,certainly operationally there will be more disruption to traffic along that Singletree corridor,which is a heavily traveled corridor. Are we going to discuss today, whether the terminus would be all the way west of Mitchell Road or at City Center? Mr. Alexander said it was intended to show what is on the palette today. We will acknowledge there is an interest in possibly locating the station on the City Center(City Hall)site and we do believe there would be a cost savings to do that. However,we would need to go along the Technology Drive route to make that work. Mayor Tyra-Lukens said so mainly what we are discussing today is the alternatives through the Town Center area. Mr. Alexander said yes,we would like to have some discussions to really weigh the Comp Plan verses Singletree and really to validate the alignment we are looking to achieve. Mayor Terry Schneider indicated that he supports the Comp Plan alternative with addressing the issue of the location of the Mitchell station at the City Hall complex at a later time. Council Member Cheryl Youakim asked if option three,Mitchell Station and Singletree station via TH 212 frontage, assumes the OMF is in Hopkins? All of the three options would accommodate the OMF at either site 3/4 in Eden Prairie or 9A in Hopkins. Chair Haigh said we heard from Mayor Tyra-Lukens and Mayor Schneider that they prefer the Comp Plan alignment and asked if any of the committee members did not support that.No members replied and Chair Haigh said she will take that as confirmation that there is support from the SWCMC for the Comp Plan alignment alternative number one. Chair Haigh said recognizing that SPO will continue to work with the watershed district regarding the impact on the wetland,as everyone is concerned about that. Mr. Alexander agreed that SPO will continue to do that, Mayor Schneidermade a motion, that we approve the Comp Plan amendment. Mayor Tyra-Lukens second the motion. No members opposed. Council Member Jim Brimeyer did not vote, • TI#23 —Operations and Maintenance Facility: Mr.Alexander presented aerial maps for the two candidates still on the table. o Site 3/4—City Garage in Eden Prairie: Cost is$95-$100 million o Site 9A—K-Tel East in Hopkins: Cost is$100-$105 million Mr. Alexander presented strengths and weaknesses for both options. Chair Haigh said the municipal consent process requires you to go back to your own city council to do a lengthy debate. I think that is good to get an inclination from people,but I do not want people to feel that somehow that binds them. Because,you have to go back and go through your own process and with that caveat if Mayor Tyra- Lukens would start with her comments, Mayor Tyra-Lukens said the general feeling about OMF is that we do not particularly want it. One of the big problems,other than wetland concerns which are shared by both sites, is the issue of our public works facility which would be taken. There has been no adequate alternate site identified for our public works facility and one of the wonderful advantages we have with the current public works facility is that it is so centrally located within Eden Prairie that their day-to-day operations,were very central. If we 2 had to move that public works facility way south in Eden Prairie where there is land,we would have major time loss and major fuel consumption increases due to the relocation. In an effort to continue to be green,we would like to maintain that facility in a central location if possible. Council Member Youakim said,like you said we would have to go back to the council and we share a lot of the same worries about the weakness of the wetlands. We also are the smallest city on the alignment,have the smallest population,and the smallest geographic layout of 2x2 square miles, so our land is really precious to us. We are fully built out and the biggest hit would be more to our tax base and our tax payers,not to mention the 250+jobs that would be lost and the 6 buildings that would be taken and some are high-tech,high paying jobs and we really have to look at that. As the smallest city on the alignment, it does affect our house quicker than it will anybody else and because of that we really want the committee to look at the shared burden and the shared cost along the line and looking at that shared burden versus the benefits when we start making other decisions. If this were to happen,Hopkins would really,really need to look at how we can mitigate our tax base loss. Some of the things that have been talked of is betterments along the line,would really become a necessity for us to get out from under the rock.We are never going to be made whole. We understand that and understand we have been working on this for decades. Hopkins wants this line as bad as everybody else on the line does and knows there will be benefits from it too,but we just cannot have burdens that so greatly outweigh the benefits. As we go along in that process, I hope you start to look at some of the betterments along the line like the park and ride OMF. Shady Oak Station right now is 500 surface lots and we keeping saying all along we need a structured ramp there. Currently the way it is drawn,Hopkins ends up with a platform and surface lots and very little room to recoup any dollars. More of the redevelopment potential is on the Minnetonka side that is now not part of that station. Also, the alignment south of the freight rail on Blake Road is a huge,huge way that we can recoup a little bit of what we would be losing as the smallest city on the alignment taking the biggest tax base hit and employment hit. One of the businesses that would go is a high-end air cleaning in hospitals and ventilation and those are technical jobs that are really needed. Mayor Schneider said for long-term preservation, options,and potential,Hopkins seems the best overall. There are two key reasons: operational costs and we do not have the extra expense of relocation, as we would with Eden Prairie. I am respectful of the jobs and tax base. There are two betterments that should be on the table as part of the recommendation to go with Hopkins as the OMF facility. One is to restructure the eastern buildings either as a retrofit,remodel,or new building to be able to relocate better jobs within that park. You cannot save all the jobs,but can save the best jobs without having them move to Minnetonka or any place else. The second element is if we are going to provide meaningful tax base for Hopkins we need to bite the bullet and do a ramp structure on the surface parking lot. That is a critical ingredient in maintaining the ridership, traffic, development potential, and travel demand management potential for that site. I recommend the Hopkins location and trying to maintain the jobs, with the condition that we do a parking ramp on the north side of the station. Chair Haigh said one of the things she heard in the discussion as a strength of the OMF location in Hopkins is it leaves open the possibility of cost savings if we get to that point to terminate the line at an earlier stage in Eden Prairie as a benefit, as well as the long term operation costs, Council Member Youakim said she appreciates Mayor Schneider's comments about the businesses too, Not all of the businesses have been willing to come to the table, so that is going to be a hurdle and I do not know how you quantify that when it comes to doing a taking. One of the central east buildings is able to stay with very little impact,but there will be hopefully some room to redevelop around that. Council Member Youakim asked for a vote to be saved until she meets with her Council, as she is not comfortable doing any recommendation when the Met Council has not been able to sit down with all the 3 businesses yet, Mr. Fuhrmann said we will continue to have conversations about technical design and the ability to avoid the impact to the central building with the track placement. We are unable however, per federal regulation,to sit down with any of those impacted businesses in Hopkins or Eden Prairie to talk about real estate acquisition at this time. We are not able to do that until we conclude the environmental review process at the end of 2014. Mayor Jim Hovland said I personally favor the Hopkins location, from a cost and cost savings standpoint over time, as well as its location has distinct benefits. I am sensitive to the impact on Hopkins,while they will have three stations in the smallest city on the line,which is a distinct benefit from an economic development standpoint, I am sensitive that there could be job losses. Mayor Schneider came up with an interesting notion with those eastern buildings. Mayor Hovland asked Council Member Youakim to go back to her Council and vet Mayor Schneider's idea, it would be helpful for you to come back and tell us if your City Council is inclined to accept that proposal. Council Member Youakim asked to wait with this issue until she can meet with her City Council. Chair Haigh said she is hearing strong support amongst the SWCMC for the Hopkins site. I understand that Hopkins continues to have some concerns and of course we are going to continue to work with the city about their concerns, We have to follow the rules we have for acquisition of property and we will do that, We can certainly delay this recommendation to give Council Member Youakim a chance to go back to her City Council to talk with them and bring it back for a final recommendation next week at the September 11`'meeting, Council Member Youakim said she appreciates that, Mayor Schneider said he would be willing to attend the Hopkins City Council meeting with Council Member Youakim, if that would be of any help. TI#21 —Freight Rail: Mr.Alexander presented a list of freight railroad historical actions/documents and they will be posted on the www.swlrt.org website. Mr.Alexander presented maps and technical drawings for the three candidates still on the table. o Brunswick Central Freight Rail Relocation—cost: $190-$200 million Mr.Peter Wagenius said the railroads seem to be asking for betterments out of this project. They are asking not for what they need,but for everything they want. Chair Haigh noted that our intention as we do this additional study, is to take a serious look at this freight rail alternative and those issues as we have all the other issues to get it right. Keep in mind,freight rail has a different regulatory environment than other businesses and residences and that does provide them with additional powers than some other businesses have. That has been going on since the country was formed. Commissioner Peter McLaughlin asked what the incremental costs are of establishing this connection. Mr. Alexander said there are two costs associated with the Canadian Pacific(CP)swap. It will be about$30 million for the swap and about$30-35 million for the southerly connector and that includes right of way costs for acquisition of 5 parcels with businesses, Commissioner McLaughlin asked for under what co-location options are you still proposing elimination of the line? Mr.Alexander said that is what is on the board today. Commissioner McLaughlin asked for the train counts. Mr.Alexander said approximately 14 trains daily per week on average on the CP/Bass Lake Spur operated by TC&W and another 5 to 6 unit trains (BNSF or CP locomotive freight) operated by TC&W. Commissioner McLaughlin asked is there an option to do co-location and eliminate the$65 million expenditure? Mr. Alexander said that is possible but would like to clarify that we need to understand if we need additional costs in there to handle the retaining structures if we keep all the storage in place to make sure we have enough room for trail and LRT,but essentially the CP swap and the southerly connection for a co-locate scenario is not a requirement. Commissioner Gail Dorfinan asked Mr. Alexander to provide the following at the September 11s' meeting, What is the market like today? I believe there is one business, a salt business that occasionally gets shipments, so how often are they served, Also,what is the future market that CP envisions in terms of needing to go south, as I do not think they have done that for a number of years. Lastly, what are their 4 improvements along the line to the south that would have to be accomplished,to accommodate that speculative southern business. Mr.Bill James points out that the switching wye has been in St.Louis Park for many decades and it is avery troublesome operational area,specifically the noise it creates when used. They are banging multi-ton rail cars up and down that switching area at 10:00 and 11:00pm. It is a distinct quality of life impact to the community, it is a safety issue and anything that can be done with modern engineering and dollars to mitigate that area is a pure bonus for this program. Commissioner McLaughlin said the money should not come out of this project budget. How do you justify taking it out of this particular budget. Commissioner Dorfman asked SPO to provide clarification at the next meeting. Right now freight trains on the MN&S and freight trains on the Kenilworth Corridor go 10 to 10.5 miles per hour. Whatever solution we come up with,we need to know how fast those trains are going to go. Are we really obligated to increase the speed to market for the freight trains in doing this and by doing so,what are the safety implications? My expectation is that the trains would still go the same speed whether they were going through St.Louis Park or through Minneapolis. o Kenilworth Deep Bore LRT Tunnel—cost: $320-$330 million o Kenilworth Shallow LRT Tunnel—cost: $150-$160 million Mr. Alexander said for both the Shallow LRT Tunnel and Deep Bore LRT Tunnel through the corridor, we do not have any requirement to take homes in that stretch. There may be slivers of property,but no homes will be taken. Mr. Alexander said 21s`Street Station would be eliminated under this option. Mr. Wagenius asked what the current limitation is on the length of trains and number of trains, Mr. Alexander said he will need to get that information from the railroads for both the deep bore and shallow tunnel options. Mr.Wagenius asked if trees will be replanted along the trail where it is feasible. Mr. Alexander said we are looking at all opportunities where we can re-vegetate this corridor. Chair Haigh asked what the additional items are in the$60-$65 million for the freight rail common elements. Mr. Alexander said there is also bridge work that needs to be done for freight at Minnehaha Creek and Louisiana,TH 100, and freight features under either relocation or co-location. Mr. Alexander presented strengths and weaknesses for each of the three options. Chair Haigh said we are waiting until we get the hydro study information for the tunnel options before identifying it as a strength or weakness. Mayor Schneider asked Minneapolis and St.Louis Park if there is one of the options that they would be willing to eliminate. Mayor Schneider said his opinion is the Shallow tunnel is a viable option with the caveats that need to be refined and a yet to be determined less impactful freight relocation if it is available,is a viable option,but needs to be studied thoroughly. The cwrent freight relocation impacts and costs have huge impacts and cost increases, compared to the Shallow tunnel. Mayor Hovland said he has concerns about environmental issues and the costs with the Deep Bore tunnel and believes the costs might be beyond the reach of CTIB. On the reroute in St.Louis Park,I have some serious concerns with the dyke running from 11 to 23 feet,the machine shops,commercial businesses, and 30 plus houses that will be taken,and going through a playground. The long term impact on people,businesses,homeowners is too much to bear. My attention is reluctantly turned back to the Kenilworth Corridor. Commissioner McLaughlin said they had a CTIB meeting about 2 weeks ago and there was a discussion and presentation from the project team,along with the options we have discussed here today. I think it is fair to report that there was a statement from each of the five counties indicating that the cost of the 5 Deep Bore Tunnel option was very troubling, as it would distort regional transit investment priority. There was a very strong sentiment expressed that, that was an unacceptable alternative. Commissioner Jan Callison said she agrees and that Deep Bore Tunnel will kill the project. The project will not be viable if we try and manage with the cost of the Deep Bore Tunnel. I believe that is not an option and should not be on the table any longer. I think we should look at the Shallow Tunnel option and look at options in St.Louis Park and agrees with the reasons Mayor Hovland outline as to why the current alignment in St. Louis Park is not acceptable, Commissioner Dorfinan said she thinks the option on the table right now for St. Louis Park relocation does not work as it is not viable. The railroads are asking for a Cadillac that they would never build for themselves. I agree with Mr.Wagenius,there are still so many unanswered questions about the Shallow tunnel that need to be answered. Mr. Wagenius said he discussed the Deep Bore Tunnel with Mayor R.T.Rybak and the Mayor expressed that he is willing to have the Deep Bore Tunnel taken off the table, as long as we were really subjecting the freight questions and the railroads to the same level of scrutiny that we have been bringing to the Shallow Tunnel, I think we made some progress in that direction and as a practical matter the Deep Bore Tunnel does not look like it is going anywhere. Mr. Alexander said we will validate the designs with TTCI. Mr. Wagenius said the relocation option that is on the table was described as unacceptable. We do not know that,we only know that the version stamped and approved by the railroads is unacceptable to them. That option is still on the table to be refined by the study as well as other freight options. Commissioner McLaughlin made a motion to end consideration of Deep Bore Tunnel. Mayor Hovland second the motion. No member opposed. Council Member Brimeyer did not vote. Commissioner McLaughlin asked for a budget goal to be established and he proposes $1.5 billion. Chair Haigh said we will have a recommended project budget discussion at the next meeting. Mayor Hovland made a motion to not recommend to the Met Council the Brunswick Central freight rail alignment as proposed. Chair Haigh said that is really a premature motion because we have not yet seen what the assessment is and we need to wait for that information. Chair Haigh respectfully requested that Mayor Hovland withdraw that motion. Mayor Hovland withdrew the motion. 4, SEPTEMBER 11,2013 SWCMC MEETING Chair Haigh proposes a change in the schedule,so we have time to hear from both the special hydrogeologist report from Wenck Associates working with the watershed district and to get the additional analysis by the outside consultant who will be looking at freight rail alignment in St. Louis Park. We need a meeting next week and one in the first week of October, contingent upon when we can get these reports back. Mayor Hovland requested to have the consultant look at all the alternative routes not just in St. Louis Park. The revised SWCMC meeting schedule; • September 11—Technical information • September 18—Technical information • October 2—Action on project scope and budget Met Council schedule; • September 11—Information item • October 7—Transportation Committee recommendation 6 • October 9—Met Council approval The meeting adjourned at 11:47am. Respectfully submitted, Lynne Hahne,Recording Secretary 7 Robert Ellis From: Hale Jay[hjay.customerelation@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 9:35 AM To: swift Subject: We Support The Light Rail Plan I am an Eden Prairie resident and want to voice my support for the current plan to build the line and have it terminate in Eden Prairie. As a resident I know this will be good for our economy,jobs in the area will increase, property values will rise, schools will be better funded, and traffic congestion will decrease. Please do not let a vocal minority of residents ruin this opportunity for Eden Prairie's future. Best regards, Hale Hale Jay 7646 Carnelian Ln Eden Prairie, MN 55346 29 Robert Ellis From: Howard Pearlman [howardpearlman47@msn.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 2:51 PM To: swim Subject: Please do not vote money for the SWLRT As a tax payer with a large property tax I oppose the building of the SWLRT because: 1. The population needed to support it and become self-funding is missing thus it will be subsidized by the taxpayers....probably forever. 2. The cost of the trains and infrastructure threaten to consume the entire budget of Eden Prairie should this scheme become operative. Thus my property taxes, about 5200 dollars a year to Eden Prairie alone, will have to double to maintain the same level of services which I am paying dearly for now. 3. The same level of service could be added through the addition of more bus service with Eden Prairie. How can anyone see that and vote for this white elephant? Please look at the economics of building the infrastructure and cost of a Light Rail System versus using the already present infrastructure that a bus uses. How much will is cost to build the tracks and the station and to maintain both? (On a related issue, why oh why is there no bus service between the SouthWest Transit Station and The Mall of America?) Thank you for carefully considering my comments, Howard Pearlman Eden Prairie, MN 952-500-8476 30 Robert Ellis From: Jack Sheehan [jc.sheehan@centurylink.net] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 1:17 PM To: swift Subject: Light Rail Plan Comment The notion that building a light rail system will create new employment opportunities in Eden Prairie has no basis in fact. I lived for lengthy periods in both New York City and Washington, D.C., two cities with extensive commuter rail systems. In both cities,the railroad systems were constructed long after businesses set up shop along the right of way.The trains didn't come first,as this project proposes.The LRT is a multi-billion dollar project, not a baseball diamond in a cornfield. If we build it,there is no empirical evidence that"they will come." The Metropolitan Council has strayed from its original purpose, the coordination of utilities and roads. Its primary function now is the hiring of consultants and the issuance of breathless reports predicting life in our city decades from now. Practical-minded business people know it is impossible to see accurately that far into the future. If built,the LRT will be around for a long time, costing hundreds of millions of dollars to operate and maintain, little of which will be realized through fares. Much has been made of claims that constructing a light rail system will magically result in the creation of thousands of new jobs. I have yet to hear one company announce that it will relocate to Eden Prairie and launch a hiring spree the very moment the trains start rolling.And despite what some think, UnitedHealth Group did not build its new offices where it did in anticipation of rail transportation. UHG has owned that land for years. It is very unlikely that the well-compensated employees in those corporate headquarters buildings will forsake their cars for a plastic seat on a modern-day trolley car. Furthermore,there is no evidence that jobs in Eden Prairie are remaining unfilled because workers cannot make their way here via the extensive bus systems, ride sharing, and the do-it-yourself cab services like Uber and Lfyt. Finally, please recall that the Metropolitan Council is an unelected government body with disproportionate powers. It's members are political appointees who need not have any experience or expertise in urban planning, transportation systems, downtown redesign, or any of the other parts of our lives into which their very intrusive noses have been stuck. Most of the utopian plans that have emerged from the Council's well-funded headquarters are pipe dreams recycled from other cities around the country,the "portable parks" being the latest example. These people are bored, desperate for something to do, and that's how we get"walkable downtowns" and rail cars operated by a tangle of high-voltage overhead wires that clutter the view and pose a great danger to vehicles and pedestrians below. The very fact that the Council wants to resurrect a mode of transportation that was deliberately phased out decades ago calls into question their judgment and competence. In summary, unless Eden Prairie can secure guarantees from employers that they will add thousands of jobs immediately upon the completion of the rail system, and that the addition of light rail, with all its street cuts and overhead wires, will significantly reduce traffic congestion and not further complicate traffic patterns as it has in Minneapolis,the City Council must say a resounding "No"to the Metropolitan Council. I am sure city residents will gladly take up a collection to purchase "Sim City" software for all the MC staff so they can indulge their fantasies without spending millions of taxpayer dollars that could be better used elsewhere. Sincerely, John C. Sheehan 17533 George Moran Dr Eden Prairie 55347 31 Robert Ellis From: Jeff Plauche [Jeff.Plauche@cypressequities.comj Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 3:35 PM To: swift Subject: SWLRT- Eden Prairie Dear Madam/Sir: My name is Jeff Plauche and I represent the new ownership of Eden Prairie Center. As new owners we are interested in learning how we can work together for the benefit of both Eden Prairie and Eden Prairie Center. It would be appreciated if you would keep us in the loop regarding any discussions of the proposed SWLRT route. I would be happy to meet with you in person to discuss this project should you feel it be appropriate. Feel free to contact me at the number below should you wish to discuss. Thank you for your consideration and have a wonderful Memorial Day weekend. Best regards, Jeff Jeff Plauche Director of Asset Management CYPRESS Cypress Equities Real Estate Investment Management 8343 Douglas Avenue, Suite 200 Dallas,TX 75225 DL: 214.561.8835 T: 214.561.8800 F:214.283.1610 Jeff.plauche@cypressequities.com CypressEquities.com Cypress and Cypress Equities are trade names licensed for use by the Cypress Equities brand. Each obligation, service, or product is the sole responsibility of the specific entity that incurs such obligation or supplies such service or product. If you do not know the specific entity with which you are communicating and/or the capacity in which that entity is acting, please inquire. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail may contain or attach confidential or privileged information, If you are not an intended recipient, any review, disclosure, dissemination, reproduction, or other use in any form of any part of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail or otherwise and permanently delete this communication from any computer,disk drive,or other storage medium. 32 Robert Ellis From: Jeff Strate [bukumi@infionline.net] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 10:26 AM To: swift Subject: Comments on SWLRT Preliminary plans. Request: Please confirm receiving this email letter. To: The Mayor,City Council Members and Staff,City of Eden Prairie From:Jeff Strate Date: May 22,2014 Re: My comments and recommendations pertaining to the Municipal Consent phase of the preliminary plans for SWLRT. Dear City Council Members and Staff, Thank you for investing your considerable talents and time to the preliminary planning of the South West Light Rail Project in Eden Prairie and its role the future well being of our various communities and companies. Also,thank you for your open ears to the variety of Eden Prairie voices and opinion regarding the project. I am confident that you will request changes in the preliminary plan that reflect those public comments that have high merit and can be effected. I urge the City Council to then vote YES to move SWLRT forward. Doing so does not preclude fine-tuning the plan in collaboration with the Met Council project planners or risk Federal funding. Please consider my comments about a few aspects of the preliminary plan that others and I feel have high merit and can be effected. With warmest regards, Jeff Strate 15921 Summerhill Drive Eden Prairie,MN 55346 952-949-8980 RE-LOCATE MITCHELL STATION FURTHER WEST Locate Mitchell Station 500 to 800 feet west from where the Preliminary Municipal Consent plan has it placed. Why: To preserve the view shed and a pocket of wildlife and bird habitat of a defining Eden Prairie wetland landscape for EP City Center's public meeting and banquet areas and future business,corporate and non-profit agency tenants. It is important that Eden Prairie's most important and formal public gathering and governing center remain attached to a landscape that inspired its name and represents one of the chief reasons people like the city—its natural parks,conservation areas,wetlands and lakes—its green infrastructure. MITCHELL STATION-REGIONAL TRAIL CONNECTION Provide for a prominent,safe and direct bikeway between Mitchell Station and the Minnesota Valley Regional LRT Trail. The trail's intersection with Venture Drive may be the best point to connect to Martin Drive either skirting Venture Drive or along an alignment through open space direct to Martin Drive. I recommend having the bikeway crossing to the east side of Martin Drive and running it south under the 4 highway overpasses.This avoids a number of car interestions on the west side of Martin Drive. Then,following one of several possible alignments through existing industrial parking and lawn and/or city property areas,the bikeway would course in a southeasterly direction to Technology Drive and the station. Use easements would need to be acquired from landowners. TECHNOLGY DRIVE BIKEWAY WEST of MITCHELL ROAD Provide for a pedestrian walk and bikeway on the north side of Technology Drive west of Mitchell Road to the station area. WHY: To serve commuters and others from Mitchell Road and Scenic Drive neighborhoods with safe and appealing walking and bicycling access to Mitchell Station. MITCHELL STATION BIKE RACKS&"NICE RIDE"BIKES The station parking area/ramp should be provided with ground level rain,wind and snow protected bike racks. The Mitchell Station should be designed with space for "Nice Ride"rental bikes. Mitchell Station will be the closest LRT station to the Minnesota River Bluffs LRT Regional Trail. The trail runs diagonally through the entire city passing through a number of neighborhoods. Commuters and students in these neighborhoods would be well served by a direct bikeway to Mitchell Station. SOUTHWEST STATION AREA-TECHNOLOGY DRIVE Purgatory Creek Park Loop Trails South of St.Andrew's Church and east of the Optum corporate campus on the Southside of Technology Drive,provide a new,replacement set of walking;biking and in-line skating trail ways to keep the function of the two trail loops of Purgatory Creek Park. It may be necessary to sacrifice patches of wetland to construct new trail segments. I would find that sacrifice acceptable. The original pre-settlement wetland was drained for producing crops like onions or for grazing livestock. The current lake is man-made and can be slightly remade again in this area to provide pedestrian access. WHY: Purgatory Creek Park is likely Eden Prairie's most visited,non-sports oriented park. It is also our chief ceremonial park. It needs to remain appealing and accessible to the those who live and work around the area. Increasing numbers of future residents will be transit users who do not own cars. This IS their closest park. Pedestrian Access to Purgatory Creek Park Improved pedestrian access for residents of the Southwest Station area condominiums,Southwest Transit station restaurants,St.Andrew's Church and companies along the north side of Technology Drive should be provided safe,inviting and appealing pedestrian access to the Purgatory Creek Park loop trails. "COMP PLAN"ALIGNMENT I find merit in the"comp plan"alignment with its station location in the"town center area." I have participated in three of the four charrets that have considered how that district should be shaped in the future. I urge the city to seriously consider the recommendations of the report that was produced from those community- planning sessions. If,however,the"comp plan"is discovered to be too expensive to construct and operate,I strongly recommend that the alignment be returned to the north side of Technology Drive. This is the route that makes the most practical sense and although not ideal for the"town center"concept,could support the concept. Every alignment option has challenges,but I remain unconvinced by the attorneys and spokespeople for Cosco and Gander Mountain that their businesses will permanently suffer. Because of the terrain along Technology Drive in that area,I believe it will be possible and affordable to run safe,convenient and appealing car portals over or under the light rail tracks to the retail and manufacturing companies on Technology Road. Jeff Strate has submitted the above comments 33 Robert Ellis From: Jerry Johnson [j1111942@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 1:02 PM To: swirl Subject: I oppose the SWLRT I oppose the proposed light rail line through Eden Prairie and encourage you to vote NO on the municipal consent. Thank You, Jerry L Johnson 9009 Sutton Dr Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Sent from my iPad 34 Robert Ellis From: Jerry Johnson [jerry.s.johnson@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 12:04 PM To: swift Subject: Comments on Light Rail I think representatives from the city of Eden Prairie and Met Council have not been clear on the purpose of the public hearings and the ability to make public comment on the Southwest Light Rail Transit project. Both Mayor Tyra-Lukens and Mr. Alexander from the Met Council stated at Tuesday's hearing that public comment was being sought on the design of the project. While that may be true, the real/legal purpose of the public hearing was for the public to comment on whether the city should approve having the light rail project in Eden Prairie at all. Not being clear about the purpose of the hearing misleads the public into thinking that we have no say in whether light rail comes to Eden Prairie, but only on design elements. The purpose of the hearing was not clearly articulated. I suspect that this lack of clarity may be intentional. I think the city and the Met Council need to clarify that the public can comment on whether the project happens at all and that the Eden Prairie City Council has the power to say "no" to the project and allow further comment from the public. To move forward with the project with this sort of confusion is unethical and probably illegal. I am against the Southwest Light Rail Transit project. I live in Eden Prairie. Here are my brief reasons: 1. I think the process seeking input and approval has been misleading to the public. 2. The voters/residents of Eden Prairie do not need light rail transit. This city has thrived without it and will continue to thrive without it. 3. It is economically unviable and therefore a waste of resources. Anyone that is unbiased to mass transit would agree that spending nearly $2 billion on light rail in this geography is not economically viable based on realistic forecasts. 4. The future of Eden Prairie needs to be about attracting the right people to live here NOT the right people to work here. Eden Prairie's priority needs to be about quality of residential life and schools. Jobs are a distant second and I say that as a business owner. Attracting good jobs is easy. Attracting good people to live in your city is VERY hard. Just ask Minneapolis and St. Paul. Adding light rail that runs from Minneapolis, to St. Louis Park, to Hopkins, through the far edge of Minnetonka to Eden Prairie does NOT attract either the right kind of residents or the right kind of jobs. That route does NOTHING for Eden Prairie today or in the future that Eden Prairie should be charting for itself. The Met Council loves this idea of homogenation of the metropolitan area, that will ruin what is different about Eden Prairie. 5. Rail transit as a method of transportation for our sort of geography and population density is completely outdated. Yes, light rail trains of today look sleek and modern, but the basic concept of trains hauling people relatively short distances (16 miles)to a finite number of fixed locations is completely outdated. We don't have huge factories in our area where thousands of people are going to the same place from the same place. We are a spread out area where people go all over the place and we lack the other infrastructure and services that would make rail transit work such as thousands of taxi cabs that can take people from the rail station to locations 10 blocks away. Investing in light rail today will be a disaster. 6. The future of transportation is VERY different than a train. Right now Google and many other companies are working on electric cars that drive themselves. They communicate with other cars on the road to make them safe and super efficient because the cars can be crowded very densely onto existing roads. This sort of transportation is possible right now. We have all the technology we need to do this. This will be the way of 35 transportation in less than 20 years. We will start seeing it in the next five years. It will be highly efficient, highly economical using small electric vehicles on existing roads, highly customized for each user and very environmentally friendly. It would be foolish to invest in a fixed rail train system when this is what is coming in the very near future. There is absolutely no doubt this is coming. 7. If we want to attract the right people and the right jobs and become super competitive in the local, national and world economy then we should be planning for and investing in being one of the first metropolitan areas to embrace this new kind of transportation that utilizes GPS auto navigation electric vehicles. That would make us very competitive for high skill and high wage jobs and residents. People don't want to ride a train to a train stop. They want to be efficiently transported to where they want to go. This is the way to go and it is completely possible. Investing $1.7 Billion in this would be a way better investment. 8. Our government is dangerously indebt and our economy is shaky and not growing. We are losing our competitiveness around the world. We as citizens need to stop pretending that public funding for projects like the Southwest Light Rail are "free" because the government is paying for it. It is NOT free. Our government will take on more debt,which we will pay. This project does cost every one of us. It costs us way more than the estimated cost of$1.7 Billion. It damages our national security and our country's viability. Someone needs to start saying no, we don't NEED this. Let's take a stand and say thanks, but no thanks and find better solutions that make us more competitive and are more economically viable. Please be clear and say "No, Eden Prairie does not want light rail". We need better solutions that are more viable and preserve what makes Eden Prairie a great place to live and work. Light rail does NOT do that. Sincerely, Jerry Johnson Jerry Johnson 8463 Crane Dance Trail Eden Prairie, MN 55344 36 Robert Ellis From: Jim Diehl [dieh0021@umn.edu] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 4:21 PM To: swift Cc: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: Clarifications and Follow-up Greetings, Council Members, I am writing to strongly encourage you to vote against municipal consent for SWLRT. This turned into a long email, so I've provided a summary before getting into it with more facts, links, and details. It obviously took longer to write and research this email than it will take you to read it, so if you'd humor me, I'd appreciate it. I want you to make your decision based on fact, not on some unverifiable rosy projections about jobs/growth, flawed word-of-mouth, one-sided presentations from the Met Council, or a vague vision/desire without significant thought of the costs and consequences. Summary: 1) Travel time by train will be about 15 minutes longer each way than the current express bus. They say we will be able to keep the bus service, but that makes the train even more inefficient in terms of density/ridership. 2) Light rail is indeed around 20 times more deadly per vehicle mile than passenger cars, and 40 times more deadly than buses. Locally, Hiawatha has killed 10 people in 10 years while the rest of the entire Metro Transit bus system with over 880 buses covering far more ground has taken 23 years to strike and kill 10 people. 3) One of the speakers in favor of SWLRT received a$30,000 federal grant to promote LRT within the Somali community. He also says many of his community members spread information by word-of-mouth. Word-of- mouth and rumor is not always correct as evidenced by the fact that some did not know there already is a bus transit option to get to the University of MN. 4) I was surprised that the Technology route had not had an environmental impact study. That is very troubling both in terms of unknown ecological and structural impact. 5) There will eventually be some kind of sales tax to pay for this construction and the ongoing operating costs. Sales taxes are regressive and make our area less competitive. There will also probably be some kind of property tax hike. I'm pretty sure at least a couple of you campaigned as "low tax" candidates. 6) Even greater amounts of high-density housing is not something that is needed in Eden Prairie. If you agree to this train, the Met Council will spend the next several decades pressuring you and future Councils to increase density at each of the stops. These new Eden Prairie residents won't all ride the train. This will cause more congestion as well as put further strain on our schools. It will cause more "flight" or "sprawl" to Savage or Chanhassen. Per your meeting last month, you said you pretty much all agreed that the Met Council's estimates for EP's future population were too high. Don't give them an excuse to turn their "guidance" into a mandate. Please vote No on municipal consent for the current SWLRT plans. If you must support a train, have it end at the Golden Triangle instead of at the Mitchell station. That would avoid a lot of expensive bridges and allow the faster and cheaper bus service to continue without cannibalizing its customer base. It would also avoid decades of future calls for ever more high-density housing at each of the three additional stops. First, I'm pretty sure you are all aware that there is currently a Southwest bus service with express service to the University of Minnesota (and relatively fast non-express service). I was surprised to hear some members of the Somali community state their wish for a train to allow access to the U of MN and educational opportunity as if 37 there is currently no other way to get to campus. The train will take significantly longer to get to the U than the current bus. I can back up my statements with facts, while some of the pro-train speakers seem to be basing their information on extremely flawed word-of-mouth, fact-less rumors, vague buzzwords like "opportunity," and flawed assumptions. While I don't normally ride the bus, I gave it a try on May 9th. The bus arrived at the SW Station early with plenty of time for boarding and left precisely at 8.07AM per the schedule. It arrived at Coffman Union at around 8:32AM, which was about five minutes ahead of schedule. On the return, there was more traffic, but with some driving on the shoulder, it still arrived back at the station on schedule. It was roughly half full both trips. Yes, there is Wifi included. Admittedly, this was a Friday and the last day of instruction for the semester, so that might have reduced the ridership a little. However, even the SW Bus service will admit their ridership is flat and they are looking for new ways to gain riders. http://swtransit.org/focus-groups/ In summary, the bus schedule is correct, and trips to the U take 31 minutes (plus some walking time) or less. http://goo.gl/maps/C6JH2 The travel time for the train is as follows. Per the official estimates, it's 38 minutes from Mitchell to the Nicollet Mall station downtown. Then, looking at the Central Corridor map, we see there are four more stops to get to the University of Minnesota. Looking at the Hiawatha schedule, we see it's 2-3 minutes per stop. So, if we start at the SW Station instead of Mitchell, it's 36 minutes to Nicollet, and then 8+minutes to the U of MN East Bank. That's a total of 44+minutes, which is 13-15 minutes LONGER each way than the current SW bus service. People say we will continue to have the SW bus service after the train is built. Thus, if you support SWLRT, you're either agreeing to pay for TWO subsidized public transportation systems that will compete for customers with each other, or you're voting to kill the existing bus service in favor of the slower and far more costly train service in spite of promises to the contrary. If some bus routes are kept and others are eliminated, you're just making the bus service more inefficient(economies of scale with the bus fleet, etc.). Second, I'd like to comment on safety. Light rail is NOT safer than bus service. I saw that same May 2014 Car and Driver article, and you can look at their infographic here: 38 THE CIRCLE( OF DEATH: Averacrefatality rates per 100 mill COMMUTER MOTORCYCLE BUS AIR CARRIER 31.5 0,5 4.2 AIR PASSENGER - LIGH TRA CARRIER CAR TRUCK' TO 0,9 1•1 11 4 1110 ip • lot LARGE MOTOR TRUCK' VEHICLE TOTAL 0.3 ,Liq. 1.4 tag tra4 heti If that image doesn't work, it shows fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles. Motorcycles are 31.5; Light Rail is 22.6; passenger cars and light (pickup) trucks are 1.1; and buses are 0.5. That data is taken from this 505-page document from the national Dept. of Transportation: www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/NTS Entire 13Q4.pdf Of course, there are numerically more auto deaths per year (with far more cars going far more places), but per mile,trains are second only to motorcycles in their deadliness. The train passengers are usually fine, but the trains are a hazard to drivers and pedestrians. To help bring more data, I'll point out that Hiawatha(now "Blue Line") light rail has killed 10 people in the 10 years of operation so far. That's with somewhere around 25-30 train cars and one line (the still unopened Central Corridor has hit three cars in three weeks of testing and I can almost promise it will start killing pedestrians and college kids at the same or higher rate than Hiawatha). Compare that to the MUCH larger Metro Transit bus system which has over 880 buses and just recently struck and killed its 10th person in 23 years. http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci 24091115/downtown-minneapolis-man-fatally-struck-by-metro-transit If you vote for a train, you are voting for a very large and dangerous machine (each Seimens S70 train car is something like 44 tons) to travel through Eden Prairie. I'm glad some of the intersections will have bridges (like the one near the already-weird Flying Cloud/Valley View intersection near Channel 9), but that is an expensive option to reduce the danger of what I see as an unnecessary and still-dangerous train. There will still be several "at grade" crossings that will not only provide a danger but will cause constant delays for drivers in 39 those areas. Third, I'd like to point out that at least one of the speakers, Mr. Asad Aliweyd, was paid $30,000 in federal grant money to promote light rail. His opinions are not exactly unbiased. Here's the link: http://www.metrocouncil.org/News-Events/Planning/Newsletters/Asad-Aliweyd-steering-S omali-community- toward-brig.aspx "Asad Aliweyd,founder and executive director of the New American Academy, was awarded a $30,000 community engagement grant by the Corridors of Opportunity initiative to help him engage the Somali community in planning for new businesses,jobs, and housing along the Southwest light rail corridor." Another interesting line from that link is: "We learned from Asad that the Somali community relies on 'word of mouth'to spread information, " said Susan Hoyt, coordinator of Corridors of Opportunity community engagement efforts. If some in the Somali community are unaware of the existing bus service to the U of MN and other places, it seems that Asad is not sharing all the facts by word of mouth with his community members. That article also says that Asad is 35 years old with 7 kids. Maybe that's why he thinks there isn't enough housing in Eden Prairie! Fourth, I'd just like to add that I had not heard that there was no environmental impact study done on the Technology Drive alignment as described by one of the speakers (from the old ADC building currently Optum Health). I know that the Culver's parking lot had issues with settling and cracking, so it's a very valid point to worry about the weight and vibrations from large trains in an unstable wetland. Even if they put the train on some kind of platform, it's hard to predict how that will settle with the weight of the trains and how long things will be out of service, etc., due to these issues of pretty much building heavy things in a swamp. This, of course, ignores the unstudied ecological impact. Fifth, I'd like to point out that the funding for half of the the immense construction costs and then all of the operating costs will be paid with some kind of state and local funding. While the federal money isn't free (hundreds of millions of additional debt on top of the existing trillions and overall economic uncertainty that creates), the local spending will outweigh that in the long run. User fees are nowhere near close to covering the cost of this. In order to fund this and other trains, there will likely be increases in metro sales taxes and/or property taxes via the Met Council and Hennepin Co. Rail Authority. For example, this article is from four months ago when SWLRT was still $1.5B, not the current $1.7B: http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/241923671.html "Hornstein and Sen. Scott Dibble, DEL-Minneapolis, chair of the Senate transportation committee, say they will move to increase the quarter-cent metro transit sales tax to three quarters of a cent to pay for Southwest and other Twin Cities transit projects." Increasing sales tax is not only regressive but also makes metro area business less competitive. Many shoppers will learn to avoid the Eden Prairie town center during years of heavy construction and perhaps not come back when the train is complete. There will also likely be some kind of property tax hike via the County, the Met Council, and/or the Railway authority. While it's not a direct tax increase, by voting for this train you are going against any "low tax" or "fiscally moderate/conservative" campaigning you may have done in the past. To put a different spin on$1.7B in spending for an unneeded and redundant transit system, please note that you could buy 30,000 $25k Hybrid cars and still have about a billion dollars left over. I say 30,000 here because 40 that's the projected ridership by 2030. Of course, that's daily rides, so it's really only 15,000 commuters/cars because they take two rides a day. When you consider the fact that a good number of these riders already ride the SW bus, you realize how few new transit riders will be created by this train. Eden Prairie's density does not call for this train, and I hope we all agree that we don't want exceptionally more density to justify the train. This brings me to my final point. Sixth, the idea that Eden Prairie hasn't had any high-density construction since the late 70's or early 80's is another "word of mouth" rumor that doesn't have any truth to it. Some of you were on the EP Council during the 90's and early 2000's and are well aware of the significant growth of high-density housing during that time. Of course, within a few years of that growth, our school district started having its issues with various "gaps" and the city went through a bit of drama as the "redistricting" went through. Those past decisions also contributed to "sprawl" or "flight" to Chanhassen, etc., that the Met Council supposedly is trying to combat. Given that portions of Eden Prairie will hopefully remain parks and wild areas, we will never have the density to support this train. However, in the developed areas, we do have plenty of high-density housing. The idea that Eden Prairie is not "diverse" is also a myth. Per their own research, the SW Transit station area and the Town Center area are already the most diverse stops along the entire proposed route. http://metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Proi ects/Current-Projects/Southwest-LRT/Proj ect-Facts/Equity.aspx "The Eden Prairie Town Center and Southwest station areas are the most diverse Southwest LRT station areas in terms of race and ethnicity (49%people of color and 40%foreign-born), but are socioeconomically comparable to the region as a whole." At the 4/22/14 Meeting, during discussion of the "Thrive 2040" plans, it sounded like the entire EP Council agreed that the Met Council's estimates for significantly increased density were not something that we wanted to impose and it is better to let market forces drive our growth. To me, that implies we want more gradual growth and to be able to maintain our precious green/park areas. Of course, the Met Council is obsessed with central planning and social engineering, so they will continually pressure you and future Councils to increase the density in Eden Prairie under the guise of opportunity, equity, or some such artificial non-market influence backed by questionable statistics and short-term incentives. In conclusion, I strongly encourage you to vote "no" on municipal consent for SWLRT. The majority of the speakers at the public hearing are opposed to this train. Some were happy to see it moved away from their "back yard" while others were upset to see it in front of their building. The easy answer is to not give consent and keep this expensive, redundant, and dangerous train out of Eden Prairie and out of everyone's back yard. If you absolutely must support some kind of train, perhaps stop it at the Golden Triangle where it will not conflict with the existing bus service, will not require several expensive bridges over intersections, will not drive calls for even more unneeded high-density housing. Again, for these and other reasons, I urge you to vote NO on the current SWLRT proposal. Thank you for reading! Jim Diehl 10530 West Riverview Drive 41 Robert Ellis From: JIMVIKEN [jimviken@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 12:05 AM To: swirl Subject: Light Rail Referendum is a very good idea I oppose any light rail approval by the EP City Council without a Citizen-voter Referendum for many important reasons. A budget item this large must be voted on by the Citizen/residents of Eden Prairie. What the EP City Council members are not aware of is that a major Global Financial reset is coming sometime within the next 24 months. This means that the US Petro Dollar will no longer be used as the World Financial Reserve Currency as the BRICS Economic Union negotiates its own currency basket exchanges. This is already happening in many different nations including a recent agreement between Australia and China for example. What will this mean for the residents of Eden Prairie? The price of gasoline sold in America will slowly rise upward by at least 20-30% and the same for the prices of all imported good (some more, some less but this is a good prediction for the loss of value of the US Dollar). This reduction in the value of the US Dollar will exert significant financial and budgetary pressures on most American Cities, even the affluent ones like Eden Prairie. This means layoff in the EP City Government will be likely and major cutbacks in the EP School System. When this global economic reset occurs, additional non-essential budget items like this 20 Million dollar plus swimming pool construction will become a major point of contention by many EP residents. It would be a wise choice for the EP City Council members to allow the Citizen/residents of Eden Prairie vote as to whether they want this expensive swimming pool remodel/expansion or not. Sincerely, Jim Viken, Ph.D. Psychologist Emeritus 9890 Crestwood Terrace EP, MN 55347 24 year EP resident 42 Robert Ellis From: Kate Williams [kew@mchsi.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 4:11 PM To: swift Subject: Safety concern re: lightrail and Eagle Ridge Academy To whom it may concern, Eagle Ridge Academy is a K-12 school in Eden Prairie (7255 Flying Cloud Drive). Currently,the plans are to have the light rail cross the street directly next to the entrance of the school. This is unacceptable as this is a huge safety risk to 800+students plus faculty. The light rail committee has not,to my knowledge, even addressed why a proximity so close to young students can even be under consideration. There are busses, parents dropping children off etc.each morning and afternoon. Children as young as 5 years old attend this school. Safety should be a priority and it seems the committee has failed to recognize and address this. Sincerely, Kate Williams Chanhassen, MN Mother to two Eagle Ridge Academy students =This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. 43 Robert Ellis From: Kline, Frank J. [FKline@ThriftyWhite.com] Sent: Friday, April 18, 2014 10:15 AM To: swirl Subject: SWLR Council members, I am not really sure of the ROI on this project.This is a lot of money spent for very little benefit to the communities that it is affecting. Is this going to remove the bus lines from our communities to the downtown area? If not why are we doing this? Thanks for listening, Frank Kline, a peat Dart/ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email contains confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient,please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of the e-mail. Do not copy, distribute,or disclose its contents to any third parties. 44 Robert Ellis From: Lindsey Johnson [lindsey.johnson.web@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 10:55 AM To: swill Subject: Vote NO I absolutely oppose the proposed Southwest LRT line through Eden Prairie. Please represent your constituents and vote NO on municipal consent. Lindsey Johnson 8911 Knollwood Drive Eden Prairie, MN 5534 612-867-7262 45 Robert Ellis From: Liz Liebo [liz.liebo@reagan.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 11:06 PM To: swift Subject: Light Rail I have seen where this line is going through Eden Prairie, and I must say it looks like the train to no where. I feel our money is much better spent on fixing and improving the roads we have. There seems to be a lot of wasteful spending going on and really makes me think twice about staying and throwing wasteful dollars into this community. Respectively, Liz Liebp Sent from my iPhone 46 Robert Ellis From: Lyle Hookom [Ihookom@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 6:36 PM To: swirl Subject: LRT in Eden Prairie I am seriously opposed to the SWLRT as the ONLY FUNCTION it will serve is to increase the size of Government. I have not seen one valid argument for light rail that shows how it would be better serve the people than our current bus transit system does. Buses are flexible, require less infrastructure,can go where the people are, use are roads and go to alternate locations for special events such as the State Fair. People have said we need to spend money on LRT now so we are ready for our transportation needs 30 years from now, if that is the case we should build more roads now as they carry 93%of the people and ALL of the products we use. In 30 years I hope we have a better alternative than trains which have been around since the 1800s. Also in 30 years where will the people be working? I doubt it will be where we have the stations built today. The wasted money could be better spent helping others such as our Senior citizens with their transport. It is time to stop this obsolete system now. Lyle Hookom Eden Prairie, MN 47 Robert Ellis From: Maribeth Schulke [mbschulke@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 11:12 AM To: swirl Subject: say no to proposed route I attended the open house and city council meeting Tuesday evening after following project since it's inception and after listening and reading all information I must urge the council in not supporting the SWLRT route as it currently stands. There simply has not been adequate research done to support the cost and feasibility of this route, especially as it passes through the Kenilworth corridor and the last three stations through Eden Prairie. In Eden Prairie the route needs to follow existing transportation corridors, not slice through wetland and park areas. It is troubling indeed to hear an environmental impact statement has not been procured along technology drive, especially considering the myriad of problems that has prevailed in the past during that area's development due to the nature of the land, it is a wetland! Remember when the Corps of Engineers put all the tires in at the corner of Prairie Center Drive and Technology to try and stabilize the soil? Then they were taken out because you can't put tires in a wetland? The annual flooding of the area by Culvers it goes on. Not to mention the disturbance it will wreak on the entire purgatory nature area. The city's movers and shakers want this area to be our "hometown downtown?"....seriously , who wants to walk along a nature trail while listening to train bells and looking at rail cars and overhead wires? Who wants to walk blocks to shop or run errands from November to May? Southwest Transit is serving our population well and can be updated for future population growth It was clear at the city council meeting that the majority of residents that were there do not support SWLRT. What worries me is what about all the residents that weren't there, what's their take on this project. They either don't know or don't care, which means they will not be riding light rail no matter where it goes, they are staying in their cars. This route is not feasible if it is only going to be for a population that comes into the city for a job and then leaves, there has to be EP residents that get on from here to go into the city. At this time, I don't see that happening with our population. Please do not regard this project like a groupon that is just too irresistible to buy, because right now it's such a good deal. Too much is at stake. I truly believe someday a southwest corridor may be feasible and a a benefit for this community, but not now, not this route. Sincerely MariBeth Schulke 48 Robert Ellis From: Martin, Evan J 46K[Evan.Martin@Cigna.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 12:33 PM To: swirl Subject: Purgatory Creek Park Hello, My name is Evan. We cannot ruin this park by having a light rail train here. This is Eden Prairie's best park! It is so quiet and I see so much wildlife in this area (even bald eagles). Please, please, please think about this. Light rail will mess everything up. This area is PERFECT as it is right now. Please to not let them change it. It is my favorite part about living in Eden prairie. We have a bus line; we do not need an alternative. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown. This email transmission may contain confidential information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly. Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient. Thank you for your compliance. Copyright (c) 2014 Cigna 49 Robert Ellis From: Megan Petkoff[mgpetkoff@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 10:29 AM To: swirl Subject: I am opposed to light rail. Big waste of Tax Payers money. 50 Robert Ellis From: Michelle Newell [michelleenewell@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 12:02 AM To: swlrt Subject: Please vote NO on Eden Prairie Light Rail I oppose the proposed light rail line through Eden Prairie and encourage you to vote NO on municipal consent. As a resident of Eden Prairie for the last 8+years, I have thoroughly enjoyed the small-town feel of the area. Bringing light rail to Eden Prairie. I feel, will ruin the small town feel I have grown to love about Eden Prairie. Please vote NO to Light Rail in Eden Prairie. Thank you, Michelle Newell 13451 Zenith Lane Eden Prairie, MN 55346 51 Robert Ellis From: Mike's Email [mcschommer@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 10:15 PM To: swlrt Subject: Southwest LRT comment My name is Michael Schommer and I am a resident of Eden Prairie. I am a strong supporter of the project and I encourage the members of the Eden Prairie City Council to vote in favor of proceeding with the project. I attended the May 20 public hearing on the Southwest LRT project and was appalled at the misinformation shared by opponents of the LRT project. Perhaps the most egregious error came when one gentleman said light rail has an "unsubsidized cost"of$12-$15 per ride whereas the bus has an "unsubsidized cost" of$3.50. No citation was provided for these numbers, but I highly doubt whether the bus figure includes the cost of road building and maintenance, or traffic lights, or police patrols, or the cost of ensuring a steady supply of gas for America's hundreds of millions of cars. I support light rail, and mass transit in general, because unlike some opponents I know what the alternative- my daily car commute-truly costs for me and my family. My 25-mile commute (each way)to St. Paul costs me more than $2,000 in gas every year, more than 400 hours of unproductive time staring out my car windshield, and tons of greenhouse gases out my tailpipe that further accelerates the climate disruption that the vast majority of reputable scientists say will make Eden Prairie far less idyllic for my children and their children. While the Southwest Transit bus system is very good, it has two key weaknesses relative to light rail. First, a bus is subject to the same traffic jams and weather-related slowdowns as other vehicles on the road. Second, buses running on gas will be subject to gas price increases that are sure to come in the future. I have traveled to other metropolitan areas where light rail and mass transit are more advanced, and I know from personal experience that it makes communities more livable, more appealing to tourists, and less captive to the automobile. My office in St. Paul is adjacent to new light rail lines, and I eagerly anticipate operations so I and my colleagues can enjoy the more productive and efficient travel option. The"unsightly wires" bemoaned by opponents are not nearly as unsightly in my view as the ugly sight of a sea of red tail lights on 35E or 494. Please do not assume that the comments and vitriol displayed at the May 20 hearing accurately represents the feelings of the majority of Eden Prairie residents. I know you know, as I do, that such events tend to draw out the most extreme views while the quiet majority of people remain focused on day to day tasks and trust you to make the right decision for the long- term future of our community. I have that trust, as do many of my Eden Prairie friends and neighbors, and I encourage you to act in our best interests -and more importantly, the best interests of our children and grandchildren. Respectfully, Michael Schommer Eden Prairie 52 Robert Ellis From: MJ2 [maxj40@aol.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 12:24 AM To: swift Subject: VOTE NO! My name is Michael Johnson Jr. I live at 8204 Hiawatha Circle Eden Prairie 55347, I oppose the proposed light rail line through Eden Prairie and encourage you to vote NO on municipal consent. Michael 53 Robert Ellis From: Nancy Litwin [Nancy.Litwin@edenprairiecenter.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 3:28 PM To: swift Cc: Robert Ellis; Rick Getschow; David Lindahl; GRP-AllCouncil; nelrae.succio@hennepin.us; Nyquist, Daren (Daren.Nyquist@metrotransit.org); swlrt@metrotransit.org Subject: Southwest LRT- Eden Prairie Center management's comments on preliminary design plans for Southwest LRT (METRO Green Line Extension) Project Attachments: Letter to Robert Ellis re SWLRT 05.20.2014.pdf Dear Mr. Ellis, On behalf of Eden Prairie Center management, I respectfully ask the staff and officials of the City of Eden Prairie, Hennepin County and the Metropolitan Council for your consideration of our comments on preliminary design plans for the Southwest LRT(METRO Green Line Extension) Project. The attached letter should be considered our submitted written comments. Thank you. Nancy J. Litwin,Sr.General Manager Eden Prairie Center 8251 Flying Cloud Drive, Suite 125 Eden Prairie, MN 55344-5305 P 952-525-2152 F 952-941-7316 nancy.litwin@edenprairiecenter.com 54 ftui PPflIPIE CEfTER May 20,2014 Mr. Robert Ellis Public Works Director City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Southwest LRT—Eden Prairie Center management's comments on preliminary design plans for Southwest LRT(METRO Green Line Extension)Project Dear Mr. Ellis, Thank you to the City of Eden Prairie staff and officials for your continued thoughtful planning efforts on Southwest LRT within Eden Prairie. Eden Prairie Center is a regional shopping, family entertainment and dining destination that showcases nearly 120 stores and restaurants, providing employment to more than 2,400 employees. Nearly twelve million shoppers visit Eden Prairie Center annually. Eden Prairie Center ownership and management understand that the Southwest LRT preliminary design plan municipal consent process is currently underway in Eden Prairie and respectfully ask your consideration of our comments that follow: 1. Eden Prairie Center ownership and management support the Eden Prairie Town Center Station adjustment to the route,as well as the alignment along the west side of Flying Cloud Drive,because this central location will more effectively benefit local employers, businesses and future economic development of the entire Major Center Area shopping district. 2. There is existing,significant traffic in the Major Center Area including congestion and backups during peak times. Motorists are already often confused and frustrated navigating their way to,through and from this shopping district. Because of this, we strongly support the preliminary design plan's new LRT bridge to cross Technology and Prairie Center Drive to the alignment between Bachman's and Costco. Additionally,the preliminary design plan's LRT bridge at the Valley View Road and Flying Cloud Drive intersection is critical. However, the at-grade LRT crossing at Technology Drive on the west side of Flying Cloud Drive has drawn our attention and is very concerning to us since this will likely increase congestion and further exasperate motorists in this shopping district. Eden Prairie Center o $251 Flying Cloud Drive,Suite 125 © Eden Prairie,MN 55344 main(952)941 7650 © lax(952)941-73 I6 3. There is still a critical need for more parking availability at the Town Center Station location and this should be revisited to more adequately accommodate increased parking needs. We are concerned for the potential of our parking lots being utilized by transit riders. With recent developments in the Major Center Area, such as the Windsor Plaza development and the addition of Famous Dave's at Tower Square,Eden Prairie Center has experienced an increase in unauthorized vehicles parking in our parking lots and requesting use of our parking lots to meet adjacent businesses' overflow parking needs. This, combined with future transit parking needs and future area growth and development, demand more parking in the immediate Town Center area. 4. The Town Center Station should dedicate adequate space for bus circulator, shuttle and taxi pickup and drop off without disrupting motorist traffic flow on Eden Road and other adjacent roadways. In addition, the design of the Southwest LRT must complement and be coordinated with the services offered by Southwest Transit. Future Southwest Transit operations are critical to the design and operation of the Southwest LRT line. Southwest Transit needs to be an active partner in the process. 5. It is important to plan the addition of a new city street from the Town Center Station cul de sac cut through to Singletree Lane to improve the flow and convenience for motorist and pedestrian traffic in and around the station area and to benefit area businesses. 6. Adequate placement for snow removal along the widening and extension of Eden Road and other adjacent roadways is important to minimize future snow hauling costs. 7. In order to protect access and visibility to Eden Prairie Center and continue to assess impacts on our operations, our business and/or our growth,we request individual follow up meetings with you and the Southwest Transitway project office to share our comments as the Southwest LRT planning process continues and the project becomes more defined. 8. Eden Prairie Center ownership and management support planning for the addition of a grade separated pedestrian connection over Flying Cloud Drive at Singletree Lane. In addition to bus circulator, shuttle and taxi services supporting the Eden Prairie Town Center Station,pedestrian connectivity from the Town Center Station to the east side of Flying Could Drive should be a component of the overall connectivity of the district. 9. The project must evaluate alternatives and determine solutions for mitigating construction impacts of the project. Without appropriate solutions during the construction phase,we anticipate potential negative construction impacts could cause many shoppers/motorists to avoid the Eden Prairie Major Center Area shopping district and build habits of choosing competing shopping areas,thereby creating continued, long-lasting negative impact on businesses in the Major Center Area. Eden Prairie Center o 8251 Flying Cloud Drive,Suite 125 o Eden Prairie,MN 55344 main(952)941-7650 o ]irx(952)941-7316 10. Due to the large,regional traffic draw of Eden Prairie Center,we request that the Southwest LRT project include directional guide signs to Eden Prairie Center to assist motorists through construction areas, detours and any roadway reconfigurations that result from the final preferred alternative route of Southwest LRT. 11. Plan reviews of proposed Metro Transit Police Department schedules and personnel deployments, as well as site housekeeping and maintenance,to the Town Center Station and other Eden Prairie LRT stations would be beneficial to us as we further evaluate the entire Southwest LRT program. Neither the City of Eden Prairie, nor Eden Prairie Center ownership and management, should have to bear additional expense burdens for crime prevention,policing or site operations related to the Southwest LRT operation. We understand that there are multiple CCTV cameras on all Metro Transit LRT platforms, as well as any of their Park and Ride areas and on board LRT vehicles and buses, and that these cameras are monitored through a 24-Hour Rail Control Center. In summary, regarding any potential or forthcoming proposed alterations to the Southwest LRT preliminary design plan,Eden Prairie Center ownership and management remain opposed to any potential taking of our property and find that would be detrimental to our operation. We look forward to working closely with you as the Southwest LRT design plan and Town Center Station design is finalized. Thank you, again. Sincerely, \k-‘411-(12 Nancy J. Litwin Sr. General Manager Eden Prairie Center cc: John Dietrich, Sr. Development Manager for Target Rick Getschow, City Manager at City of Eden Prairie David Lindahl, Economic Development Director at City of Eden Prairie Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Eden Prairie Mayor Brad Aho, Eden Prairie City Council Member Ron Case,Eden Prairie City Council Member Sherry Butcher Wickstrom, Eden Prairie City Council Member Kathy Nelson, Eden Prairie City Council Member Daren Nyquist,Metro Transit Community Outreach Coordinator Eden Prairie Center o 3251 Plying Cloud Drive.Suite 125 o Eden Prairie,MN 55344 main(952)94 I-7650 o fax(952)941-7316 Robert Ellis From: Nielsen, Vicki [vicki.nielsen@stinsonleonard.com] Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 10:56 AM To: Daren.Nyquist@metrotransit.org; Robert Ellis Cc: susan.haigh@metc.state.mn.us; katie.rodriguez@metc.state.mn.us; Iona.schreiber@metc.state.mn.us;jennifer.munt@metc.state.mn.us; gary.vaneyll@metc.state.mn.us; steve;james.brimeyer@metc.state.mn.us; gary.cunningham@metc.state.mn.us; adam.duininck@metc.state.mn.us; edward.reynoso@metc.state.mn.us; marie.mccarthy@metc.state.mn.us; sandy.rummel@metc.state.mn.us; harry.melander@metc.state.mn.us; richard.kramer@metc.state.mn.us;jon.commers@metc.state.mn.us; steven.chavez@metc.state.mn.us; wendy.wulff@metc.state.mn.us; Nancy Tyra-Lukens; Brad Aho; Ron Case; Sherry Butcher Wickstrom; Kathy Nelson; hcrra@hennepin.us; commissioner.mclaughlin@hennepin.us; randy.johnson@hennepin.us; jan.callison@hennepin.us; dave_pelner@uhg.com; Ispeltz@angelogordon.com; fwhiting@angelogordon.com;john.shardlow@stantec.com; tbaxter@esi-engineering.com Subject: Southwest Light Rail Transit Segment W1A Technology Drive Alignment Attachments: Letter.pdf The attached letter is being sent to you at the request of Todd Phelps. Please contact him directly with any questions or comments. Thank you. Vicki Nielsen I Legal Administrative Assistant I Stinson Leonard Street LLP 150 South Fifth Street,Suite 2300 I Minneapolis, MN 55402 T: 612.335.1688 I F: 612.335.1657 vicki.nielsen@stinsonleonard.com ( www.stinsonleonard.com This communication (including any attachments)is from a law firm and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If it has been sent to you in error, please contact the sender for instructions concerning return or destruction,and do not use or disclose the contents to others. 55 Todd M.Phelps 612.335.1871 DIRECT 612,335.1657 DIRECT FAX S T I N S O N todd.phelps@stinsonleonard.com LEONARD STREET May 15, 2014 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL & U.S. MAIL Metropolitan Council Robert Ellis Southwest LRT Project Office Public Works Director 6465 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 500 City of Eden Prairie St. Louis Park, MN 55426 8080 Mitchell Road ATTN: Daren Nyquist Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Southwest Light Rail Transit Segment W1A Technology Drive Alignment Dear Mr. Ellis and Mr. Nyquist: I am writing on behalf of our client, AGNL Health, L.L.C. ("AGNL Health"), regarding the preliminary design plans for West Segment 1 A ("Segment W1A") of the Southwest Light Rail Transit Project ("SWLRT"). AGNL Health is the owner of the office campus located at 13625 Technology Drive in Eden Prairie, Minnesota (the "Campus"), which is immediately adjacent to the modified alignment of Segment W1A proposed in the preliminary design layout developed for the municipal consent process (the "Technology Drive Alignment"). AGNL Health is concerned with the potential for significant impacts from the Technology Drive Alignment to the carefully-designed atmosphere of the Campus. More specifically, the Campus was designed to create an atmosphere that supports connectivity and collaboration by emphasizing naturally lit open spaces and by diffusing the boundary between the buildings and the natural beauty of the Campus site. The Technology Drive Alignment threatens this fundamental character of the Campus, and will diminish the quality of the experience at the Campus for employees and visitors. Summary of AGNL Health's Comments As a property owner that will be significantly impacted by the sudden decision to pursue the Technology Drive Alignment, AGNL Health is providing this letter to voice its concerns regarding the SWLRT development process. As described more fully in the Detailed Comments included as Attachment A, these concerns and considerations include: 150 South Fifth Street, Suite 2300 • Minneapolis, MN 55402 www.stinsonleonard,com 612.335.1500 MAIN • 612.335.1657 FAX 100963183v4 May 15, 2014 Page 2 • The municipal consent process should be postponed because no environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment has been completed, and the City of Eden Prairie lacks essential information regarding the potential impacts of the route. • Minnesota law requires supplemental environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment before the City of Eden Prairie can grant its consent. • AGNL Health has not yet had the opportunity to participate in a public process to identify and resolve concerns regarding the potential impacts of the Technology Drive Alignment. The opportunity for public comment in the municipal consent process is insufficient without the benefit of adequate environmental review. • The Technology Drive Alignment raises significant and unique substantive considerations at the Campus relating to noise and vibration, traffic, soil conditions, wetlands, and costs that require detailed technical analysis. AGNL Health's Requests AGNL Health specifically requests the opportunity to meaningfully participate in an informed public comment process and the following: 1) Metropolitan Council should postpone the municipal consent process for the City of Eden Prairie until the potential impacts of the Technology Drive Alignment have been fully evaluated and considered as part of a supplemental environmental review; or 2) If the municipal consent process for the City of Eden Prairie moves forward, the City of Eden Prairie should a) Disapprove the preliminary design plans, b) Stipulate that its disapproval can only be withdrawn once supplemental environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment is completed and deemed adequate, and c) Reserve the right to reevaluate its municipal consent based on the supplemental environmental review, including the ability to require mitigation measures for the Technology Drive Alignment and address any other issues identified by the City of Eden Prairie, affected property owners, and other stakeholders. 100963183v4 May 15, 2014 Page 3 AGNL Health looks forward to working with the Metropolitan Council and the City of Eden Prairie to develop a robust analysis of the Technology Drive Alignment and to developing a mutually-agreeable path forward for the SWLRT project. Sincerely, STINSON RD STREET LLP Todd . helps c . Susan Haigh (susan.haigh@metc.state.mn.us) Katie Rodriguez (katie.rodriguez@metc.state.mn.us) Lona Schreiber (lona.schreiber@metc.state.mn.us) Jennifer Munt (jennifer.munt@metc.state.mn.us) Gary Van Eyll (aary.vaneyll@metc.state.mn.us) Steve Elkins (steve.elkins@metc.state.mn.us) James Brimeyer (james.brimeyer@metc.state.mn.us) Gary L. Cunningham (aary.cunninaham@metc.state.mn.us) Adam Duininck (adam.duininck@metc.state.mn.us) Edward Reynoso (edward.reynoso@metc.state.mn.us) Marie McCarthy (marie.mccarthy@metc.state.mn.us) Sandy Rummel (sandy.rummel@metc.state.mn.us) Harry Melander (harry.melander@metc.state.mn.usl Richard Kramer (richard.kramer@metc.state.mn.us) Jon Commers (jon.commers@metc.state.mn.us) Steven T. Chavez (steven.chavez@metc.state.mn.us) Wendy Wulff (wendy.wulff@metc.state.mn.us) Nancy Tyra-Lukens (ntyra-lukens@edenprairie.ora) Brad Aho (baho@edenprairie.org) Ron Case (rcase@edenprairie.ora) Sherry Butcher Wickstrom (sbutcherwickstrom@edenprairie.orq) Kathy Nelson (knelson@edenprairie.org) Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority (hcrra@hennepin.us) Peter McLaughlin (commissioner.mclaughlin@hennepin.us Randy Johnson (randy.johnson@hennepin.us) Jan Callison (ian.callison@hennepin.us) David Palmer (dave pelner@uhg.com) Lisa Speltz (Ispeltz@angelogordon.com) Gordon Whiting (fwhiting@angelogordon.com) John W.Shardlow (john.shardlow@stantec.com) Anthony J. Baxter (tbaxter@esi-enaineering.com) 100963183v4 Attachment A-AGNL Health, LLC's Detailed Comments to Southwest Light Rail Transit Segment W1A Technology Drive Alignment I. The Municipal Consent Process Should Not Proceed Because Eden Prairie Lacks Information About the Potential Impacts of the Technology Drive Alignment, and this Information Is Essential to the Consent Process. • The municipal consent process required under Minnesota law is currently underway for the SWLRT. As a matter of law and from a practical standpoint, however, the City of Eden Prairie cannot and should not participate in the process until environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment is completed. Despite not having published the SWLRT Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS"), and despite the absence of any environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment, the Metropolitan Council has initiated the municipal consent process. This process is scheduled to be completed in July 2014, long before the FEIS will be published and any environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment will be completed. This unnecessary rush to obtain local approvals violates the procedural requirements of the Minnesota Environmental Protection Act ("MEPA") and the National Environmental Protection Act ("NEPA"), and unfairly undermines the community's ability to make an informed decision on the preliminary design plan. Therefore, the Metropolitan Council should not proceed with the municipal consent process until all environmental review is complete, and the City of Eden Prairie should disapprove the preliminary design plan and require that environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment be completed. A. Minnesota law requires completion of an environmental impact statement before the City of Eden Prairie consents to the SWLRT preliminary design plan. Under Minnesota's municipal consent statute, the City of Eden Prairie has just one opportunity to review and approve the SWLRT's preliminary design plan. See Minn. Stat. § 473.3994. Once the City of Eden Prairie approves the design plan (or disapproves the preliminary design plan but provides amendments to the plan that, if implemented, would cause the city to withdraw its disapproval), it has no further opportunity to review or vote on the design (whether preliminary or final) unless "substantial" changes are made from the preliminary to final design stage. Because Eden Prairie will not again review the design plan, its decision approving the proposed design plan is a "final decision" of a government entity. MEPA, however, expressly prohibits a final governmental decision approving a project such as the SWLRT until after a FEIS is published and determined to be adequate. See Minn. Stat. § 116D.04, subd. 2a; Minn. R. 4410.3100, subp. 1. Furthermore, the City of Eden Prairie and other local entities are required to consider the FEIS when making permitting and approval decisions for the SWLRT. See Minn. R. 4410.7055. In this case, the FEIS for the entire project has not yet been completed and published (much less deemed adequate). More significantly, no environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment has been completed. Therefore, the City of Eden Prairie cannot, as a matter of law, make a final decision consenting to the SWLRT preliminary design until an FEIS is published and determined 1 100963183v4 to be adequate, which necessarily requires completion of supplemental environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment. Accordingly, the City of Eden Prairie should disapprove the preliminary design plan and require that the environmental review process be completed. B. To comply with Minnesota law, the City of Eden Prairie should withhold consent until all environmental review is completed. Even if the City of Eden Prairie could approve the preliminary design plan before the environmental review process is completed (which it cannot), it should not do so because it and members of the community lack basic and essential information regarding the potential impacts of the Technology Drive Alignment. The purpose of environmental review under MEPA and NEPA is to inform policymakers and the public of the potential impacts of a proposed project, and to identify changes or alternatives that could minimize or mitigate those effects. Yet, the Metropolitan Council and the City of Eden Prairie are proceeding with the municipal consent process without having completed any environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment, and without having engaged AGNL Health regarding impacts to the Campus. As a result, the City of Eden Prairie lacks sufficient information as to: • what noise and vibration impacts the Technology Drive Alignment will have on the carefully-designed atmosphere of the Campus, the Campus auditorium and broadcast facility, and other acoustically-sensitive areas; • what traffic impacts there will be along the Technology Drive-Mitchell Road corridor, the only means of access to the Campus; • what impact there will be to wetlands and other aquatic resources along the alignment; and • what mitigation measures may be necessary to address particular impacts, as envisioned by the consent process. The absence of any environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment also deprives the consent process of meaningful participation by the community. A public hearing must be held before the City of Eden Prairie's decision to approve or disapprove the preliminary design plan. See Minn. Stat. § 473.3994. This hearing, however, is the first opportunity that ANGL Health and other members of the community will have to weigh in on the Technology Drive Alignment, and the community members will be without any information related to the potential impacts of the newly-developed alignment at the time of the hearing. By hurriedly seeking municipal consent before environmental review is completed, the Metropolitan Council is demanding that the City of Eden Prairie make a decision on whether to approve the preliminary design plan not only before it has all the facts regarding the Technology Drive Alignment, but also before there is an opportunity for community members to provide informed input to the City. Simply put, too much uncertainty exists at this time regarding the Technology Drive Alignment for the City of Eden Prairie to meaningfully evaluate and consent to the proposed 2 100963183v4 Technology Drive Alignment. Therefore, the Metropolitan Council should postpone the municipal consent process until the uncertainty associated with the Technology Drive Alignment is resolved through the environmental review process. In the absence of the Metropolitan Council's postponement, the City of Eden Prairie should disapprove the preliminary design plan until the environmental review process is completed. II. To Inform the Municipal Consent Process and Other Permitting Decisions, Both NEPA and MEPA Require Additional Analysis of, and Public Comment on, the SWLRT Technology Drive Alignment. Aside from the legal requirements associated with the municipal consent process, additional information regarding the Technology Drive Alignment must be developed. Both NEPA and MEPA require that supplemental environmental review be completed to ensure the Technology Drive Alignment is adequately reviewed, and further require that the public be provided with opportunities to comment on the environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment. Accordingly, the Metropolitan Council must undertake supplemental environmental review and allow AGNL Health to participate in that process. A. NEPA and MEPA require a supplemental EIS for the Technology Drive Alignment. Because the Technology Drive Alignment represents a significant modification to the original alignment along Highway 212 (the "Highway 212 Alignment") and was not evaluated under the Southwest Transitway Draft Environmental Impact Statement ("DEIS"), both MEPA and NEPA require supplemental environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment to ensure that decision-makers have the necessary information regarding potential impacts from the alignment. Both NEPA and MEPA require that a supplemental environmental review document be prepared when a project change results in impacts not already considered in the environmental review. Under MEPA, supplementation is required where "there is substantial new information or new circumstances that significantly affect the potential environmental effects from the proposed project that have not been considered in the final EIS" Minn. R. 4410.3000, subp.3. Similarly, NEPA requires a supplemental EIS when "changes to the proposed action would result in significant environmental impacts that were not evaluated in the EIS." 23 C.F.R. 771.130(a). The Technology Drive Alignment constitutes a new circumstance/change in the proposed action for which supplementation is required.' While the DEIS evaluated a preferred route and multiple alternative alignments, only the Highway 212 Alignment was evaluated for Segment W1A, no alternative alignments were evaluated for that segment, and the Technology Drive Alignment was not developed until after the DEIS was published and public comment period closed. Because the Technology Drive Alignment has the potential to result in significant environmental impacts such as noise, vibration, traffic, and ' AGNL Health understands that the Metropolitan Council is in agreement that a supplemental EIS is required for the Technology Drive Alignment. 3 100963183v4 wetlands impacts that were not analyzed in the DEIS, a supplemental environmental impact statement ("SEIS") is required for the Technology Drive Alignment. B. AGNL Health and other stakeholders should have the opportunity to participate in the supplemental environmental review process. As part of the supplemental environmental review process, AGNL Health must be provided the opportunity participate and provide comments on the Technology Drive Alignment and associated impacts to the Campus and other resources along the segment. For example, MEPA requires the responsible governmental unit ("RGU") to adopt a notice of the preparation of the SEIS, and to publish a summary of the notice in the EQB Monitor. Minn. R. 4410.3000, subp. 5(B). Any person may submit comments on the proposed scope of the supplemental document within 20 days of the notice publication in the EQB Monitor. Id. This participation is particularly important for affected property owners who may suffer significant economic harm from governmental decisions. While the Metropolitan Council has indicated that a SEIS for the Technology Drive Alignment is being prepared, no public notice of the SEIS has been published in the EQB Monitor, and no other opportunity for AGNL Health to participate in the development of an SEIS on the Technology Drive Alignment has been provided. To the extent the scope of the SEIS is still being established, AGNL Health requests the ability to participate in the SEIS scoping process, as contemplated by Minn. R. 4410.3000, subp. 5(A). In the event the SEIS scoping is complete and the Metropolitan Council elects not to provide AGNL Health even an informal opportunity to participate in the scoping process, AGNL Health requests that notice of the SEIS be published in the EQB Monitor promptly so that AGNL Health is informed of the content contemplated by the SEIS, and has the opportunity to provide comments in accordance with Minn. R. 4410.3000, subp. 5(B). Once scoping and notice of the SEIS are complete, the Metropolitan Council and other agencies, in preparing an SEIS, must follow the process for development of an EIS, including publication of a draft document and providing the opportunity for public comment on the draft document. Minn. R. 4410.3000, subp. 5(C); 23 CFR 771.130(d). These opportunities for public comment are essential for stakeholders such as AGNL Health to identify and explain the importance of potential impacts to their interests, which are then available for consideration throughout project permitting. For AGNL Health, participation in the SEIS process is necessary to develop detailed information and analysis for consideration in the municipal consent process, including potential mitigation measures to alleviate impacts to the Campus that could be incorporated into the project by the City of Eden Prairie as part of the municipal consent process. III. Significant Uncertainties Regarding the Potential Impacts of the SWLRT Technology Drive Alignment Should Be Addressed Before Identifying the Alignment as the Preferred Alternative. As discussed above, the only alignment of Segment W 1 A analyzed in the DEIS was the Highway 212 Alignment. While some of the technical evaluation completed for the DEIS was 4 100963183v4 on a broad enough scale that the evaluation may potentially be utilized for the Technology Drive Alignment (e.g., air, cultural resources, and sensitive species), there is still a significant need to perform technical evaluations of the potential impacts of the Technology Drive Alignment, to compare those impacts to the Highway 212 Alignment, and to identify possible mitigation measures to address the identified impacts. AGNL Health urges the Metropolitan Council to delay the municipal consent process until these technical evaluations can be completed. If the municipal consent process continues to move forward without supplemental environmental review, the City of Eden Prairie should disapprove the preliminary design layout and require that supplemental environmental review, including all necessary technical evaluations, of the Technology Drive Alignment be completed so that the City of Eden Prairie's approval of the alignment is conditioned on resolution of these important technical issues. Based on its preliminary review of available information, AGNL Health has identified the most critical areas for further technical evaluation. This list is necessarily preliminary in nature, and is not intended to be a comprehensive representation of the scope of supplemental environmental review that AGNL Health deems necessary. Rather, it is only intended to highlight the significance of some of the issues that have yet to be considered in the environmental review process. A. Noise and vibration First and foremost, AGNL Health is concerned about the potential for noise and vibration from the SWLRT to invade the ambience of health, peace, and quietude that is a central focus of the carefully-planned atmosphere of the Campus. The Campus also contains several areas that are highly-sensitive acoustical environments, including an auditorium and a broadcasting facility. AGNL Health has retained expert consultants in the noise and vibration field to conduct a thorough analysis of the noise and vibration impacts this alignment may have on the auditorium and its use as a broadcast facility. AGNL Health urges the Metropolitan Council to delay the municipal consent process until further analysis of the impact potential, as well as potential mitigation measures, can be completed. Only by allowing this analysis to proceed can the City of Eden Prairie recommend specific mitigation measures to protect the Campus environment. Alternatively, the City of Eden Prairie should disapprove the preliminary design layout and require that supplemental environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment be completed to evaluate these noise and vibration impacts and potential mitigation measures. B. Traffic Also of concern to AGNL Health's continued and uninterrupted enjoyment of the Campus is the significant disruption that the SWLRT will cause to traffic flow between Technology Drive and the Campus for the more than 1000 employees that work at the Campus and their guests. The primary access route to the Campus is via Technology Drive. This route will be significantly limited, and even closed during construction. Moreover, there will be long-term changes to the flow of traffic into and out of the Campus from the Technology Drive Alignment. The potential impacts of the Technology Drive Alignment to 5 100963183v4 traffic patterns relate to AGNL Health's fundamental rights to enjoyment of, ingress to, and egress from its property, and its reasonable expectations created by years of existing use.2 These impacts, however, have not been analyzed, and mitigation measures have not been developed, for the Technology Drive Alignment. Thus, AGNL Health desires that these traffic impacts along Technology Drive and to the Campus access be evaluated with specificity, and mitigation measures identified to inform the City of Eden Prairie and other decision- makers when acting on the preliminary design plans. C. Soil conditions Beyond the specific concerns regarding the impacts to AGNL Health's property, there is also a substantial need to evaluate the suitability of the soils at the site for supporting the SWLRT and associated facilities. Geotechnical evaluations completed at the site before the construction of the Campus indicate that the particular combination of soils is unique to the Twin Cities area, and the nature of these soils could present significant engineering challenges (and associated cost increases) for the Technology Drive Alignment. Highly- plastic, fine-grained clay soils known as "fat clays" are located at the site. These fat clays can undergo significant volume changes corresponding with their moisture content, offer marginal support for moderate or heavily-loaded structures, and can be susceptible to significant settlement when fill is place upon them. Indeed, the Campus has experienced issues with settlement directly as a result of these fat clays — information that AGNL Health would have presented as part of any public process regarding the Technology Drive Alignment. Because of the potential challenges posed by these soil conditions, it is imperative to the safe and economic operation of the SWLRT that additional technical evaluation of the suitability of this soil environment along the Technology Drive Alignment be completed and available to inform decisions regarding the route. D. Wetlands Furthermore, as part of the supplemental review of the Technology Drive Alignment, additional consideration must be given to the wetlands impacts associated with the alignment. While wetlands delineations for the entire SWLRT project will be completed as part of the wetlands permitting processes, wetlands impacts were still evaluated as part of the DEIS, which did not identify any wetlands impacts along the Highway 212 Alignment. Based on the preliminary design plans, the Technology Drive Alignment will result in additional wetlands impacts. These impacts need to be evaluated and presented so that the public and decision-makers can evaluate whether the benefits associated with the Technology Drive Alignment outweigh these additional impacts to the natural environment, and to determine whether mitigation will be required as a result of the additional impacts. 2 The Campus contains a structured parking facility for more than 1200 cars that is utilized by the more than 1000 employees who work at the Campus and their guests. 6 100963183v4 E. Additional costs Finally, another necessary consideration for the Metropolitan Council, the City of Eden Prairie, and the public is the cost associated with the alignment. The economics of the Technology Drive Alignment, particularly as compared to the Highway 212 Alignment are largely unknown at this time. No information regarding the cost difference between the two alignments for Segment W1A is available, and it is unclear whether the added cost of extending the SWLRT beyond Mitchell Road, as is now proposed as part of the Technology Drive Alignment, will generate sufficient additional ridership to justify that extensive cost. The ultimate and relative costs of the Technology Drive Alignment are further muddied by the significant uncertainty regarding the potential impacts of the alignment and the mitigation measures that will be necessary to address those impacts and implement the proposed route. IV. Conclusion For the reasons set forth above, the Metropolitan Council should postpone the municipal consent process and should complete a supplement environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment. Completing supplemental environmental review of the alignment before the municipal consent process will ensure compliance with applicable law, afford the opportunity for meaningful public comment on the alignment, and provide the necessary information for a fully-informed municipal consent process. If the municipal consent process moves forward without environmental review of the Technology Drive Alignment, the City of Eden Prairie should disapprove the preliminary design plan, and condition the withdrawal of its disapproval on the completion of environmental review on the Technology Drive Alignment to the satisfaction of the City, AGNL Health, and other stakeholders, and reserve the right to hold a supplemental public hearing on the alignment and to specify necessary modifications or mitigation measures. AGNL Health looks forward to working with the Metropolitan Council and the City of Eden Prairie to develop a robust analysis of the Technology Drive Alignment and to developing a mutually-agreeable path forward for the SWLRT project. 7 100963183v4 Robert Ellis From: PEGGY INGBER [peggy974@msn.com] Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 4:16 PM To: swirl Subject: SWLR I have been reading about the light rail and looking at the designs. My question is: why do we need 5 stations in Eden Prairie. There are a total of 16 stations along the line, and they are putting 5 in one town. Do you really think people will get on the light rail in Eden Prairie just to ride it to the other side of Eden Prairie and endure 4 other stops along the way. I think people from the west will get on at the furthest stop and people who live in EP will drive to the eastern most stop instead of sitting through 4 stops in their own town. So you have 3 stops in between that will take up prime real estate in the city, will cost a lot of money to build, and will probably not get much usage. Why can't you save money by eliminating some of the stops in the middle of the Eden Prairie route. The distance the light rail is traveling through our city is not that great and 5 stops just seems way too excessive and unnecessary. Thank you. Peggy 56 Robert Ellis From: Richard Skala[rjskala@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 2:45 PM To: swift Subject: Oppose LRT through Eden Prairie Dear E.P. Council Members, My name is Richard Skala, and I live in Eden Prairie. I would like to begin by thanking you for all that you have done and are doing to help make Eden Prairie a wonderful community. Today, however I would like to focus on something that I believe will be very bad for our future that is LRT. And to also inform you that many of my neighbors and friends living in this city are also 'very much' opposed to it. I'd like to briefly review by way of questions what you, as council members should continually ask yourselves: 1) Do you really understand the 'huge' cost to the taxpayer that you are planning to burden us with, to build and operate this 'boondoggle (a very fitting word) plus the billions more it will cost the taxpayer to 'rebuild' in 30 years? 2)Do you really understand the considerable congestion and safety issues that automatically come with this project, as well as the economic costs to this city (tax base) and others, as people change their travel and shopping routes and habits away from these messed up intersections that lead to our retail areas? 3)Do you really understand the fact that this project will only reduce by 3%, yes just 3%,the traffic problem for this part of the metro and that those who had been able to use buses will soon waste much more time every day in getting from destination to destination and that they will still require either additional modes of transportation and/or long walks in the elements to get there. DO YOU REALLY UNDERSTAND THAT WE ALREADY HAVE A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THAT IS WORKING WELL AND IS SUPERIOR TO LRT ??? 4) Do you really understand the fact that our existing SW Metro bus line will obviously be discontinued because the Met Council will dictate that "people can and should ride the train", somehow justifying that we don't need two forms of transit from the SW taking away convenience, choice and more of our freedoms ? 5)Do you really understand that in spite of the proposed LRT, the existing highway system operation and maintenance costs will not go away or be reduced in any way ? 6)Do you really understand that this is NOT a plan that looks to the future and that, in fact there is no hard evidence that traffic on our existing metro highway system is going to get worse ? That in fact with modern technology (electronic communication, etc) and continued suburban development less drivers (not more) will be driving the major metro roadways (if you believe otherwise please check your sources, stop relying on others and do some homework'of your own'). 57 7) Do you really understand that the Green line, from Mpls to St Paul, has/will NOT create $2B of truly real added business that much of this supposed $2B is with our taxpayer dollars as government is funding these entities (ie, Habitat for Humanity, etc) ? And that this supposed $2B does not include the huge dollars lost due to the closing of over 130 businesses (not to mention how this has affected all those employees and employers at a personal level). 8) Do you understand that there are really only a handful of people who will profit (in some cases handsomely) from all of this. And that LRT does not in itself create business, it only relocates it ? So what are the positives ? it is very difficult to come up with any. A person has to be intellectually dishonest to believe that building businesses and housing projects along some train tracks is the American way, or some kind of good life. For those of you who are familiar with Agenda21, please don't tell us you believe this should be our future. Besides wasting huge amounts of money, very few social programs ever work( more on that some other day). These 'utopian' practices have not brought individual wealth or even financial independence to any community, anywhere, ever in fact, they come at a huge economic (and often social)price. We, in America, ....including Eden Prairie, are at a time when we cannot afford any more financial recklessness. In spite of PRINTING nearly $1T annually we still have a stagnant economy,...this is NOT the time to borrow foolishly against our, and our children's future. In conclusion, I know that you already know every thing that I've mentioned, and you probably are beginning to realize that more and more of those you serve are catching on to the facts. My friends and neighbors have told me they are not interested in sending their own emails or letters. They are very busy working hard to pay their bills and sadly many feel their opinions don't matter. However, all of them are watching closely and noting where our council members stand on this hugely important issue. 58 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 5:52 PM To: Robert Ellis; Janet Jeremiah; David Lindahl Subject: FW: Light Rail - New Met Council update fyi Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota CD 8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 eila 952.949.8410 I ® rgetschow@edenprairie.org I" edenprairie.org From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:jerry.s.johnson@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 12:03 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: Light Rail - New Met Council update I know the "deadline" has passed where you wanted public comment on the Southwest Light Rail, but the Met Council just released some information yesterday concerning the new line running between Minneapolis and St. Paul that is very relevant to the SWLRT decision. The Met Council announced that the 11 mile trip from downtown Minneapolis to downtown St. Paul will take 48 minutes. When a Met Council spokesperson was asked by a TV reporter that 48 minutes seemed like a long time for such a short trip and whether that would make it an unattractive option for riders the spokesperson said that light rail is not designed (intended) for long trips, but rather for short rides from stop to stop and that the average time between stations was 2 minutes. So as you consider whether Eden Prairie should endorse light rail that information needs to be seriously considered. First,what is the expected trip time from Eden Prairie to downtown and from downtown to Eden Prairie? That will make a huge difference in whether people will actually use it for commuting. The Met Council should absolutely have an estimate for that. Based on the 11 mile trip between Minneapolis and St. Paul the SWLRT trip will easily be over an hour. Second, what is the real reason Eden Prairie would want light rail? If the purpose of light rail is NOT for long trips, but for short stop to stop trips then how does Eden Prairie benefit? I thought we were looking for efficient ways to move people between Eden Prairie and downtown and vice versa so we could take congestion off the roads and attract workers to Eden Prairie jobs. Clearly those are not the benefits if the purpose is for short stop to stop trips. Light rail is NOT looking so good for Eden Prairie tax payers and residents, which are the only constituents you have a duty of loyalty to. Decide wisely. Sincerely, Jerry Johnson 8463 Crane Dance Trail Eden Prairie, MN 55344 59 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 7:31 PM To: Robert Ellis; David Lindahl; Janet Jeremiah Subject: Fwd: Any upcoming articles about SWLRT? Attachments: 20140529_SunCurrent_Commentary.docx; ATT00001..htm FYI Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: CraigsListReplyKen<Craigslistreplyken@comcast.net> Date: May 29, 2014 at 5:58:01 PM CDT To: GRP-AllCouncil <GRP-AllCouncil@edenprairie.org> Subject: FW: Any upcoming articles about SWLRT? 05/29/2014 Dear EP City Council, For months I have been concerned that not enough has been done to get the word out about how the SWLRT will be impacting our city, the result of which has been some serious misinformation filling the vacuum. Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blOUrcYX3Zs I was going to submit the attached commentary to the Eden Prairie Sun Current, but it appears I don't meet their requirements as a contributor (per e-mail thread attached). I'm still not a fan of the Eden Prairie News, so I won't be submitting it to that newspaper either. But this is something I think you should see. I studied the Preliminary Design Plans (at the library) and afterwards had e-mail conversations with Daren Nyquist, and found there are some impacts the SWLRT will have in our city that few people understand. I'd advise you pass this by Robert Ellis and/or Daren for fact checking. All the best. Ken 60 Begin forwarded message: From: Kenhigginbotham <kenhigginbotham@comcast.net> Date: May 28, 2014 5:14:42 PM CDT To: Natalie Conrad <natalie.conrad@ecm-inc.com> Subject: Re: Any upcoming articles about SWLRT? No thanks,Natalie. Not interested. All the best. Ken Sent from my iPod On May 28, 2014, at 3:52 PM, "Natalie Conrad" <natalie.conrad@ecm-inc.com> wrote: Hi Ken, Thanks for offering a commentary, but we reserve those for elected officials, city officials or experts in a given area. Feel free to send a letter within the 350 word limit if you wish. Thank you, Natalie Conrad Community Editor- Eden Prairie Sun Current Newspapers Office: 952-392-6851 natalie.conrad@ecm-inc.com From: Ken Higginbotham [mailto:kenhigginbotham@comcast.net] To: 'Natalie Conrad' [mailto:natalie.conrad@ecm-inc.com] Sent: Mon, 26 May 2014 14:22:01 -0600 Subject: RE: Any upcoming articles about SWLRT? Hi Natalie. Would you be interested in a commentary instead of a letter-to-the-editor? It's about 1050 words. Ken 61 From: Natalie Conrad [mailto:natalie.conrad@ecm-inc.com] Sent: Monday, May 05, 2014 2:20 PM To: Ken Higginbotham Subject: Re: Any upcoming articles about SWLRT? Hi Ken, Sorry for the delay. I ran an announcement on the municipal consent hearing about two weeks ago. I have an announcement from Donna Azarian in this week's paper about a presentation she will giving on SWLRT May 13. I plan to stop by the open house prior to the hearing and stay for the hearing and city council meeting, as usual, to see how things unravel. At this point it seems it is just a matter of seeing what happens and how it affects the process of the SWLRT. The St. Louis Park editor has been covering most of the SWLRT developments, since the SWLRT project office is in St. Louis Park, but I have ran most of his stories in my paper. I mainly just focus on the Eden Prairie specific aspects. Feel free to send me a letter to the editor sometime this week if you so choose. That way I could run the letter in the May 15 issue, prior to the hearing on May 20. Thank you, Natalie Conrad Community Editor- Eden Prairie Sun Current Newspapers Office: 952-392-6851 natalie.conradOecm-inc.com From: Ken Higginbotham [mailto:kenhigginbotham@@comcast.net] To: natalie.conrad@ ecm-inc.com Sent: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 13:27:39 -0600 Subject: Any upcoming articles about SWLRT? Hi Natalie. I've been bugging city staff for months to get the word out about the SWLRT project (please see attached e-mails regarding my saga). Have you gotten anything yet? The municipal consent hearing is just a tad over three weeks away. Hope all is well. «...» «...» Ken Higginbotham 14151 Vale Court Eden Prairie, MN 55346 952.937-2666 62 Trying to Make the Best of SWLRT Juggernaut by Ken Higginbotham Not quite a year ago I submitted a letter-to-the-editor entitled "Is SWLRT Right for Eden Prairie?" In it I outlined serious concerns about what the system could do to our fair city. At the time, the video animation of the route on the Metropolitan Council's website showed an at-grade crossing at the convergence of Valley View Road, Prairie Center Drive and Flying Cloud Drive. One could only imagine the traffic backup created in all directions with 220 trains crossing every day. And there was talk of trains going down the middle of Singletree Lane with a station in front of Brunswick Zone; and the rail line possibly cutting through the heart of Purgatory Creek near the Gathering Bridge; and of tight turns in the route that would result in screeching noise pollution; and the commandeering of the city's main garage complex for a new SWLRT Operational Maintenance Facility (OMF); and concern that SWLRT will cause the ultimate demise of the award winning Southwest Transit express bus service between Southwest Station and downtown Minneapolis. While a firm believer in mass transit, I remain concerned about the affect SWLRT will have on Eden Prairie. After all, let's face it, there's really no stopping this juggernaut. It's a done deal. At this point maybe all we can do is to try and make the best of it. In reviewing the Preliminary Design Plans published in April, I believe our city staff has done an admirable job. The City of Eden Prairie, in fact, had one of our own traffic engineers embedded with the SWLRT Project Office to keep our interests well represented during plan development. For example, that at-grade train crossing near the confluence of Prairie Center Drive,Valley View Road and Flying Cloud Drive will instead be a grade-separation crossing over those roadways on new LRT bridges. The Town Center station that was once planned to go in the middle of Singletree Lane will instead be located behind Brunswick Zone along an extension of Eden Road. Per protests by leaders of nearby businesses, the line will not travel anywhere along Singletree Lane. And there will be bridges carrying trains over Technology Drive and Prairie Center Drive near Southwest Station and Purgatory Creek Park, over Flying Cloud Drive near Nine Mile Creek, and over Shady Oak Road in the Golden Triangle. There will still be at-grade crossings, including one at Technology Drive and Mitchell Road. SWLRT will have priority with the stop light there, meaning that if the light is red the train will indeed stop, but if the light is green and about to turn yellow, the train will keep it green until it passes. The plans show no crossing arms at that intersection. There will also be at-grade crossings over driveways to a number of businesses on Flying Cloud Drive and Eden Road, some with crossing arms and others without. A very problematic at-grade crossing will be at Technology Drive and Flying Cloud Drive near IHOP. (A LRT bridge is not possible because of the difference in elevation between I- 494 and Eden Road). Here the SWLRT will have pre-emptive control over the stoplight. This means if the light is red, the approaching train will change it to green. There will be crossing arms controlling vehicle traffic. This will be a busy and dangerous crossing. One idea, not supported by the SWLRT Project Office, is for trains to "run with the signal" where the existing traffic signal controls the trains and not the other way around. Perhaps the roadway most impacted by SWLRT will be Technology Drive between Prairie Center Drive and Mitchell Road. The two westbound lanes will be reduced to one after passing the at-grade train crossing at Southwest Station. Much needed left turn lanes will be added in both directions, yes, but there will be at least three new stoplights where driveways to businesses cross the tracks. The concern is, unless the signals are timed precisely, drivers along Technology Drive might experience significant delays. The Preliminary Design Plans show that we're going to lose Culvers and the Southwest Transit business offices when they build a new 400-stall parking structure to the west of the existing parking ramp at Southwest Station. There will be a new indoor waiting area for bus patrons, though, and there's a recent memorandum of understanding (albeit non-binding) between SW Transit and the Metropolitan Council to operate both bus and rail operations seamlessly out of Southwest Station. The numerous tight turns on the route originally planned through the city have been reduced to just one. It will be at the northeast corner of Southwest Station near Anchor Bank where trains will be moving at dead slow speed. The tight radius of the turn originally planned at Eden Road and Flying Cloud Drive has been widened substantially by the taking of the strip mall at that location. This will reduce, but probably not completely eliminate, that screeching noise generated by steel wheel flanges grinding against the inside of steel rails. Liberal track lubrication at this turn may be necessary. The Preliminary Design Plans show improvements given to traffic flow at numerous impacted intersections with additional turn lanes where needed. And the city can keep its centrally located main garage for snow plows. The OMF will be located in Hopkins instead of Eden Prairie. In projects like this we can't always get everything we ask for, but there have been significant improvements to the original plans thanks to our wonderfully talented staff at the City of Eden Prairie and the folks at the SWLRT Project Office who have listened. The final Environmental Impact Statement is due to be published sometime this year. It is expected that all parties continue to strive for even more needed improvements, especially in regards to the issues discussed herein. Mr.Higginbotham, a 39-year resident of Eden Prairie, is a retired mainframe computer consultant whose clients included Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad. Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 3:14 PM To: Robert Ellis; Janet Jeremiah; David Lindahl Subject: FW: Southwest Light Rail Line fyi Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota CC 8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 f 952.949.8410 I ® rgetschow@edenprairie.org 1'10 edenprairie.org From: Jeremy Van Beusekom [mailto:jeremyvb@q.com] Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 12:14 AM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: Southwest Light Rail Line Dear Eden Prairie City Council Members, I would like to provide my feedback on the Southwest Light Rail transit in advance of any decision the council will make regarding the rail line on behalf of the City of Eden Prairie. I have been listening since the beginning of the introduction of the light rail line project. I have finally decided to come forward and voice my opinion. I am not a current public transit user, but was for a number of years, using the southwest transit bus service from the station on Technology Road traveling to Downtown Minneapolis. I do not currently work in downtown, or I would still be using the bus for my transit. I have been looking at the numbers, both cost and ridership, the perceived need and also the impact that the Southwest light rail will make on Eden Prairie. I am concerned with many aspects of this project and do not think it is a good thing for our city! First the numbers. I did some research and see that SWTransit bus service cost$8,443,891 to operate in 2013. That cost translates into 1,032,889 rides at a cost per ride of approximately$8.18. Fares only collected on average$2.41 per ride, the rest being paid for by the tax payers. Light rail will cost approximately$1.7B to construct and $48.07M annually to operate. These numbers come directly from the light rail website. They are planning for ridership to be 30,000 daily(weekday) by 2030. If we do not include any of the capital costs of the project this looks like $6.16 per ride. If we assume that the project will be capitalized over 30 years,the annualized cost is$104.7M or$13.42 per ride, significantly more than the cost to operate SW Transit. The other interesting fact is if you take the total ridership for SW Transit in 2013 and divide it by the number of weekdays in the year,you average 3972 rides per day. This is for the entire SW Transit, including through Eden Prairie, Chanhassen and Chaska. SW Light Rail is predicting that 2030 ridership will be 12007 rides per day for the light rail alone in only the five Eden Prairie stations. This is three times as much as SW Transit carries today and it doesn't include Chanhassen or Chaska riders. I don't see how ridership from Eden Prairie will increase that much given that we are not even close to that today and our city is virtually built to capacity. This is not a financial winning solution. We could double the buses and routes that SW Transit runs today and still not even come close to the cost of the light rail. I understand that there are stops in other cities along the way, but the costs per rider take that into account. 63 From a quality of life, the light rail will negatively impact Eden Prairie as well. I was driving down technology drive from Mitchell to Prairie Center Drive last Thursday evening. There were a large number of walkers, runners and bikers on the trail along Technology and Purgatory park was very crowded. I was rather surprised for a Thursday evening. It was great to see all of the people using our parks and trails, enjoying our great city. Then I pictured the light rail crossing the corner by the park, up around the SW Transit ramp and going down Technology Drive. I imagined how much the wires and trains would ruin the beautiful landscape that we have in that area and how many fewer people would be using that park or the associated trails, because of the train. It saddened me to think of the loss of beauty in the core part of our city. The final thing that made me write you a letter was the Memorial Day ceremony at Purgatory Creek Park. It was a beautiful ceremony and really hit home about the importance of Memorial Day and what all of our Veterans have done for each of us in this country, including giving me the opportunity to write you this letter. As my wife,two children and I left the ceremony, I commented to my wife how much different this ceremony would have been if we had to pause to wait for the train to sound it's horn as it crossed the road to head to SW Station. It's not that I don't like change. In fact we just sold our Eden Prairie home, but made sure to buy another one in our great city of Eden Prairie. We love this community and have given of ourselves to help those around us. Including being on the EPFD for 10 years, providing a safe environment for our young girls to learn through Girl Scouts and other volunteer activities. We use the parks, use the trails and take advantage of the services,schools and other amenities a city like ours can provide. The light rail will not provide us the benefit that is being sold to us. The busing system is better in our city than in most cities. The train is over priced and will bring to our city the wires, noise and visual disruption that I see every day as I exit 494 at 34th ave to go to work. Btw, I cannot take the light rail to my job, because it would take two hours as I would have to go through downtown Minneapolis to get there when I can drive in 20 minutes. Let's strengthen our bus service. If it is"reverse" routes that we need to put in to bring people from Minneapolis and other cities to Eden Prairie for work, then lets do that with the buses. It can be done much cheaper and in a more flexible way. Finally, if given the choice to ride a bus to downtown from EP for 25 minutes or take the train and get there in 45 minutes, I'll be on the bus every day. The train won't get me on board. Please vote to NO to letting the train come to Eden Prairie Thank you so much for taking the time to read my lengthy email. I'm sure you get emails on this topic every day and I appreciate your willingness to read mine. Sincerely, Jeremy Van Beusekom 17751 Sterling Terrace soon to be 17964 Strawberry Court 952-334-9802 64 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 3:14 PM To: Robert Ellis; Janet Jeremiah; David Lindahl Subject: FW: Light Rail Transit Correspondence FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota 8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 fit 952.949.8410 I ® rgetschow@edenprairie.org I u edenprairie.org From: David Johnson [mailto:davidmichaeljohnson@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 11:48 AM To: GRP-AIICouncil Subject: Light Rail Transit Correspondence City of Eden Prairie, City Council Honorable Ms. Nancy Tyra-Lukens- Mayor Council Members Ms. Kathy Nelson, Mr. Ron Case, Ms. Sherry Butcher Wickstrom, Mr. Brad Aho Friday, May 23, 2014 Dear Mayor Tyra-Lukens and Eden Prairie City Council, I appreciate all the work that is being done on the ambitious plan of extending the Light Rail to the South West Station, and now on to Mitchell Road. I had no problem with the original plan. I thought it was a good plan. However, the new plan, which was contrived to placate Costco's lawyers, sends the light rail too close to my nice home. Regrettably this will create a noisy, unsightly, and potentially dangerous condition for approximately 400 residents of the South West Station Condominiums. And it will adversely impact the federally protected marsh lands across the street, on the South side of Technology Drive. Bald Eagles nest there. My daughter watches them from the windows. That lake/marsh is one of the last semi-pristine parcels of land in Eden Prairie. 65 The visual materials, including the drawings, and computer animated flyover that the Light Rail office has made available are incorrect, incomplete and downright deceptive. They have offered no correct, readable renderings to the residents of Eden Prairie, especially the residents of South West Station Condominiums,most of whom cannot visually conceive what elevated train track structures running so close to their homes will look and sound like. I know. I've seen them. They are unsightly, and the trains shake the ground. Additionally we are missing an environmental impact study, especially for the federally protected marshlands on the south side of Technology drive. You are not ready to close the "Comments Period". Technically You Are Not Even Ready To Start The Comments Period. For these reasons, I cannot allow this to happen. The Light Rail system is best suited for commuters traveling between 4 and 20 miles to and from work. It should not run through housing developments. It should run next to, or down the middle of the highway. Please re-route the light rail back down the middle of route 212. You can put the parking stations closer in and connect them with enclosed walk-ways, but the trains need to be away from where people are living. I would like to hear back from you very soon saying that you are postponing this until it can be properly reviewed by all those who will be affected. It will be more expensive to change later; and may I assure you, I am as determined as Costco's lawyers not to have this train running so close to my home. Thank you very much. Sincerely, David M. Johnson Southwest Station Condominiums 66 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 4:21 PM To: Robert Ellis Subject: FW: Purgatory Creek Park FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota Lint 8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 952.949.8410 I ® rgetschow@edenprairie.org I` u edenprairie.org From: Evan Martin [mailto:martin.evan29@igmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 11:00 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: Purgatory Creek Park Hi, My name is Evan. I just love this park so much. I am very, very worried about the light rail running through this area. I see so much wildlife here, even bald eagles. This place is a sanctuary for many Eden Prairie residents. It is my favorite park. Right now, it is so quiet and peaceful. Is there anything we can do to avoid having this run right through our park? I am scared. 67 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 10:17 AM To: David Lindahl; Robert Ellis; Janet Jeremiah Subject: FW: FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota 8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 "L1 952.949.8410 i ® rgetschow@edenprairie.org I`J edenprairie.org From: eilercraig(agmail.com [mailto:eilercraig(agmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 9:54 AM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: After attending the Veterans Memorial service on Memorial Day at Purgatory Park, I couldn't help but think of the SWLRT when it is build and how we will have to listen to the clang, clang, clang, clang of the trains as we try to hear what the speakers are saying! Sent from Windows Mail 68 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 3:42 PM To: Robert Ellis; David Lindahl; Janet Jeremiah Subject: FW: Information regarding Public Hearing FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota EID 8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 81-2 952.949.8410 I ® rgetschow@edenprairie.org (`u edenprairie.org From: dazarian10comcast.net [mailto:dazarian1@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 3:40 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: Information regarding Public Hearing Dear Eden Prairie City Council, It is very important to note that the overwhelming majority of people who showed up to the Eden Prairie Public Hearing regarding SWLRT spoke against building Light Rail in Eden Prairie. Those who spoke for it seem to have ties to the project itself or to the Met Council. I have discovered the following after Tuesday night's Public Hearing: 1) Asad Aliweyd, the Director of the "New American Academy" spoke in favor of the light rail in Eden Prairie at the public hearing. Aliweyd's school was given a $30,000 grant by the Met Council's "Corridors of Opportunity" to help him "engage the immigrant community in planning for new businesses, jobs, and housing along the Southwest light rail corridor." To me, it sounds like the Met Council paid Mr. Aliweyd to be a cheerleader to drum up support for the light rail within the immigrant community. http://www.metrocouncil.org/News-Events/Planning/Newsletters/Asad-Aliweyd-steering- Somali-community-toward-brig.aspx Currently, the New American Academy is located 6/10th of a mile away from the proposed Golden Triangle Light Rail Station. What happens when the New American Academy outgrows it's current location and needs to move elsewhere and decides that another building, not near the station, will suit their needs? Rail transit is inflexible. Bus service (which exists already!) can go wherever the students of The New American Academy need to go. 2) Milestone AV Technology CEO Scott Gill spoke in favor of the SWLRT at the Eden Prairie Public Hearing. Interestingly, Mr. Gill's Milestone Technology was paid by the Met Council to "design and facilitate a strategic planning process" for the Metropolitan Council in 2011. http://www.metrocouncil.org/About-Us/Publications-And-Resources/2013-Unified-Operating- Budget.aspx Mr. Gill also sits on the Metropolitan Council's "Southwest Light Rail Business Advisory Committee" http://www.metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Projects/Current-Projects/Southwest- LRT/SWLRT-Committees/Business-Advisory-Committee/Members.aspx?source=child. These gentlemen's businesses have profited one way or another from the Met Council to push the light rail project. Their pro-LRT statements at Tuesday's meeting should be taken with the 69 consideration of the information above. I have provided you with the URL's where you can find the facts regarding the information I have provided above. People whose businesses have financially benefitted from the Met Council or the SWLRT in any way should do the right thing and recuse themselves from a public hearing. I consider their testimony to be duplicitous and self-serving. Thank you, Donna Azarian Eden Prairie 70 Robert Ellis From: Rickhoff, Scott A. [Scott.A.Rickhoff@supervalu.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 8:35 AM To: swift Subject: Please Vote No on Light Rail and the reasons why. Mailing address: Scott& Kim Rickhoff 11079 Bluestem Lane. EP 55347 From: Rickhoff, Scott A. Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 8:26 AM To: 'swlrt@edenprairie.org' Subject: Please Vote No on Light Rail and the reasons why. To the EP City Council... My wife and I oppose running any light rail line through Eden Prairie. In Short,the project is unsustainable (for the taxpayer) and encourage you to vote NO on municipal consent. Can anyone on the Council share with us which transit system line in the state is operating in the black without taxpayer subsidies? Or name any in the five state area that are operating in the black? Can anyone point out any real private economic activity?Specifically, provide examples of newly operating"powerful economic engines"that exist where LRT is operating today? If there was to be all this economic activity,wouldn't you think private enterprise would already be willing to support the cost of a train?As a taxpayer, I am not getting sucked in again over empty promises. In fact, I was waiting for 30 years to see that"powerful economic activity and redevelopment" around the HHH Metrodome promised by WCCO Sports reporter,Sid Hartman and others, in the early 80's. Other than a bar named Hubert's,the economic activity in that area looks sort of thin. It is apparent to many taxpayers that the Met Council is simply replacing existing bus routes, some successful and some not,which is hardly a recipe for new self-sufficient development. Who is auditing the estimated ridership numbers for 2030?The Met Council? Or is it other faceless special interests of LRT? Bold assertions were also made at the start of the Central Corridor,yet it appears to need subsidized tickets to maintain ridership. I believe these subsidies are a direct result of LRT failing to meet ridership estimations.The taxpayers are left with the bill. Even if ridership meets that quota, can anyone explain why the opportunity cost comparison of busses appear to be MIA?Anyone disagree with the obvious fact that buses can do the same job (transportation) at a fraction of cost of $1.2BB train route? (Has anyone even heard of a billion dollar bus proposal?)Wonder why? Why is no one putting a number on the efficiency of capital usage comparing trains vs busses? It doesn't exactly take a transportation engineer to realize the ROI of capital spent on busses is significant better vs capital spent on trains. ROI Example: we can easily reallocate underutilized busses to other routes for maximum capital usage. During slow periods,we can reallocate or using DFL's favorite word, easily'redistribute' buses. 71 ROI Example: Speed to adjust: Bus transit management can respond within the hour to move transit capital to new areas where the specific need exists. (ie.State Fair Time or highway construction, bridge repair) LRT Proponents will say you can move train assets,too, but can you move a train for less than the cost of a quarter tank of gas? It is all about opportunity cost. What about the 800 pound gorilla in the Met Council Chamber? What do you do with a train and tracks and depots when the demographic requires adjustments? If we maintain a bus system,you can simply change the bus route. Ever try to change railroad tracks and bridges? Imagine the horror if the same people that designed US169 are in charge of this. It has been almost 18 years and MNDOT is still 'fixing' 169 to make it drivable. Again, taxpayers getting stuck with the tab. How many believe if we build the train once, the train exists permanently forever? Let's not even get into the repair and replacement cost of infrastructure due to frost wedging.The train infrastructure will deteriorate like our MN roads, whether they are used or not.Taxpayers again will be on the hook for replacing every bolt, track& bridge. Even if 75%of road traffic is removed from city streets, deterioration issues with roads still occur and MN taxpayers will need to continue to pay for repairs of roads in addition to rail infrastructure. Is there Federal financial help already lined up to pay for replacement maintenance in the out years? In 1982, how many of you thought we would have been replacing the Metrodome? I didn't. Some proponents insinuate that free money exists? Really? Is it free? Neither the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) nor does the Federal Government create wealth. Only productive taxpayers create wealth through work, productivity and savings.The state is constantly fighting deficits.They are worse with Dayton at the helm passing out goodies to his cronies and special interests.The last time I looked the Federal Government is 17 Trillion in debt, that is $17,000,000,000,000!!! But that is concern for future email. In short,what does a train do that a bus cannot do at a fraction of the cost? Until these questions are answered and fully understood, discussed and debated by the taxpayers there should no approval to move forward. Scott& Kimberly Rickhoff EP SD42 P17. 11079 Bluestem Lane. EP 55347 72 r 1r BANK & TRUST i You can bank on us 100 Prairie Center Drive • Eden Prairie, MN 55344 • p. 952-516-7300 • f. 952-516-7301 Daren Nyquist April 29, 2014 South West LTR Project Office Park Place West,6465 Wayzata Blvd St. Louis Park MN,55426 David Lindahl Economic Development Manager, Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchel Rd Eden Prairie MN,55344 Gentlemen, In anticipation of the upcoming city hearing, I am writing to reiterate our objection to the construction proposal for the Southwest LRT,as it relates to our building at 100 Prairie Center Drive.As you are aware, I have presented this proposal to the Board of Directors and Senior Management of our Bank. Both groups remain strongly opposed to this plan.Their opposition is based on the negative impact this plan will have on the viability of our banking business at this location and on the economic value of our building. Specifically: • Visibility of our building and signage will be significantly obscured by the elevated track. • Street visibility is vitally important to our banking business. • The track is 55 feet from buildings and 20 feet from our drive way on the north side of the building. • Oy,yr tenant on the second floor on the north side will have their view completely obstructed by the elevated track.They will not renew their lease under such circumstances. • We have space to lease out on the second floor on the south side. No one will lease this space with the construction activity that will occur on our site contemplated by the current plan. i-ai thermore,we understand that there is an alternative route that will not have this negative effect on our business and arcr.crty value and that will reduces ridership time. I have contacted legal counsel,who informs me :t;.,,:a 4.1gniiic:ant damage claim is warranted if the LRT is constructed as currently proposed. Legal action is not our p-^fern e1 course of action,but we have the caligation to preserve the value of our business and its assets. I vve c:_I•)c-the ul)Noitunity iv discuss our position with you. Resp?.;tfully, K Ca t-e-,.1-ec.___. K. Robert Lea President ii/l/Ni;.l i , I t f•i„t';Littl lit 1,,21.4 Y:i/+'ki,{i i,(iiU;:lif, ,. ;%i i1J.t,.li r'i Robert Ellis From: Rob [rrozanski@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 11:12 PM To: swift Subject: Swift I oppose the light rail and urge you to vote no on municipal consent. Costly, outdated technology, inflexible. I assume most of you will vote for this for ideological reasons. But it is not in the best interests of the city. Rob & Louise Rozanski 19186 Poplar Circle EP 74 Robert Ellis From: Robert[rlouiskennedy@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 10:04 AM To: swlrt Subject: Light Rail I oppose the Light Rail proposal. This will not be of benefit to Eden Prairie. It will impede business while it is being built and it will not be used the majority of the residents when finished. 75 Robert Ellis From: Jim San Hamel [JimSanHamel©comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 1:45 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: SWLRT TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: PLEASE NO LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT IN EDEN PRAIRIE! YOU IN"GOVERNMENT"ARE ABOUT TO SPEND ALMOST 2 BILLION DOLLARS ON A SYSTEM WHICH WE CANNOT AFFORD. ON THE NATIONAL LEVEL ALONE,OUR DEBT IS NOW OVER 17.5 TRILLION DOLLARS AND CONTINUES TO INCREASE WITH NO END IN SIGHT. WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO GET THE MESSAGE THAT SPENDING NEEDS TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY RESTRAINED?IS IT GOING TO TAKE A REVOLUTION?DOES THE ECONOMY HAVE TO COLLAPSE?WHAT IS IT GOING TO TAKE? WHAT ON EARTH ARE YOU THINKING? THIS IRRESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT SPENDING HAS GOT TO STOP. AN UNNEEDED AND UNWANTED SWLRT WOULD BE A GREAT PLACE TO START. JIM SAN HAMEL EDEN PRAIRIE,MN 1 Robert Ellis From: Wendi Russo [russowendi@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 12:34 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: Light rail Dear City Council, I am against the light rail system for the way it will destroy the natural landscape In Eden Prairie, the lack of drops in central locations, with the one location being at the outermost edge of the Triangle. At this time Eden Prairie is one of the most desirable places to live in America-let's keep it that way!! Sincerely, Wendi Russo Sent from my iPad 1 Robert Ellis From: Jenny Kasbohm [jennykaz@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 9:45 AM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: NO SWLRT in Eden Prairie Dear Council, I would like to put in my feedback to NOT proceed with the plans for the SWLRT through Eden Prairie. I frequent via car and bicycle, as do my children, the areas where the LRT will cross through. I am not in favor of the additional congestion the LRT will create for motor vehicles or pedestrians. Nor the noise pollution this will create. We are the Prairie, NOT the City. Leave it as such. I choose to live in the suburbs, not the city for that reason. We have a good bus system that takes people Downtown to work, events and attractions. In my opinion we do not need any more mass transit in Eden Prairie. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Jenny Kasbohm 12 year Eden Prairie resident 952 932 4243 i Robert Ellis From: Debbie [ddzeller@outlook.com] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2014 4:29 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: Light Rail Council members, Please consider carefully the decision to allow the light rail to pass through Eden Prairie as it is now planned. There are numerous reasons to oppose this plan and we do for the simple fact that the light rail will be used by a disproportionately small group while costing excess amounts. The light rail in MN already can't sustain itself and is continuing to be a burden on taxpayers. Why build more until it can be proven to be self-sustaining? But today we ask that you consider reasons more personal to us as 14 year residents of Eden Prairie. A few impacts of the light rail that will directly effect our family negatively as as follows. We live in the Eden Lake Elementary district and believe the currently proposed station on Technology Drive and Prairie Center Drive will ultimately increase traffic on Anderson Lakes Pkwy going right by the school. Drivers will look for alternate routes to avoid the station and the headache and many will choose Anderson Lakes parkway. Anderson Lakes Pkwy is a pedestrian and bike heavy area that has already seen accidents and fatalities. It is already a constant struggle to travel this road at the posted speed without being dangerously tailgated. The addition of more traffic, particularly traffic seeking to "get around" a light rail crossing, will only make this worse and more dangerous. Further, we have one child that attend Eagle Ridge Academy and the proposed rail cuts right by this school too. Just ask the administrators at ERA or the EP Police about the traffic challenges and headaches that are already present in this area. Part of the problem is the large number of parents that drive their kids to this school as well as the number of buses they have trying to get around this already tightly configured area. Adding a light rail crossing will only make this worse and will directly put kids K-12 at risk. Finally, as proposed, the light rail station at Mitchell Road will be problematic. We have a high school freshman who will be driving soon. The few times we have driven him to school we have been very aware of the traffic issues along Eden Prairie Road and Mitchell Road due to young drivers rushing to school. The addition of a train crossing, which will be heavily used in the morning when students are heading to class, will only make these issues worse. Please think carefully of all the deaths related to the existing light rail and then think of young drivers running late to school. Keeping our kids safe should be a priority and this configuration seems like it will be an accident waiting to happen. Further, will destroy the wooded and wetland area that is currently there. We don't have a lot of space like this left EP and should protect the ones we do. Thank you for allowing us to express and for giving consideration to our opinion on this issue. Debbie & Phil Zeller 10336 Normandy Crest Eden Prairie, MN 555347 i ddzeller@hotmail.com 2 Robert Ellis From: Jean Jenderko [jenderko@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2014 11:27 AM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: SWLRT Dean Council Members, We strongly urge you to stop the SWLRT from the planned Eden Prairie routes. The line will run through our already high traffic, high accident corridors. The traffic mess will be enormously worse as it is already horrific at most times of the day. The final stop off Mitchell Road will make getting to the high school even more difficult for students and buses. The Mitchell stop is basically in the middle of nowhere, with few businesses to support this vast financial investment. The planned route will move drivers off of Prairie Center to Anderson Lakes thus creating even more cars going past Oak Point and perhaps Eden Lake. We strongly urge you to stop these planned routes before billions of tax payer dollars are wasted. Our Southwest bus system is superb and we encourage more money in flexible transportation options instead of a highly expensive fixed route. Sincerely, Dean and Jean Jenderko 1 Robert Ellis From: THOMAS GODWARD [godward4590@msn.com] Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2014 10:11 AM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: SWLRT Eden Prairie City Council, I have been a resident of Eden Prairie for 30 years and I do not want Light Rail coming to our town. I agree with many of the points made by Donna Azarian that were published in this past weeks Eden Prairie News. I have yet to meet any resident of Eden Prairie that is in favor of the light rail. Please NO LIGHT RAIL in our community. Kim Godward i Robert Ellis From: Bob Wentzel [bobwentzel9@aol.com] Sent: Friday, April 18, 2014 2:36 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: LRT Council Members, The LRT idea should be dropped! Please debate it further, question the benefits more, and buy time to ultimately disapprove of the idea for Eden Prairie. As a consultant working out of Eden Prairie, I have visited several businesses in the area, and have yet to hear of anyone being concerned that they are having issues attracting workers. Businesses throughout Eden Prairie and the southwest suburbs are doing well and will unlikely benefit from the LRT. Any incentives to act fast to obtain Federal funding are irrelevant when the project getting the funding is a bad idea. The rails will create a shabby and industrial look to an otherwise attractive setting around Technology Drive, Prairie Center Drive, and Mitchell Road. It will likely create some danger as well where the rail will cross roads at ground level. In the event that the project continues, at least reopen the idea of stopping it in the Golden Triangle where it's more of an industrial environment, rather than a commercial and park-like setting. Also, LRT shoppers will make the MOA their destination rather than EP. Any trickle of benefit retail would receive is greatly outweighed by the disadvantages of LRT to EP! Reopen your consideration of all the objections coming out on this now while there is still time. This is a bad idea for Eden Prairie! Bob Wentzel Eden Prairie Business Owner and Resident 1 Robert Ellis From: Jared Taylor[j2jtaylor@aol.com] Sent: Friday, April 18, 2014 1:56 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: LRT Hello to all. I would like to express my feelings regarding the LRT for Eden Prairie. I have heard that less than 90% of all passenger rail service is ever paid for by the traveling public. After traveling around the MOA and 34th ave and seeing the tangle of wires, rails, roads and stop lights and imagining all that running through Eden Prairie would be horrible. I trust you will make the right decision for our town. Thank you, Jared Taylor 1 Robert Ellis From: Jerry Johnson [jerry.s.johnson@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 1:26 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: Light Rail Dear Council Members, First, thank you for your service to the city of Eden Prairie. We have a wonderful city with great leadership. I wanted to express my concerns with having the Southwest light rail line run to Eden Prairie. Before we rush to embrace light rail coming to Eden Prairie I would challenge you to clearly articulate how the current residents and to a lesser extent the businesses of Eden Prairie specifically benefit. Every resident and business in Eden Prairie today moved here for reasons other than access to light rail. Therefore, we should not make the decision to allow light rail to come to our city without doing our own very serious independent analysis of the possible benefits and negatives. We should not just take the Met Council's promises and analysis. I get the strong sense that people are being swept up into a romantic vision of all the benefits of having light rail connect Eden Prairie to Downtown Minneapolis and from there to the airport or Mall of America or to Downtown St. Paul. I would ask you to challenge that idealist thinking. Before we get swept into that vision we need to consider the reality of what benefits and problems the current light rail line running from Minneapolis to the Mall of America in Bloomington has created. For example, have any of you ridden the current light rail line from Minneapolis to Bloomington recently? Have you recently ridden it at 10:00 PM? If not, I would challenge you do so before agreeing to have light rail come to Eden Prairie. It isn't a romantic experience. Would you feel comfortable parking your car in a light rail parking lot along Hiawatha Avenue and then walking to your car at 10:00 PM? Have we asked the Cities of Minneapolis and Bloomington for crime statistics in the areas near the light rail stations prior to light rail and after light rail? Have we asked Metropolitan Transit for the crime statistics on the current light rail for each year since light rail opened? Have we looked at the crime data and in the cases where the perpetrator was caught have we charted where that perpetrator lived in relation to where the crime occurred? Have we verified the economic benefit to the areas around the light rail transit stations that are located outside of the downtown loop? Have we verified the change in real estate value for properties along the current light rail line, not just around the stations, but all along the line? My suspicion is that the impact of the current light rail line is mixed. I am sure there has been some benefit for some people, but I am also sure there has been more than an insignificant amount of negatives. The news is full of reports of crimes being committed on the trains and near the stations. We need to consider that this easy access to Eden Prairie via light rail will bring with it these very real problems. This will change the environment in Eden Prairie forever. I would ask you to consider if we are really willing to accept that change or the risk of that possible change? Are the potential benefits really worth the potential problems? Do we really want people from Chaska catching the light rail in Eden Prairie on a Saturday night to head to downtown Minneapolis for a night of drinking? Our transit station will be a drunken mess at 2:00 AM on Saturday and Sunday mornings. i We need to consider the ongoing additional costs to the city of having a light rail transit station in our city and not just the potential economic benefit to some businesses. There is absolutely no doubt that we will experience an increase in crime in the areas around the transit stations. This will add expense to our police department and will decrease property values. In summary,please don't make this decision based upon romantic visions of possibilities that the Met Council is selling, but based upon what we currently have and what we risk. There is data available for what has happened along the current Hiawatha line and we need to consider that data. Easy access to Eden Prairie from Minneapolis and St. Paul does not just benefit people living in Eden Prairie. It will bring others with negative intentions. There is no rush to sign up for light rail in Eden Prairie. We can say no. We can watch this first experiment and have the line end in Hopkins or Minnetonka. Eden Prairie will get much of the promised benefits if the line gets that close without taking the downside risk. If it turns out to be successful we can be sure they will consider expanding the line at a future date. We will get a second chance. Thank you for your consideration of this email. Sincerely, Jerry Johnson 8463 Crane Dance Trail Eden Prairie 2 Robert Ellis From: David Fosdick[davefosdick@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 7:40 AM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: Light Rail I know EP is designed to be the end of the line. But this impacts everyone. I watch TV home remodeling shows. Why do all the old homes often have hardwood floors covered up by carpet? And why are most new homes having hardwood installed? Seems odd doesn't it. What will happen in 10 years. Will these new home also out carpet over those hardwood floors? What does this have to do with a passenger line? Maybe nothing and maybe everything. Didn't at the turn of out last century Minneapolis have a network of rails for trolleys to shuttle around shoppers and workers and didn't this close (or did these rails get paved over with brick, rock or asphalt?) Bottom line. How many people current use Southwest Transit to commute to downtown? How easy is it to add a bus or remove a bus from a route (state fair being a perfect example). How easy is it to change a bus route ? In real dollars the major infrastructure is there. Our roads. It's a pittance compared to the price tag of a Lightrail line. I like many I work and have children that need to be cared for. I pay taxes and I need the flexibility to move and get from 1 location to another. Both within and outside Eden Prairie. Adding a light rail will disrupt local Eden Prairie traffic and will cause people to avoid the EP Center and other areas. If you don't believe me. Drive down Hiawatha (Hwy 55)the stop lights are maddening. Why. Light rail line. Do I drive that way anymore? Absolutely not. I avoid it like the plague. A light rail line will hurt EP businesses Long term. 30 yrs from now. The line and cars need replaced. Price tag? Estimates are close to what the price tag is today. What is estimated rides over this 30 yr span? By my math 15,343 riders per day over 30 years riding everyday of the year breaks down to $1 per ride. Again what is ridership of current Soutwest Transit Bus station? A quick internet search says 2,800 to 4000 per day. Met Council estimates 28000 Where are these people going to come from? Are current light rail ridership supporting the operating costs of the light rail or is it being Subsidized? EP is virtually built up in terms of housing and commercial development and our school enrollment has peaked. This is not a"Field of Dreams"where build it and they will come exists. Instead in 30 years just like those homeowners. We will put carpet over the tracks. Please vote against the Southwest Light Rail. The citizens of Eden Prairie and the State of Minnesota pockets cannot afford the tax hits, and the subsidies needed to support the light rail. Please support me and vote against the light rail Thank you Dave Fosdick Sent from my iPhone 1 Robert Ellis From: Lorene McWaters Sent: Monday, April 07, 2014 7:56 AM To: GRP-AllCouncil; Rick Getschow; Janet Jeremiah; Robert Ellis Subject: FW: City Council Contact Us Form Lorene McWaters, Executive Assistant City of Eden Prairie/Office of the City Manager 8080 Mitchell Road/Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952.949.8412 Original Message From: Communications E-Mail Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 10:58 AM To: Lorene McWaters Subject: City Council Contact Us Form Submission information Submitter DB ID : 4281 Submitter's language : Default language IP address : 67.4.129.11 Time to take the survey : 9 min. , 40 sec. Submission recorded on : 4/3/2014 10:57:39 AM Survey answers Please feel free to contact us with any comments or questions: Office of the City Manager 8080 Mitchell Road 952-949-8554 Or fill out the form below to send an email message: First Name phyllis Last Name syverson Email Address syver.32hotmail.com Phone Number 9529753981 Address 17275 wesst 62nd City edenprairie State MN Zip 55346 Message Although I realize the met council and the light rail issue is not on your docket I would like you to know that that project is the worse thing that can be done to this community..lt will turn a lovely city into a crummy, noisy mess to say nothing of the criminal element that it will bring right along with it....and the safety and security of this community will be gone....We have an excellent bus system that serves our community well we dont need light rail I woujid hope that some of the council members would listen to their constituents and pass the word to the met council people....This proect will be a disaster for this community Would you like to be contacted regarding your comments? 1 Yes [] No [x] How do you prefer we contact you? Phone [] Email [] Other[] Not answered 2 Robert Ellis From: Maribeth Schulke [mbschulke@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 9:01 AM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: no swirl I am very much in favor in mass transit, I know we have got to kick the car habit and I believe light rail definitely must play a part in our metro future but I do not believe the southwest corridor route as planned is the right choice for our region. I agree with Minneapolis that too much of what we love in our cities and why we live here will be compromised. A western route running along already established major traffic lines is more desirable. If they build it there, we will get there to ride it to our jobs vice versa. I especially deplore the Mitchell station, you guys on the council may work near it but you won't have to live near it. Think of those neighborhoods who will have to hear and see the trains all the time and also miss greenspace you will destroy in its path. Not having enough parking at Southwest station just exemplifies the fact that our town is not a good choice for this route. Sadly, if this route is approved, we will move away from this town that we love and have called home for 25 years MariBeth Schulke 8481 Hiawatha Ave. i Robert Ellis From: Robin Mcpherson [rvmcpherson1@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 4:37 PM To: swift Subject: Fwd: Please Vote YES on light rail Received an email earlier today asking if my husband and I would send a "no" email regarding light rail in EP. However, I am very much in favor and hope you will vote YES. Most of the email below covers the fact that light rail will likely require subsidies. I'm not sure we have any transportation or roads that don't require subsidies whether it be City. /other funding for repairs,tax breaks or state/federal spending. I pay taxes for these kind of services. Texas tried toll roads to avoid subsidies,which was a complete failure. Also look at Houston for a city that grew but didn't want to spend funds for mass transportation. If we wait, it will be that much more difficult and costly to catch up (Los Angeles). I ride both the bus and the light rail. I think there is room and need for both. As I age, I'm less comfortable driving into Minneapolis to work during winter or inclement weather. As the population ages, I'm sure more will feel the same way. It opens up job opportunities for those within EP who may not be able to drive into other surrounding cities. And it gets cars off the roads. Heck, maybe my decrease in driving will eliminate a future pothole or two I would like to write more,but I just saw this and it looks like the deadline for response is here. Thanks for reading. Robin McPherson 11097 Bluestem Lane Eden Prairie, MN. 55347 Sent from my iPad The deadline for this email is Friday, 5/23, at 4:30PM. From: Rickhoff, Scott A. Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 8:26 AM To: 'swlrt@edenprairie.orq' Subject: Please Vote No on Light Rail and the reasons why. To the EP City Council... 77 My wife and I oppose running any light rail line through Eden Prairie. In Short, the project is unsustainable (for the taxpayer) and encourage you to vote NO on municipal consent. Can anyone on the Council share with us which transit system line in the state is operating in the black without taxpayer subsidies? Or name any in the five state area that are operating in the black? Can anyone point out any real private economic activity?Specifically, provide examples of newly operating "powerful economic engines" that exist where LRT is operating today? If there was to be all this economic activity, wouldn't you think private enterprise would already be willing to support the cost of a train?As a taxpayer, I am not getting sucked in again over empty promises. In fact, I was waiting for 30 years to see that"powerful economic activity and redevelopment" around the HHH Metrodome promised by WCCO Sports reporter, Sid Hartman and others, in the early 80's. Other than a bar named Hubert's, the economic activity in that area does not exist. It is apparent to many taxpayers that the Met Council is simply replacing existing bus routes, some successful and some not,which is hardly a recipe for new self-sufficient development. Who is auditing the estimated ridership numbers for 2030?The Met Council? Or is it other faceless special interests of LRT? Bold assertions were also made at the start of the Central Corridor,yet it appears to need subsidized tickets to maintain ridership. I believe these subsidies are a direct result of LRT failing to meet ridership estimations.The taxpayers are left with the bill. Even if ridership meets that quota, can anyone explain why the opportunity cost comparison of busses appear to be MIA?Anyone disagree with the obvious fact that buses can do the same job (transportation) at a fraction of cost of$1.2BB train route? (Has anyone even heard of a billion dollar bus proposal?)Wonder why? Why is no one putting a number on the efficiency of capital usage comparing trains vs busses? It doesn't exactly take a transportation engineer to realize the ROI of capital spent on busses is significant better vs capital spent on trains. ROI Example: we can easily reallocate underutilized busses to other routes for maximum capital usage. During slow periods,we can reallocate or using DFL's favorite word, easily 'redistribute' buses. ROI Example: Speed to adjust: Bus transit management can respond within the hour to move transit capital to new areas where the specific need exists. (ie. State Fair Time or highway construction, bridge repair) LRT Proponents will say you can move train assets too, but can you move a train for less than the cost of a quarter tank of gas? It is all about opportunity cost. What about the 800 pound gorilla in the Met Council Chamber? What do you do with a train and tracks and depots when the demographic requires adjustments? If we maintain a bus system, you can simply change the bus route. Ever try to change railroad tracks and bridges? Imagine the horror if the same people that designed US169 are in charge of this. It has been almost 18 years and MNDOT is still 'fixing' 169 to make it drivable.Again, taxpayers getting stuck with the tab. 78 How many believe if we build the train once,the train exists permanently forever? Let's not even get into the repair and replacement cost of infrastructure due to frost wedging. The train infrastructure will deteriorate like our MN roads, whether they are used or not.Taxpayers again will be on the hook for replacing every bolt, track& bridge. Even if 75%of road traffic is removed from city streets, deterioration issues with roads still occur and MN taxpayers will need to continue to pay for repairs of roads in addition to rail infrastructure. Is there Federal financial help already lined up to pay for replacement maintenance in the out years? In 1982, how many of you thought we would have been replacing the Metrodome? I didn't. Some proponents insinuate that free money exists? Really? Is it free? Neither the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) nor does the Federal Government create wealth. Only productive taxpayers create wealth through work, productivity and savings.The state is constantly fighting deficits.They are worse with Dayton at the helm passing out goodies to his cronies and special interests.The last time I looked the Federal Government is 17 Trillion in debt, that is$17,000,000,000,000!!! But that is concern for future email. In short,what does a train do that a bus cannot do at a fraction of the cost? Until these questions are answered and fully understood, discussed and debated by the taxpayers there should no approval to move forward. Scott & Kimberly Rickhoff EP SD42 P17. 11079 Bluestem Lane EP 55347 79 Robert Ellis From: Roger Shipp [rogerlshipp@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 10:01 AM To: swift Subject: SW LRT It is amazing to reflect on what an out-of-control project this has been: the citizens who pay the bill for this project now and yearly as operating deficits have to be paid, do not get a vote; the almighty Met Council already knows better than anyone what our communities need and they know how to garner public policy points nationally, and all along, inspite of the huge cost of$1.6B to construct, there is no talk about the $100M needed annually to service all the lines coming into Minneapolis. What greater problems in the metro area and in outstate could be resolved with an outlay of$100M? Instead, we are being saddled with a new fiscal responsibility of$100M each year in addition to the lingering problems that liberals also want fixed! Why is there no commonsense reasoning? Why no public vote on such a huge (tax) expenditure? When will Met Council back out of meddling in each community's affairs and spending our tax dollars for us? What an outrage! 80 Robert Ellis From: Roxann Johnson [roxanngjohnson@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 8:06 AM To: swift Subject: Opposition to SWLRT I oppose the proposed light rail through Eden Prairie and encourage you to vote NO on Municipal Consent. We attended the hearing on Tuesday evening. Very thoughtful opposition was clearly stated by the majority of those speaking. Many more of us agreed with the opposition as was obvious by our applause in support of them. Please vote NO for all of the reasons we all heard. (I have also attended previous "information" sessions.) Thanks for your consideration. Roxann Johnson 9009 Sutton Drive Eden Prairie 55347 81 Robert Ellis From: Ryan Johnson [ryan.johnson.ce@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 10:44 AM To: swirl Subject: No SWLRT As a civil engineer it is my job to provide planning and infrastructure improvement to municipalities in the State of Minnesota, including some in the SW metro that would be affected by light rail. With my knowledge in those areas I oppose the proposed light rail line through Eden Prairie and encourage you to vote NO on municipal consent. It is not a good use of funding when there are so many more important needs in our area. An example being the smaller towns in Carver County can't even fix their roads because a lack of funds. Why spend so many billions to provide such little benefit to so few people. 98% of people will still drive their vehicles to work everyday and congest the roads. And we already have a great bus transit system in the area. If we put$1 billion into the bus system you could have busses or shuttles running non stop increasing customer convenience and therefore ridership. We don't need another mode of transportation, especially at this cost, we need to improve our existing infrastructure and transit instead. I have lived in Eden Prairie my entire life, I bought a house here because I knew what a great place it was to grow up in. And it is still a wonderful place to raise my kids. I hope you'll take my advice as a life long resident and civil engineer that it's not in our best interest to bring LRT to Eden Prairie. I appreciate your time to read this and please feel free to contact me about this if you would like. Thank you, Ryan Johnson 952-426-8335 8911 Knollwood Drive, Eden Prairie,MN 55347 82 Robert Ellis From: serveu.AI [serveu.Al@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 6:33 AM To: swirt Subject: Stop swirt. Stop swirt. This will be a huge waste of taxpayer money from the moment the first penny is spent and it already has been spent. No no no no, what part of no can you not get your liberal minds to understand. Al Bowers 27 year resident of E P From my Android phone on T-Mobile.The first nationwide 4G network. 83 Robert Ellis From: Shardlow, John [John.Shardlow@stantec.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:15 PM To: nani.jacobson@metrotransit.org Cc: Lisa W. Speltz(LSpeltz@angelogordon.com); Phelps, Todd (todd.phelps@stinsonleonard.com); tbaxter@esi-engineering.com; David Lindahl; Janet Jeremiah; Robert Ellis; Nyquist, Daren (Daren.Nyquist@metrotransit.org) Subject: AGNL Health Questions Related to the Southwest LRT SEIS; Request for a Meeting Attachments: AGNL Health Questions Related to the Southwest LRT SETS; Request for a Meeting.pdf John Shardlow Principal Stantec 2335 Highway 36 West St. Paul MN 55113 Phone: (651) 967-4560 Cell: (612) 720-3674 Fax: (651) 636-1311 John.Shardlow@stantec.com Stantec The content of this email is the confidential property of Stantec and should not be copied,modified,retransmitted,or used for any purpose except with Stantec's written authorization.If you are not the intended recipient,please delete all copies and notify us immediately. �i i Please consider the environment before printing this email. 84 Stantec Memo To: Nani Jacobson From: John Shardlow Metro Transit 2335 Highway 36 West St, Paul, MN File: Date: June 3, 2014 Reference: Information related to the SEIS for the new alignment for SWLRT between the Southwest station and the new Mitchell Station I am a consultant to AGNL Health, the owners of the office campus located at 13625 Technology Drive. Since this property owner only learned about the alignment change on the day of the hearing when the Metropolitan Council approved it, we have been working to locate, analyze and provide information about the potential impacts of the project to AGNL. We have met with Jim Alexander and Daren Nyquist from the project office and several members of the Eden Prairie staff and they have all been very helpful. We are making progress, but some key questions remain unanswered. We attended the public hearing last week that was co-hosted by the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority and the Metropolitan Council, All of the property owners along the entire corridor, except the stretch between the Southwest Station and the Mitchell Rd. station had information available to them in the DEIS to help them understand potential impacts and advocate for their interests, As you know the Supplemental EIS is being prepared, but unfortunately it will not be available until after the Municipal Consent process has been completed. This is why we have been asking questions about the scope and focus of the SEIS. Daren Nyquist forwarded documents to us that included general descriptions of the scope. While we are grateful to receive them they do not include the level of information we need so let me be more specific about our request.The AGNL Health Campus includes an auditorium that will be immediately adjacent to the tracks. In addition to normal meeting functions this facility also has the technology and is sometimes used to broadcast meetings throughout the tenant's network. It has a special and sophisticated sound system that amplifies sounds throughout the space to allow any attendee's voice to be heard and sometimes broadcasted or recorded, Have the special characteristics of this use been recognized by the preparers of the SEIS and will the potential adverse impacts of the project on this facility be studied as part of the environmental review?Tony Baxter from ESI Engineering and I would like to come to your office and meet with you to review the classification of this facility. Please let me know when you are available to meet with us and I will coordinate with Tony Baxter. The second major area of concern for AGNL relates to extensive wetlands in the vicinity of the campus, the need to drive deep pilings throughout the portion of the corridor that crosses the wetlands and the uniquely poor soil conditions on the AGNL campus itself. The presence of "fat clays" and other soil conditions greatly complicated the design and construction of the pest¢}EhwittmagimKHily\i©drla1rtG rosof;\windows\temporary Internet files\content.outlook\tkh(3tix3\agr>1health questions re€otedto sets for southwest Irt corridor.docx Stantec June 3, 2014 Nani Jacobson Page 2 of 2 Reference: Information related to the SEIS for the new alignment for SWLRT between the Southwest station and the new Mitchell Station AGNL Campus and there have been persisleril sel(ling problems on the property ever since. Are the preparers of the SEIS aware of these soil conditions on the AGNL Campus? In closing, I want to emphasize that we are not attempting to obstruct this project or be adversarial. AGNL believes that it is possible that the extension of the Blue Line past their property could ultimately have a net positive effect on its value. We also understand that the SETS is part of a longer and staged design process and that some information can only be provided later on. Given the magnitude of their investment in this campus and the profound change that the new alignment represents it is critically important that they participate effectively at every step. In order to do so they need information and they need to make certain that every stage of the environmental review and design process is informed by adequate Information. The answers to the questions listed above are important to help AGNL advocate effectively protecting their interests. We are also very open to sharing information with the Project team and the SETS preparers because we have a strong mutual interest in utilizing the best available information at every stage of the process. Please let me know if we can assist you or your team in any way. STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC. John Shardlow, FAICP Principal Phone: (651)967-4560 Fax: (651)636-1311 John.Shardlow@stantec.com c. Lisa Speltz, Angelo, Gordon &Co. Todd Phelps, Stinson Leonard Street T Baxter, ESI Engineering David Lindahl, City of Eden Prairie Robert Ellis, City of Eden Prairie J Jeremiah, City of Eden Prairie Daren Nyquist, Metro Transit P941361sWithreSOGTIENIT Alm fcflirldrosoft whdows\temporary Internet files\content.outlook\tkhf3hx3\agnl health queslions related to sels for soul hwest Irt corridor.docx Robert Ellis From: skerickso@att.net Sent: Friday, April 18, 2014 10:40 AM To: swift Subject: SWLTR Why are they ending at Mitchell Rd. station, or am I not thinking of the right location for this station, near Mitchell Rd. and 212? With the urban sprawl going all the way out to Chaska and Victoria this seems short sighted. Most of the traffic in Eden Prairie now seems to generate from these commuters passing through our city. Their goal to "accommodate forecasted growth in jobs and households in the Southwest Corridor." does not support this plan! I would much rather have one train going through our city rather than the constant traffic on the main highways. Or on second thought maybe it's some Eden Prairie residents in neighborhoods that are affected by the light rail that want it to stop there and not go any further near their homes. 85 Robert Ellis From: Smith, Steve E [Steve.E.Smith@HealthPartners.Com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 11:29 AM To: swirl Subject: Please don't ruin our beautiful city!! Please vote no to bring light rail to Eden Prairie. I live in northern EP and I have spoken with many of my neighbors. We will STOP shopping in Eden Prairie if this train is built. We will not put up with over 200 trains a day and just take our money to another City. Please don't make me a Eden Prairie resident by name only, vote NO!! Steve Smith 6824 Jeremy Court Eden Prairie, MN 55346 This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or the individual responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, please be advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please return it to the sender immediately and delete the original message and any copy of it from your computer system. If you have any questions concerning this message, please contact the sender. Disclaimer R001.0 86 Robert Ellis From: Smith, Steve E [Steve.E.Smith@HealthPartners.Com] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2014 3:57 PM To: swirl Subject: Please vote NO on SWLR Please don't put ugly power lines, ugly rails, expensive trains and 100 year old technology in our beautiful City. We don't have the money or density to support such a train and our busses work great! Please vote NO on consent to SWLR. Steve Smith 6824 Jeremy Court Eden Praire MN 55346 This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or the individual responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, please be advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please return it to the sender immediately and delete the original message and any copy of it from your computer system. If you have any questions concerning this message, please contact the sender. Disclaimer R001.0 87 Robert Ellis From: Stefonowicz, Rob A. [rstefonowicz@larkinhoffman.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 4:51 PM To: swlrt Cc: 'Kristin LeBre'; 'Chad Tabatt; Van Cleve, Gary A. Subject: Comments of ShopHQ Re: Public Hearing for SW LRT Municipal Consent Plans Attachments: ShopHQ Comments -SW LRT.pdf Please include the attached letter as comments of ValueVision Media d/b/a ShopHQ in the public record for the above referenced matter. Rob A. Stefonowicz Shareholder Larkin p 1952-896-3254 Hoj2a1 f 1952-842-1718 f,, ,,,C1,44fT. www.larkinhoffman.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: INFORMATION IN THIS MESSAGE, INCLUDING ANY ATTACHMENTS, IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. This message may be an Attorney-Client communication from the law firm of Larkin Hoffman Daly&Lindgren Ltd., and as such is privileged and confidential. If you are not an intended recipient of this message, or an agent responsible for delivering it to an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this message in error,and that any review,dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete the message, and return any hard copy print-outs. No legal advice is being provided or implied via this communication unless you are (1)a client of Larkin Hoffman Daly&Lindgren Ltd.,and (2) an intended recipient of this message. CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any advice contained in this email (including any attachments unless expressly stated otherwise) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for purposes of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer. 88 Larkin Ho`�Ji •G i Larkin Hoffman Daly&Lindgren Ltd. ATTOR Nests 1500 Wells Fargo Plaza 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Minneapolis,Minnesota 55431-1194 GE4E9.?.G: 952-835-3800 FA>;: 952-896-3333 HE la www.larkinhoffman.com May 20, 2014 City of Eden Prairie Via Email Public Works Department swlrt@edenpraire.org Robert Ellis,Public Works Director 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Public Hearing: Southwest Light Rail Transit Municipal Consent Plans Comments of ValueVision Media,Inc. d/b/a ShopHQ Property Address: 6678-89 and 6740 Shady Oak Road,Eden Prairie, MN Dear City Representatives: Our firm represents ValueVision Media, Inc. d/b/a ShopHQ ("ShopHQ") in connection with the Southwest LRT project. Please include this letter in the official record as comments of ShopHQ regarding the municipal consent plans for the Southwest LRT project. ShopHQ's corporate headquarters and live television studios are located in Eden Prairie at 6678- 6698 and 6740 Shady Oak Road(the"Property"). ShopHQ employs in excess of 500 individuals at the Property and produces and transmits live shopping television from the Property. The proposed alignment of the Southwest LRT line is in very close proximity to the Property— traveling along the western boundary of the Property. ShopHQ is greatly concerned that the noise and vibrations from the construction and eventual operation of the proposed Southwest LRT line will disrupt its ability to conduct business operations from the Property; the most significant of its concerns being the ability to conduct live television broadcasting from its onsite studios (both indoor and outdoor studios). The Metropolitan Council has conducted vibration testing on the Property, but it has yet to share the results with ShopHQ and has indicated that it has not yet begun to analyze the collected data. According to the Met Council,the data collected will be analyzed in the coming months in support of the development of the Final Environmental Impact Statement. ShopHQ anticipates that mitigation measures will be required to address the noise and/or vibration issues to the Property if the proposed design and alignment is ultimately approved. ShopHQ seeks the City's support and participation in assuring that all reasonable and necessary mitigation measures are implemented by the Met Council so as to protect the continued viability of ShopHQ's business operations on the Property. ShopHQ would request that the City City of Eden Prairie Public Works Department May 20, 2014 Page 2 condition its municipal consent on the Met Council's agreement to implement those mitigation measures which are deemed reasonable and necessary. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions regarding ShopHQ's comments. :(Syett•ely, ob A. Stefonowicz, or Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd. Direct Dial: 952-896-3254 Direct Fax: 952-842-1718 Email: rstefonowicz n,larkinhoffin n.com 4823-2794-2683,v. I Robert Ellis From: zvikes@yahoo.com Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 11:19 AM To: swlrt Subject: Vote for Light Rail in EP I support continuing to develop public transportation in EP and urge you to vote in favor establishing a light rail line in Eden Prairie 89 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Monday, July 07, 2014 1:09 PM To: Janet Jeremiah; Robert Ellis; David Lindahl Subject: FW: light rail FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota CC8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 EE952.949.8410 I rgetschow(a�edenprairie.org j fledenprairie.org Original Message From: Larry and Kris Paulsen [mailto:Ikpaulsenearthlink.net] Sent: Monday, July 07, 2014 11:02 AM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: light rail July 7, 2014 Dear Members of the Eden Prairie City Council, As long standing citizens of Eden Prairie, we want to encourage you to vote positively to bring light rail to our city. Through the 28 years our family has lived here, gone through the school system and one parent worked for the school system as an educator, we have observed careful planning of the city's growth. Our housing and business developments, roads and infrastructure have had thoughtful processes bringing a successful and vibrant city worthy of awards and pride throughout its citizenry. Light rail will continue that forward thinking on the part of all who live here. It will enable flexibility in travel for employment as well as pleasure. It will connect us with surrounding communities as the metro area works together. Some have said that Eden Prairie does not have a dense enough population to support light rail. We must remember that the train will also provide transportation for employees of our businesses here which not only provides for work opportunities for people in the metro area but also support the healthy growth of our local economy. As our elected leaders I trust that you will look to the future and bring light rail to Eden Prairie. Most Sincerely, Kristine & Larry Paulsen 9876 Balmoral Lane Eden Prairie MN 952.237.1135 i Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Monday, July 07, 2014 1:09 PM To: Robert Ellis; Janet Jeremiah; David Lindahl Subject: FW: SW LRT fyi Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota CC8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 EE952.949.8410 I rgetschowedenprairie.orq Illedenprairie.org Original Message From: Steve [mailto:steveden8638aol.com] Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2014 9:46 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject:SW LRT Dear Mayor and Council Members, I would like to voice my opposition to the SW LRT. This is a project that is prohibitively expensive, about 8-9 times the cost of road improvement, and one that is sponsored by the partisan Met Council. Indeed, not one of those members is elected but rather appointed by a Democratic Governor. This is clearly a one sided project championed by a Council that is obsessed with light rail and gentrification. As I celebrated the 4th of July with my family it reminded me of how our Forefathers fought for liberty against an oppressive government. Isn't that what we are fighting now? A one sided government that insists on imposing big government planning over the freedom to choose. If nothing else, you owe the citizens of Eden Prairie the right to a referendum before you approve such a project. The amount of construction alone would be an incredible burden on those of us who live and travel around the Shady Oak/Hwy 212 area. I sincerely hope you reject the approval of this project. Sincerely, Steve &Joanne Hayden 12232 Chadwick Lane Eden Prairie Sent from my iPad 2 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 2:12 PM To: Robert Ellis; Janet Jeremiah; David Lindahl Subject: FW: LRT FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota EC 8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 "L� 952.949.8410 I ® rgetschow@edenprairie.org I`J edenprairie.org From: Marilynn Torkelson [mailto:marilynntorkelson@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 1:40 PM To: GRP-AIICouncil Subject: LRT Hi, I have been an Eden Prairie resident for 18 years. I see the LRT as a billion dollar boondooggle. Please vote against the SW LRT. I hate to imagine the traffic snarls that would result every single time a train goes by in an area that already has heavy traffic. I would on the other hand LOVE to see bus service extended to the weekends. Bus service is flexible. There are express bus service options. My son lives downtown works evenings and has no way to visit us on the weekends because he does not own a car. This results in us making two round trips to Minneapolis if we want to have a family dinner at home. Not having bus service on the weekend is a first step towards making downtown more accessible. Why don't we start there with existing infastructure? I'd love to go to the Mill City farmers market by bus. There are better, cheaper, more environmentally friendly ways to provide public transportation. Vote No on the SW LRT Sincerely Marilynn Torkelson "If suburbia were landscaped with meadows,prairies,thickets, or forests...then the water would sparkle, fish would be good to eat again, birds would sing and human spirits would soar." -Lorrie Otto 3 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2014 8:56 AM To: Janet Jeremiah; David Lindahl; Robert Ellis Subject: FW: No SWLRT in Eden Prarie FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota 8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 fie 952.949.8410 I ® rgetschow@edenprairie.org edenprairie.org From: Fritsche,Peter [mailto:pfritsche©©datasci.com] Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:51 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: No SWLRT in Eden Prarie Dear EP council, First let me say, I am a huge advocate for mass transit. We need to find creative ways to reduce road congestion and fuel consumption. Just as importantly,we need to make sure we are making decisions based on sound business plans which include facts and data. From all that I have read on the proposed LRT, the data does not support the plan. Ridership and financial payback just do not appear to justify this project. It appears that this is being forced through in order to capture federal funds. While I understand the financial benefits in job creation, this does not justify and support the overall costs. I thank you for your time and consideration in this important decision. Best regards, Peter Fritsche 9830 Laguna Cir Eden Prairie, MN 55347 952-567-4099 4 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 4:41 PM To: Janet Jeremiah; Robert Ellis; David Lindahl Subject: FW: Light Rail -Opposition FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota 8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 952.949.8410 I ® rgetschow@edenprairie.org 1'10 edenprairie.org From: Jessica Bergmann [mailto:Jess.Bergmann©RyanCompanies.com] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 9:29 AM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: Light Rail - Opposition Good Morning, I have been a life-long citizen of Eden Prairie (aside from college and a 2-year"stint" in Uptown) and now as an adult and commuter, I have been thrilled with the ease and convenience of Southwest Transit's bus services. I am writing to you in the hopes that you vote NO to the Southwest light rail line. I do not think this service will add any benefits to the citizens of Eden Prairie. The bus system is phenomenal as it is, many people use it, and the commute from Eden Prairie to downtown Minneapolis on a light rail would only extend the amount of travel time for those of us that use public transportation—I can currently get downtown on the Express bus within 25 minutes because there are no extra stops and the use of the carpool lanes/shoulders. I also disagree with the amount of money that State is expecting to spend on this project. Think of how many lanes could be added to our current highway system for that same amount of money—it sure seems like our State is struggling with our finances as it is, and then to spend BILLIONS of dollars on a light rail system through the Southwest suburbs seems very irresponsible—I truly believe that the number of people who would use this form of transit is so low that we would never recover the cost. Would the train schedule interfere with the bus schedule? Do we really need two forms of public transportation coming in and out of Eden Prairie? What are the financial consequences for building this line from Minneapolis all the way to Eden Prairie? What are the Benefits—are there any financial benefits at all? What is the cost of maintaining a rail line (both on the City level and on the State level)? Do we really want our community to be filled with train tracks? We have enough stop lights and intersections, as it is. People will always choose to drive themselves or take the bus before choosing a TRAIN. We do not live in a Big City with rail lines,for a reason—we don't want that type of lifestyle. Please do not force us to have it. When I read about the Northstar line that goes up to Big Lake, it sure seems like there are more problems than anything else. Why would we welcome that"mess" in to our City? Please vote NO and do not allow the light rail to come in to Eden Prairie. We have absolutely NO NEED for it in our community, and I do not think the State should be spending this large amount of money on a project that does not have any real positive impact on anything, anyway. Thank you, 5 Jessica Broich Bergmann 6 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 11:17 AM To: Robert Ellis; Janet Jeremiah; David Lindahl Subject: FW: LRT FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota 8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 LrI - 952.949.8410 I ® rgetschow@edenprairie.org I' U edenprairie.org From: Kenny [mailto:kdsien@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 9:08 AM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: LRT Having lived in Eden Prairie for 35 years I am somewhat puzzled as to why four of the five Council Members are in favor of the LRT ending in Eden Prairie. Southwest Transit has done an absolutely fantastic job transporting Eden Prairie residents downtown. I've read that the four of the five council members say that Eden Prairie residents are in favor of LRT. That is not at all what I am hearing in my neighborhood. Most of the people I have discussed LRT with don't think that it will substantially benefit our community. I'm thinking that the four council members in favor of LRT are discussing this project just amongst themselves. Since Hopkins has already approved LRT to their city, why not just have it end there? A win/win situation. 7 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 9:20 AM To: Janet Jeremiah; David Lindahl; Robert Ellis Subject: FW: LRT in EP FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota 8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 952.949.8410 I ® rgetschow@edenprairie.org I`' edenprairie.org From: Betsy Gall [mailto:betsygall10gmail.com] Sent: Thursday,June 19, 2014 4:48 PM To: Ron Case Cc: GRP-AllCouncil; Nancy Tyra-Lukens Subject: LRT in EP Dear Ron- I'd like to inform you that you do not speak for this Eden Prairie resident regarding "strong consensus for LRT in EP" as posted in the Star& Tribune yesterday. I have yet to meet ONE Eden Prairie friend or neighbor who thinks this boondoggle is a good idea. Exactly who are you polling? I don't have the time to attend every meeting and frankly, I am so disgusted by the way the unelected members of the Met Council operate, I just throw up my hands. As I'm sure you know, studies have shown that Minneapolis-St. Paul does not have the population density for the Southwest Light Rail corridor to succeed. Light rail transit is inflexible and not dependable in poor weather conditions. In cities other than New York City, only 3% or less of the population use rail transit, with a metro population of over 3 million people the SWLRT predicts that there will be whopping 30,000 riders by 2030! This is insane. And the biggest secret of Light Rail is that tracks and train have to be refurbished or rebuilt at a cost equal to or more than the cost to originally build it. So please stop with the sweeping conclusions that all in EP are on board with your boondoggle. We are not. Sincerely, Betsy Gall 8 Robert Ellis From: Ryan Lawinger[lawinger@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2014 10:43 PM To: paul.miller@minneapolismn.gov Cc: nelrae.succio@hennepin.us; Robert Ellis Subject: SWLRT- Please Support! Dear Paul, Robert and Nelrae Please support the SWLRT! I am a resident of both Minneapolis and Eden Prairie (Work and Live respectively), and former live & work resident of Minneapolis. I spend the vast majority of my time and money between these two wonderful cities, and want the LRT connection between Eden Prairie and Minneapolis for work(Linden Hills), and especially for leisure; I love downtown Minneapolis and an LRT connection would make it more accessible for myself, my kids, and visitors. I am an architect, familiar with the route, and believe that the proposed route is a reasonable compromise given the wide variety of demands that surround this project. This is a project for the region and for the ages, please allow it to happen! Truly best wishes with decision making process. Please share with others as it makes sense. Warm Regards, Ryan Lawinger 9 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2014 4:34 PM To: Janet Jeremiah; David Lindahl; Robert Ellis Subject: FW: Light Rail Opinion FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota CD 8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 siri 952.949.8410 I ® rgetschow@edenprairie.org I`u edenprairie.org From: Claire Hilgeman [mailto:hilge093Caumn.edu] Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2014 11:04 AM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: Light Rail Opinion Dear Councilmembers, I just want to make sure I reiterate the thoughts in my Star Tribune editorial of June 19, 2014 to you personally. Eden Prairie does not need light rail. For some reason, some people feel this idea is somehow "cool" without giving due thought to the reality of it. Eden Prairie has always tended to jump on bandwagons of one sort or another and erroneously thinking that light rail through Eden Prairie is the "thing to do" is just another example. How about we buck this trend and actually reject this nightmare idea for all of the many practical reasons it is a mistake? I work at the U of M and have seen up close the intrusive years-long construction project as it ground by interminably. Is this really what you think Eden Prairie residents want to experience in their midst? The cost is so awful, I actually can be brought to tears thinking about it and the good this funding could do in other arenas- early childhood education, feeding the hungry, sheltering the homeless, parenting assistance, respite care for the elderly and disabled. That list runs long and deep, as you know. For a city always so concerned about duplication of services, how is this not a classic case? Southwest Transit takes Eden Prairie residents to the U of M, Normandale, specific big employers (Best Buy), downtown (where you can easily transfer to get to St. Paul), and points around the Eden Prairie loop etc. Yes, there are people riding the Green Line, but only because they took away their bus service! Many of my co-workers are lamenting the loss of their buses, not because it was a change, but because their commute is longer and they have to walk farther to get to the infrequent stations. In bad weather, my bus commute can take an hour, which sucks. But at least my buses can get me to work eventually. The light rail and the Northstar have had to completely suspend service for hours or days due to cars stuck on the tracks, snow and ice on the tracks, structural damage, etc. Approximately one person a month has been killed by light rail. I can't remember the last time a death has occurred due to a Metro Transit or Southwest Transit bus. After years of working to bury underground cables for telephone, TV service, etc., we now decide to erect huge above ground pylons and string cables and transformers through the middle of our city? Light rail is just plain ugly! From my office window I can see the "Welcome to the Twin Cities Campus" sign blocked by the Green Line Pylons and partially obscuring the lettering that has been there for decades. Lastly, let's talk about technology. The future of transportation is in self-driving 10 vehicles. This is not a pipe dream- this is the reality of technology being discussed in every engineering venue in the world. Light rail is not a "forward-thinking" concept, it is an old concept already found lacking and replaced with better options. If this was not true, we would still have streetcars. To sink billions of dollars into an archaic technology makes absolutely no sense. Buses can easily change routes, add or decrease service according to where it is needed. Light rail is a fixed route with no ability to add stations- it is a very limited mode of transportation. Since most of you are long- time elected local representatives of "the people", I would think you have pondered each and every one of these realities as part of your deep study of this important issue. So it is with dismay that I feel you have completely ignored all of it. How can anyone look at the realities of this situation and think that light rail is worth the costs? Can Eden Prairie, for once, show a little backbone and say "No, this is just not a good idea?" Claire Hilgeman Academic Advisor CLA Arts Student Community 575 Heller Hall 612-626-7714 Claire Hilgeman Academic Advisor CLA Arts Student Community 575 Heller Hall 612-626-7714 Robert Ellis From: Jim Diehl [dieh0021@umn.edu] Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 2:35 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil; swirl Subject: More LRT data Hi, Council, I just wanted to point out a couple of quick data points from very recent reporting before your LRT vote tomorrow. 1) Met Council estimates of economic impact are greatly exaggerated, and 2) only 40%think LRT is worth the cost. Please take less than 8 minutes to view these stories if you have not already seen them. Of course, you can read the article or glance at my summary below: "How Much Development Has Green Line Really Generated? " (6/16/14, video is a little over 4 minutes) http://kstp.com/news/stories/S3472677.shtml?cat=1 - The Met Council's claim of$2.5B in development attracted by the Green Line (Central Corridor) is greatly exaggerated because around 75% (19 of 25 developers who responded) said they would have built anyway, even without LRT. -A large part of the spending is the roughly-quarter-billion-dollar St. Paul Union Depot(mostly government spending) "KSTP/SurveyUSA: Light Rail Remains Unpopular" (6/13/14, —2 minutes) http://kstp.com/news/stories/S3474034.shtml -Most people (51%) in a recent KSTP/Survey USA poll do not think LRT is worth the cost, and only 40%think it is. - 65% said they'd almost never ride, 28% said they'd only occasionally ride, and only 6% said they'd regularly ride. In summary, hardly anyone will ride it(while we all pay for it for decades), and it doesn't bring as much economic development as they claim. That adds to previous emails you know about regarding the incomplete environmental impact study of a heavy train through an unstable wetland south of Technology Drive, the very questionable need for even more high-density housing in E.P. that will be spurred by this project,the danger associated with exceptionally large heavy objects at some of the at-grade crossings, the traffic disruptions for all other drivers in the area, the businesses that will be hurt or go under during the long construction phase, the inevitable sales,property, or other tax increases that will come to pay for this, the inflexibility of rail compared to our faster and already existing bus service, and the various other reasons to oppose the train as mentioned by a strong majority of speakers at the E.P. public hearing. The Met Council is not pointing out very many of these flaws to you,they are exaggerating the benefits, and I 12 think it is unwise to let them steer you against the will of the people with their biased and questionable data. I strongly believe that SWLRT is wrong for E.P. Please vote no!! If you don't want to vote no, how about a referendum for such a large change to our city? If you don't want a referendum, how about a delay of the consent vote until the environmental impact study is done? Thank you for reading! Jim Diehl 10530 W. Riverview Drive 13 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 11:10 AM To: Robert Ellis; Janet Jeremiah; David Lindahl Subject: FW: KSTP Poll shows overwhelming majority will NEVER USE the SWLRT Attachments: photo.PNG FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota CC8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 EE952.949.8410 I rgetschow( edenprairie.orq II edenprairie.org Original Message From: Donna fmailto:donnaazarian c(Dyahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 5:49 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: KSTP Poll shows overwhelming majority will NEVER USE the SWLRT ONLY 6% OF THOSE POLLED BY KSTP-TV SAY THEY WILL USE THE SWLRT REGULARLY. These numbers are very clear that a vote for SWLRT is a vote to waste taxpayer dollars. Donna Azarian Eden Prairie 15 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 11:10 AM To: Robert Ellis; David Lindahl; Janet Jeremiah Subject: FW: SWLRT KSTP POLL SHOWS 51% SAY NEW LIGHT RAIL LINE "NOT WORTH IT" Attachments: photo.PNG FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota CC8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 EE952.949.8410 I rgetschowedenprairie.orq Illedenprairie.org Original Message From: Donna [mailto:donnaazarian ci yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 5:46 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: SWLRT KSTP POLL SHOWS 51% SAY NEW LIGHT RAIL LINE "NOT WORTH IT" Consider that 51% of those polled say that SWLRT is not worth it, according to a KSTP poll. $1.6 Billion of taxpayers dollars will be squandered to build the SWLRT and millions more will be squandered for operating and maintenance. At least give Eden Prairie a vote on whether or not to have this ruin our city. We live in a constitutional republic, not a dictatorship. Donna Azarian Eden Prairie 16 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 11:09 AM To: Robert Ellis; David Lindahl; Janet Jeremiah Subject: FW: Southwest LRT FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota E9 8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 fer 952.949.8410 I ® rgetschow@edenprairie.org I`1) edenprairie.org From: Jill Boyd [mailto:jillmboyd(agmail.com] Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2014 4:14 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: Southwest LRT Dear Council Members, My name is Jill Boyd. I've lived and taught in Eden Prairie for eight years. I feel called to take a moment to write you and express my deep concern about the light rail project going through in Eden Prairie. I would be remiss if I didn't do part in voicing my thoughts (whether it's too late or not!) about the very expensive project at hand and so much of the taxpayers' money and community well-being at stake. I am so happy living in Eden Prairie. This community has become my home and I love it and I strive to be an important part of making it a great place. I usually don't write letters like these because I have been so content living in Eden Prairie. Thank you for your service to our community. It makes a difference to young families like mine who are looking for a community with outstanding opportunities, facilities, and good neighbors! However, after following the developments of the light rail plan, after researching and reading a lot of information about it, my concerns about this community and the success of the project as a whole have compounded into strong feelings of disagreement that this light rail would be fully beneficial to our community. I would like to preface this by saying a few things about myself: I am 30 years old, am married, and have a 7- month-old son. My husband and I have lived in EP for 8 years and plan on raising our family here. I teach music at the high school and have become involved in many school and community functions. I would also like to say that I am a progressive thinker and I would consider myself pretty liberal. I am greatly concerned with the world and people around me. I am greatly in favor of the idea of mass transit and of the efficiency and options mass transit brings, especially for those who would prosper from being able to become more independent as a result of mass transportation. (I believe the Southwest Bus Transit does a great deal in this respect!) But, I have real concerns about how efficient and successful the Southwest LRT would be: 1)Recently, a figure came out that was alarmingly high, which stated the disapproval for this projects was very high among community members. With a price tag of 1.7 billion dollars??!!!!, why would we approve such a project that isn't supported by a higher percent of our community? For that price, I would want to -hands down - see agreement across the board. 17 2) I haven't read any details about the routes and train schedule. Will there be a direct train, so I could ride straight to Minneapolis, non-stop? To be honest, if that wasn't an option, I know for sure I would never use the light rail. For the price it would take to ride the LR,the time it would take (especially if I have to stop 16 times on the way downtown!), and the inconvenience of waiting in line during busy times, etc., I would definitely opt to drive in traffic downtown- any time of the day, any time of the year. I would prefer to have the freedom of my own vehicle. I have to think that many people would do the same. It would be so nice to see some of that 1.7 billion dollars go toward roads infrastructure and maintenance, because, let's face it, the "train" system is so outdated and cars aren't going anywhere any time soon! Why would we spend so much of our very precious resources on an inflexible system? 3) Will the train be self-sustaining? Will the rider fees cover the cost of operating, maintenance, improvements, updates, etc? Or will our tax dollars continue to pay for something long after it's built? 4)During the Memorial Service at Purgatory Creek this past month, I got really sad thinking about what would happen to our beautiful community when the infrastructure of a mass-transit train would bust through our home... It just wouldn't be the same place. I work very diligently to be a contributing member of this community. It's so frustrating to think a huge chunk of precious resources will go towards something I won't ever use - and if I do, it won't be because it's faster or more convenient - it would be a very seldom "something to do" option... So, there you go. Some words from somebody who goes about her business,tries to make this world a better place, and doesn't complain... I hope the Eden Prairie City Council makes the right choice that reflects a good portion of our community. Half of the community agreeing with this project just doesn't seem like enough for me. Thanks for your service and enjoy your summer! Sincerely, Jill Boyd 18 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 11:08 AM To: Robert Ellis; Janet Jeremiah; David Lindahl Subject: FW: Vote No FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota L�L� 8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 8/2 952.949.8410 I ® rgetschow@edenprairie.org 1'16 edenprairie.org From: eilercraig©gmail.com [mailto:eilercraigCa gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2014 4:05 PM To: GRP-AllCouncil Subject: Vote No Consider how the costs for building the green line escalated from it's original estimates, the same thing will happen to SWLRT. Green Line: 1994- estimated 474 million 2006- 840 million estimated 2011- 957 million estimated 2014- 1 billion of which Minnesotans will pay 500 million! Operating costs for the Green Line - $35 million a year! The same thing will happen with SWLRT. Costs will double from original estimates of a little less that 2 billion. Do we really need this?Vote NO. 19 Robert Ellis From: Rick Getschow Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 11:25 AM To: Robert Ellis; Janet Jeremiah; David Lindahl Cc: jennifer.munt@metc.state.mn.us Subject: Loon Letter regarding SWLRT Attachments: 2014_06_12_SWLRTIetterLoon.pdf FYI Rick Getschow City Manager City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota CC8080 Mitchell Road I Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 EE952.949.8410 rgetschow(u�edenprairie.orq Illedenprairie.org Original Message From: Kathy Nelson Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 11:20 AM To: Rick Getschow Subject: FW: Letter regarding SWLRT From: Jenifer Loon [rep.jenifer.loon@house.mn] Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 10:16 AM To: Brad Aho; Kathy Nelson; Nancy Tyra-Lukens; Ron Case; Sherry Butcher Wickstrom Subject: Letter regarding SWLRT Dear Members of the Eden Prairie City Council, In advance of your scheduled meeting of June 17 where you are expected to consider Municipal Consent of the Southwest Green Line LRT Extension, I am writing to share my concerns and the views that have been expressed to me by constituents who have contacted me regarding the project. Please see my attached letter. You will receive a hard copy of this letter as well. Sincerely, Jenifer Loon State Representative 14 t t t pPl Rt)IFII Jenifer Loon Minnesota to State Representative �� . c f District 48B House g Hennepin County 1 i� 4 'pp Representatives .,t•°'a' COMMITTEES: COMMERCE AND CONSUMER PROTECTION FINANCE AND POLICY RULES AND LEGISLATIVE ADMINISTRATION TAXES WAYS AND MEANS June 12,2014 Via Electronic Delivery Eden Prairie City Council City Center 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Dear Members of the Eden Prairie City Council, In advance of your scheduled meeting of June 17 where you are expected to consider Municipal Consent of the Southwest Green Line LRT Extension,I am writing to share my concerns and the views that have been expressed to me by constituents who have contacted me regarding the project. As you know,the scope of the project includes 15.8 miles of new Light Rail Transit(LRT)track,and 16 new stations running through four suburban communities connecting downtown Minneapolis with Eden Prairie.I question the overall return on investment of this $1.7 billion project and its impact on Eden Prairie. The project simply does not achieve the goals of connecting workers,shoppers, and people in a cost effective manner. Even after months of review,public hearings and analysis there remain many unresolved matters and concerns about the current alignment through Eden Prairie. With five stations planned for Eden Prairie and numerous at-grade crossings still part of the route through our city,plans to mitigate construction congestion and business loss has not been adequately addressed. Moreover, the decision to move the alignment to Technology Drive west of SW Transit station for the final station and parking ramp at Mitchell Road deviates from the original Environmental Impact Statement(EIS). It is my understanding that local business owners and citizens concerned about the wetlands in the area have expressed significant reservations about the proximity of the newly proposed alignment. I am told that a Supplemental EIS will be provided,but only after the City is asked to consider and grant Municipal Consent. Early in the process.of evaluating the alignment,the business community urged the City to find amicable solutions to alignment issues that are identified prior to granting municipal consent to the project. From (952)829-1792 State Office Building, 100 Rev Dr Martin Luther King Jr Blvd.St.Paul, Minnesota 55155-1298 (651)296-7449 FAX: (651)296-5378 Email:rep.jenifer.loon@house,mn SrdL-i-S. my point of view, this has not been met given the most recent alignment changes and the lack of EIS on a portion of the route to satisfy the community's interests. In addition, as a State Legislator, it is my responsibility to be a careful steward of our state's limited resources. While most of the focus has been on the cost for construction(combined local, state and federal funds) little attention has been given to the long-term budget impact of the operating costs associated with this project. The Met Council and project planners have projected ridership of 30,000 on an average weekday in 2030, and it is expected that that fare box revenue will cover one-third of the estimated operating budget. In other words,the proposed SWLRT will run a deficit of two-thirds the line's operating costs each year that will have to be covered by state taxpayers. In your deliberations, I ask that you recognize the proposed alignment is without a completed EIS,the significantly negative impact of the construction phase on Eden Prairie residents and businesses,and the overall long-term budgetary impact of this project. For these reasons I oppose this project, and I urge your opposition to granting municipal consent for the SWLRT. Sincerely, Jenifer Loon State Representative Cc:Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Brad Aho, Kathy Nelson,Ron Case, Sherry Butcher Wickstrom CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Report of the City Manager July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: XIV.B.1. Rick Getschow, City Manager Eden Prairie Strategic Plan Update Requested Action No action requested. This is an information item only. Synopsis The City Council has discussed elements of the city's strategic plan during several work sessions this year. These elements include our vision, mission, goals, and current strategies. An update will be provided at the meeting on the current state of the city's strategic plan. Additionally, there will also be an unveiling of a new performance dashboard that will be published on the city's website. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Report of the Community Development Director July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: XIV.C.1. Community Development/ Acceptance of the Southwest Corridor Janet Jeremiah Investment Framework (formerly called TSAAP) Report Requested Action Move to: Adopt the Resolution accepting the Southwest Corridor Investment Framework report subject to the following conditions: 1. The Southwest Corridor Investment Framework will be amended to revise the Golden Triangle Area Future Land Uses in accordance with the revised map included as Exhibit A. 2. The Southwest Corridor Investment Framework will be amended to revise the Town Center future east-west roadway alignment to avoid impacts to the existing Emerson- Rosemount building. 3. The Southwest Corridor Investment Framework will be updated and amended as new information and City of Eden Prairie policy direction becomes available, Synopsis The Southwest Corridor Investment Framework is the result of the Transitional Station Area Action Planning (TSAAP) initiative in which Eden Prairie has been involved. Staff is recommending acceptance of the report subject to certain amendments to preservaddress direction from a City Council workshop presentation on the final report. . It is intended to be a "living" document with the ability to make future changes. It could potentially be used as a basis for considering future Comprehensive Plan amendments and funding priorities. Background Information The Southwest Corridor TSAAP initiative has been a collaborative process led by Hennepin County Community Works. Eden Prairie and the other communities have been involved since selection of the consultant, HKGi. The initiative was funded through HUD's Sustainable Communities program and has involved open houses and Planning Commission/City Council updates. Hennepin County released the final report for City consideration on January 16, 2014. The full report and an executive summary and key maps are available at: http://www.swlrtcommunityworks.org/southwest-corridor-investment-framework-0 At the March 18, 2014 City Council workshop, the Council heard a presentation on Eden Prairie portions of the final Southwest Corridor Investment Framework report and provided comments. Some concern was expressed with the amount of housing redevelopment shown in the Golden Triangle Area(GTA)by 2040, which could encourage redevelopment of existing employment or limit future employment growth. Staff also noted that the maps for the Town Center station area inadvertently showed a future east-west roadway impacting Emerson-Rosemount's building and that should be corrected. Staff recommends revising the Investment Framework to replace the GTA station area future land use map with the attached"Golden Triangle Future Land Use—Proposed Recommended Revised Southwest Corridor Investment Framework TSAAP Plan"map. The map combined with other changes in the GTA that are already anticipated in our adopted Comprehensive Plan reflects year 2040 projections of approximately 29,000 employees in the GTA and about 1900 housing units. The previous Investment Framework land use map reflected 2040 projections of about 22,500 employees and about 2700 housing units, so the differences include an increase of about 6500 employees and decrease of about 800 housing units since the Council reviewed this in March. The Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of similar amendments on April 11, 2014. Those have been reviewed in more detail and modified by staff to further protect employment opportunities through greater flexibility in a mixed use area. The proposed conditions of acceptance address the GTA land use amendments, the Town Center east-west roadway amendment, and ensuring that the Investment Framework is a"living" document that is amended based upon additional information and potential future City Council policy changes. Any future Comprehensive Plan amendments would involve public hearings at the City and approval by the Metropolitan Council. Attachment Resolution of Acceptance with Conditions Golden Triangle Future Land Use—Proposed Recommended Revised map CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.2014- A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS TO THE GOLDEN TRIANGLE AREA FUTURE LAND USES AND TOWN CENTER PROPOSED EAST-WEST ROADWAY LOCATION WHEREAS,the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners adopted Resolution No. 09-0596 in 2009 to establish the Southwest LRT Community Works program in consultation with the cities of Eden Prairie, Edina,Minnetonka,Hopkins, St. Louis Park, and Minneapolis, and other Southwest LRT partners; and WHEREAS,the Southwest LRT Community Works Steering Committee, composed of Southwest LRT Community Works partners from cities and other agencies along the Southwest corridor,was formed in 2010 to provide overall guidance and direction for the Southwest LRT Community Works Project; and WHEREAS, Southwest LRT Community Works goals include stimulating economic development, building bridges for effective planning and implementation, maintaining and improving natural systems, strengthening communities through connections and enhancing the tax base; and WHEREAS, a key activity of the Southwest LRT Community Works program is collaborative work on station area planning activities and preparation of a corridor-wide framework for on-going investment; and WHEREAS, in late 2012, Hennepin County, in consultation with city partners, contracted with Hoisington Koegler Group Inc (HKGi) on behalf of the Southwest Community Works Steering Committee to conduct transitional station area action planning activities, resulting in a draft Corridor Investment Framework; and WHEREAS, the Southwest Corridor Investment Framework will guide activities of the Southwest LRT Community Works partners to prepare areas around proposed stations for transit oriented development, access improvements, and other efforts to support the Southwest LRT project; and WHEREAS,the Southwest LRT Community Works Steering Committee accepted the Southwest Corridor Investment Framework as a document to guide ongoing collaborative activities by partner agencies in achieving Southwest LRT Community Works goals; and WHEREAS,the Southwest LRT Community Works Steering Committee referred the Southwest Corridor Investment Framework to member cities and partner organizations for individual actions as deemed appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTS THE SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The Southwest Corridor Investment Framework will be amended to revise the Golden Triangle Area Future Land Uses in accordance with the revised map included as Exhibit A. 2. The Southwest Corridor Investment Framework will be amended to revise the Town Center future east-west roadway alignment to avoid impacts to the existing Emerson-Rosemount building. 3. The Southwest Corridor Investment Framework will be updated and amended as new information and City of Eden Prairie policy direction becomes available. ADOPTED by the City Council on July 14, 2014. Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk Golden Triangle Future Land Use Proposed Recommended Revised Southwest Corridor Investment Framework TSAAP Plan y. N N. A - DISCLAIMER:The City of Eden Prairie does not warrant the accuracy nor the correctness _ - __ of the Informatlon contained In this map.It Is your responsibility to verify the accuracy of this information.In no event will The QV of Eden Prairie be liable for any damages, Y '� including loss of business,lost profits,business interruption, tion,loss of business information ' or other pecuniary loss that might arise from the use of this map or the information it ® contains.Map Information is believed to be accurate but accuracy is not guaranteed. ` ' • Any errors or omissions should be reported to The City of Eden Prairie. M'.\GIS\Projects\LightRail\Golden_Triangle_Classification\GoldenTriangle_futclass.mod Map was Updated/Created:Monday,April 07,2014 "': ' / ...' j. '' '...-:414 --. . . .'";--' . 1 :.::. i-1:::.‘-.:::: .-:::;'.....:. .,i... . • • • It • . 4 u'7!1 ".runt: _�k a . ipi, 4. in ""ems r fi:'! , ;_.. 1 •_ . - . • - s,� '� W 70TH S 0 •r-r - _ ..- = 2x_ '� Vie' -.� O IXP Po'I N f _ • . • Golden Triangle Classification Office Industrial - Proposed LRT Route . � Mixed Commercial Residential Proposed Light Rail Station IP Multi Family Residential 0 50 100 20Meters Mixed Commercial Office AGENDA CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MONDAY, JULY 14, 2014 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEMBERS: Chair Nancy Tyra- Lukens, Council Members Brad Aho, Ron Case, Sherry Butcher Wickstrom, and Kathy Nelson CITY STAFF: City Manager Rick Getschow, Public Works Director Robert Ellis, City Planner Julie Klima, Community Development Director Janet Jeremiah, City Attorney Ric Rosow, Finance Director Sue Kotchevar and Recorder Jan Curielli I. ROLL CALL /CALL THE HRA MEETING TO ORDER II. APPROVE MINUTES OF HRA MEETING HELD ON DECEMBER 3, 2013 III. PUBLIC HEARING TO APPROVE EDEN GARDENS HOUSING PROJECT AND HOUSING AGREEMENT, SET INCOME AND PRICE REQUIREMENTS, AND APPROVE THE PURCHASE AND SALE OF THE PROPERTY AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SCENIC HEIGHTS ROAD AND EDEN PRAIRIE IV. ADJOURNMENT HRA ITEM NO.: II UNAPPROVED MINUTES HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TUESDAY,DECEMBER 3, 2013 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEMBERS: Chair Nancy Tyra- Lukens, Council Members Brad Aho, Sherry Butcher Wickstrom, Ron Case, and Kathy Nelson CITY STAFF: City Manager Rick Getschow, Public Works Director Robert Ellis, Community Development Director Janet Jeremiah, Parks and Recreation Director Jay Lotthammer, Finance Director Sue Kotchevar, City Attorney Ric Rosow and Council Recorder Jan Curielli I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE HRA MEETING TO ORDER Chair Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:04 PM in shared session with the City Council. All members were present. II. APPROVE MINUTES OF HRA MEETING HELD ON SEPEMBER 3, 2013 MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Case, to approve the minutes of the HRA meeting held September 3, 2013. Motion carried 5-0. III. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. HRA 2013-05 CERTIFYING THE 2014 HRA PROPERTY TAX LEVY TO BE $200,000 AND APPROVING THE 2014 HRA BUDGET OF $200,000 Getschow said the HRA approved the proposed 2013 HRA property tax levy and budget on September 3, 2013. Also on September 3, 2013, the Eden Prairie City Council adopted resolutions consenting and approving the proposed 2013 HRA property tax levy. Minnesota Law authorizes the HRA to levy a tax with the consent of the City Council. He noted the amount of the HRA levy has been set at $200,000 for more than ten years. Aho asked about the taxing limits of the HRA. Getschow said the maximum levy would be $1,600,000, so this is just a small portion of that. Aho said he just wanted people to know we are definitely not taxing at the maximum level. MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Nelson, to adopt Resolution HRA No. 2013-05 to approve the proposed 2014 property tax levy to be $200,000 and to accept the proposed 2014 budget of$200,000. Motion carried 5-0. IV. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Aho, to adjourn the HRA. Motion carried 5-0. Chair Tyra-Lukens adjourned the HRA meeting at 7:08 PM. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AGENDA DATE: July 14, 2014 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: HRA ITEM NO: III. Community Development: Public Hearing to approve Eden Janet Jeremiah, David Lindahl, Gardens housing project and housing Molly Koivumaki agreement, set income and price requirements, and approve the purchase and sale of the property at the southwest corner of Scenic Heights Road and Eden Prairie Requested Action: Move to: • Close the public hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution determining to carry out a Housing Development Project(the"Project"), identifying the project area and adopting findings; and • Adopt the Resolution approving purchase and sale of the project area and establishing terms and conditions for the Project; and • Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Purchase Agreement, Housing Project Agreement and such other documents as are necessary to consummate the transaction. Synopsis: The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie (the "HRA") is considering the purchase of an approximately 8.4 acre parcel from MnDOT for$900,000 and immediately selling the same parcel to Eden Gardens, LLCs for$950,000 for the Eden Gardens Green Mid-Market single-family housing development. The parcel is located at the southwest corner of Eden Prairie Road and Scenic Heights Road. The $50,000 difference between the HRA purchase price and the price at which the property will be sold to the Developer will be used to cover various costs incurred by the City. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 469.001 to 469.047 (the"HRA Statute")provides authority for the HRA to undertake the Project to provide affordable housing for persons of moderate income and their families. A Purchase Agreement and Housing Project Agreement establish specific requirements of the Developer. Background: The Strategic Plan for Housing and Economic Development, adopted by the City Council in October, 2012, included a course of action for establishing a Green, Mid-Market neighborhood at the southwest corner of Scenic Heights Road and Eden Prairie Road. The Project accomplishes the City Council's goal and meets the following purposes identified in MS §469.001: 1) to provide a sufficient supply of adequate, safe, and sanitary dwellings in order to protect the health, safety, morals, and welfare of the citizens of this state; and 2) to remedy the shortage of housing for moderate income residents. The HRA Statute states that public participation in activities intended to meet the purposes of sections 469.001 to 469.047 and the exercise of powers confined by sections 469.001 to 469.047 are public uses and purposes for which private property may be acquired and public money spent. The parcel is currently owned by MnDOT and is left over from construction of Highway 212. The goal is to create an environmentally sustainable single family neighborhood with a majority of homes sold to qualified buyers at moderate income price ranges. In April, 2013, the City held a neighborhood meeting for initial feedback and then released a Request for Proposals seeking a developer for this Project. Following a thorough review of four submittals (one incomplete), the Eden Garden proposal by Homestead Partners (now Eden Gardens, LLC) was selected by the City Council in August, 2013. The Eden Gardens proposal has consistently included 36 single- family homes which will all be Green Path certified and a common open space with community gardens and other amenities. Additional neighborhood meetings and public hearings to gain feedback on the specific design and potential neighborhood impacts have resulted in certain plan amendments and traffic mitigation to address neighborhood ideas and concerns. MnDOT's original appraisal indicated a property value of$950,000. Staff requested and received a reduction in the price to $900,000 due to the need for approximately$50,000 of unanticipated soil correction costs. The HRA will sell the property to Eden Gardens, LLC for$950,000. The $950,000 price constitutes a reduction in Eden Gardens, LLC's original offer to the City as the Developer will be responsible for the unanticipated soil correction costs as well as other matters. The HRA will use the $50,000 difference between the purchase and sale price to cover City/HRA closing, legal, financial consultant review, and development review costs (including a noise study and Planning staff time). The City hired an independent consultant to review Eden Gardens, LLC's pro-forma to ensure that its anticipated costs and profit are within industry standards. The review indicated that its anticipated costs are within standards and its profit margin will be low by industry standards. Eden Gardens, LLC must provide proof of financing for the Project prior to closing. The closing will be simultaneous with the City's purchase of the property from MnDOT. Preference for all home types will be given to buyers who currently live or work in Eden Prairie. To accommodate life-cycle housing, floor plans will include a one-level living option. Sixteen(16)units will be sold at market-rate. This is necessary in order to achieve the goal of providing housing affordable to moderate income homebuyers at an affordable price and to avoid the need for a public cash subsidy for the Project. Twenty(20) of the housing units will be sold only to moderate income homebuyers. Moderate income eligibility is defined as 80-120% of the Area Median Income ("AMI") or$66,320 - $99,480 with the AMI at$82,900 for homes sold in 2014. This number is adjusted annually by HUD, however the adjustments are generally minor and the AMI remains fairly consistent from year to year. Minnesota Housing Finance Agency(MHFA) annually determines the home cost or loan limits for the 11 County metro area based upon the moderate income range, which is currently$248,000 - $372,000 with the median home cost at$310,000. In order to carry out this Project without a cash subsidy and provide the twenty(20)units for moderate income homebuyers, the actual price ranges of the mid-market homes are anticipated to be in the $330,000-$360,000 range and will therefore likely only be accessible to the upper 20-25% of the income eligibility range. Income eligibility will be overseen by staff in the office of Housing& Community Services, using an application and income verification system that is consistent with the City's current Housing Rehabilitation and First Time Homebuyer programs. The Developer has and will continue to involve Hennepin Technical College in the development process. Specifically, the Developer will involve students in opportunities such as framing a home, learning how"green"mechanical/electrical systems work and learning green techniques used in storm- water management. The Developer will construct the Project in a manner that meets specified Green standards according to the final PUD plans and development approval by the City. All homes will be Green Path certified and include solar options, green and energy efficient construction, water efficiency, and low-mow grass lawns. The neighborhood will include community gardens, a shelter with a green roof and solar panels, rain gardens, walkable streets, solar sidewalk lighting, and primarily native landscaping that requires minimal water and mowing. Prior to closing on homes to individual buyers, the Developer must complete all common infrastructure improvements and amenities (including, but not limited to the alleys, streets, sanitary sewer, water, shelter, tot lot, and storm sewer). Park dedication fees for moderate income buyers will be deferred and will be waived entirely if the housing unit remains owned by a qualified moderate income buyer for 10 years. If any moderate income housing unit is resold within 10 years to a buyer who does not meet moderate income eligibility requirements, the seller or buyer must pay the deferred park dedication fee. The amount of park dedication is fixed at the 2014 rate. Further after the initial sale of a moderate income unit by the Developer, the seller of a unit to a buyer who does not meet moderate income eligibility requirements must remit a portion of the profit received by the seller in that transaction to the City for reinvestment in low and moderate income housing initiatives. Both look back requirements will end ten years after the date of the initial purchase of the housing unit from the Developer. Attachments: Resolutions Purchase Agreement Housing Project Agreement HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA H.R.A. RESOLUTION NO. 2014-01 A RESOLUTION DETERMINING TO CARRY OUT A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECT,IDENTIFYING THE AREA,AND ADOPTING FINDINGS BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority("HRA") in and for the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: RECITALS WHEREAS,pursuant to Minn. Stat. 469.017, the HRA has the authority to complete a housing development project; WHEREAS, there is a shortage of decent, safe, and sanitary housing for persons of moderate income and their families in the City; WHEREAS, in order to partially alleviate the shortage, the HRA has determined to carry out a housing development project(the "Project"); WHEREAS, the goals for the Project are to increase environmental sustainability/energy efficiency and single family housing affordability for moderate income individuals and their families. The intent of the Project is to create an environmentally sustainable single family neighborhood with implementation of"green" measures with 20 of the housing units to be sold to people with moderate incomes as defined below; WHEREAS, in order to ensure that the Project partially alleviates the shortage of moderate income housing, the HRA will establish moderate income and price limits for the Project; WHEREAS, based on evidence presented by developers who responded to the Project Request for Proposals, in order to make the Project feasible and to provide the desired moderate income housing, the HRA has determined that 16 of the housing units in the Project may be sold at market rates. The remaining 20 of the housing units must be sold to people with incomes and at the prices set forth below. NOW THEREFORE, THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: 1. Recitals. All of the Recitals set forth above are incorporated herein. 2. Findings. The HRA finds that there is a shortage of decent, safe, and sanitary housing for persons of moderate income and their families in the City. 1 3. Determination. In order to partially alleviate the shortage, the HRA determines to carry out the Project. 4. Project Area. The property on which the Project will be constructed is located at the southwest corner of Eden Prairie Road and Scenic Heights Road as illustrated on attached Exhibit A("Project Area") and is legally described on attached Exhibit B. 5. Project Feasibility. Based on evidence presented by developers who responded to the Project Request for Proposals, in order to make the Project feasible and to provide the desired moderate income housing, 16 of the housing units in the Project may be sold at market rates. The market rate units shall be built on Blocks 1 and 5 as shown on the Preliminary Plat of Eden Gardens. The 20 Moderate Income Units must be sold: (i) to people who qualify under the Moderate Income Limits set forth below in B; and (ii) at the Affordable Housing Prices set forth below in C. 6. Moderate Income Limits. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development annually determines the area median income for Hennepin County ("Area Median Income"). The Area Median Income is published annually in December for use in the following year. The HRA hereby determines that the moderate income limits for the Project (the "Moderate Income Limits") shall be 80% to 120% of the Area Median Income. (For example, the Area Median Income for Hennepin County published in December 2013 for use in the year 2014 was $82,900. The moderate income limits for all Moderate Income Units sold in 2014 is $66,320 to $99,480.) 7. Affordable Housing Prices. Based upon the Area Median Income the Minnesota Housing Finance Authority annually sets a loan limit for the 11-County Metro ("Area Affordable Price"). The Area Affordable Price is published in December for use in the following year. For purposes hereof, the affordable housing prices for persons of moderate income for the Project shall be 80% to 120% of the Area Affordable Price (the "Affordable Housing Prices") (For example, the Area Affordable Price published in December 2013 for use in the year 2014 was $310,000. Consequently, the Affordable Housing Prices for all Moderate Income Units sold in 2014 is $248,000 to $372,000.) ADOPTED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie this 14th day of July, 2014. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Chair ATTEST: Rick Getschow, Executive Director 2 CERTIFICATION I, Rick Getschow, Executive Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014 - 01 passed by the Authority on the 14th day of July, 2014. Executive Director 3 EXHIBIT A TO H.R.A. RESOLUTION NO. 2014-01 Depiction of Project Area scenic, hheicahtsFY tgl,ts Rd ;ce ,c• �yeigY+l• s rt - Sc.enic P Ci 'a VFCtcry luthtmF cr. ro cp CD iJ P fiJ {y r1 m 6 � 97 fq Mulford Dr Pitttorri Ds- MiII rd Or Map dam csoi co❑g1e 4 EXHIBIT B TO H.R.A. RESOLUTION NO. 2014-01 Legal Description of Project Area Parcel I: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A.That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17,Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota,described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence north along the east line thereof 914 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 244 feet,more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence northerly along said centerline 116.3 feet;thence westerly 482.6 feet, more or less to a point 1,018.6 feet north of the south line of said Southeast Quarter in a line described as beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 17;thence west along the south line thereof 274 feet;thence deflecting right 91 degrees 58 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 1,018.6 feet;thence south along said line 1,018.6 feet to south line thereof;thence east along said south line 274 feet to point of beginning;excepting therefrom said County Road No. 4; which lies southerly of Line I described below: Line 1. Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing,along the north line of said Lot 1 for 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees I I minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 36.57 feet;thence South 64 degrees 51 minutes 39 seconds East 50.99 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 32.54 feet and there terminating; Parcel 2: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line I to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; 5 together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,adjoining and southerly of the above described strip, which lies northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with said 50 foot parallel line;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,which lies easterly of Line 2 described below: Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of Said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner and there terminating; Parcel 3: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below and westerly of Line 2 described below: Line 1_ Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner, thence run northerly along said east line to a point distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described above;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; 6 To be platted as: Lot 1, Block 1; Lots 1-5, Block 2; Lots 1-5, Block 3; Lots 1-10, Block 4; Lots 1-15, Block 5; and Outlots A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, Eden Gardens, Hennepin County. 7 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA H.R.A. RESOLUTION NO. 2014-02 A RESOLUTION SELECTING A DEVELOPER,APPROVING PURCHASE AND SALE OF THE PROJECT AREA AND ESTABLISHING TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority("HRA") in and for the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: RECITALS WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. 469.017, the HRA has the authority to complete a housing development project; WHEREAS, the HRA adopted H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 at a duly noticed meeting on July 14, 2014. In H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 the HRA found that there is a shortage of decent, safe, and sanitary housing for persons of moderate income and their families in the City and determined to carry out a housing development project to partially alleviate the shortage (the "Project"); WHEREAS, the property on which the Project will be constructed is located at the southwest corner of Eden Prairie Road and Scenic Heights Road as illustrated on attached Exhibit A ("Project Area") and is legally described on attached Exhibit B. WHEREAS, the Project Area is currently owned by the Minnesota Department of Transportation ("MnDOT") and is available for purchase by the HRA to carry out the Project; WHEREAS, the goals for the Project are to increase environmental sustainability/energy efficiency and single family housing affordability for moderate income individuals and their families. The intent of the Project is to create an environmentally sustainable single family neighborhood with implementation of"green" measures with 20 of the housing units to be sold to people with moderate incomes; WHEREAS, in order to ensure that the housing development project partially alleviates the shortage of moderate income housing, the HRA in H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 established moderate income and affordability limits for the Project; WHEREAS, the HRA issued a Request for Proposals in order to select a developer to carry out the Project; 1 WHEREAS, the HRA intends to purchase the Project Area from MnDOT and sell the Project Area to the selected developer; WHEREAS, the HRA has held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the purchase and sale of the Project Area on July 14, 2014; NOW THEREFORE, THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: 1. Recitals. All of the Recitals set forth above are incorporated herein. 2. Purchase. The HRA hereby approves the purchase of the Project Area from the MnDOT in order to carry out the Project. 3. Developer. The HRA hereby selects Eden Gardens, LLC (as successor to Homestead Partners, LLC) to carry out the Project based review of all proposals submitted, information provided by Homestead Partners, LLC and the other applicants, and the information provided at the public hearing. Homestead Partners, LLC submitted a proposal that complies with the Request for Proposals; complies with the income and pricing limits established by the HRA; and meets the HRA's goals for the housing development project to increase sustainability/energy efficiency and single family housing affordability. 4. Fair Market Value. The HRA hereby sets the estimated fair market value of the Project Area at $950,000.00, based on the MnDOT 2012 Market Value Summary Appraisal Report issued by Day Group, LLC. 5. Sale. The HRA hereby approves the sale of the Project Area to Eden Gardens, LLC for$950,000.00 in order to carry out the Project. The HRA hereby approves the Purchase Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit C and authorizes the execution of the Purchase Agreement by the appropriate HRA officers. The sale of the Project Area to Eden Gardens, LLC is conditioned on the execution of the Housing Project Agreement between the HRA and Eden Gardens, LLC, attached hereto as Exhibit D. ADOPTED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie this 14th day of July, 2014. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Chair ATTEST: Rick Getschow, Executive Director 2 CERTIFICATION I, Rick Getschow, Executive Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014 — 02 passed by the Authority on the 14th day of July, 2014. Executive Director 3 EXHIBIT A to H.R.A. RESOLUTION 2014-02 Depiction of Project Area Scenic rieights.Rd • 0,Jtg scer11c Mei[}1Rei 1` SC2c'rlJC NeJyhts red 11 VFc c rr lutheraF f'D CD • {q n 0 11, F. n � W � r3 Mulford J+ itttorri 4s Millford Lr Map dam C2{314 Gerogle 4 EXHIBIT B to H.R.A. RESOLUTION 2014-02 Legal Description of Project Area Parcel 1: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A.That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17,Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota,described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence north along the east line thereof 914 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 244 feet,more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence northerly along said centerline 116.3 feet;thence westerly 482.6 feet, more or less to a point 1,018.6 feet north of the south line of said Southeast Quarter in a line described as beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 17;thence west along the south line thereof 274 feet;thence deflecting right 91 degrees 58 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 1,018.6 feet;thence south along said line 1,018.6 feet to south line thereof;thence east along said south line 274 feet to point of beginning;excepting therefrom said County Road No. 4; which lies southerly of Line I described below: Line 1. Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing,along the north line of said Lot 1 for 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 36.57 feet;thence South 64 degrees 51 minutes 39 seconds East 50.99 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 32.54 feet and there terminating; Parcel 2: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; 5 together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,adjoining and southerly of the above described strip, which lies northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with said 50 foot parallel line;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,which lies easterly of Line 2 described below: Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of Said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner and there terminating; Parcel 3: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below and westerly of Line 2 described below: Line 1_ Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner, thence run northerly along said east line to a point distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described above;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; 6 To be platted as: Lot 1, Block 1; Lots 1-5, Block 2; Lots 1-5, Block 3; Lots 1-10, Block 4; Lots 1-15, Block 5; and Outlots A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, Eden Gardens, Hennepin County. 7 EXHIBIT C to H.R.A. RESOLUTION NO. 2014-02 Purchase Agreement PURCHASE AGREEMENT THIS PURCHASE AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is dated as of July 14, 2014 between the Housing Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota a municipal corporation and political subdivision organized and existing under the Constitution and the laws of the State of Minnesota(referred to as "Seller") and Eden Gardens, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company(referred to as "Buyer"). RECITALS The Minnesota Department of Transportation (referred to as "MnDOT") is the fee owner of certain real property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, containing approximately 8.44 acres, legally described on the attached Exhibit A (the "Land"). The Land, together with all buildings and improvements constructed or located on the Land and all easements and rights benefiting or appurtenant to the Land is collectively referred to herein as the "Real Property". WHEREAS, Seller has determined that there is a shortage of decent, safe, and sanitary housing for persons of moderate income and their families in the City; WHEREAS, in order to alleviate the housing shortage, the HRA has determined to carry out a housing development project pursuant to Minn. Stat. 469.017(the "Project"); WHEREAS, the goals for the Project are to increase environmental sustainability/energy efficiency and single family housing affordability for moderate income individuals and their families. The intent of the Project is to create an environmentally sustainable single family neighborhood with implementation of"green" measures with 20 of the housing units to be sold to people with moderate incomes; WHEREAS, in order to ensure that the housing development project partially alleviates the shortage of moderate income housing, the HRA will establish moderate income and price limits and buyer eligibility requirements for the housing development project; WHEREAS, Seller has adopted H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 and H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-02 relating to the housing development project, approving the project, approving purchase and sale of the Real Property, and establishing regulations for the project. WHEREAS, Seller intends to acquire the Real Property from MnDOT after which Seller desires to sell the Real Property to Buyer and Buyer desires to purchase the Real Property from Seller, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. Upon purchase of the Real Property Buyer shall complete the housing development project on the Real Property. 8 For purposes of this Agreement the effective date is the later date both Seller and Buyer shall have executed this Agreement ("Effective Date") as shown by the dates next to their signature blocks. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Sale of Real Property. Seller agrees to sell to Buyer and Buyer agrees to buy from Seller the Real Property. 2. Purchase Price. The purchase price to be paid by Buyer to Seller is Nine Hundred Fifty Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($950,000.000). 3. Payment of Purchase Price. The Purchase Price shall be paid as follows: 3.1 Earnest Money. One Hundred Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($100,000) as earnest money ("Earnest Money") which Earnest Money shall be held by Custom Home Builders Title ("Escrow Agent") in an interest bearing escrow account, pursuant to the Escrow Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit B, provided, however, that the fee for any such account shall be paid by Buyer. The Earnest Money shall be deposited within three (3) business days of the Effective Date. Unless otherwise disbursed pursuant to the Escrow Agreement, the Earnest Money and all interest accrued thereon shall be paid to Seller at Closing and credited against the Purchase Price. 3.2 Closing Payment. Subject to adjustments provided for herein, Eight Hundred Fifty Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($850,000.00) in cash or by wire transfer of U.S. Federal Funds to be received by Seller on or before 1:00 p.m. local time on the Closing Date. 4. A. Buyer's Contingencies. Unless waived by Buyer in writing, Buyer's obligation to purchase the Real Property shall be subject to and contingent upon each of the following: 4.1 Performance of Seller's Obligations. Seller shall have performed all of the obligations required to be performed by Seller under this Agreement, as and when required by this Agreement. 4.2 Title. Title shall have been found acceptable by Buyer or made acceptable in accordance with the requirements and terms of Section 10 below. 4.3 Phase I. No later than forty-five (45) days after the Effective Date Buyer shall have determined that it is satisfied with a Phase I Environmental Report (prepared in accordance with the current ASTM standard for Phase I environmental site assessments) to be prepared with regard to the Real 9 Property by an environmental consultant reasonably acceptable to Buyer (the "Phase I"). Buyer shall cause the Phase Ito be prepared no later than thirty-five (35) days after the Effective Date at Buyer's cost and expense. Buyer shall deliver a copy to Seller within three (3) business days after any termination of this Agreement. 4.4 Testing. No later than forty-five (45) days after the Effective Date Buyer shall have determined that it is satisfied with the results of and matters disclosed by any soil tests, engineering inspections, hazardous waste and environmental reviews of the Real Property, all such tests, inspections and reviews to be obtained at Buyer's sole cost and expense. 4.5 No Adverse Action. There shall not exist on the Closing Date any lawsuit, governmental investigation or other proceeding challenging the transaction contemplated in this Purchase Agreement, or which might adversely affect the right of Buyer to own, develop, or use the Real Property after the Closing Date for Buyer's intended use. 4.6 Governmental Approval. No later than one-hundred twenty (120) days after the application date Buyer shall have obtained approval from the City of Eden Prairie all full and final approvals for a housing development, including, without limitation, City Council approval of: a Resolution for Planned Unit Development Concept Review, 1st and 2nd Reading of an Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Change, Site Plan Review, (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Governmental Approvals"). Seller shall without charge to Buyer cooperate in Buyer's attempts to obtain all such governmental approvals. Seller shall further execute such rezoning applications, plans, environmental worksheets and other documents as may be required by governmental bodies to accomplish the foregoing. Buyer has made application with the City of Eden Prairie for the Government Approvals. 4. B. Termination by Buyer. If any of the foregoing contingencies set forth in Section 4. A. of this Agreement have not been satisfied, in Buyer's sole discretion, on or before the stated date then this Agreement may be terminated, at Buyer's option, by written notice from Buyer to Seller; provided, however, Buyer may only terminate this Agreement as a consequence of its dissatisfaction with the physical condition of the Property if Buyer has performed reasonable and customary investigation or due diligence with respect to the physical attributes of the Real Property that Buyer finds unsatisfactory. Such notice of termination shall be given no later than three (3) business days after the stated date for the relevant contingency item, provided, however, that said notice shall be given prior to the Closing Date. If Buyer fails to give notice of termination as provided above, the contingencies are automatically deemed waived. Buyer may also waive any contingency by written notice to Seller but such written notice is not required for a waiver to be effective. Upon a termination by Buyer (a) Buyer and Seller shall execute a recordable written termination of this Agreement, which shall include Buyer's quit claim of any interest in and to the Real Property, (b) the Earnest Money and any 10 interest accrued thereon shall be released to Buyer, and (c) upon fulfillment of(a) and (b) above neither party will have any further rights or obligations regarding this Agreement or the Real Property except for the rights and obligations of indemnification set forth in Sections 6, 13, 15 and 16. 5. Seller's Contingencies. Unless waived by Seller in writing, Seller's obligation to sell the Real Property to Buyer shall be subject to and contingent upon the occurrence of each of the following on or before the Closing Date: 5.1 Acquisition. Seller shall have acquired fee simple marketable title of the Real Property from MnDOT on or before the Closing Date. 5.2 Financing. Buyer has provided to Seller a commitment to finance the acquisition of the Real Property from a lender and on terms satisfactory to Seller. 5.3 Approvals. Buyer shall have obtained all Governmental Approvals. 5. B. Termination by Seller. If any of the foregoing contingencies set forth in Section 5. A. of this Agreement have not been satisfied on or before the Closing Date then this Agreement shall automatically be terminated. Upon such a termination (a) Buyer and Seller shall execute a recordable written termination of this Agreement, which shall include Buyer's quit claim of any interest in and to the Real Property, (b) the Earnest Money and any interest accrued thereon shall be released to Buyer, and (c) upon fulfillment of(a) and (b) above neither party will have any further rights or obligations regarding this Agreement or the Real Property except for the rights and obligations of indemnification set forth in Sections 6, 13, 15 and 16. 6. Buyer's Access Investigation and Security. Seller shall, pursuant to MnDOT's approval, allow Buyer, and Buyer's agents, access to the Real Property without charge and at all reasonable times for the purpose of Buyer's investigation and testing the same. Buyer shall pay all costs and expenses of such investigation and testing and shall indemnify and hold Seller, MnDOT and the Real Property harmless from all costs and liabilities relating to Buyer's activities. Buyer shall further promptly repair and restore any damage to the Real Property caused by or occurring during Buyer's testing and return the Real Property to substantially the same condition as existed prior to such entry. 7. Seller's Closing Documents. On the Closing Date, Seller shall execute and/or deliver to Buyer the following (collectively, "Seller's Closing Documents"): 7.1 Deed. A Warranty Deed, in recordable form reasonably satisfactory to Buyer, conveying the Real Property to Buyer, free and clear of all encumbrances, except the Encumbrances set forth on Exhibit C hereto and the Permitted Encumbrances. 11 7.2 Title Policy. The Policy described in Section 10 of this Agreement, or a suitably marked up Title Commitment for the Policy initialed by Title Company, in the form required by this Agreement. 7.3 Affidavit. Such Affidavit of Seller as may be reasonably required by Title Company to issue the Policy. 7.4 IRS Reporting Form. The appropriate Federal Income Tax reporting form, if any, as required. 7.5 Housing Project Agreement. The Housing Project Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit D. 7.6 Other Documents. All other documents reasonably determined by Buyer to be necessary to transfer the Real Property to Buyer free and clear of all encumbrances, except the Permitted Encumbrances. 8. Buyer's Closing Documents. On the Closing Date, Buyer will execute and/or deliver to Seller the following(collectively, "Buyer's Closing Documents"): 8.1 Purchase Price. The Purchase Price, by wire transfer of U.S. Federal Funds or by certified check to be received in Title Company's trust account or delivered to Seller on or before 1:00 p.m. local time on the Closing Date. 8.2 Title Documents. Such Affidavits of Purchaser, Certificates of Value or other documents as may be reasonably required by Title Company in order to record the Seller's Closing Documents and issue the Policy. 8.3 Executive Order Affidavit. An affidavit properly executed and in recordable form confirming the Buyer's representations in Section 13.2. 8.4 Other Documents. All other documents reasonably determined by Seller to be necessary to consummate the transaction contemplated hereby in a manner consistent with the terms and conditions hereof. 8.5 Housing Project Agreement. The Housing Project Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit D. 9. Prorations. Seller and Buyer agree to the following prorations and allocation of costs regarding this Agreement: 9.1 Title Insurance and Closing Fee. Seller will pay all costs of the Title Evidence described in Section 10 of this Agreement and the fees charged by Title Company for any escrow required regarding Buyer's Objections. Buyer will pay the premium or cost of the Owner's Title Policy and all 12 additional premiums required for the issuance of any Mortgagee's Title Insurance Policy required by Buyer. Seller and Buyer will each pay one- half of any reasonable and customary closing fee or charge imposed by any closing agent designated by Title Company. 9.2 Deed Tax. Seller shall pay all state deed tax regarding the Warranty Deed to be delivered by Seller under this Agreement. 9.3 Real Estate Taxes and Special Assessments. At Closing, the Purchase Price shall be adjusted as follows: 9.3.1 Current Year's Taxes. All real property taxes which have become a lien on the Real Property ("Taxes") and which are due and payable prior to the year in which Closing occurs, shall be paid by Seller at or prior to Closing. All Taxes which are due and payable in the year in which Closing occurs shall be prorated to the Closing Date and Seller's portion shall be paid by Seller at Closing. This proration shall result in Seller's payment of Taxes from January 1 to the date immediately prior to the Closing Date and Buyer's payment of Taxes from the Date of Closing to December 31. 9.3.2 Assessments. All charges for improvements or services already made to or which benefit the Real Property, and all levied assessments (general or special) arising out of or in connection with any assessment district created or confirmed prior to the Effective Date ("Assessments") shall be paid in full by Seller at Closing. All assessments (general or special) which are levied after the Effective Date and all assessments (general or special) which are pending but not levied as of the Effective Date or which become pending after the Effective Date shall be assumed and paid by Buyer. 9.4 Recording Costs. Seller will pay the cost of recording all documents necessary to place record title in the condition warranted by Seller and requested by Buyer in this Agreement. Buyer will pay the cost of recording all other documents, including the cost of recording the final plat. 9.5 Other Costs. All other operating costs of the Real Property will be allocated between Seller and Buyer as of the Closing Date, so that Seller pays that part of such other operating costs payable before the Closing Date, and Buyer pays that part of such operating costs payable from and after the Closing Date. 9.6 Attorney's Fees. Each of the parties will pay its own attorney's fees, except that a party defaulting under this Agreement or any closing 13 document will pay the reasonable attorneys fees and costs incurred by the non-defaulting party to enforce its rights regarding such default. 10. Title Examination. Title examination will be conducted as follows: 10.1 Seller's Title Evidence. Seller shall, no later than thirty(30) days after the Effective Date furnish to Buyer, at Seller's cost and expense, the following: A commitment ("Title Commitment") for the most current ALTA Form B Owner's Policy of Title Insurance insuring title to the Real Property in the amount of the Purchase Price, issued by Custom Home Builders Title ("Title Company"). The Title Commitment will commit Title Company to insure title to the Real Property subject only to the Permitted Encumbrances. 10.2 Survey. No later than thirty (30) days after its receipt of the Title Commitment Buyer may obtain at its own expense an ALTA/ASCM as built survey (the "Survey") prepared by a Registered Land Surveyor properly licensed to practice in the State of Minnesota in form acceptable to Buyer (the "Survey"). Buyer shall provide a copy of the Survey to Seller within three (3) days after any termination of this Agreement. 10.3 Buyer's Objections. Within ten(10)business days after receiving the later of the Title Commitment and the Survey, Buyer shall make written objections ("Objections") to the form and/or contents of the Title Commitment and the Survey if Buyer has obtained one within the time set forth in 10.2. Buyer's failure to make Objections within such time period will constitute a waiver of Objections. Any matter shown on the Title Commitment and/or Survey and not objected to by Buyer shall be a "Permitted Encumbrance" pursuant to this Agreement. Seller will have sixty (60) days after receipt of the Objections to cure the Objections, during which period the Closing will be postponed as necessary. Seller shall use its best efforts to correct any Objections. To the extent that the Objections are not cured within such sixty (60) day period, Buyer will have the option to terminate this Agreement and receive a refund of the Earnest Money, or waive the Objections and proceed to Closing. 11. Closing. The closing of the purchase and sale contemplated by this Agreement (the "Closing") shall occur contemporaneously with Seller's acquisition of the Property from MnDOT. The Closing shall occur on August 29, 2014, or another date mutually agreed upon by the parties (the "Closing Date"). The Closing shall take place at the offices of the Title Company, or at such other place as may be agreed to. Seller agrees to deliver possession of the Real Property to Buyer on the Closing Date. 12. No Representations by Seller. IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT SELLER IS NOT MAKING AND HAS NOT AT ANY TIME MADE ANY WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS OF ANY KIND OR CHARACTER, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH 14 RESPECT TO THE REAL PROPERTY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS AS TO HABITABILITY, MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE (OTHER THAN SELLER'S LIMITED OR SPECIAL WARRANTY OF TITLE TO BE SET FORTH IN THE DEED), ZONING, TAX CONSEQUENCES, LATENT OR PATENT PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS, UTILITIES, ACCESS, OPERATING HISTORY OR PROJECTIONS, VALUATION, GOVERNMENTAL APPROVALS, THE COMPLIANCE OF THE REAL PROPERTY WITH GOVERNMENTAL LAWS, THE TRUTH, ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY PROPERTY DATA OR OTHER INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE REAL PROPERTY DELIVERED TO BUYER BY SELLER, OR ANY OTHER MATTER OR THING REGARDING THE REAL PROPERTY. BUYER ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT UPON THE CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION CONTEMPLATED BY THIS AGREEMENT, SELLER SHALL SELL AND BUYER SHALL ACCEPT THE REAL PROPERTY "AS IS, WHERE IS, WITH ALL FAULTS". BUYER HAS NOT RELIED AND WILL NOT RELY ON, AND SELLER IS NOT LIABLE FOR OR BOUND BY, ANY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, GUARANTIES, STATEMENTS, REPRESENTATIONS OR INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE REAL PROPERTY OR RELATING THERETO (INCLUDING SPECIFICALLY, WITHOUT LIMITATION, PROPERTY INFORMATION PACKAGES DISTRIBUTED WITH RESPECT TO THE REAL PROPERTY) MADE OR FURNISHED BY SELLER, THE MANAGER OF THE PROPERTY, OR ANY REAL ESTATE BROKER OR AGENT REPRESENTING OR PURPORTING TO REPRESENT SELLER, TO WHOMEVER MADE OR GIVEN, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, ORALLY OR IN WRITING, UNLESS SPECIFICALLY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT. BUYER REPRESENTS TO SELLER THAT BUYER HAS CONDUCTED, OR WILL HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONDUCT PRIOR TO CLOSING, SUCH INVESTIGATIONS OF THE REAL PROPERTY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE PHYSICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS THEREOF, AS BUYER DEEMS NECESSARY TO SATISFY ITSELF OF THE CONDITION OF THE REAL PROPERTY AND THE EXISTENCE OR NONEXISTENCE OR CURATIVE ACTION TO BE TAKEN WITH RESPECT TO ANY HAZARDOUS OR TOXIC SUBSTANCES OR MATERIALS ON, WITHIN, UNDER OR DISCHARGED FROM THE REAL PROPERTY, AND WILL RELY SOLELY UPON SAME AND NOT UPON ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OR ON BEHALF OF SELLER OR ITS AGENTS, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, SHAREHOLDERS OR EMPLOYEES WITH RESPECT THERETO. UPON CLOSING, BUYER SHALL ASSUME THE RISK THAT ADVERSE MATTERS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADVERSE PHYSICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS MAY HAVE BEEN REVEALED BY BUYER'S INVESTIGATIONS, AND BUYER, UPON CLOSING, SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE WAIVED, RELINQUISHED AND RELEASED SELLER (AND SELLER'S OFFICERS, BOARD MEMBERS, EMPLOYEES AND AGENTS) FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL CLAIMS, DEMANDS, CAUSES OF ACTION (INCLUDING CAUSES OF ACTION IN TORT), LOSSES, DAMAGES, LIABILITIES, COSTS AND EXPENSES (INCLUDING ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COURT COSTS) OF ANY AND EVERY KIND OR CHARACTER, KNOWN OR UNKNOWN, WHICH BUYER MIGHT HAVE ASSERTED OR 15 ALLEGED AGAINST SELLER (AND SELLER' OFFICERS, BOARD MEMBERS, EMPLOYEES AND AGENTS) AT ANY TIME BY REASON OF OR ARISING OUT OF ANY LATENT OR PATENT PHYSICAL CONDITIONS, VIOLATIONS OF ANY APPLICABLE LAWS (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS) AND ANY AND ALL OTHER ACTS, OMISSIONS, EVENTS, CIRCUMSTANCES OR MATTERS REGARDING THE REAL PROPERTY. 13. Representations and Warranties by Buyer. Buyer represents and warrants to Seller as follows: 13.1 Authority. Buyer is a limited liability company duly organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota; that Buyer is duly qualified to transact business in the State of Minnesota; that Buyer has the requisite company power and authority to enter into this Agreement and the Buyer's Closing Documents signed by it; such documents have been duly authorized by all necessary company action on the part of Buyer and have been duly executed and delivered; that the execution, delivery and performance by Buyer of such documents do not conflict with or result in violation of state law or any judgment, order or decree of any court or arbiter to which Buyer is a party; such documents are valid and binding obligations of Buyer, and are enforceable in accordance with their terms. 13.2 Anti-Terrorism, Executive Order 13224 and Public Law 107-56. The Buyer is not in violation of any laws relating to terrorism or money laundering ("Anti-Terrorism Laws"), including Executive Order No. 13224 on Terrorist Financing, effective September 24, 2001 (the "Executive Order"), and the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, Public Law 107-56. The Buyer or, to the knowledge of the Buyer, none of its agents acting or benefiting in any capacity in connection with the transaction, is any of the following: 13.2.1 Person or entity that is listed in the annex to, or is otherwise subject to the provisions of, the Executive Order; 13.2.2 Person or entity owned or controlled by, or acting for or on behalf of, any Person or entity that is listed in the annex to, or is otherwise subject to the provisions of, the Executive Order; 13.2.3 Person or entity with which Seller is prohibited from dealing or otherwise engaging in any transaction by any Anti-Terrorism Law; 13.2.4 Person or entity that commits, threatens or conspires to commit or supports "terrorism" as defined in the Executive Order; or 16 13.2.5 Person or entity that is named as a "specially designated national and blocked person" on the most current list published by the U.S. Treasury Department Office of Foreign Asset Control at its official website or any replacement website or other replacement official publication of such list. The Buyer or, to the knowledge of Buyer, any of its agents acting in any capacity in connection with the transaction does not (i) conduct any business or engage in making or receiving any contribution of funds, goods or services to or for the benefit of any Person described above, (ii) deal in, or otherwise engage in any transaction relating to, any property or interests in property blocked pursuant to the Executive Order, or (iii) engages in or conspires to engage in any transaction that evades or avoids, or has the purpose of evading or avoiding, or attempts to violate, any of the prohibitions set forth in any Anti-Terrorism Law. Buyer will indemnify Seller, its successors and assigns, against, and will hold Seller, its successors and assigns, harmless from, any expenses or damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, that Seller incurs because of the breach of any of the above representations and warranties, whether such breach is discovered before or after closing; provided, and notwithstanding the foregoing, each of the representations and warranties herein contained shall survive the Closing for a period of three years and any action concerning a breach of any of the foregoing representations or warranties of Buyer shall be commenced within three years of the Closing or shall be deemed waived. Consummation of this Agreement by Seller with knowledge of any breach of such warranties and representations by Buyer will constitute a waiver or release by Seller of any claims due to such breach. 14. Condemnation. If, prior to the Closing Date, eminent domain proceedings are commenced against all or any part of the Real Property by any entity, Seller shall immediately give notice to Buyer of such fact and at Buyer's option (to be exercised within thirty (30) days after the date of Seller's notice), this Agreement shall terminate, in which event neither party will have further obligations under this Agreement, except for the rights and obligations of indemnification set forth in Sections 6, 13, 15 and 16, and the Earnest Money, together with any accrued interest, shall be refunded to Buyer. If Buyer shall fail to give such notice then there shall be no reduction in the Purchase Price, and Seller shall assign to Buyer at the Closing Date all of Seller's right, title and interest in and to any award made or to be made in the condemnation proceedings. Prior to the Closing Date, if the Agreement has not been terminated pursuant to the first sentence of this Section, Seller shall not designate counsel, appear in, or otherwise act with respect to such condemnation proceedings without Buyer's prior written consent. 15. Broker's Commission. Seller and Buyer represent and warrant to each other that they have dealt with no brokers, finders or the like in connection with this transaction. The parties agree to indemnify each other and to hold each other harmless against all claims, damages, costs or expenses of or for any other such fees or commissions resulting from their actions or agreements 17 regarding the execution or performance of this Agreement, and will pay all costs of defending any action or lawsuit brought to recover any such fees or commissions incurred by the other party, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 16. Mutual Indemnification. Seller and Buyer agree to indemnify each other against, and hold each other harmless from, all liabilities (including reasonable attorney's fees in defending against claims) arising out of the ownership, operation or maintenance of the Real Property for their respective periods of ownership. Such rights of indemnification will not arise to the extent that (a) the party seeking indemnification actually receives insurance proceeds or other cash payments directly attributable to the liability in question, (net of the cost of collection, including reasonable attorney's fees) or (b) the claim for indemnification arises out of the act or neglect of the party seeking indemnification. If and to the extent that the indemnified party has insurance coverage, or the right to make claim against any third party for any amount to be indemnified against as set forth above, the indemnified party will, upon full performance by the indemnifying party of its indemnification obligations, assign such rights to the indemnifying party or, if such rights are not assignable, the indemnified party will diligently pursue such rights by appropriate legal action or proceeding and assign the recovery and/or right of recovery to the indemnifying party to the extent of the indemnification payment made by such party. 17. Assignment. Buyer may not assign its rights under this Agreement, without the prior written consent of the Seller which consent shall be granted if the assignment is commercially reasonable. 18. Survival. Except as stated in Section 13, all of the terms of this Agreement will survive and be enforceable for a period of one year after the Closing. 19. Notices. Any notice required or permitted to be given by any party upon the other is given in accordance with this Agreement if it is directed to Seller by delivering it personally to an officer of Seller, or if it is directed to Buyer, by delivering it personally to an officer of Buyer, or if mailed in a sealed wrapper by United States registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, or if deposited cost paid with a nationally recognized, reputable overnight courier,properly addressed as follows: If to Seller: Housing Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie Attn: Janet Jeremiah 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 With a copy to: Richard Rosow Gregerson, Rosow, Johnson &Nilan, LTD. 650 Third Ave South, Suite 1600 Minneapolis, MN 55402 If to Buyer: Eden Gardens, LLC Attn: Matthew Hanish 18 525 — 15th Avenue South Hopkins, MN 55347 With a copy to: Gary Eidson Fabyanske, Westra, Hart& Thomson, P.A. 333 South Seventh Street, Suite 2600 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Notices shall be deemed effective on the earlier of the date of receipt or the date of deposit as aforesaid, provided, however, that if notice is given by deposit that the time for response to any notice by the other party shall commence to run one business day after any such deposit. Any party may change its address for the service of notice by giving written notice of such change to the other party, in any manner above specified, 10 days prior to the effective date of such change. 20. Captions. The paragraph headings or captions appearing in this Agreement are for convenience only, are not a part of this Agreement and are not to be considered in interpreting this Agreement. 21. Entire Agreement; Modification. This written Agreement constitutes the complete agreement between the parties and supersedes any prior oral or written agreements between the parties regarding the Real Property. There are no verbal agreements that change this Agreement and no waiver of any of its terms will be effective unless in writing executed by the parties. 22. Binding Effect. This Agreement binds and benefits the parties and their successors and assigns. 23. Controlling Law. This Agreement has been made under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and such laws will control its interpretation. 24. Remedies. If either Party defaults under this Agreement, the non-defaulting Party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to the defaulting Party. If Buyer fails to cure such default within five (5) business days of the date of such notice from Seller, Seller may cancel this Agreement pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 559.21. If Seller fails to cure such default within five (5) business days of the date of such notice from Buyer, Buyer may immediately terminate this Agreement by delivering to Seller at the address noted in Section 19 a Notice of Termination executed by an authorized representative(s) of Buyer. The foregoing is the exclusive remedy for either Party. All other remedies, including damages for breach, equitable remedies, specific performance, and all other remedies at law or equity are waived and relinquished by each of the Parties. SIGNATURES ON SUCCEEDING PAGE 19 IN AGREEMENT, Seller and Buyer have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. SELLER: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By NOT FOR SIGNATURE Date: Nancy Tyra-Lukens Its Chair By NOT FOR SIGNATURE Date: Rick Getschow Its Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 14th day of July, 2014, by Nancy Tyra-Lukens and Rick Getschow, respectively the Chair and Executive Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, on behalf of said authority. NOT FOR SIGNATURE Notary Public 20 BUYER: EDEN GARDENS, LLC By NOT FOR SIGNATURE Date: Matthew Hanish Vice President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2014, Matthew Hanish, the Vice President, of Eden Gardens, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the company. NOT FOR SIGNATURE Notary Public 21 EXHIBIT A TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT Legal Description of Land Parcel 1 That part of Tract A described below: Tract A.That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17,Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota,described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence north along the east line thereof 914 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 244 feet,more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence northerly along said centerline 116.3 feet;thence westerly 482.6 feet, more or less to a point 1,018.6 feet north of the south line of said Southeast Quarter in a line described as beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 17;thence west along the south line thereof 274 feet;thence deflecting right 91 degrees 58 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 1,018.6 feet;thence south along said line 1,018.6 feet to south line thereof;thence east along said south line 274 feet to point of beginning;excepting therefrom said County Road No. 4; which lies southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing,along the north line of said Lot 1 for 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 36.57 feet;thence South 64 degrees 51 minutes 39 seconds East 50.99 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 32.54 feet and there terminating; Parcel 2: That part of Tract A described below; Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219,87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; 22 together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,adjoining and southerly of the above described strip, which lies northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with said 50 foot parallel line;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,which lies easterly of Line 2 described below: Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of Said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner and there terminating; Parcel 3: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below and westerly of Line 2 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner, thence run northerly along said east line to a point distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described above;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; 23 To be platted as: Lot 1, Block 1; Lots 1-5, Block 2; Lots 1-5, Block 3; Lots 1-10, Block 4; Lots 1-15, Block 5; and Outlots A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, Eden Gardens, Hennepin County. 24 EXHIBIT B TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT ESCROW AGREEMENT The undersigned ("Title Company"), acknowledges receipt of $ (the "Earnest Money") to be held by it pursuant to the Purchase Agreement to which this Escrow Agreement is attached. Title Company will hold the Earnest Money (hereinafter the "Earnest Money") in accordance with the terms of the Purchase Agreement and disburse the same strictly in accordance with such terms. Title Company will invest the Earnest Money in such interest-bearing accounts, instruments, corporate paper, or money market funds as approved by both Buyer and Seller, Interest will accrue for the benefit of Buyer, unless the Purchase Agreement is terminated by reason of the default of Buyer, in which case the interest will be paid to Seller. Prior to the waiver or satisfaction of its contingencies, Buyer may direct the Title Company to return the Earnest Money to it if Buyer is entitled to terminate and elects to terminate the Purchase Agreement. Title Company is not responsible for any decision concerning performance or effectiveness of the Purchase Agreement or for resolution of any disputes concerning the Purchase Agreement. Title Company is responsible only to act in accordance with the joint and mutual direction of both Seller and Buyer, or in lieu thereof, the direction of a court of competent jurisdiction except as to Buyer's right to direct the return of the Earnest Money in accordance with the Purchase Agreement. Seller and Buyer will hold Title Company harmless from all claims for damages arising out of this Escrow Agreement and do hereby agree to indemnify Title Company for all costs and expenses in connection with this escrow, including court costs and attorneys' fees, except for Title Company's failure to account for the funds held hereunder, or acting in conflict with the terms hereof. The fees and charges of the Title Company will be paid by Seller. This Escrow Agreement is dated this day of , 20 • By Its 25 EXHIBIT C TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT ENCUMBRANCES 1. Federal, state and municipal laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. 2. Utility and drainage easement(s), if any, as shown on the recorded plat. 3. The lien of real estate taxes and pending special assessment not yet due and payable subject to the proration and allocation provisions hereof. 4. Restrictions in deed from MnDOT to City or HRA that: (a)the Property is conveyed for"public purposes"; and/or (b) the Property and the title thereto shall revert and vest in the State of Minnesota whenever the Property ceases to be used for the stated public purposes. 5. 6. 26 EXHIBIT D TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT Housing Project Agreement HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made as of the 14th day of July, 2014, by and between the Housing Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, a municipal corporation and political subdivision organized and existing under the Constitution and the laws of the State of Minnesota (the "HRA") and Eden Gardens, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company(the "Developer"), WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. 469.017, the HRA has the authority to complete a housing development project; WHEREAS, the HRA adopted H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 at a duly noticed meeting on July 14, 2014. In H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 the HRA found that there is a shortage of decent, safe, and sanitary housing for persons of moderate income and their families in the City and determined to carry out a housing development project to partially alleviate the shortage (the "Project"); WHEREAS, the property on which the Project will be constructed is located at the southwest corner of Eden Prairie Road and Scenic Heights Road as illustrated on attached Exhibit A ("Project Area") and is legally described on attached Exhibit B. WHEREAS, the goals for the Project are to increase environmental sustainability/energy efficiency and single family housing affordability for moderate income individuals and their families. The intent of the Project is to create an environmentally sustainable single family neighborhood with implementation of"green" measures with 20 of the housing units to be sold to people with moderate incomes as defined below; WHEREAS, in order to ensure that the housing development project partially alleviates the shortage of moderate income housing, the HRA in H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 established moderate income and affordability limits for the Project; WHEREAS, based on evidence presented by developers who responded to the Project Request for Proposals, in order to make the Project feasible and to provide the desired moderate income housing, the HRA has determined that 16 of the housing units in the Project may be sold at market rates. The market rate housing units shall be located on Lot 1, Block 1 and Lots 1-15, Block 5, Eden Gardens. The remaining 20 housing units (collectively the "Moderate Income Units") must be sold to people with incomes that fall within the range of the "Moderate Income Limits" (as defined below in Paragraph 1.B hereof) and at prices that fall within the range of "Affordable Housing Prices" (as defined below in Paragraph 1.0 hereof), that are applicable at the time of such sale. The Moderate Income Units shall be located on Lots 1-5, Block 2, Lots 1- 5, Block 3, and Lots 1-10, Block 4, Eden Gardens; and 27 WHEREAS, the HRA adopted H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-02 at a duly noticed public hearing on July 14, 2014. In H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-02 the HRA approved the purchase and sale of the Project Area; set the estimated market value of the Project Area; and selected Developer to complete the Project subject to the condition that Developer and HRA enter into this Housing Project Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual obligations of the parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other as follows: 1. Housing Criteria. The Project shall consist of 36 single family units. Twenty units shall be Moderate Income Units. The remaining 16 units may be sold at market rates. The size of the 20 Moderate Income Units shall range between 1600 and 2200 square feet above grade and the 16 market rate units shall range between 1600 and 2600 square feet above grade. Floor plans available for potential buyers shall include a one-level living floor plan option. The 20 Moderate Income Units shall be priced and sold based on the following calculations: A. Project Feasibility. Based on evidence presented by developers who responded to the Project Request for Proposals, in order to make the Project feasible and to provide the desired moderate income housing, 16 of the housing units in the Project may be sold at market rates. The market rate units shall be built on Blocks 1 and 5 as shown on the Preliminary Plat of Eden Gardens. The 20 Moderate Income Units must be sold: (i) to people who qualify under the Moderate Income Limits set forth below in B; and (ii) at the Affordable Housing Prices set forth below in C. B. Moderate Income Limits. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development annually determines the area median income for Hennepin County ("Area Median Income"). The Area Median Income is published annually in December for use in the following year. The HRA hereby determines that the moderate income limits for the Project (the "Moderate Income Limits") shall be 80% to 120% of the Area Median Income. (For example, the Area Median Income for Hennepin County published in December 2013 for use in the year 2014 was $82,900. The moderate income limits for all Moderate Income Units sold in 2014 is $66,320 to $99,480.) C. Affordable Housing Prices. Based upon the Area Median Income the Minnesota Housing Finance Authority annually sets a loan limit for the 11-County Metro ("Area Affordable Price"). The Area Affordable Price is published in December for use in the following year. For purposes hereof, the affordable housing prices for persons of moderate income for the Project shall be 80% to 120% of the Area Affordable Price (the "Affordable Housing Prices") (For example, the Area Affordable Price published in December 2013 for use in the year 2014 was $310,000. Consequently, the Affordable Housing Prices for all Moderate Income Units sold in 2014 is $248,000 to $372,000.) 28 2. Minnesota's Green Path Development Standards. The Developer shall construct the Project in a manner that meets Minnesota's Green Path ("Green Path") standards as required in the attached as Exhibit C. 3. Community Involvement. The Developer shall engage the community by involving Hennepin Technical College. Specifically, the Developer shall involve students through opportunities such as framing a home, learning how `green' mechanical/electrical systems work or learning green techniques used in stormwater management. 4. Sale of the Project Area. For purposes of this Agreement, "sale" includes any transfer of a housing unit including but not limited to sale, conveyance, gift, and involuntary transfer. The Developer may not close on the sale of any Moderate Income Unit unless all of the following conditions have been met: A. All infrastructure including streets, sanitary sewer, water, and storm sewer, but not including landscaping and the final wear course on streets and other items that cannot reasonably be completed due to winter weather conditions and that do not materially affect the use or function of such items of infrastructure, are substantially complete and accepted in writing by the City; B. All public space including common areas, parks and community buildings are complete and accepted in writing by the HRA; C. The residential structure on the lot to be sold has been issued a certificate of occupancy or temporary certificate of occupancy; and D. The sale has been approved in writing by the HRA prior to closing in order to ensure compliance with the terms of this Agreement. In order to request such approval for the sale of each Moderate Income Unit, Developer, or any subsequent owner that is selling a Moderate Income Unit, shall submit a complete application to the HRA for the sale of each Moderate Income Unit in such form and substances as required by the HRA, which shall include at a minimum all information required by the HRA to verify the income of the prospective purchaser. Upon receipt of a complete application the HRA shall inform the Developer or other requesting party, in writing and within five business days, whether the application is approved. If the HRA fails to respond to a complete application within five business days, the application will be deemed approved. 5. Initial Sale of Housing Units by Developer. Initial sale of Moderate Income Units by the Developer shall comply with the income and pricing requirements set forth in Paragraph 1. In addition, during the Preference Period, the initial sale of all housing units by the Developer shall give preference to prospective buyers who live or work in the City of Eden Prairie. During the Preference Period, Developer shall market to residents and employees of Eden Prairie businesses and permit those who live or work within the City of Eden Prairie to have the first opportunity to sign a purchase agreement for their desired lot, or if no specific lot is specified, for a lot within the Project. As used herein, the phrase "Preference Period" shall refer 29 to the period of time that elapses between the date hereof and the 180th day after the date of the issuance of the first building permit for the Project. 6. Future Sale of Housing Units. After the initial sale of any Moderate Income Unit by the Developer, the seller in any subsequent sale of a Moderate Income Unit that consists of a "Non-Qualifying Sale" and that is closed within 10 years of the date of the initial sale by the Developer of the subject Moderate Income Unit, shall remit the "Applicable Portion of the Profit" received by such seller in such transaction to the City for reinvestment in low and moderate income housing initiatives. As used herein, the phrase "Non-Qualifying Sale" shall be defined as the sale of a Moderate Income Unit that is closed within 10 years of the date of the initial sale of such Moderate Income Unit by the Developer and that is made either: (i) to a buyer that has income in excess of the Moderate Income Limits or (ii) at a price that is in excess of the Affordable Housing Prices, both as measured in the year in which the closing of such sale of the Moderate Income Unit occurs. The Seller of any Moderate Income Unit may apply to the HRA pursuant to Paragraph 4.D hereof for a determination that a prospective sale of such Moderate Income Unit shall not constitute a Non-Qualifying Sale. As used herein, the phrase "Applicable Portion of the Profit" shall refer to the portion designated pursuant to the chart set forth below in Paragraph 6.B. A. Profit. The "Profit" from the subsequent sale of a Moderate Income Unit shall be defined as the funds received by the seller from the buyer at the closing of such sale, after deduction of the sum of the following: (i) all costs and fees listed on the settlement statement (which costs shall include any park dedication fee paid pursuant to Paragraph 7 hereof), excluding amounts necessary to satisfy any mortgages recorded against the property; (ii) the amount of the seller's basis in the Moderate Income Unit as of the date of its acquisition thereof; plus (iii) the cost of improvements made by the seller as defined in IRS publication 523 which increase the seller's basis in the Moderate Income Unit. B. Remittance. The amount of any "profit" that is required to be remitted to the City by the seller of a Moderate Income Unit in a Non-Qualifying Sale shall be as follows: Time elapsed since the date of the Profits to be initial purchase of the housing unit remitted to from the Developer City Less than 1 year 90% At least 1 year but less than 2 years 80% At least 2 years but less than 3 years 70% At least 3 years but less than 4 years 60% At least 4 years but less than 5 years 50% At least 5 years but less than 6 years 40% At least 6 years but less than 7 years 30% At least 7 years but less than 8 years 20% At least 8 years but less than 9 years 10% 30 At least 9 years but less than 10 years 5% Regardless of the number of times a Moderate Income Unit is sold, the requirements of this Paragraph 6 shall apply to any subsequent sale of such Moderate Income Unit that consists of a Non-Qualifying Sale and shall be based on the amount of time that has elapsed from the date of the initial sale of the housing unit by the Developer; provided, however, the provisions of this Paragraph 6 shall not be applicable to any sale of any Moderate Income Unit that closes at any time subsequent to the 10th anniversary of the closing of the initial sale of such Moderate Income Unit by the Developer. 7. Park Dedication Fee. The park dedication fee of $6,500.00 per unit shall be waived for each Moderate Income Unit; provided, however, if any closing upon the sale of a Moderate Income Unit in a Non-Qualifying Sale occurs at any time within 10 years of the date of the initial sale of the Moderate Income Unit by the Developer, the waiver of the park dedication fee for that Moderate Income Unit shall be revoked and such park dedication fee in the amount of$6,500.00 shall be due and payable at the time of the closing of such Non-Qualifying Sale. 8. Bond. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project Area, Developer shall provide to the HRA a bond equal to $100,000 to secure the Developer's obligations pursuant to this Agreement, including to reimburse the HRA for costs, including reasonable attorney fees, incurred by the HRA in any action to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement (the "Security"). The HRA may draw down on or make a claim against the Security, as appropriate, upon five (5) business days' notice to the Developer, for any violation of the terms of this Agreement or if the Security is allowed to lapse prior to the end of the required term. If the Security has not then been renewed, replaced or otherwise extended beyond the expiration date, the HRA may also draw down or make a claim against the Security as appropriate. If the Security is drawn down on or a claim is made against the Security, the proceeds shall be used to cure the default(s) and to reimburse the HRA for all costs and expenses, including attorneys' fee, incurred by the HRA in enforcing this Agreement. Any amount of the Security that is drawn by the HRA shall be held by the HRA in trust and disbursed only if, and to the extent, that the Security may be disbursed hereunder. Developer shall be released from any further obligation to maintain the Security and all amounts of such Security that may then exist shall be released to Developer upon the earlier of the following: (i) the sale of all Moderate Income Units by the Developer; or(ii)the termination of Developer's obligations to sell the Moderate Income Units as set forth in Paragraph 12 below. 9. Developer Warranties. Developer makes the following representations and warranties: A. The Developer is a Minnesota limited liability company, has power to enter into this Agreement and to perform its obligations hereunder and, by doing so, is not in violation of any provisions of its articles of organization, operating agreement or member control agreement or the laws of the State. B. The Developer has obtained funds sufficient for the acquisition or construction of the Project. 31 C. The execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, and the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement is not prevented, limited by or conflicts with (unless all necessary waivers, consents or the like have been obtained) or results in a breach of, material terms, conditions or provision of any contractual restriction, evidence of indebtedness, agreement or instrument of whatever nature to which the Developer is now a party or by which they are bound, or constitutes a material default under any of the foregoing. 10. City Development Agreement. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project Area, Developer shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Eden Prairie with respect to the Project and such Development Agreement shall be recorded against the Project Area. 11. Revision of Limits and Prices. If there are no prospective purchasers for any of the Moderate Income Units within six months following the issuance of the first building permit for the Project and upon written request of the Developer, the HRA shall revise the Moderate Income Limits and Affordable Housing Prices. 12. Moderate Income Units. Notwithstanding any contrary provision herein, the Developer's obligation to sell the Moderate Income Units subject to the requirements in Paragraph 1, and the conditions applicable to the Developer's sale of any Moderate Income Units in Paragraph 4, shall terminate upon the earlier of: (i) no Moderate Income Units have sold within 36 months following the issuance of the first building permit for the Project; or (ii) no Moderate Income Units have sold in the previous 12 months. Developer shall submit to the HRA evidence substantiating such lack of sales and the HRA shall execute an amendment to this Agreement terminating the obligation in Paragraph 1 and conditions in Paragraph 4. Upon such termination, the provisions of Paragraph 6 shall be deemed terminated with respect to any unsold Moderate Income Units, the waiver of the park dedication fee for unsold Moderate Income Units set forth in Paragraph 7 shall be revoked and the park dedication fee for all unsold Moderate Income Units shall become immediately due and payable by the Developer. Any Moderate Income Units which have been sold prior to termination shall remain subject to Paragraphs 6 and 7. All obligations in this Agreement not specifically amended or terminated by this Paragraph shall survive, including but not limited to applicable provisions concerning the remittance of a portion of "Profits" set forth in Paragraph 6 for Moderate Income Units sold prior to such termination. 13. Binding. This Agreement shall be recorded against the Project Area. Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable as real covenants that "run" with the title to all lots within the Project Area, and shall also be enforceable against, and inure to the benefit of the HRA and the Developer; provided, however, and notwithstanding any contrary provision herein, although the provisions of Paragraphs 6 and 7 herein constitute real covenants that run with title to the Moderate Income Units and that are enforceable against future owners of Moderate Income Units to the extent provided therein, Developer shall have no personal 32 obligation to perform any of the covenants of Paragraphs 6 and 7 hereof, provided the Developer is not the seller in any transaction that constitutes a Non-Qualifying sale. 14. Remedies. Developer acknowledges, on its own and for all successors and assigns, that the rights of HRA to perform the obligations of Developer contemplated in this agreement are special, unique, and of an extraordinary character, and that, in the event that Developer violates, or fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, HRA may be without an adequate remedy at law. Developer agrees, therefore, that in the event Developer violates, fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, HRA may, at its option, institute and prosecute an action to specifically enforce such covenant, to enjoin conduct or activities that violate the terms hereof, withhold building permits, or seek any other remedy available at law or in equity. In the event of any litigation between the HRA and Developer to enforce or interpret the provisions hereof in which the HRA is the prevailing party, the HRA shall be entitled to an award requiring Developer to reimburse the HRA for all of its costs and expenses in such action, including reasonable attorneys' fees. No remedy conferred in this agreement is intended to be exclusive and each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. The election of any one or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of any other remedy. 15. No HRA Liability. No failure of the HRA to comply with any term, condition, covenant or agreement herein shall subject the HRA to liability for any claim for damages, costs or other financial or pecuniary charges. No execution on any claim, demand, cause of action or judgment shall be levied upon or collected from the general credit, general fund or taxing powers of the HRA. 16. Recording. This Agreement shall be recorded at the County Recorder and / or Registrar of Titles at the closing of the Developer's purchase of the Project Area from the HRA. This Agreement shall be recorded after the deed from the HRA to Developer and prior to any mortgages or encumbrances. No land alteration or building permits for the Project Area shall be issued until proof of filing of the Agreement is submitted to the HRA. 17. Right of Entry. The Developer hereby grants to the HRA and the City of Eden Prairie, their agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the Project Area to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the HRA or City in conjunction with this Agreement. 18. No Third Party Beneficiaries. Except with respect to Developer, the HRA, and the covenants hereof that "run" with title to the lots within the Project pursuant to Paragraph 13 hereof, no provision of this Agreement inures to the benefit of any third person, including the public at large, so as to constitute any such person as a third-party beneficiary of the Agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action for any such person. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused these presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid. [signatures on following pages] 33 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By NOT FOR SIGNATURE Nancy Tyra-Lukens Its Chair By NOT FOR SIGNATURE Rick Getschow Its Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 14th day of July, 2014, by Nancy Tyra-Lukens and Rick Getschow, respectively the Chair and Executive Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, on behalf of said authority. NOT FOR SIGNATURE Notary Public 34 EDEN GARDENS, LLC By_NOT FOR SIGNATURE Date: Matthew Hanish Vice President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2014, Matthew Hanish, the Vice President, of Eden Gardens, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the company. NOT FOR SIGNATURE Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Gregerson, Rosow, Johnson &Nilan, LTD 650 Third Ave S, Suite 1600 Minneapolis, MN 55376 35 EXHIBIT A TO TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Depiction of Project Area • scenic Ileights fed 0{1f5 U sccroc.Hyei irA s R- • S{:C'rJG He jI1ts rB L¢7 c - - - G 7 � w • -33 G l- 1-7 a 1 �} irb Mulford Dr vs Mi$tord.4r Millford � Lrcr. Map dam G2U14 Guogle 36 EXHIBIT B TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Legal Description of Project Area Parcel 1 That part of Tract A described below: Tract A.That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17,Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota,described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence north along the east line thereof 914 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 244 feet,more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence northerly along said centerline 116.3 feet;thence westerly 482.6 feet, more or less to a point 1,018_6 feet north of the south line of said Southeast Quarter in a line described as beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 17;thence west along the south line thereof 274 feet;thence deflecting right 91 degrees 58 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 1,018.6 feet;thence south along said line 1,018.6 feet to south line thereof;thence east along said south line 274 feet to point of beginning;excepting therefrom said County Road No. 4; which lies southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing,along the north line of said Lot 1 for 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 36.57 feet;thence South 64 degrees 51 minutes 39 seconds East 50.99 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 32.54 feet and there terminating; Parcel 2: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219,87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; 37 together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,adjoining and southerly of the above described strip, which lies northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with said 50 foot parallel line;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,which lies easterly of Line 2 described below: Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of Said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner and there terminating; Parcel 3: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below and westerly of Line 2 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner, thence run northerly along said east line to a point distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described above;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; 38 To be platted as: Lot 1, Block 1; Lots 1-5, Block 2; Lots 1-5, Block 3; Lots 1-10, Block 4; Lots 1-15, Block 5; and Outlots A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, Eden Gardens, Hennepin County. 39 EXHIBIT C TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Green Features and Sustainable Neighborhood Items 1. Green Path advanced certified homes: efficient windows, insulation improvements, high efficiency HVAC systems, high efficiency appliances and efficient lighting systems, etc. Eden Gardens will be the first development wide effort, in the state,to build all homes to Green Path Advanced Certification. 2. Homes: a. Build all homes to be 'solar ready', allowing residents an easy retrofit for solar panels. b. Rough in electric, in garages, required for electric car chargers. c. Offer sun tunnels as an option. d. The model home will have a solar feature installed to display the possible solar options for future residents. The solar feature will consist of either a solar PV panel (electricity) or a solar hot water panel system to heat the homes water. Solar options will be available on all homes. e. Use of low VOC paints and use of recycled materials/products where possible. 3. Low impact Site development strategies a. Reduce impervious surfaces; narrower street sections, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans b. Reduce stormwater runoff and manage via rain gardens and bio-swales, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. Keep all stormwater mgmt on site; not utilizing MnDOT pond or other regional ponding. c. Reduce storm sewer piping and ponding, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. d. Shade streets to minimize the heat island effect. e. Compact Development decreases urban sprawl. f. Use of eco-lawns (no-mow) in central green space, landscaped outlots and for all lawn areas of all home lots; eliminating dependency on irrigation and minimizing need for mowing. g. Utilization of native landscaping in accordance with City's native plant ordinance throughout development and no plantings that contain neonicotanoids. Drought tolerant plantings will require no irrigation; as well as low maintenance needs and costs to the HOA. h. Reduce impervious surfaces through eliminating some alleyways. i. Increase the amount of pervious surfaces. Install pervious surface sidewalks from the driveway to the front door of the model home and provide this as an option on all other units. j. Permeable Pavers—install permeable pavers at sidewalk to park shelter to decrease impervious surfaces and allow for groundwater recharge. 40 4. Site Lighting: a. Install high efficiency LED street lights; limiting light pollution, lowering maintenance and operational costs for the City. b. Install solar pathway lighting; eliminating the operational costs to the HOA and eliminating infrastructure required in standard practices (trenching for conduits/piping). 5. Site furnishings: install park furniture made of recycled plastics, (ie picnic tables). 6. Community Garden plots: Promotes local food growth and community gathering space. 7. Walkable Streets: minimal distance between the sidewalk and most buildings, sidewalks along 100%of street length, elevated ground floors, low design speeds for most streets, minimal driveway crossings along sidewalks. 8. Neighborhood Connections: connections to existing bike/walking trails and neighborhood sidewalks. Also, no cul-de-sacs are encouraged. 9. Community participation: multiple forms of community feedback to guide the project through design, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. 10. Solar and Green Roofs: Install green roofs on park shelter and garden shed; install solar panels on the park shelter which can be used to power the bollards or other features in the common area. Excess electricity can be sold back to Xcel Energy and the proceeds from the sale can be used to offset Home Owners Association (HOA) costs. 11. Rain Barrels: Install at the park shelter and garden shed to capture excess rainwater and utilize in the garden plots. 12. Tot Lot—provide community gathering space for children 13. Site Signage: Install educational and interactive signage throughout public spaces of the development to inform residents, and community members, of the green strategies used. For example, create a sign by the rain garden that educates the importance and functions of these site features. We will work in partnership with the City, as they continue to educate residents of the importance of water resources, etc. 14. The developer shall provide as an option to potential buyers a floor plan providing single level living design. 15. Increase Green site features/benefits by increasing on-site storm water infiltration by the addition of bioswales and increased rain garden area, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. 41 EXHIBIT D to H.R.A. RESOLUTION NO. 2014-02 Housing Project Agreement HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made as of the 14th day of July, 2014, by and between the Housing Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, a municipal corporation and political subdivision organized and existing under the Constitution and the laws of the State of Minnesota (the "HRA") and Eden Gardens, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company(the "Developer"), WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. 469.017, the HRA has the authority to complete a housing development project; WHEREAS, the HRA adopted H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 at a duly noticed meeting on July 14, 2014. In H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 the HRA found that there is a shortage of decent, safe, and sanitary housing for persons of moderate income and their families in the City and determined to carry out a housing development project to partially alleviate the shortage (the "Project"); WHEREAS, the property on which the Project will be constructed is located at the southwest corner of Eden Prairie Road and Scenic Heights Road as illustrated on attached Exhibit A ("Project Area") and is legally described on attached Exhibit B. WHEREAS, the goals for the Project are to increase environmental sustainability/energy efficiency and single family housing affordability for moderate income individuals and their families. The intent of the Project is to create an environmentally sustainable single family neighborhood with implementation of"green" measures with 20 of the housing units to be sold to people with moderate incomes as defined below; WHEREAS, in order to ensure that the housing development project partially alleviates the shortage of moderate income housing, the HRA in H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 established moderate income and affordability limits for the Project; WHEREAS, based on evidence presented by developers who responded to the Project Request for Proposals, in order to make the Project feasible and to provide the desired moderate income housing, the HRA has determined that 16 of the housing units in the Project may be sold at market rates. The market rate housing units shall be located on Lot 1, Block 1 and Lots 1-15, Block 5, Eden Gardens. The remaining 20 housing units (collectively the "Moderate Income Units") must be sold to people with incomes that fall within the range of the "Moderate Income Limits" (as defined below in Paragraph 1.B hereof) and at prices that fall within the range of "Affordable Housing Prices" (as defined below in Paragraph 1.0 hereof), that are applicable at the time of such sale. The Moderate Income Units shall be located on Lots 1-5, Block 2, Lots 1- 5, Block 3, and Lots 1-10, Block 4, Eden Gardens; and 42 WHEREAS, the HRA adopted H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-02 at a duly noticed public hearing on July 14, 2014. In H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-02 the HRA approved the purchase and sale of the Project Area; set the estimated market value of the Project Area; and selected Developer to complete the Project subject to the condition that Developer and HRA enter into this Housing Project Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual obligations of the parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other as follows: 1. Housing Criteria. The Project shall consist of 36 single family units. Twenty units shall be Moderate Income Units. The remaining 16 units may be sold at market rates. The size of the 20 Moderate Income Units shall range between 1600 and 2200 square feet above grade and the 16 market rate units shall range between 1600 and 2600 square feet above grade. Floor plans available for potential buyers shall include a one-level living floor plan option. The 20 Moderate Income Units shall be priced and sold based on the following calculations: A. Project Feasibility. Based on evidence presented by developers who responded to the Project Request for Proposals, in order to make the Project feasible and to provide the desired moderate income housing, 16 of the housing units in the Project may be sold at market rates. The market rate units shall be built on Blocks 1 and 5 as shown on the Preliminary Plat of Eden Gardens. The 20 Moderate Income Units must be sold: (i) to people who qualify under the Moderate Income Limits set forth below in B; and (ii) at the Affordable Housing Prices set forth below in C. B. Moderate Income Limits. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development annually determines the area median income for Hennepin County ("Area Median Income"). The Area Median Income is published annually in December for use in the following year. The HRA hereby determines that the moderate income limits for the Project (the "Moderate Income Limits") shall be 80% to 120% of the Area Median Income. (For example, the Area Median Income for Hennepin County published in December 2013 for use in the year 2014 was $82,900. The moderate income limits for all Moderate Income Units sold in 2014 is $66,320 to $99,480.) C. Affordable Housing Prices. Based upon the Area Median Income the Minnesota Housing Finance Authority annually sets a loan limit for the 11-County Metro ("Area Affordable Price"). The Area Affordable Price is published in December for use in the following year. For purposes hereof, the affordable housing prices for persons of moderate income for the Project shall be 80% to 120% of the Area Affordable Price (the "Affordable Housing Prices") (For example, the Area Affordable Price published in December 2013 for use in the year 2014 was $310,000. Consequently, the Affordable Housing Prices for all Moderate Income Units sold in 2014 is $248,000 to $372,000.) 43 2. Minnesota's Green Path Development Standards. The Developer shall construct the Project in a manner that meets Minnesota's Green Path ("Green Path") standards as required in the attached as Exhibit C. 3. Community Involvement. The Developer shall engage the community by involving Hennepin Technical College. Specifically, the Developer shall involve students through opportunities such as framing a home, learning how `green' mechanical/electrical systems work or learning green techniques used in stormwater management. 4. Sale of the Project Area. For purposes of this Agreement, "sale" includes any transfer of a housing unit including but not limited to sale, conveyance, gift, and involuntary transfer. The Developer may not close on the sale of any Moderate Income Unit unless all of the following conditions have been met: A. All infrastructure including streets, sanitary sewer, water, and storm sewer, but not including landscaping and the final wear course on streets and other items that cannot reasonably be completed due to winter weather conditions and that do not materially affect the use or function of such items of infrastructure, are substantially complete and accepted in writing by the City; B. All public space including common areas, parks and community buildings are complete and accepted in writing by the HRA; C. The residential structure on the lot to be sold has been issued a certificate of occupancy or temporary certificate of occupancy; and D. The sale has been approved in writing by the HRA prior to closing in order to ensure compliance with the terms of this Agreement. In order to request such approval for the sale of each Moderate Income Unit, Developer, or any subsequent owner that is selling a Moderate Income Unit, shall submit a complete application to the HRA for the sale of each Moderate Income Unit in such form and substances as required by the HRA, which shall include at a minimum all information required by the HRA to verify the income of the prospective purchaser. Upon receipt of a complete application the HRA shall inform the Developer or other requesting party, in writing and within five business days, whether the application is approved. If the HRA fails to respond to a complete application within five business days, the application will be deemed approved. 5. Initial Sale of Housing Units by Developer. Initial sale of Moderate Income Units by the Developer shall comply with the income and pricing requirements set forth in Paragraph 1. In addition, during the Preference Period, the initial sale of all housing units by the Developer shall give preference to prospective buyers who live or work in the City of Eden Prairie. During the Preference Period, Developer shall market to residents and employees of Eden Prairie businesses and permit those who live or work within the City of Eden Prairie to have the first opportunity to sign a purchase agreement for their desired lot, or if no specific lot is specified, for a lot within the Project. As used herein, the phrase "Preference Period" shall refer 44 to the period of time that elapses between the date hereof and the 180th day after the date of the issuance of the first building permit for the Project. 6. Future Sale of Housing Units. After the initial sale of any Moderate Income Unit by the Developer, the seller in any subsequent sale of a Moderate Income Unit that consists of a "Non-Qualifying Sale" and that is closed within 10 years of the date of the initial sale by the Developer of the subject Moderate Income Unit, shall remit the "Applicable Portion of the Profit" received by such seller in such transaction to the City for reinvestment in low and moderate income housing initiatives. As used herein, the phrase "Non-Qualifying Sale" shall be defined as the sale of a Moderate Income Unit that is closed within 10 years of the date of the initial sale of such Moderate Income Unit by the Developer and that is made either: (i) to a buyer that has income in excess of the Moderate Income Limits or (ii) at a price that is in excess of the Affordable Housing Prices, both as measured in the year in which the closing of such sale of the Moderate Income Unit occurs. The Seller of any Moderate Income Unit may apply to the HRA pursuant to Paragraph 4.D hereof for a determination that a prospective sale of such Moderate Income Unit shall not constitute a Non-Qualifying Sale. As used herein, the phrase "Applicable Portion of the Profit" shall refer to the portion designated pursuant to the chart set forth below in Paragraph 6.B. A. Profit. The "Profit" from the subsequent sale of a Moderate Income Unit shall be defined as the funds received by the seller from the buyer at the closing of such sale, after deduction of the sum of the following: (i) all costs and fees listed on the settlement statement (which costs shall include any park dedication fee paid pursuant to Paragraph 7 hereof), excluding amounts necessary to satisfy any mortgages recorded against the property; (ii) the amount of the seller's basis in the Moderate Income Unit as of the date of its acquisition thereof; plus (iii) the cost of improvements made by the seller as defined in IRS publication 523 which increase the seller's basis in the Moderate Income Unit. B. Remittance. The amount of any "profit" that is required to be remitted to the City by the seller of a Moderate Income Unit in a Non-Qualifying Sale shall be as follows: Time elapsed since the date of the Profits to be initial purchase of the housing unit remitted to from the Developer City Less than 1 year 90% At least 1 year but less than 2 years 80% At least 2 years but less than 3 years 70% At least 3 years but less than 4 years 60% At least 4 years but less than 5 years 50% At least 5 years but less than 6 years 40% At least 6 years but less than 7 years 30% At least 7 years but less than 8 years 20% At least 8 years but less than 9 years 10% At least 9 years but less than 10 years 5% 45 Regardless of the number of times a Moderate Income Unit is sold, the requirements of this Paragraph 6 shall apply to any subsequent sale of such Moderate Income Unit that consists of a Non-Qualifying Sale and shall be based on the amount of time that has elapsed from the date of the initial sale of the housing unit by the Developer; provided, however, the provisions of this Paragraph 6 shall not be applicable to any sale of any Moderate Income Unit that closes at any time subsequent to the 10th anniversary of the closing of the initial sale of such Moderate Income Unit by the Developer. 7. Park Dedication Fee. The park dedication fee of $6,500.00 per unit shall be waived for each Moderate Income Unit; provided, however, if any closing upon the sale of a Moderate Income Unit in a Non-Qualifying Sale occurs at any time within 10 years of the date of the initial sale of the Moderate Income Unit by the Developer, the waiver of the park dedication fee for that Moderate Income Unit shall be revoked and such park dedication fee in the amount of$6,500.00 shall be due and payable at the time of the closing of such Non-Qualifying Sale. 8. Bond. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project Area, Developer shall provide to the HRA a bond equal to $100,000 to secure the Developer's obligations pursuant to this Agreement, including to reimburse the HRA for costs, including reasonable attorney fees, incurred by the HRA in any action to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement (the "Security"). The HRA may draw down on or make a claim against the Security, as appropriate, upon five (5) business days' notice to the Developer, for any violation of the terms of this Agreement or if the Security is allowed to lapse prior to the end of the required term. If the Security has not then been renewed, replaced or otherwise extended beyond the expiration date, the HRA may also draw down or make a claim against the Security as appropriate. If the Security is drawn down on or a claim is made against the Security, the proceeds shall be used to cure the default(s) and to reimburse the HRA for all costs and expenses, including attorneys' fee, incurred by the HRA in enforcing this Agreement. Any amount of the Security that is drawn by the HRA shall be held by the HRA in trust and disbursed only if, and to the extent, that the Security may be disbursed hereunder. Developer shall be released from any further obligation to maintain the Security and all amounts of such Security that may then exist shall be released to Developer upon the earlier of the following: (i) the sale of all Moderate Income Units by the Developer; or(ii)the termination of Developer's obligations to sell the Moderate Income Units as set forth in Paragraph 12 below. 9. Developer Warranties. Developer makes the following representations and warranties: A. The Developer is a Minnesota limited liability company, has power to enter into this Agreement and to perform its obligations hereunder and, by doing so, is not in violation of any provisions of its articles of organization, operating agreement or member control agreement or the laws of the State. B. The Developer has obtained funds sufficient for the acquisition or construction of the Project. 46 C. The execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, and the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement is not prevented, limited by or conflicts with (unless all necessary waivers, consents or the like have been obtained) or results in a breach of, material terms, conditions or provision of any contractual restriction, evidence of indebtedness, agreement or instrument of whatever nature to which the Developer is now a party or by which they are bound, or constitutes a material default under any of the foregoing. 10. City Development Agreement. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project Area, Developer shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Eden Prairie with respect to the Project and such Development Agreement shall be recorded against the Project Area. 11. Revision of Limits and Prices. If there are no prospective purchasers for any of the Moderate Income Units within six months following the issuance of the first building permit for the Project and upon written request of the Developer, the HRA shall revise the Moderate Income Limits and Affordable Housing Prices. 12. Moderate Income Units. Notwithstanding any contrary provision herein, the Developer's obligation to sell the Moderate Income Units subject to the requirements in Paragraph 1, and the conditions applicable to the Developer's sale of any Moderate Income Units in Paragraph 4, shall terminate upon the earlier of: (i) no Moderate Income Units have sold within 36 months following the issuance of the first building permit for the Project; or (ii) no Moderate Income Units have sold in the previous 12 months. Developer shall submit to the HRA evidence substantiating such lack of sales and the HRA shall execute an amendment to this Agreement terminating the obligation in Paragraph 1 and conditions in Paragraph 4. Upon such termination, the provisions of Paragraph 6 shall be deemed terminated with respect to any unsold Moderate Income Units, the waiver of the park dedication fee for unsold Moderate Income Units set forth in Paragraph 7 shall be revoked and the park dedication fee for all unsold Moderate Income Units shall become immediately due and payable by the Developer. Any Moderate Income Units which have been sold prior to termination shall remain subject to Paragraphs 6 and 7. All obligations in this Agreement not specifically amended or terminated by this Paragraph shall survive, including but not limited to applicable provisions concerning the remittance of a portion of "Profits" set forth in Paragraph 6 for Moderate Income Units sold prior to such termination. 13. Binding. This Agreement shall be recorded against the Project Area. Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable as real covenants that "run" with the title to all lots within the Project Area, and shall also be enforceable against, and inure to the benefit of the HRA and the Developer; provided, however, and notwithstanding any contrary provision herein, although the provisions of Paragraphs 6 and 7 herein constitute real covenants that run with title to the Moderate Income Units and that are enforceable against future owners of Moderate Income Units to the extent provided therein, Developer shall have no personal obligation to perform any of the covenants of Paragraphs 6 and 7 hereof, provided the Developer is not the seller in any transaction that constitutes a Non-Qualifying sale. 47 14. Remedies. Developer acknowledges, on its own and for all successors and assigns, that the rights of HRA to perform the obligations of Developer contemplated in this agreement are special, unique, and of an extraordinary character, and that, in the event that Developer violates, or fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, HRA may be without an adequate remedy at law. Developer agrees, therefore, that in the event Developer violates, fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, HRA may, at its option, institute and prosecute an action to specifically enforce such covenant, to enjoin conduct or activities that violate the terms hereof, withhold building permits, or seek any other remedy available at law or in equity. In the event of any litigation between the HRA and Developer to enforce or interpret the provisions hereof in which the HRA is the prevailing party, the HRA shall be entitled to an award requiring Developer to reimburse the HRA for all of its costs and expenses in such action, including reasonable attorneys' fees. No remedy conferred in this agreement is intended to be exclusive and each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. The election of any one or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of any other remedy. 15. No HRA Liability. No failure of the HRA to comply with any term, condition, covenant or agreement herein shall subject the HRA to liability for any claim for damages, costs or other financial or pecuniary charges. No execution on any claim, demand, cause of action or judgment shall be levied upon or collected from the general credit, general fund or taxing powers of the HRA. 16. Recording. This Agreement shall be recorded at the County Recorder and / or Registrar of Titles at the closing of the Developer's purchase of the Project Area from the HRA. This Agreement shall be recorded after the deed from the HRA to Developer and prior to any mortgages or encumbrances. No land alteration or building permits for the Project Area shall be issued until proof of filing of the Agreement is submitted to the HRA. 17. Right of Entry. The Developer hereby grants to the HRA and the City of Eden Prairie, their agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the Project Area to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the HRA or City in conjunction with this Agreement. 18. No Third Party Beneficiaries. Except with respect to Developer, the HRA, and the covenants hereof that "run" with title to the lots within the Project pursuant to Paragraph 13 hereof, no provision of this Agreement inures to the benefit of any third person, including the public at large, so as to constitute any such person as a third-party beneficiary of the Agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action for any such person. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused these presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid. [signatures on following pages] 48 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By NOT FOR SIGNATURE Nancy Tyra-Lukens Its Chair By NOT FOR SIGNATURE Rick Getschow Its Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 14th day of July, 2014, by Nancy Tyra-Lukens and Rick Getschow, respectively the Chair and Executive Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, on behalf of said authority. NOT FOR SIGNATURE Notary Public 49 EDEN GARDENS, LLC By_NOT FOR SIGNATURE Date: Matthew Hanish Vice President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2014, Matthew Hanish, the Vice President, of Eden Gardens, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the company. NOT FOR SIGNATURE Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Gregerson, Rosow, Johnson &Nilan, LTD 650 Third Ave S, Suite 1600 Minneapolis, MN 55376 50 EXHIBIT A TO TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Depiction of Project Area scenic Ileights fed 'cenf• _- _ - - — • - • t4+06ts RQ. ccr,,c i-ye�uY+1s Rd • S{:Cnic Hei+jhts f� L¢1 c - - - G 7 � w • -33 G l- 1-7 a 1 �} irb MiilFr�Dr vs Mi$tord.4r Millford � Lrcr. Map dam G2U14 Guogle 51 EXHIBIT B TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Legal Description of Project Area Parcel 1 That part of Tract A described below: Tract A.That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17,Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota,described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence north along the east line thereof 914 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 244 feet,more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence northerly along said centerline 116.3 feet;thence westerly 482.6 feet, more or less to a point 1,018_6 feet north of the south line of said Southeast Quarter in a line described as beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 17;thence west along the south line thereof 274 feet;thence deflecting right 91 degrees 58 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 1,018.6 feet;thence south along said line 1,018.6 feet to south line thereof;thence east along said south line 274 feet to point of beginning;excepting therefrom said County Road No. 4; which lies southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing,along the north line of said Lot 1 for 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 36.57 feet;thence South 64 degrees 51 minutes 39 seconds East 50.99 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 32.54 feet and there terminating; Parcel 2: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219,87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; 52 together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,adjoining and southerly of the above described strip, which lies northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with said 50 foot parallel line;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,which lies easterly of Line 2 described below: Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of Said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner and there terminating; Parcel 3: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below and westerly of Line 2 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner, thence run northerly along said east line to a point distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described above;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; 53 To be platted as: Lot 1, Block 1; Lots 1-5, Block 2; Lots 1-5, Block 3; Lots 1-10, Block 4; Lots 1-15, Block 5; and Outlots A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, Eden Gardens, Hennepin County. 54 EXHIBIT C TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Green Features and Sustainable Neighborhood Items 1. Green Path advanced certified homes: efficient windows, insulation improvements, high efficiency HVAC systems, high efficiency appliances and efficient lighting systems, etc. Eden Gardens will be the first development wide effort, in the state,to build all homes to Green Path Advanced Certification. 2. Homes: a. Build all homes to be 'solar ready', allowing residents an easy retrofit for solar panels. b. Rough in electric, in garages, required for electric car chargers. c. Offer sun tunnels as an option. d. The model home will have a solar feature installed to display the possible solar options for future residents. The solar feature will consist of either a solar PV panel (electricity) or a solar hot water panel system to heat the homes water. Solar options will be available on all homes. e. Use of low VOC paints and use of recycled materials/products where possible. 3. Low impact Site development strategies a. Reduce impervious surfaces; narrower street sections, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans b. Reduce stormwater runoff and manage via rain gardens and bio-swales, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. Keep all stormwater mgmt on site; not utilizing MnDOT pond or other regional ponding. c. Reduce storm sewer piping and ponding, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. d. Shade streets to minimize the heat island effect. e. Compact Development decreases urban sprawl. f. Use of eco-lawns (no-mow) in central green space, landscaped outlots and for all lawn areas of all home lots; eliminating dependency on irrigation and minimizing need for mowing. g. Utilization of native landscaping in accordance with City's native plant ordinance throughout development and no plantings that contain neonicotanoids. Drought tolerant plantings will require no irrigation; as well as low maintenance needs and costs to the HOA. h. Reduce impervious surfaces through eliminating some alleyways. i. Increase the amount of pervious surfaces. Install pervious surface sidewalks from the driveway to the front door of the model home and provide this as an option on all other units. j. Permeable Pavers—install permeable pavers at sidewalk to park shelter to decrease impervious surfaces and allow for groundwater recharge. 55 4. Site Lighting: c. Install high efficiency LED street lights; limiting light pollution, lowering maintenance and operational costs for the City. d. Install solar pathway lighting; eliminating the operational costs to the HOA and eliminating infrastructure required in standard practices (trenching for conduits/piping). 5. Site furnishings: install park furniture made of recycled plastics, (ie picnic tables). 6. Community Garden plots: Promotes local food growth and community gathering space. 7. Walkable Streets: minimal distance between the sidewalk and most buildings, sidewalks along 100%of street length, elevated ground floors, low design speeds for most streets, minimal driveway crossings along sidewalks. 8. Neighborhood Connections: connections to existing bike/walking trails and neighborhood sidewalks. Also, no cul-de-sacs are encouraged. 9. Community participation: multiple forms of community feedback to guide the project through design, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. 10. Solar and Green Roofs: Install green roofs on park shelter and garden shed; install solar panels on the park shelter which can be used to power the bollards or other features in the common area. Excess electricity can be sold back to Xcel Energy and the proceeds from the sale can be used to offset Home Owners Association (HOA) costs. 11. Rain Barrels: Install at the park shelter and garden shed to capture excess rainwater and utilize in the garden plots. 12. Tot Lot—provide community gathering space for children 13. Site Signage: Install educational and interactive signage throughout public spaces of the development to inform residents, and community members, of the green strategies used. For example, create a sign by the rain garden that educates the importance and functions of these site features. We will work in partnership with the City, as they continue to educate residents of the importance of water resources, etc. 14. The developer shall provide as an option to potential buyers a floor plan providing single level living design. 15. Increase Green site features/benefits by increasing on-site storm water infiltration by the addition of bioswales and increased rain garden area, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. 56 PURCHASE AGREEMENT THIS PURCHASE AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is dated as of July 14, 2014 between the Housing Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota a municipal corporation and political subdivision organized and existing under the Constitution and the laws of the State of Minnesota(referred to as "Seller") and Eden Gardens, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company(referred to as "Buyer"). RECITALS The Minnesota Department of Transportation (referred to as "MnDOT") is the fee owner of certain real property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, containing approximately 8.44 acres, legally described on the attached Exhibit A (the "Land"). The Land, together with all buildings and improvements constructed or located on the Land and all easements and rights benefiting or appurtenant to the Land is collectively referred to herein as the "Real Property". WHEREAS, Seller has determined that there is a shortage of decent, safe, and sanitary housing for persons of moderate income and their families in the City; WHEREAS, in order to alleviate the housing shortage, the HRA has determined to carry out a housing development project pursuant to Minn. Stat. 469.017(the "Project"); WHEREAS, the goals for the Project are to increase environmental sustainability/energy efficiency and single family housing affordability for moderate income individuals and their families. The intent of the Project is to create an environmentally sustainable single family neighborhood with implementation of"green" measures with 20 of the housing units to be sold to people with moderate incomes; WHEREAS, in order to ensure that the housing development project partially alleviates the shortage of moderate income housing, the HRA will establish moderate income and price limits and buyer eligibility requirements for the housing development project; WHEREAS, Seller has adopted H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 and H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-02 relating to the housing development project, approving the project, approving purchase and sale of the Real Property, and establishing regulations for the project. WHEREAS, Seller intends to acquire the Real Property from MnDOT after which Seller desires to sell the Real Property to Buyer and Buyer desires to purchase the Real Property from Seller, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. Upon purchase of the Real Property Buyer shall complete the housing development project on the Real Property. For purposes of this Agreement the effective date is the later date both Seller and Buyer shall have executed this Agreement ("Effective Date") as shown by the dates next to their signature blocks. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Sale of Real Property. Seller agrees to sell to Buyer and Buyer agrees to buy from Seller the Real Property. 2. Purchase Price. The purchase price to be paid by Buyer to Seller is Nine Hundred Fifty Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($950,000.000). 3. Payment of Purchase Price. The Purchase Price shall be paid as follows: 3.1 Earnest Money. One Hundred Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($100,000) as earnest money ("Earnest Money") which Earnest Money shall be held by Custom Home Builders Title ("Escrow Agent") in an interest bearing escrow account, pursuant to the Escrow Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit B, provided, however, that the fee for any such account shall be paid by Buyer. The Earnest Money shall be deposited within three (3) business days of the Effective Date. Unless otherwise disbursed pursuant to the Escrow Agreement, the Earnest Money and all interest accrued thereon shall be paid to Seller at Closing and credited against the Purchase Price. 3.2 Closing Payment. Subject to adjustments provided for herein, Eight Hundred Fifty Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($850,000.00) in cash or by wire transfer of U.S. Federal Funds to be received by Seller on or before 1:00 p.m. local time on the Closing Date. 4. A. Buyer's Contingencies. Unless waived by Buyer in writing, Buyer's obligation to purchase the Real Property shall be subject to and contingent upon each of the following: 4.1 Performance of Seller's Obligations. Seller shall have performed all of the obligations required to be performed by Seller under this Agreement, as and when required by this Agreement. 4.2 Title. Title shall have been found acceptable by Buyer or made acceptable in accordance with the requirements and terms of Section 10 below. 4.3 Phase I. No later than forty-five (45) days after the Effective Date Buyer shall have determined that it is satisfied with a Phase I Environmental Report (prepared in accordance with the current ASTM standard for Phase I environmental site assessments) to be prepared with regard to the Real Property by an environmental consultant reasonably acceptable to Buyer (the "Phase I"). Buyer shall cause the Phase Ito be prepared no later than thirty-five (35) days after the Effective Date at Buyer's cost and expense. Buyer shall deliver a copy to Seller within three (3) business days after any 2 termination of this Agreement. 4.4 Testing. No later than forty-five (45) days after the Effective Date Buyer shall have determined that it is satisfied with the results of and matters disclosed by any soil tests, engineering inspections, hazardous waste and environmental reviews of the Real Property, all such tests, inspections and reviews to be obtained at Buyer's sole cost and expense. 4.5 No Adverse Action. There shall not exist on the Closing Date any lawsuit, governmental investigation or other proceeding challenging the transaction contemplated in this Purchase Agreement, or which might adversely affect the right of Buyer to own, develop, or use the Real Property after the Closing Date for Buyer's intended use. 4.6 Governmental Approval. No later than one-hundred twenty (120) days after the application date Buyer shall have obtained approval from the City of Eden Prairie all full and final approvals for a housing development, including, without limitation, City Council approval of: a Resolution for Planned Unit Development Concept Review, 1st and 2nd Reading of an Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Change, Site Plan Review, (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Governmental Approvals"). Seller shall without charge to Buyer cooperate in Buyer's attempts to obtain all such governmental approvals. Seller shall further execute such rezoning applications, plans, environmental worksheets and other documents as may be required by governmental bodies to accomplish the foregoing. Buyer has made application with the City of Eden Prairie for the Government Approvals. 4. B. Termination by Buyer. If any of the foregoing contingencies set forth in Section 4. A. of this Agreement have not been satisfied, in Buyer's sole discretion, on or before the stated date then this Agreement may be terminated, at Buyer's option, by written notice from Buyer to Seller; provided, however, Buyer may only terminate this Agreement as a consequence of its dissatisfaction with the physical condition of the Property if Buyer has performed reasonable and customary investigation or due diligence with respect to the physical attributes of the Real Property that Buyer finds unsatisfactory. Such notice of termination shall be given no later than three (3) business days after the stated date for the relevant contingency item, provided, however, that said notice shall be given prior to the Closing Date. If Buyer fails to give notice of termination as provided above, the contingencies are automatically deemed waived. Buyer may also waive any contingency by written notice to Seller but such written notice is not required for a waiver to be effective. Upon a termination by Buyer (a) Buyer and Seller shall execute a recordable written termination of this Agreement, which shall include Buyer's quit claim of any interest in and to the Real Property, (b) the Earnest Money and any interest accrued thereon shall be released to Buyer, and (c) upon fulfillment of(a) and (b) above neither party will have any further rights or obligations regarding this Agreement or the Real Property except for the rights and obligations of indemnification set forth in Sections 6, 13, 15 and 16. 3 5. Seller's Contingencies. Unless waived by Seller in writing, Seller's obligation to sell the Real Property to Buyer shall be subject to and contingent upon the occurrence of each of the following on or before the Closing Date: 5.1 Acquisition. Seller shall have acquired fee simple marketable title of the Real Property from MnDOT on or before the Closing Date. 5.2 Financing. Buyer has provided to Seller a commitment to finance the acquisition of the Real Property from a lender and on terms satisfactory to Seller. 5.3 Approvals. Buyer shall have obtained all Governmental Approvals. 5. B. Termination by Seller. If any of the foregoing contingencies set forth in Section 5. A. of this Agreement have not been satisfied on or before the Closing Date then this Agreement shall automatically be terminated. Upon such a termination(a) Buyer and Seller shall execute a recordable written termination of this Agreement, which shall include Buyer's quit claim of any interest in and to the Real Property, (b) the Earnest Money and any interest accrued thereon shall be released to Buyer, and (c) upon fulfillment of(a) and(b) above neither party will have any further rights or obligations regarding this Agreement or the Real Property except for the rights and obligations of indemnification set forth in Sections 6, 13, 15 and 16. 6. Buyer's Access Investigation and Security. Seller shall, pursuant to MnDOT's approval, allow Buyer, and Buyer's agents, access to the Real Property without charge and at all reasonable times for the purpose of Buyer's investigation and testing the same. Buyer shall pay all costs and expenses of such investigation and testing and shall indemnify and hold Seller, MnDOT and the Real Property harmless from all costs and liabilities relating to Buyer's activities. Buyer shall further promptly repair and restore any damage to the Real Property caused by or occurring during Buyer's testing and return the Real Property to substantially the same condition as existed prior to such entry. 7. Seller's Closing Documents. On the Closing Date, Seller shall execute and/or deliver to Buyer the following(collectively, "Seller's Closing Documents"): 7.1 Deed. A Warranty Deed, in recordable form reasonably satisfactory to Buyer, conveying the Real Property to Buyer, free and clear of all encumbrances, except the Encumbrances set forth on Exhibit C hereto and the Permitted Encumbrances. 7.2 Title Policy. The Policy described in Section 10 of this Agreement, or a suitably marked up Title Commitment for the Policy initialed by Title Company, in the form required by this Agreement. 7.3 Affidavit. Such Affidavit of Seller as may be reasonably required by Title Company to issue the Policy. 4 7.4 IRS Reporting Form. The appropriate Federal Income Tax reporting form, if any, as required. 7.5 Housing Project Agreement. The Housing Project Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit D. 7.6 Other Documents. All other documents reasonably determined by Buyer to be necessary to transfer the Real Property to Buyer free and clear of all encumbrances, except the Permitted Encumbrances. 8. Buyer's Closing Documents. On the Closing Date, Buyer will execute and/or deliver to Seller the following (collectively, "Buyer's Closing Documents"): 8.1 Purchase Price. The Purchase Price, by wire transfer of U.S. Federal Funds or by certified check to be received in Title Company's trust account or delivered to Seller on or before 1:00 p.m. local time on the Closing Date. 8.2 Title Documents. Such Affidavits of Purchaser, Certificates of Value or other documents as may be reasonably required by Title Company in order to record the Seller's Closing Documents and issue the Policy. 8.3 Executive Order Affidavit. An affidavit properly executed and in recordable form confirming the Buyer's representations in Section 13.2. 8.4 Other Documents. All other documents reasonably determined by Seller to be necessary to consummate the transaction contemplated hereby in a manner consistent with the terms and conditions hereof. 8.5 Housing Project Agreement. The Housing Project Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit D. 9. Prorations. Seller and Buyer agree to the following prorations and allocation of costs regarding this Agreement: 9.1 Title Insurance and Closing Fee. Seller will pay all costs of the Title Evidence described in Section 10 of this Agreement and the fees charged by Title Company for any escrow required regarding Buyer's Objections. Buyer will pay the premium or cost of the Owner's Title Policy and all additional premiums required for the issuance of any Mortgagee's Title Insurance Policy required by Buyer. Seller and Buyer will each pay one- half of any reasonable and customary closing fee or charge imposed by any closing agent designated by Title Company. 9.2 Deed Tax. Seller shall pay all state deed tax regarding the Warranty Deed to be delivered by Seller under this Agreement. 5 9.3 Real Estate Taxes and Special Assessments. At Closing, the Purchase Price shall be adjusted as follows: 9.3.1 Current Year's Taxes. All real property taxes which have become a lien on the Real Property("Taxes") and which are due and payable prior to the year in which Closing occurs, shall be paid by Seller at or prior to Closing. All Taxes which are due and payable in the year in which Closing occurs shall be prorated to the Closing Date and Seller's portion shall be paid by Seller at Closing. This proration shall result in Seller's payment of Taxes from January 1 to the date immediately prior to the Closing Date and Buyer's payment of Taxes from the Date of Closing to December 31. 9.3.2 Assessments. All charges for improvements or services already made to or which benefit the Real Property, and all levied assessments (general or special) arising out of or in connection with any assessment district created or confirmed prior to the Effective Date ("Assessments") shall be paid in full by Seller at Closing. All assessments (general or special) which are levied after the Effective Date and all assessments (general or special) which are pending but not levied as of the Effective Date or which become pending after the Effective Date shall be assumed and paid by Buyer. 9.4 Recording Costs. Seller will pay the cost of recording all documents necessary to place record title in the condition warranted by Seller and requested by Buyer in this Agreement. Buyer will pay the cost of recording all other documents, including the cost of recording the final plat. 9.5 Other Costs. All other operating costs of the Real Property will be allocated between Seller and Buyer as of the Closing Date, so that Seller pays that part of such other operating costs payable before the Closing Date, and Buyer pays that part of such operating costs payable from and after the Closing Date. 9.6 Attorney's Fees. Each of the parties will pay its own attorney's fees, except that a party defaulting under this Agreement or any closing document will pay the reasonable attorneys fees and costs incurred by the non-defaulting party to enforce its rights regarding such default. 10. Title Examination. Title examination will be conducted as follows: 10.1 Seller's Title Evidence. Seller shall, no later than thirty(30) days after the Effective Date furnish to Buyer, at Seller's cost and expense, the 6 following: A commitment ("Title Commitment") for the most current ALTA Form B Owner's Policy of Title Insurance insuring title to the Real Property in the amount of the Purchase Price, issued by Custom Home Builders Title ("Title Company"). The Title Commitment will commit Title Company to insure title to the Real Property subject only to the Permitted Encumbrances. 10.2 Survey. No later than thirty (30) days after its receipt of the Title Commitment Buyer may obtain at its own expense an ALTA/ASCM as built survey (the "Survey") prepared by a Registered Land Surveyor properly licensed to practice in the State of Minnesota in form acceptable to Buyer (the "Survey"). Buyer shall provide a copy of the Survey to Seller within three (3) days after any termination of this Agreement. 10.3 Buyer's Objections. Within ten (10) business days after receiving the later of the Title Commitment and the Survey, Buyer shall make written objections ("Objections") to the form and/or contents of the Title Commitment and the Survey if Buyer has obtained one within the time set forth in 10.2. Buyer's failure to make Objections within such time period will constitute a waiver of Objections. Any matter shown on the Title Commitment and/or Survey and not objected to by Buyer shall be a "Permitted Encumbrance" pursuant to this Agreement. Seller will have sixty (60) days after receipt of the Objections to cure the Objections, during which period the Closing will be postponed as necessary. Seller shall use its best efforts to correct any Objections. To the extent that the Objections are not cured within such sixty (60) day period, Buyer will have the option to terminate this Agreement and receive a refund of the Earnest Money, or waive the Objections and proceed to Closing. 11. Closing. The closing of the purchase and sale contemplated by this Agreement (the "Closing") shall occur contemporaneously with Seller's acquisition of the Property from MnDOT. The Closing shall occur on August 29, 2014, or another date mutually agreed upon by the parties (the "Closing Date"). The Closing shall take place at the offices of the Title Company, or at such other place as may be agreed to. Seller agrees to deliver possession of the Real Property to Buyer on the Closing Date. 12. No Representations by Seller. IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT SELLER IS NOT MAKING AND HAS NOT AT ANY TIME MADE ANY WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS OF ANY KIND OR CHARACTER, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THE REAL PROPERTY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS AS TO HABITABILITY, MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE (OTHER THAN SELLER'S LIMITED OR SPECIAL WARRANTY OF TITLE TO BE SET FORTH IN THE DEED), ZONING, TAX CONSEQUENCES, LATENT OR PATENT PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS, UTILITIES, ACCESS, OPERATING HISTORY OR PROJECTIONS, VALUATION, GOVERNMENTAL APPROVALS, THE COMPLIANCE OF THE REAL 7 PROPERTY WITH GOVERNMENTAL LAWS, THE TRUTH, ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY PROPERTY DATA OR OTHER INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE REAL PROPERTY DELIVERED TO BUYER BY SELLER, OR ANY OTHER MATTER OR THING REGARDING THE REAL PROPERTY. BUYER ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT UPON THE CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION CONTEMPLATED BY THIS AGREEMENT, SELLER SHALL SELL AND BUYER SHALL ACCEPT THE REAL PROPERTY "AS IS, WHERE IS, WITH ALL FAULTS". BUYER HAS NOT RELIED AND WILL NOT RELY ON, AND SELLER IS NOT LIABLE FOR OR BOUND BY, ANY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, GUARANTIES, STATEMENTS, REPRESENTATIONS OR INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE REAL PROPERTY OR RELATING THERETO (INCLUDING SPECIFICALLY, WITHOUT LIMITATION, PROPERTY INFORMATION PACKAGES DISTRIBUTED WITH RESPECT TO THE REAL PROPERTY) MADE OR FURNISHED BY SELLER, THE MANAGER OF THE PROPERTY, OR ANY REAL ESTATE BROKER OR AGENT REPRESENTING OR PURPORTING TO REPRESENT SELLER, TO WHOMEVER MADE OR GIVEN, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, ORALLY OR IN WRITING,UNLESS SPECIFICALLY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT. BUYER REPRESENTS TO SELLER THAT BUYER HAS CONDUCTED, OR WILL HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONDUCT PRIOR TO CLOSING, SUCH INVESTIGATIONS OF THE REAL PROPERTY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE PHYSICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS THEREOF, AS BUYER DEEMS NECESSARY TO SATISFY ITSELF OF THE CONDITION OF THE REAL PROPERTY AND THE EXISTENCE OR NONEXISTENCE OR CURATIVE ACTION TO BE TAKEN WITH RESPECT TO ANY HAZARDOUS OR TOXIC SUBSTANCES OR MATERIALS ON, WITHIN, UNDER OR DISCHARGED FROM THE REAL PROPERTY, AND WILL RELY SOLELY UPON SAME AND NOT UPON ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OR ON BEHALF OF SELLER OR ITS AGENTS, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, SHAREHOLDERS OR EMPLOYEES WITH RESPECT THERETO. UPON CLOSING, BUYER SHALL ASSUME THE RISK THAT ADVERSE MATTERS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADVERSE PHYSICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS MAY HAVE BEEN REVEALED BY BUYER'S INVESTIGATIONS, AND BUYER, UPON CLOSING, SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE WAIVED, RELINQUISHED AND RELEASED SELLER(AND SELLER'S OFFICERS,BOARD MEMBERS, EMPLOYEES AND AGENTS) FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL CLAIMS, DEMANDS, CAUSES OF ACTION (INCLUDING CAUSES OF ACTION IN TORT), LOSSES, DAMAGES, LIABILITIES, COSTS AND EXPENSES (INCLUDING ATTORNEYS'FEES AND COURT COSTS) OF ANY AND EVERY KIND OR CHARACTER, KNOWN OR UNKNOWN, WHICH BUYER MIGHT HAVE ASSERTED OR ALLEGED AGAINST SELLER (AND SELLER' OFFICERS, BOARD MEMBERS, EMPLOYEES AND AGENTS) AT ANY TIME BY REASON OF OR ARISING OUT OF ANY LATENT OR PATENT PHYSICAL CONDITIONS, VIOLATIONS OF ANY APPLICABLE LAWS (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS) AND ANY AND ALL OTHER ACTS, OMISSIONS, EVENTS, CIRCUMSTANCES OR MATTERS REGARDING THE REAL PROPERTY. 13. Representations and Warranties by Buyer. Buyer represents and warrants to Seller 8 as follows: 13.1 Authority. Buyer is a limited liability company duly organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota; that Buyer is duly qualified to transact business in the State of Minnesota; that Buyer has the requisite company power and authority to enter into this Agreement and the Buyer's Closing Documents signed by it; such documents have been duly authorized by all necessary company action on the part of Buyer and have been duly executed and delivered; that the execution, delivery and performance by Buyer of such documents do not conflict with or result in violation of state law or any judgment, order or decree of any court or arbiter to which Buyer is a party; such documents are valid and binding obligations of Buyer, and are enforceable in accordance with their terms. 13.2 Anti-Terrorism, Executive Order 13224 and Public Law 107-56. The Buyer is not in violation of any laws relating to terrorism or money laundering ("Anti-Terrorism Laws"), including Executive Order No. 13224 on Terrorist Financing, effective September 24, 2001 (the "Executive Order"), and the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, Public Law 107-56. The Buyer or, to the knowledge of the Buyer, none of its agents acting or benefiting in any capacity in connection with the transaction, is any of the following: 13.2.1 Person or entity that is listed in the annex to, or is otherwise subject to the provisions of, the Executive Order; 13.2.2 Person or entity owned or controlled by, or acting for or on behalf of, any Person or entity that is listed in the annex to, or is otherwise subject to the provisions of, the Executive Order; 13.2.3 Person or entity with which Seller is prohibited from dealing or otherwise engaging in any transaction by any Anti-Terrorism Law; 13.2.4 Person or entity that commits, threatens or conspires to commit or supports "terrorism" as defined in the Executive Order; or 13.2.5 Person or entity that is named as a "specially designated national and blocked person" on the most current list published by the U.S. Treasury Department Office of Foreign Asset Control at its official website or any replacement website or other replacement official publication of such list. The Buyer or, to the knowledge of Buyer, any of its agents acting in any 9 capacity in connection with the transaction does not (i) conduct any business or engage in making or receiving any contribution of funds, goods or services to or for the benefit of any Person described above, (ii) deal in, or otherwise engage in any transaction relating to, any property or interests in property blocked pursuant to the Executive Order, or (iii) engages in or conspires to engage in any transaction that evades or avoids, or has the purpose of evading or avoiding, or attempts to violate, any of the prohibitions set forth in any Anti-Terrorism Law. Buyer will indemnify Seller, its successors and assigns, against, and will hold Seller, its successors and assigns, harmless from, any expenses or damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, that Seller incurs because of the breach of any of the above representations and warranties, whether such breach is discovered before or after closing; provided, and notwithstanding the foregoing, each of the representations and warranties herein contained shall survive the Closing for a period of three years and any action concerning a breach of any of the foregoing representations or warranties of Buyer shall be commenced within three years of the Closing or shall be deemed waived. Consummation of this Agreement by Seller with knowledge of any breach of such warranties and representations by Buyer will constitute a waiver or release by Seller of any claims due to such breach. 14. Condemnation. If, prior to the Closing Date, eminent domain proceedings are commenced against all or any part of the Real Property by any entity, Seller shall immediately give notice to Buyer of such fact and at Buyer's option (to be exercised within thirty (30) days after the date of Seller's notice), this Agreement shall terminate, in which event neither party will have further obligations under this Agreement, except for the rights and obligations of indemnification set forth in Sections 6, 13, 15 and 16, and the Earnest Money, together with any accrued interest, shall be refunded to Buyer. If Buyer shall fail to give such notice then there shall be no reduction in the Purchase Price, and Seller shall assign to Buyer at the Closing Date all of Seller's right, title and interest in and to any award made or to be made in the condemnation proceedings. Prior to the Closing Date, if the Agreement has not been terminated pursuant to the first sentence of this Section, Seller shall not designate counsel, appear in, or otherwise act with respect to such condemnation proceedings without Buyer's prior written consent. 15. Broker's Commission. Seller and Buyer represent and warrant to each other that they have dealt with no brokers, finders or the like in connection with this transaction. The parties agree to indemnify each other and to hold each other harmless against all claims, damages, costs or expenses of or for any other such fees or commissions resulting from their actions or agreements regarding the execution or performance of this Agreement, and will pay all costs of defending any action or lawsuit brought to recover any such fees or commissions incurred by the other party, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 16. Mutual Indemnification. Seller and Buyer agree to indemnify each other against, and hold each other harmless from, all liabilities (including reasonable attorney's fees in defending against claims) arising out of the ownership, operation or maintenance of the Real Property for their respective periods of ownership. Such rights of indemnification will not arise 10 to the extent that (a) the party seeking indemnification actually receives insurance proceeds or other cash payments directly attributable to the liability in question, (net of the cost of collection, including reasonable attorney's fees) or (b) the claim for indemnification arises out of the act or neglect of the party seeking indemnification. If and to the extent that the indemnified party has insurance coverage, or the right to make claim against any third party for any amount to be indemnified against as set forth above, the indemnified party will, upon full performance by the indemnifying party of its indemnification obligations, assign such rights to the indemnifying party or, if such rights are not assignable, the indemnified party will diligently pursue such rights by appropriate legal action or proceeding and assign the recovery and/or right of recovery to the indemnifying party to the extent of the indemnification payment made by such party. 17. Assignment. Buyer may not assign its rights under this Agreement, without the prior written consent of the Seller which consent shall be granted if the assignment is commercially reasonable. 18. Survival. Except as stated in Section 13, all of the terms of this Agreement will survive and be enforceable for a period of one year after the Closing. 19. Notices. Any notice required or permitted to be given by any party upon the other is given in accordance with this Agreement if it is directed to Seller by delivering it personally to an officer of Seller, or if it is directed to Buyer, by delivering it personally to an officer of Buyer, or if mailed in a sealed wrapper by United States registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, or if deposited cost paid with a nationally recognized, reputable overnight courier, properly addressed as follows: If to Seller: Housing Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie Attn: Janet Jeremiah 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 With a copy to: Richard Rosow Gregerson, Rosow, Johnson&Nilan, LTD. 650 Third Ave South, Suite 1600 Minneapolis, MN 55402 If to Buyer: Eden Gardens, LLC Attn: Matthew Hanish 525 — 15th Avenue South Hopkins, MN 55347 With a copy to: Gary Eidson Fabyanske, Westra, Hart& Thomson, P.A. 333 South Seventh Street, Suite 2600 Minneapolis, MN 55402 11 Notices shall be deemed effective on the earlier of the date of receipt or the date of deposit as aforesaid, provided, however, that if notice is given by deposit that the time for response to any notice by the other party shall commence to run one business day after any such deposit. Any party may change its address for the service of notice by giving written notice of such change to the other party, in any manner above specified, 10 days prior to the effective date of such change. 20. Captions. The paragraph headings or captions appearing in this Agreement are for convenience only, are not a part of this Agreement and are not to be considered in interpreting this Agreement. 21. Entire Agreement; Modification. This written Agreement constitutes the complete agreement between the parties and supersedes any prior oral or written agreements between the parties regarding the Real Property. There are no verbal agreements that change this Agreement and no waiver of any of its terms will be effective unless in writing executed by the parties. 22. Binding Effect. This Agreement binds and benefits the parties and their successors and assigns. 23. Controlling Law. This Agreement has been made under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and such laws will control its interpretation. 24. Remedies. If either Party defaults under this Agreement, the non-defaulting Party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to the defaulting Party. If Buyer fails to cure such default within five (5) business days of the date of such notice from Seller, Seller may cancel this Agreement pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 559.21. If Seller fails to cure such default within five (5) business days of the date of such notice from Buyer, Buyer may immediately terminate this Agreement by delivering to Seller at the address noted in Section 19 a Notice of Termination executed by an authorized representative(s) of Buyer. The foregoing is the exclusive remedy for either Party. All other remedies, including damages for breach, equitable remedies, specific performance, and all other remedies at law or equity are waived and relinquished by each of the Parties. SIGNATURES ON SUCCEEDING PAGE 12 IN AGREEMENT, Seller and Buyer have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. SELLER: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By Date: Nancy Tyra-Lukens Its Chair By Date: Rick Getschow Its Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 14th day of July, 2014, by Nancy Tyra-Lukens and Rick Getschow, respectively the Chair and Executive Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, on behalf of said authority. Notary Public 13 BUYER: EDEN GARDENS, LLC By Date: Matthew Hanish Vice President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2014, Matthew Hanish, the Vice President, of Eden Gardens, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the company. Notary Public 14 EXHIBIT A TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT Legal Description of Land Parcel l That part of Tract A described below: Tract A.That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17,Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota,described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence north along the east line thereof 914 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 244 feet,more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence northerly along said centerline 116.3 feet;thence westerly 482.6 feet, more or less to a point 1,018.6 feet north of the south line of said Southeast Quarter in a line described as beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 17;thence west along the south line thereof 274 feet;thence deflecting right 91 degrees 58 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 1,018.6 feet;thence south along said line 1,018.6 feet to south line thereof;thence east along said south line 274 feet to point of beginning;excepting therefrom said County Road No. 4; which lies southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing,along the north line of said Lot 1 for 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 36.57 feet;thence South 64 degrees 51 minutes 39 seconds East 50.99 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 32.54 feet and there terminating; Parcel 2: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; 15 together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,adjoining and southerly of the above described strip, which lies northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with said 50 foot parallel line;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,which lies easterly of Line 2 described below: Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of Said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner and there terminating; Parcel 3: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below and westerly of Line 2 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner, thence run northerly along said east line to a point distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described above;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; 16 To be platted as: Lot 1, Block 1; Lots 1-5, Block 2; Lots 1-5, Block 3; Lots 1-10, Block 4; Lots 1-15, Block 5; and Outlots A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, Eden Gardens, Hennepin County. 17 EXHIBIT B TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT ESCROW AGREEMENT The undersigned ("Title Company"), acknowledges receipt of $ (the "Earnest Money") to be held by it pursuant to the Purchase Agreement to which this Escrow Agreement is attached. Title Company will hold the Earnest Money (hereinafter the "Earnest Money") in accordance with the terms of the Purchase Agreement and disburse the same strictly in accordance with such terms. Title Company will invest the Earnest Money in such interest-bearing accounts, instruments, corporate paper, or money market funds as approved by both Buyer and Seller, Interest will accrue for the benefit of Buyer, unless the Purchase Agreement is terminated by reason of the default of Buyer, in which case the interest will be paid to Seller. Prior to the waiver or satisfaction of its contingencies, Buyer may direct the Title Company to return the Earnest Money to it if Buyer is entitled to terminate and elects to terminate the Purchase Agreement. Title Company is not responsible for any decision concerning performance or effectiveness of the Purchase Agreement or for resolution of any disputes concerning the Purchase Agreement. Title Company is responsible only to act in accordance with the joint and mutual direction of both Seller and Buyer, or in lieu thereof, the direction of a court of competent jurisdiction except as to Buyer's right to direct the return of the Earnest Money in accordance with the Purchase Agreement. Seller and Buyer will hold Title Company harmless from all claims for damages arising out of this Escrow Agreement and do hereby agree to indemnify Title Company for all costs and expenses in connection with this escrow, including court costs and attorneys' fees, except for Title Company's failure to account for the funds held hereunder, or acting in conflict with the terms hereof. The fees and charges of the Title Company will be paid by Seller. This Escrow Agreement is dated this day of , 20 • By Its 18 EXHIBIT C TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT ENCUMBRANCES 1. Federal, state and municipal laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. 2. Utility and drainage easement(s), if any, as shown on the recorded plat. 3. The lien of real estate taxes and pending special assessment not yet due and payable subject to the proration and allocation provisions hereof. 4. Restrictions in deed from MnDOT to City or HRA that: (a) the Property is conveyed for"public purposes"; and/or (b)the Property and the title thereto shall revert and vest in the State of Minnesota whenever the Property ceases to be used for the stated public purposes. 5. 6. 19 EXHIBIT D TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT Housing Project Agreement HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made as of the 14th day of July, 2014, by and between the Housing Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, a municipal corporation and political subdivision organized and existing under the Constitution and the laws of the State of Minnesota (the "HRA") and Eden Gardens, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the "Developer"), WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. 469.017, the HRA has the authority to complete a housing development project; WHEREAS, the HRA adopted H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 at a duly noticed meeting on July 14, 2014. In H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 the HRA found that there is a shortage of decent, safe, and sanitary housing for persons of moderate income and their families in the City and determined to carry out a housing development project to partially alleviate the shortage (the "Project"); WHEREAS, the property on which the Project will be constructed is located at the southwest corner of Eden Prairie Road and Scenic Heights Road as illustrated on attached Exhibit A("Project Area") and is legally described on attached Exhibit B. WHEREAS, the goals for the Project are to increase environmental sustainability/energy efficiency and single family housing affordability for moderate income individuals and their families. The intent of the Project is to create an environmentally sustainable single family neighborhood with implementation of"green" measures with 20 of the housing units to be sold to people with moderate incomes as defined below; WHEREAS, in order to ensure that the housing development project partially alleviates the shortage of moderate income housing, the HRA in H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 established moderate income and affordability limits for the Project; WHEREAS, based on evidence presented by developers who responded to the Project Request for Proposals, in order to make the Project feasible and to provide the desired moderate income housing, the HRA has determined that 16 of the housing units in the Project may be sold at market rates. The market rate housing units shall be located on Lot 1, Block 1 and Lots 1-15, Block 5, Eden Gardens. The remaining 20 housing units (collectively the "Moderate Income Units") must be sold to people with incomes that fall within the range of the "Moderate Income Limits" (as defined below in Paragraph 1.B hereof) and at prices that fall within the range of "Affordable Housing Prices" (as defined below in Paragraph 1.0 hereof), that are applicable at the time of such sale. The Moderate Income Units shall be located on Lots 1-5, Block 2, Lots 1- 5, Block 3, and Lots 1-10, Block 4, Eden Gardens; and 20 WHEREAS, the HRA adopted H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-02 at a duly noticed public hearing on July 14, 2014. In H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-02 the HRA approved the purchase and sale of the Project Area; set the estimated market value of the Project Area; and selected Developer to complete the Project subject to the condition that Developer and HRA enter into this Housing Project Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual obligations of the parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other as follows: 1. Housing Criteria. The Project shall consist of 36 single family units. Twenty units shall be Moderate Income Units. The remaining 16 units may be sold at market rates. The size of the 20 Moderate Income Units shall range between 1600 and 2200 square feet above grade and the 16 market rate units shall range between 1600 and 2600 square feet above grade. Floor plans available for potential buyers shall include a one-level living floor plan option. The 20 Moderate Income Units shall be priced and sold based on the following calculations: A. Project Feasibility. Based on evidence presented by developers who responded to the Project Request for Proposals, in order to make the Project feasible and to provide the desired moderate income housing, 16 of the housing units in the Project may be sold at market rates. The market rate units shall be built on Blocks 1 and 5 as shown on the Preliminary Plat of Eden Gardens. The 20 Moderate Income Units must be sold: (i) to people who qualify under the Moderate Income Limits set forth below in B; and (ii) at the Affordable Housing Prices set forth below in C. B. Moderate Income Limits. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development annually determines the area median income for Hennepin County ("Area Median Income"). The Area Median Income is published annually in December for use in the following year. The HRA hereby determines that the moderate income limits for the Project (the "Moderate Income Limits") shall be 80% to 120% of the Area Median Income. (For example, the Area Median Income for Hennepin County published in December 2013 for use in the year 2014 was $82,900. The moderate income limits for all Moderate Income Units sold in 2014 is $66,320 to $99,480.) C. Affordable Housing Prices. Based upon the Area Median Income the Minnesota Housing Finance Authority annually sets a loan limit for the 11-County Metro ("Area Affordable Price"). The Area Affordable Price is published in December for use in the following year. For purposes hereof, the affordable housing prices for persons of moderate income for the Project shall be 80% to 120% of the Area Affordable Price (the "Affordable Housing Prices") (For example, the Area Affordable Price published in December 2013 for use in the year 2014 was $310,000. Consequently, the Affordable Housing Prices for all Moderate Income Units sold in 2014 is $248,000 to $372,000.) 21 2. Minnesota's Green Path Development Standards. The Developer shall construct the Project in a manner that meets Minnesota's Green Path ("Green Path") standards as required in the attached as Exhibit C. 3. Community Involvement. The Developer shall engage the community by involving Hennepin Technical College. Specifically, the Developer shall involve students through opportunities such as framing a home, learning how `green' mechanical/electrical systems work or learning green techniques used in stormwater management. 4. Sale of the Project Area. For purposes of this Agreement, "sale" includes any transfer of a housing unit including but not limited to sale, conveyance, gift, and involuntary transfer. The Developer may not close on the sale of any Moderate Income Unit unless all of the following conditions have been met: A. All infrastructure including streets, sanitary sewer, water, and storm sewer, but not including landscaping and the final wear course on streets and other items that cannot reasonably be completed due to winter weather conditions and that do not materially affect the use or function of such items of infrastructure, are substantially complete and accepted in writing by the City; B. All public space including common areas, parks and community buildings are complete and accepted in writing by the HRA; C. The residential structure on the lot to be sold has been issued a certificate of occupancy or temporary certificate of occupancy; and D. The sale has been approved in writing by the HRA prior to closing in order to ensure compliance with the terms of this Agreement. In order to request such approval for the sale of each Moderate Income Unit, Developer, or any subsequent owner that is selling a Moderate Income Unit, shall submit a complete application to the HRA for the sale of each Moderate Income Unit in such form and substances as required by the HRA, which shall include at a minimum all information required by the HRA to verify the income of the prospective purchaser. Upon receipt of a complete application the HRA shall inform the Developer or other requesting party, in writing and within five business days, whether the application is approved. If the HRA fails to respond to a complete application within five business days, the application will be deemed approved. 5. Initial Sale of Housing Units by Developer. Initial sale of Moderate Income Units by the Developer shall comply with the income and pricing requirements set forth in Paragraph 1. In addition, during the Preference Period, the initial sale of all housing units by the Developer shall give preference to prospective buyers who live or work in the City of Eden Prairie. During the Preference Period, Developer shall market to residents and employees of Eden Prairie businesses and permit those who live or work within the City of Eden Prairie to have the first opportunity to sign a purchase agreement for their desired lot, or if no specific lot is specified, for a lot within the Project. As used herein, the phrase "Preference Period" shall refer 22 to the period of time that elapses between the date hereof and the 180th day after the date of the issuance of the first building permit for the Project. 6. Future Sale of Housing Units. After the initial sale of any Moderate Income Unit by the Developer, the seller in any subsequent sale of a Moderate Income Unit that consists of a "Non-Qualifying Sale" and that is closed within 10 years of the date of the initial sale by the Developer of the subject Moderate Income Unit, shall remit the "Applicable Portion of the Profit" received by such seller in such transaction to the City for reinvestment in low and moderate income housing initiatives. As used herein, the phrase "Non-Qualifying Sale" shall be defined as the sale of a Moderate Income Unit that is closed within 10 years of the date of the initial sale of such Moderate Income Unit by the Developer and that is made either: (i) to a buyer that has income in excess of the Moderate Income Limits or (ii) at a price that is in excess of the Affordable Housing Prices, both as measured in the year in which the closing of such sale of the Moderate Income Unit occurs. The Seller of any Moderate Income Unit may apply to the HRA pursuant to Paragraph 4.D hereof for a determination that a prospective sale of such Moderate Income Unit shall not constitute a Non-Qualifying Sale. As used herein, the phrase "Applicable Portion of the Profit" shall refer to the portion designated pursuant to the chart set forth below in Paragraph 6.B. A. Profit. The "Profit" from the subsequent sale of a Moderate Income Unit shall be defined as the funds received by the seller from the buyer at the closing of such sale, after deduction of the sum of the following: (i) all costs and fees listed on the settlement statement (which costs shall include any park dedication fee paid pursuant to Paragraph 7 hereof), excluding amounts necessary to satisfy any mortgages recorded against the property; (ii) the amount of the seller's basis in the Moderate Income Unit as of the date of its acquisition thereof; plus (iii) the cost of improvements made by the seller as defined in IRS publication 523 which increase the seller's basis in the Moderate Income Unit. B. Remittance. The amount of any"profit" that is required to be remitted to the City by the seller of a Moderate Income Unit in a Non-Qualifying Sale shall be as follows: Time elapsed since the date of the Profits to be initial purchase of the housing unit remitted to from the Developer City Less than 1 year _ 90% At least 1 year but less than 2 years _ 80% At least 2 years but less than 3 years _ 70% At least 3 years but less than 4 years 60% At least 4 years but less than 5 years _ 50% At least 5 years but less than 6 years _ 40% At least 6 years but less than 7 years _ 30% At least 7 years but less than 8 years _ 20% At least 8 years but less than 9 years 10% 23 At least 9 years but less than 10 years 5% Regardless of the number of times a Moderate Income Unit is sold, the requirements of this Paragraph 6 shall apply to any subsequent sale of such Moderate Income Unit that consists of a Non-Qualifying Sale and shall be based on the amount of time that has elapsed from the date of the initial sale of the housing unit by the Developer; provided, however, the provisions of this Paragraph 6 shall not be applicable to any sale of any Moderate Income Unit that closes at any time subsequent to the 10th anniversary of the closing of the initial sale of such Moderate Income Unit by the Developer. 7. Park Dedication Fee. The park dedication fee of $6,500.00 per unit shall be waived for each Moderate Income Unit; provided, however, if any closing upon the sale of a Moderate Income Unit in a Non-Qualifying Sale occurs at any time within 10 years of the date of the initial sale of the Moderate Income Unit by the Developer, the waiver of the park dedication fee for that Moderate Income Unit shall be revoked and such park dedication fee in the amount of $6,500.00 shall be due and payable at the time of the closing of such Non-Qualifying Sale. 8. Bond. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project Area, Developer shall provide to the HRA a bond equal to $100,000 to secure the Developer's obligations pursuant to this Agreement, including to reimburse the HRA for costs, including reasonable attorney fees, incurred by the HRA in any action to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement (the "Security"). The HRA may draw down on or make a claim against the Security, as appropriate, upon five (5)business days' notice to the Developer, for any violation of the terms of this Agreement or if the Security is allowed to lapse prior to the end of the required term. If the Security has not then been renewed, replaced or otherwise extended beyond the expiration date, the HRA may also draw down or make a claim against the Security as appropriate. If the Security is drawn down on or a claim is made against the Security, the proceeds shall be used to cure the default(s) and to reimburse the HRA for all costs and expenses, including attorneys' fee, incurred by the HRA in enforcing this Agreement. Any amount of the Security that is drawn by the HRA shall be held by the HRA in trust and disbursed only if, and to the extent, that the Security may be disbursed hereunder. Developer shall be released from any further obligation to maintain the Security and all amounts of such Security that may then exist shall be released to Developer upon the earlier of the following: (i) the sale of all Moderate Income Units by the Developer; or (ii) the termination of Developer's obligations to sell the Moderate Income Units as set forth in Paragraph 12 below. 9. Developer Warranties. Developer makes the following representations and warranties: A. The Developer is a Minnesota limited liability company, has power to enter into this Agreement and to perform its obligations hereunder and, by doing so, is not in violation of any provisions of its articles of organization, operating agreement or member control agreement or the laws of the State. B. The Developer has obtained funds sufficient for the acquisition or construction of the Project. 24 C. The execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, and the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement is not prevented, limited by or conflicts with (unless all necessary waivers, consents or the like have been obtained) or results in a breach of, material terms, conditions or provision of any contractual restriction, evidence of indebtedness, agreement or instrument of whatever nature to which the Developer is now a party or by which they are bound, or constitutes a material default under any of the foregoing. 10. City Development Agreement. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project Area, Developer shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Eden Prairie with respect to the Project and such Development Agreement shall be recorded against the Project Area. 11. Revision of Limits and Prices. If there are no prospective purchasers for any of the Moderate Income Units within six months following the issuance of the first building permit for the Project and upon written request of the Developer, the HRA shall revise the Moderate Income Limits and Affordable Housing Prices. 12. Moderate Income Units. Notwithstanding any contrary provision herein, the Developer's obligation to sell the Moderate Income Units subject to the requirements in Paragraph 1, and the conditions applicable to the Developer's sale of any Moderate Income Units in Paragraph 4, shall terminate upon the earlier of: (i) no Moderate Income Units have sold within 36 months following the issuance of the first building permit for the Project; or (ii) no Moderate Income Units have sold in the previous 12 months. Developer shall submit to the HRA evidence substantiating such lack of sales and the HRA shall execute an amendment to this Agreement terminating the obligation in Paragraph 1 and conditions in Paragraph 4. Upon such termination, the provisions of Paragraph 6 shall be deemed terminated with respect to any unsold Moderate Income Units, the waiver of the park dedication fee for unsold Moderate Income Units set forth in Paragraph 7 shall be revoked and the park dedication fee for all unsold Moderate Income Units shall become immediately due and payable by the Developer. Any Moderate Income Units which have been sold prior to termination shall remain subject to Paragraphs 6 and 7. All obligations in this Agreement not specifically amended or terminated by this Paragraph shall survive, including but not limited to applicable provisions concerning the remittance of a portion of "Profits" set forth in Paragraph 6 for Moderate Income Units sold prior to such termination. 13. Binding. This Agreement shall be recorded against the Project Area. Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable as real covenants that "run" with the title to all lots within the Project Area, and shall also be enforceable against, and inure to the benefit of the HRA and the Developer; provided, however, and notwithstanding any contrary provision herein, although the provisions of Paragraphs 6 and 7 herein constitute real covenants that run with title to the Moderate Income Units and that are enforceable against future owners of Moderate Income Units to the extent provided therein, Developer shall have no personal 25 obligation to perform any of the covenants of Paragraphs 6 and 7 hereof, provided the Developer is not the seller in any transaction that constitutes a Non-Qualifying sale. 14. Remedies. Developer acknowledges, on its own and for all successors and assigns, that the rights of HRA to perform the obligations of Developer contemplated in this agreement are special, unique, and of an extraordinary character, and that, in the event that Developer violates, or fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, HRA may be without an adequate remedy at law. Developer agrees, therefore, that in the event Developer violates, fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, HRA may, at its option, institute and prosecute an action to specifically enforce such covenant, to enjoin conduct or activities that violate the terms hereof, withhold building permits, or seek any other remedy available at law or in equity. In the event of any litigation between the HRA and Developer to enforce or interpret the provisions hereof in which the HRA is the prevailing party, the HRA shall be entitled to an award requiring Developer to reimburse the HRA for all of its costs and expenses in such action, including reasonable attorneys' fees. No remedy conferred in this agreement is intended to be exclusive and each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. The election of any one or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of any other remedy. 15. No HRA Liability. No failure of the HRA to comply with any term, condition, covenant or agreement herein shall subject the HRA to liability for any claim for damages, costs or other financial or pecuniary charges. No execution on any claim, demand, cause of action or judgment shall be levied upon or collected from the general credit, general fund or taxing powers of the HRA. 16. Recording. This Agreement shall be recorded at the County Recorder and / or Registrar of Titles at the closing of the Developer's purchase of the Project Area from the HRA. This Agreement shall be recorded after the deed from the HRA to Developer and prior to any mortgages or encumbrances. No land alteration or building permits for the Project Area shall be issued until proof of filing of the Agreement is submitted to the HRA. 17. Right of Entry. The Developer hereby grants to the HRA and the City of Eden Prairie, their agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the Project Area to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the HRA or City in conjunction with this Agreement. 18. No Third Party Beneficiaries. Except with respect to Developer, the HRA, and the covenants hereof that "run" with title to the lots within the Project pursuant to Paragraph 13 hereof, no provision of this Agreement inures to the benefit of any third person, including the public at large, so as to constitute any such person as a third-party beneficiary of the Agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action for any such person. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused these presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid. [signatures on following pages] 26 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By NOT FOR SIGNATURE Nancy Tyra-Lukens Its Chair By NOT FOR SIGNATURE Rick Getschow Its Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 14th day of July, 2014, by Nancy Tyra-Lukens and Rick Getschow, respectively the Chair and Executive Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, on behalf of said authority. NOT FOR SIGNATURE Notary Public 27 EDEN GARDENS, LLC By_NOT FOR SIGNATURE Date: Matthew Hanish Vice President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2014, Matthew Hanish, the Vice President, of Eden Gardens, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the company. NOT FOR SIGNATURE Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Gregerson, Rosow, Johnson&Nilan, LTD 650 Third Ave S, Suite 1600 Minneapolis, MN 55376 28 EXHIBIT A TO TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Depiction of Project Area Scenic, rieicak}ts AdAds li e�3+ j� �1 • - - + +`lrl�,j t1Q j erv.C' hieic1• 114LF Rll {.P�iJC Heights 'ri _ t n e t • _ to _ �t M[Iiford Dr -3] en Mitftord Dr Millford Dr Map dsm2{]l 7 Google 29 EXHIBIT B TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Legal Description of Project Area Parcel 1 That part of Tract A described below: Tract A.That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17,Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota,described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence north along the east line thereof 914 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 244 feet,more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence northerly along said centerline 116.3 feet;thence westerly 482.6 feet, more or less to a point 1,018.6 feet north of the south line of said Southeast Quarter in a line described as beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 17;thence west along the south line thereof 274 feet;thence deflecting right 91 degrees 58 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 1,018.6 feet;thence south along said line 1,018.6 feet to south line thereof;thence east along said south line 274 feet to point of beginning;excepting therefrom said County Road No_ 4; which lies southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing,along the north line of said Lot 1 for 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 36.57 feet;thence South 64 degrees 51 minutes 39 seconds East 50.99 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 32.54 feet and there terminating; Parcel 2: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North, Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; 30 together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,adjoining and southerly of the above described strip, which lies northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with said 50 foot parallel line;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,which lies easterly of Line 2 described below: Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of Said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner and there terminating; Parcel 3: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet, more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below and westerly of Line 2 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner, thence run northerly along said east line to a point distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described above;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; 31 To be platted as: Lot 1, Block 1; Lots 1-5, Block 2; Lots 1-5, Block 3; Lots 1-10, Block 4; Lots 1-15, Block 5; and Outlots A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, Eden Gardens, Hennepin County. 32 EXHIBIT C TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Green Features and Sustainable Neighborhood Items 1. Green Path advanced certified homes: efficient windows, insulation improvements, high efficiency HVAC systems, high efficiency appliances and efficient lighting systems, etc. Eden Gardens will be the first development wide effort, in the state, to build all homes to Green Path Advanced Certification. 2. Homes: a. Build all homes to be 'solar ready', allowing residents an easy retrofit for solar panels. b. Rough in electric, in garages, required for electric car chargers. c. Offer sun tunnels as an option. d. The model home will have a solar feature installed to display the possible solar options for future residents. The solar feature will consist of either a solar PV panel (electricity) or a solar hot water panel system to heat the homes water. Solar options will be available on all homes. e. Use of low VOC paints and use of recycled materials/products where possible. 3. Low impact Site development strategies a. Reduce impervious surfaces; narrower street sections, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans b. Reduce stormwater runoff and manage via rain gardens and bio-swales, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. Keep all stormwater mgmt on site; not utilizing MnDOT pond or other regional ponding. c. Reduce storm sewer piping and ponding, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. d. Shade streets to minimize the heat island effect. e. Compact Development decreases urban sprawl. f. Use of eco-lawns (no-mow) in central green space, landscaped outlots and for all lawn areas of all home lots; eliminating dependency on irrigation and minimizing need for mowing. g. Utilization of native landscaping in accordance with City's native plant ordinance throughout development and no plantings that contain neonicotanoids. Drought tolerant plantings will require no irrigation; as well as low maintenance needs and costs to the HOA. h. Reduce impervious surfaces through eliminating some alleyways. i. Increase the amount of pervious surfaces. Install pervious surface sidewalks from the driveway to the front door of the model home and provide this as an option on all other units. j. Permeable Pavers—install permeable pavers at sidewalk to park shelter to decrease impervious surfaces and allow for groundwater recharge. 33 4. Site Lighting: a. Install high efficiency LED street lights; limiting light pollution, lowering maintenance and operational costs for the City. b. Install solar pathway lighting; eliminating the operational costs to the HOA and eliminating infrastructure required in standard practices (trenching for conduits/piping). 5. Site furnishings: install park furniture made of recycled plastics, (ie picnic tables). 6. Community Garden plots: Promotes local food growth and community gathering space. 7. Walkable Streets: minimal distance between the sidewalk and most buildings, sidewalks along 100% of street length, elevated ground floors, low design speeds for most streets, minimal driveway crossings along sidewalks. 8. Neighborhood Connections: connections to existing bike/walking trails and neighborhood sidewalks. Also, no cul-de-sacs are encouraged. 9. Community participation: multiple forms of community feedback to guide the project through design, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. 10. Solar and Green Roofs: Install green roofs on park shelter and garden shed; install solar panels on the park shelter which can be used to power the bollards or other features in the common area. Excess electricity can be sold back to Xcel Energy and the proceeds from the sale can be used to offset Home Owners Association (HOA) costs. 11. Rain Barrels: Install at the park shelter and garden shed to capture excess rainwater and utilize in the garden plots. 12. Tot Lot—provide community gathering space for children 13. Site Signage: Install educational and interactive signage throughout public spaces of the development to inform residents, and community members, of the green strategies used. For example, create a sign by the rain garden that educates the importance and functions of these site features. We will work in partnership with the City, as they continue to educate residents of the importance of water resources, etc. 14. The developer shall provide as an option to potential buyers a floor plan providing single level living design. 15. Increase Green site features/benefits by increasing on-site storm water infiltration by the addition of bioswales and increased rain garden area, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. 34 HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made as of the 14th day of July, 2014, by and between the Housing Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, a municipal corporation and political subdivision organized and existing under the Constitution and the laws of the State of Minnesota (the "HRA") and Eden Gardens, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the "Developer"), WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. 469.017, the HRA has the authority to complete a housing development project; WHEREAS, the HRA adopted H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 at a duly noticed meeting on July 14, 2014. In H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 the HRA found that there is a shortage of decent, safe, and sanitary housing for persons of moderate income and their families in the City and determined to carry out a housing development project to partially alleviate the shortage (the "Project"); WHEREAS, the property on which the Project will be constructed is located at the southwest corner of Eden Prairie Road and Scenic Heights Road as illustrated on attached Exhibit A ("Project Area") and is legally described on attached Exhibit B. WHEREAS, the goals for the Project are to increase environmental sustainability/energy efficiency and single family housing affordability for moderate income individuals and their families. The intent of the Project is to create an environmentally sustainable single family neighborhood with implementation of"green"measures with 20 of the housing units to be sold to people with moderate incomes as defined below; WHEREAS,in order to ensure that the housing development project partially alleviates the shortage of moderate income housing, the HRA in H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-01 established moderate income and affordability limits for the Project; WHEREAS, based on evidence presented by developers who responded to the Project Request for Proposals, in order to make the Project feasible and to provide the desired moderate income housing,the HRA has determined that 16 of the housing units in the Project may be sold at market rates. The market rate housing units shall be located on Lot 1, Block 1 and Lots 1-15, 1 Block 5, Eden Gardens. The remaining 20 housing units (collectively the "Moderate Income Units") must be sold to people with incomes that fall within the range of the "Moderate Income Limits" (as defined below in Paragraph 1.B hereof) and at prices that fall within the range of "Affordable Housing Prices"(as defined below in Paragraph 1.0 hereof),that are applicable at the time of such sale. The Moderate Income Units shall be located on Lots 1-5, Block 2, Lots 1-5, Block 3, and Lots 1-10, Block 4, Eden Gardens; and WHEREAS, the HRA adopted H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-02 at a duly noticed public hearing on July 14, 2014. In H.R.A. Resolution No. 2014-02 the HRA approved the purchase and sale of the Project Area; set the estimated market value of the Project Area; and selected Developer to complete the Project subject to the condition that Developer and HRA enter into this Housing Project Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual obligations of the parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other as follows: 1. Housing Criteria. The Project shall consist of 36 single family units. Twenty units shall be Moderate Income Units. The remaining 16 units may be sold at market rates. The size of the 20 Moderate Income Units shall range between 1600 and 2200 square feet above grade and the 16 market rate units shall range between 1600 and 2600 square feet above grade. Floor plans available for potential buyers shall include a one-level living floor plan option. The 20 Moderate Income Units shall be priced and sold based on the following calculations: A. Project Feasibility. Based on evidence presented by developers who responded to the Project Request for Proposals, in order to make the Project feasible and to provide the desired moderate income housing, 16 of the housing units in the Project may be sold at market rates. The market rate units shall be built on Blocks 1 and 5 as shown on the Preliminary Plat of Eden Gardens. The 20 Moderate Income Units must be sold: (i)to people who qualify under the Moderate Income Limits set forth below in B; and(ii) at the Affordable Housing Prices set forth below in C. B. Moderate Income Limits. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development annually determines the area median income for Hennepin County ("Area Median Income"). The Area Median Income is published annually in December for use in the following year. The HRA hereby determines that the moderate income limits for the Project (the "Moderate Income Limits") shall be 80%to 120%of the Area Median Income. (For example,the Area Median Income for Hennepin County published in December 2013 for use in the year 2014 was $82,900. The moderate income limits for all Moderate Income Units sold in 2014 is $66,320 to $99,480.) C. Affordable Housing Prices. Based upon the Area Median Income the Minnesota Housing Finance Authority annually sets a loan limit for the 11-County Metro ("Area Affordable Price"). The Area Affordable Price is published in December for use in the following year. For purposes hereof,the affordable housing prices for persons of moderate income for the Project shall be 80% to 120% of the Area 2 Affordable Price (the "Affordable Housing Prices") (For example, the Area Affordable Price published in December 2013 for use in the year 2014 was $310,000. Consequently, the Affordable Housing Prices for all Moderate Income Units sold in 2014 is $248,000 to $372,000.) 2. Minnesota's Green Path Development Standards. The Developer shall construct the Project in a manner that meets Minnesota's Green Path("Green Path") standards as required in the attached as Exhibit C. 3. Community Involvement. The Developer shall engage the community by involving Hennepin Technical College. Specifically,the Developer shall involve students through opportunities such as framing a home,learning how `green'mechanical/electrical systems work or learning green techniques used in stormwater management. 4. Sale of the Project Area. For purposes of this Agreement, "sale" includes any transfer of a housing unit including but not limited to sale, conveyance, gift, and involuntary transfer. The Developer may not close on the sale of any Moderate Income Unit unless all of the following conditions have been met: A. All infrastructure including streets, sanitary sewer,water, and storm sewer,but not including landscaping and the final wear course on streets and other items that cannot reasonably be completed due to winter weather conditions and that do not materially affect the use or function of such items of infrastructure, are substantially complete and accepted in writing by the City; B. All public space including common areas, parks and community buildings are complete and accepted in writing by the HRA; C. The residential structure on the lot to be sold has been issued a certificate of occupancy or temporary certificate of occupancy; and D. The sale has been approved in writing by the HRA prior to closing in order to ensure compliance with the terms of this Agreement. In order to request such approval for the sale of each Moderate Income Unit, Developer, or any subsequent owner that is selling a Moderate Income Unit, shall submit a complete application to the HRA for the sale of each Moderate Income Unit in such form and substances as required by the HRA,which shall include at a minimum all information required by the HRA to verify the income of the prospective purchaser. Upon receipt of a complete application the HRA shall inform the Developer or other requesting party,in writing and within five business days,whether the application is approved. If the HRA fails to respond to a complete application within five business days,the application will be deemed approved. 5. Initial Sale of Housing Units by Developer. Initial sale of Moderate Income Units by the Developer shall comply with the income and pricing requirements set forth in Paragraph 1. In addition,during the Preference Period,the initial sale of all housing units by the Developer shall 3 give preference to prospective buyers who live or work in the City of Eden Prairie. During the Preference Period, Developer shall market to residents and employees of Eden Prairie businesses and permit those who live or work within the City of Eden Prairie to have the first opportunity to sign a purchase agreement for their desired lot, or if no specific lot is specified, for a lot within the Project.As used herein,the phrase"Preference Period"shall refer to the period of time that elapses between the date hereof and the 180th day after the date of the issuance of the first building permit for the Project. 6. Future Sale of Housing Units. After the initial sale of any Moderate Income Unit by the Developer, the seller in any subsequent sale of a Moderate Income Unit that consists of a "Non-Qualifying Sale" and that is closed within 10 years of the date of the initial sale by the Developer of the subject Moderate Income Unit, shall remit the "Applicable Portion of the Profit" received by such seller in such transaction to the City for reinvestment in low and moderate income housing initiatives. As used herein, the phrase "Non-Qualifying Sale" shall be defined as the sale of a Moderate Income Unit that is closed within 10 years of the date of the initial sale of such Moderate Income Unit by the Developer and that is made either: (i)to a buyer that has income in excess of the Moderate Income Limits or (ii) at a price that is in excess of the Affordable Housing Prices, both as measured in the year in which the closing of such sale of the Moderate Income Unit occurs. The Seller of any Moderate Income Unit may apply to the HRA pursuant to Paragraph 4.D hereof for a determination that a prospective sale of such Moderate Income Unit shall not constitute a Non-Qualifying Sale. As used herein, the phrase "Applicable Portion of the Profit" shall refer to the portion designated pursuant to the chart set forth below in Paragraph 6.B. A. Profit. The "Profit" from the subsequent sale of a Moderate Income Unit shall be defined as the funds received by the seller from the buyer at the closing of such sale, after deduction of the sum of the following: (i) all costs and fees listed on the settlement statement (which costs shall include any park dedication fee paid pursuant to Paragraph 7 hereof), excluding amounts necessary to satisfy any mortgages recorded against the property; (ii)the amount of the seller's basis in the Moderate Income Unit as of the date of its acquisition thereof; plus (iii) the cost of improvements made by the seller as defined in IRS publication 523 which increase the seller's basis in the Moderate Income Unit. B. Remittance. The amount of any"profit" that is required to be remitted to the City by the seller of a Moderate Income Unit in a Non-Qualifying Sale shall be as follows: Time elapsed since the date of the initial Profits to be purchase of the housing unit from the remitted to Developer City Less than 1 year 90% At least 1 year but less than 2 years 80% At least 2 years but less than 3 years 70% At least 3 years but less than 4 years 60% At least 4 years but less than 5 years 50% At least 5 years but less than 6 years 40% 4 At least 6 years but less than 7 years 30% At least 7 years but less than 8 years 20% At least 8 years but less than 9 years 10% At least 9 years but less than 10 years 5% Regardless of the number of times a Moderate Income Unit is sold, the requirements of this Paragraph 6 shall apply to any subsequent sale of such Moderate Income Unit that consists of a Non-Qualifying Sale and shall be based on the amount of time that has elapsed from the date of the initial sale of the housing unit by the Developer; provided, however, the provisions of this Paragraph 6 shall not be applicable to any sale of any Moderate Income Unit that closes at any time subsequent to the 10th anniversary of the closing of the initial sale of such Moderate Income Unit by the Developer. 7. Park Dedication Fee. The park dedication fee of$6,500.00 per unit shall be waived for each Moderate Income Unit; provided, however, if any closing upon the sale of a Moderate Income Unit in a Non-Qualifying Sale occurs at any time within 10 years of the date of the initial sale of the Moderate Income Unit by the Developer, the waiver of the park dedication fee for that Moderate Income Unit shall be revoked and such park dedication fee in the amount of$6,500.00 shall be due and payable at the time of the closing of such Non-Qualifying Sale. 8. Bond. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project Area, Developer shall provide to the HRA a bond equal to $100,000 to secure the Developer's obligations pursuant to this Agreement, including to reimburse the HRA for costs, including reasonable attorney fees, incurred by the HRA in any action to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement (the "Security"). The HRA may draw down on or make a claim against the Security, as appropriate, upon five(5)business days' notice to the Developer, for any violation of the terms of this Agreement or if the Security is allowed to lapse prior to the end of the required term. If the Security has not then been renewed, replaced or otherwise extended beyond the expiration date,the HRA may also draw down or make a claim against the Security as appropriate. If the Security is drawn down on or a claim is made against the Security,the proceeds shall be used to cure the default(s) and to reimburse the HRA for all costs and expenses, including attorneys' fee, incurred by the HRA in enforcing this Agreement. Any amount of the Security that is drawn by the HRA shall be held by the HRA in trust and disbursed only if, and to the extent, that the Security may be disbursed hereunder. Developer shall be released from any further obligation to maintain the Security and all amounts of such Security that may then exist shall be released to Developer upon the earlier of the following: (i) the sale of all Moderate Income Units by the Developer; or(ii)the termination of Developer's obligations to sell the Moderate Income Units as set forth in Paragraph 12 below. 9. Developer Warranties. Developer makes the following representations and warranties: A. The Developer is a Minnesota limited liability company, has power to enter into this Agreement and to perform its obligations hereunder and, by doing so, is not in violation of any provisions of its articles of organization, operating agreement or member control agreement or the laws of the State. 5 B. The Developer has obtained funds sufficient for the acquisition or construction of the Project. C. The execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, and the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement is not prevented, limited by or conflicts with (unless all necessary waivers, consents or the like have been obtained) or results in a breach of, material terms, conditions or provision of any contractual restriction, evidence of indebtedness, agreement or instrument of whatever nature to which the Developer is now a party or by which they are bound, or constitutes a material default under any of the foregoing. 10. City Development Agreement. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project Area, Developer shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Eden Prairie with respect to the Project and such Development Agreement shall be recorded against the Project Area. 11. Revision of Limits and Prices. If there are no prospective purchasers for any of the Moderate Income Units within six months following the issuance of the first building permit for the Project and upon written request of the Developer,the HRA shall revise the Moderate Income Limits and Affordable Housing Prices. 12. Moderate Income Units. Notwithstanding any contrary provision herein, the Developer's obligation to sell the Moderate Income Units subject to the requirements in Paragraph 1, and the conditions applicable to the Developer's sale of any Moderate Income Units in Paragraph 4, shall terminate upon the earlier of: (i)no Moderate Income Units have sold within 36 months following the issuance of the first building permit for the Project; or (ii) no Moderate Income Units have sold in the previous 12 months. Developer shall submit to the HRA evidence substantiating such lack of sales and the HRA shall execute an amendment to this Agreement terminating the obligation in Paragraph 1 and conditions in Paragraph 4. Upon such termination, the provisions of Paragraph 6 shall be deemed terminated with respect to any unsold Moderate Income Units,the waiver of the park dedication fee for unsold Moderate Income Units set forth in Paragraph 7 shall be revoked and the park dedication fee for all unsold Moderate Income Units shall become immediately due and payable by the Developer. Any Moderate Income Units which have been sold prior to termination shall remain subject to Paragraphs 6 and 7. All obligations in this Agreement not specifically amended or terminated by this Paragraph shall survive, including but not limited to applicable provisions concerning the remittance of a portion of"Profits"set forth in Paragraph 6 for Moderate Income Units sold prior to such termination. 13. Binding. This Agreement shall be recorded against the Project Area. Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable as real covenants that"run"with the title to all lots within the Project Area, and shall also be enforceable against, and inure to the benefit of the HRA and the Developer; provided, however, and notwithstanding any contrary provision herein, although the provisions of Paragraphs 6 and 7 herein constitute real covenants that run with title to the Moderate Income Units and that are enforceable against future owners of Moderate Income 6 Units to the extent provided therein,Developer shall have no personal obligation to perform any of the covenants of Paragraphs 6 and 7 hereof, provided the Developer is not the seller in any transaction that constitutes a Non-Qualifying sale. 14. Remedies. Developer acknowledges, on its own and for all successors and assigns, that the rights of HRA to perform the obligations of Developer contemplated in this agreement are special,unique, and of an extraordinary character, and that,in the event that Developer violates, or fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, HRA may be without an adequate remedy at law. Developer agrees, therefore, that in the event Developer violates, fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein,HRA may, at its option, institute and prosecute an action to specifically enforce such covenant, to enjoin conduct or activities that violate the terms hereof, withhold building permits, or seek any other remedy available at law or in equity. In the event of any litigation between the HRA and Developer to enforce or interpret the provisions hereof in which the HRA is the prevailing party, the HRA shall be entitled to an award requiring Developer to reimburse the HRA for all of its costs and expenses in such action, including reasonable attorneys' fees. No remedy conferred in this agreement is intended to be exclusive and each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. The election of any one or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of any other remedy. 15. No HRA Liability. No failure of the HRA to comply with any term, condition, covenant or agreement herein shall subject the HRA to liability for any claim for damages, costs or other financial or pecuniary charges. No execution on any claim, demand, cause of action or judgment shall be levied upon or collected from the general credit, general fund or taxing powers of the HRA. 16. Recording. This Agreement shall be recorded at the County Recorder and / or Registrar of Titles at the closing of the Developer's purchase of the Project Area from the HRA. This Agreement shall be recorded after the deed from the HRA to Developer and prior to any mortgages or encumbrances. No land alteration or building permits for the Project Area shall be issued until proof of filing of the Agreement is submitted to the HRA. 17. Right of Entry. The Developer hereby grants to the HRA and the City of Eden Prairie, their agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the Project Area to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the HRA or City in conjunction with this Agreement. 18. No Third Party Beneficiaries. Except with respect to Developer,the HRA, and the covenants hereof that"run"with title to the lots within the Project pursuant to Paragraph 13 hereof, no provision of this Agreement inures to the benefit of any third person, including the public at large, so as to constitute any such person as a third-party beneficiary of the Agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action for any such person. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused these presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid. [signatures on following pages] 7 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By Nancy Tyra-Lukens Its Chair By Rick Getschow Its Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 14th day of July, 2014, by Nancy Tyra-Lukens and Rick Getschow, respectively the Chair and Executive Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie, on behalf of said authority. Notary Public 8 EDEN GARDENS, LLC By Date: Matthew Hanish Vice President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2014, Matthew Hanish, the Vice President, of Eden Gardens, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the company. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Gregerson, Rosow, Johnson&Nilan, LTD 650 Third Ave S, Suite 1600 Minneapolis, MN 55376 9 EXHIBIT A TO TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Depiction of Project Area scenic Heights Rd Rd Soe' no. scero. C I 4:1 '7 thCrOry LtitherW CD 1 . -33 El 7-- m[liford Dr -31 fvlillford Dr g;. Mitribrd Ds- map dam M2.131 GetOgle 10 EXHIBIT B TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Legal Description of Project Area Parcel 1: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A.That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17,Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota,described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence north along the east line thereof 914 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes D0 seconds a distance of 244 feet,more or less,to the centerline of County Road No. 4;thence northerly along said centerline 116.3 feet;thence westerly 482.6 feet,more or less to a point 1,018.6 feet north of the south line of said Southeast Quarter in a line described as beginning at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 17;thence west along the south line thereof 274 feet;thence deflecting right 91 degrees 58 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 1,018.6 feet;thence south along said line 1,018.6 feet to south line thereof;thence east along said south line 274 feet to point of beginning;excepting therefrom said County Road No. 4; which lies southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION, thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East, assumed bearing,along the north line of said Lot 1 for 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 36.57 feet;thence South 64 degrees 51 minutes 39 seconds East 50.99 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 32.54 feet and there terminating; Parcel 2: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.0D feet,more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2,FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; 11 together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,adjoining and southerly of the above described strip, which lies northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with said 50 foot parallel line;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described,which lies easterly of Line 2 described below: Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of Said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner and there terminating; Parcel 3: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 116 North,Range 22 West,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence run northerly along the west line thereof 914.00 feet;thence deflecting right 81 degrees 37 minutes 00 seconds,244.00 feet,more or less,to the centerline of County Road No.4;thence southeasterly along said centerline to a point 146.50 feet northerly of at right angles from the south line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;thence westerly to a point 189.24 feet east from the west line thereof;thence southerly 146.50 feet;thence westerly 189.24 feet to the beginning,lying westerly of the westerly right of way line of County Road No.4; which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described below and westerly of Line 2 described below: Line 1. Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 1,Block 2, FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota;thence North 84 degrees 38 minutes 27 seconds East,assumed bearing, along the north line of said Lot 1, 107.05 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1;thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having radius of 480.87 feet and a central angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 19 seconds for 161.05 feet;thence North 13 degrees 49 minutes 45 seconds East,40.00 feet;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East, 100.20 feet to the west line of Tract A hereinbefore described which is the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described;thence South 76 degrees 10 minutes 15 seconds East 18.91 feet;thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 520.87 feet and a central angle of 24 degrees 11 minutes 09 seconds for 219.87 feet;thence North 79 degrees 38 minutes 36 seconds East 100 feet and there terminating; Line 2. From the most easterly corner of said Tract A run westerly along the south line of said Tract A for 20 feet to the point of beginning of Line 2 to be described;thence run northwesterly to a point distant 8 feet southwesterly (measured at right angles)of a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 330 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner;thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 2 feet;thence run northerly to a point on the east line of said Tract A,distant 455 feet northwesterly of said most easterly corner, thence run northerly along said east line to a point distant 23.06 feet southerly of its intersection with a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet southerly of Line 1 described above;thence run northwesterly to a point on said parallel line,distant 20.06 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; 12 To be platted as: Lot 1, Block 1; Lots 1-5, Block 2; Lots 1-5, Block 3; Lots 1-10, Block 4; Lots 1-15, Block 5; and Outlots A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, Eden Gardens, Hennepin County. 13 EXHIBIT C TO HOUSING PROJECT AGREEMENT Green Features and Sustainable Neighborhood Items 1. Green Path advanced certified homes: efficient windows, insulation improvements, high efficiency HVAC systems, high efficiency appliances and efficient lighting systems, etc. Eden Gardens will be the first development wide effort, in the state,to build all homes to Green Path Advanced Certification. 2. Homes: a. Build all homes to be 'solar ready', allowing residents an easy retrofit for solar panels. b. Rough in electric, in garages, required for electric car chargers. c. Offer sun tunnels as an option. d. The model home will have a solar feature installed to display the possible solar options for future residents. The solar feature will consist of either a solar PV panel (electricity) or a solar hot water panel system to heat the homes water. Solar options will be available on all homes. e. Use of low VOC paints and use of recycled materials/products where possible. 3. Low impact Site development strategies a. Reduce impervious surfaces; narrower street sections, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans b. Reduce stormwater runoff and manage via rain gardens and bio-swales, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. Keep all stormwater mgmt on site; not utilizing MnDOT pond or other regional ponding. c. Reduce storm sewer piping and ponding, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. d. Shade streets to minimize the heat island effect. e. Compact Development decreases urban sprawl. f. Use of eco-lawns (no-mow) in central green space, landscaped outlots and for all lawn areas of all home lots; eliminating dependency on irrigation and minimizing need for mowing. g. Utilization of native landscaping in accordance with City's native plant ordinance throughout development and no plantings that contain neonicotanoids. Drought tolerant plantings will require no irrigation; as well as low maintenance needs and costs to the HOA. h. Reduce impervious surfaces through eliminating some alleyways. i. Increase the amount of pervious surfaces. Install pervious surface sidewalks from the driveway to the front door of the model home and provide this as an option on all other units. j. Permeable Pavers—install permeable pavers at sidewalk to park shelter to decrease impervious surfaces and allow for groundwater recharge. 14 4. Site Lighting: a. Install high efficiency LED street lights; limiting light pollution, lowering maintenance and operational costs for the City. b. Install solar pathway lighting; eliminating the operational costs to the HOA and eliminating infrastructure required in standard practices (trenching for conduits/piping). 5. Site furnishings: install park furniture made of recycled plastics, (ie picnic tables). 6. Community Garden plots: Promotes local food growth and community gathering space. 7. Walkable Streets: minimal distance between the sidewalk and most buildings, sidewalks along 100%of street length, elevated ground floors, low design speeds for most streets, minimal driveway crossings along sidewalks. 8. Neighborhood Connections: connections to existing bike/walking trails and neighborhood sidewalks. Also, no cul-de-sacs are encouraged. 9. Community participation: multiple forms of community feedback to guide the project through design, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. 10. Solar and Green Roofs: Install green roofs on park shelter and garden shed; install solar panels on the park shelter which can be used to power the bollards or other features in the common area. Excess electricity can be sold back to Xcel Energy and the proceeds from the sale can be used to offset Home Owners Association (HOA) costs. 11. Rain Barrels: Install at the park shelter and garden shed to capture excess rainwater and utilize in the garden plots. 12. Tot Lot—provide community gathering space for children 13. Site Signage: Install educational and interactive signage throughout public spaces of the development to inform residents, and community members, of the green strategies used. For example, create a sign by the rain garden that educates the importance and functions of these site features. We will work in partnership with the City, as they continue to educate residents of the importance of water resources, etc. 14. The developer shall provide as an option to potential buyers a floor plan providing single level living design. 15. Increase Green site features/benefits by increasing on-site storm water infiltration by the addition of bioswales and increased rain garden area, in accordance with the final approved PUD and plat plans. 15