Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 06/04/1991 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL � j APPROVED MINUTES TIME: 7:30 PM Tuesday, June 4, 1991 LOCATION: City Hall Council Chambers, 7600 Executive Drive COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Douglas Tenpas, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, H. Martin Jessen and Patricia Pidcock CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager, Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Director of Planning Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, and Recording Secretary Roberta Wick PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL All Councilmembers present. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS MOTION Anderson moved seconded by Pidcock, to approve the agenda. Under X.A. Reports of Councilmembers, Pidcock requested addition of the following items: (1) Award to Eden Prairie Girls' Gymnastics Team; (2) Action Regarding Local Option Sales Tax request from Hennepin County Commissioners. Anderson requested the addition of the following items: (3) Erosion; (4) Eurasian Milfoil. Harris requested the addition of two items (5) Water Towers; (6) Discussion on Land Acquisition Issues. Tenpas requested the addition of Item: (7) Special Guest at McDonalds by Eden Prairie Center. Jessen requested the addition of the following items: (8) Billboards on Highway 494, (9) Anagram Sidewalk; (10) Portable Toilets in the Park; (11) Naegele Property and Major Center Area Discussions. Jullie requested the addition of item III.I. to the Consent Calendar: Second Reading for the Rezoning Ordinance for Bluffs West Ninth Addition. Motion to approve the agenda as amended approved 5-0. Eden Prairie 2 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved II. MINUTES A. Board of Review Meeting held Monday, May 6, 1991 MOTION Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the minutes of the Board of Review Meeting held Monday, May 6, 1991. Motion approved 5-0. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. EATON INDUSTRIAL ADDITION by The Eaton Corporation. Approval of Developer's Agreement. Location: 15151 Highway 5 B. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF EATON INDUSTRIAL ADDITION (located south of T.H. 5 and east of Wallace Road.) Resolution No. 91-111 C. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF BLUFFS EAST 8TH ADDITION (located west of County Road 18 and north of Bluff Road). Resolution 91-131 D. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION (located west of County Road 4 and south of the Proposed Extension of Scenic Heights Road). Resolution No. 91-132 E. ABATEMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR STREET ASSESSMENTS ADJACENT TO STARING LAKE PARKWAY F. RESOLUTION No. 91-135 RELATING TO FINANCING COMPLETED IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FOR WHICH BONDS HAVE NOT YET BEEN SOLD G. RELEASE OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT WITH CENTRE% REAL ESTATE FOR SCENIC HEIGHTS ROAD THROUGH FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 3RD ADDITION H. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST I. SECOND READING OF REZONING ORDINANCE FOR BLUFFS NINTH ADDITION. MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Consent Calendar as amended. Motion approved 5-0. Eden Prairie 3 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. RIVERSEDGE ADDITION by Tushie Montgomery Associates. Adoption of Resolution No. 91-115, Planned Unit Development Concept Review and Planned Unit Development District Review on 55.5 acres with waivers within the Rural Zoning District; Adoption of Resolution No. 91-116, Preliminary Plat of 55.5 acres into 4 single-family lots, one outlot and road right-of-way to be known as Fransen Addition. Location: 9901 Riverview Road. (Resolution No. 91-115 - PUD Concept Review; Resolution No. 91-116 - Preliminary Plat) Jullie said notice for the public hearing was mailed to ten property owners in the project area and was published in the May 23, 1991 issue of the Eden Prairie News. Gary Tushie, representing Tushie-Montgomery and Associates, said that the issues in the staff recommendation were addressed at meetings with the Planning Commission and Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. He explained the project by the use of maps and drawings. He said the project consisted of dividing a 55-acre lot owned by Fransens into three residential lots. One of the lots would remain as the Fransen residence, with one 5-acre lot to the east and one 13-acre lot to the west. The owners were negotiating with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to sell the outlot on the floodplain to this agency. The area also included a conservancy area as recommended in the staff report to retain the vegetation both on the river valley side of the property and on the Purgatory Creek side. Enger said the project was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its May 13, 1991 meeting and approval was recommended on a 5-1-1 vote subject to the recommendations of the staff report of May 10, 1991. The recommendations were as follows: (1) Recommend approval of the Planned Development Concept PUD District review with waivers for lot size and street frontage; (2) Preliminary plat of 55 acres into three lots and one outlot based upon plans dated May 8, 1991, subject to the recommendations made in the report of May 10, 1991 and subject to the following: (a) Modify the preliminary plat to depict a 40-foot-wide trail easement; (b) Modify the preliminary plat to depict a conservancy easement area; (c) Provide information showing the structural ability of the bridge to accommodate a 10-ton per axle weight fire truck weight and 10-foot-wide minimum; and (d) Prior to final plat approval, submit a detailed storm water runoff and erosion control plan for review by the City Engineer and Watershed District. Enger said because of the sensitivity of the area to soil erosion and its proximity to the Minnesota River, there were also a number of recommendations to be fulfilled prior to building permit issuance. Prior to building permit issuance proponent shall provide plans with Eden Prairie 4 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved the following information: (1) A site plan with the house located within the proposed building pad area; (2) A grading plan based on field-verified topography; (3) A plan which includes no additional retaining walls; (4) No steepening of natural slopes; (5) Walk-out levels from the house must meet natural grade; (6) No more than one 20-foot-wide construction area on the downslope side of the house; (7) Roof drains to eliminate erosion potential from storm water runoff; (8) Submission of restoration and erosion control plans; (9) No construction or grading in backyard conservation easement on the slope; (10) Detailed soil tests to give information on erosion susceptibility and footing suitability; (11) An engineers design for footing, foundation, and retaining walls; (12) Payment of the Cash Park Fee. Lambert said the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission reviewed the proposal at its meeting on June 3, 1991 and recommended to support the proposal unanimously based on the planning staff report. The three main issues addressed were the location of the 40-foot trail easement on the west side of Purgatory Creek, the final location of the street easement line on the south- facing slope, and the final status of the outlot to insure that it would become part of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife refuge. The Commission was impressed with the property owner's commitment to develop the site into only three lots and believed the plan for the subdivision was a good one. Lambert said there was a commitment to the scenic easement and the preservation of the slopes, and the intent was to sell the floodplain to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The floodplain was not being dedicated to the City in this case because such a dedication did not fit into the developer's plans. Council members expressed concern that the floodplain was not being dedicated to the City. Pauly said that there was no way the City could require donation of property to the City. Donation had been done by a number of developers because of tax considerations and other reasons, but it had been strictly voluntary. Jessen asked what restrictions applied to the conservancy area. Lambert said the conservancy easement would prohibit anything from being done to change the natural character of the area of the conservancy without approval from the City. Jessen asked if the floodplain area could be protected in the same fray. Lambert said he believed the conservancy restrictions were stronger than those applying to the floodplain because up to 10 percent of floodplain material could be removed without a grading permit, whereas in the conservancy area, nothing could be done without approval from the City. Eden Prairie 5 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved Pidcock asked what would happen if the Fish and Wildlife Service did not purchase the floodplain area. Mr. Fransen said that the property was to be part of a 95-acre park and it would be condemned if it was not sold, so the Fransens had no choice but to sell it to the Fish and Wildlife Service. Mrs. Harold Fowler, 10315 Riverview Road, referred to the letter she had sent to the City. She said she was concerned about the easement over the Fransen property. She said the Fowler family had had for 60 years and the easement was the only way to access her property. She asked if she had access to the property by prescription if the stipulation about the easement was not in the abstract. Pauly said if the Fowlers did not have an easement of record, they would be able to obtain a prescriptive easement because of the many years they had used the land to access their property. Tenpas suggested that the Fowlers and Fransens discuss the issue and settle it between the two parties. Mrs. Fowler said she was concerned about safety with the area being public land. Tenpas suggested that staff follow up with the Crime Prevention Unit and to be sure the area was adequately patrolled. There were no further comments from the audience. MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the public hearing and adoption Resolution No. 91-115 for PUD Concept Review. Anderson said that before second reading he would like the opportunity to review the plans for the creek ownership and trail corridor. Tenpas said he was satisfied with the easement as presented. Motion approved 5-0. MOTION Harris moved and Pidcock seconded, to adopt Resolution 91-116 to approve Preliminary Plat and direct staff to prepare development agreement incorporating Commission and staff recommendations, and Council conditions including those regarding the floodplain conservancy areas and the trail. Motion approved 5-0. Eden Prairie 6 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved B. ROUND LAKE VIEW 2ND AND 3RD ADDITIONS by Zachman Development Company. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on approximately 10 acres; Adoption of Resolution No. 91-117, Preliminary Plat of approximately 10 acres into 29 single-family lots to be known as Round Lake View 2nd and 3rd Additions. Location: North of Valley View Road, north and west of Duck Lake Road. (Resolution No. 91-117 - Preliminary Plat; Ordinance No. 14-91 - Zoning District Change) Jullie said notice for the public hearing was mailed to 78 property owners in the property area and published in the May 23, 1991 issue of the Eden Prairie News. Jim Zachman, representing Zachman Development Company, explained the project with the use of maps and drawings. Enger said the Planning Commission approved the project at its May 13, 1991 meeting on a 7-0 vote, subject to staff recommendations in the report of May 10, 1991. Those recommendations were: (1) Prior to City Council approval, submit an architectural diversity plan for the double-frontage lots along Rosella Drive to demonstrate the availability of room for deck construction. (2) Prior to final plant submit detailed erosion control and runoff plans for review by the City Engineering Department and Watershed District. (3) Provide a clear zone easement for that portion of Lots 11 and 12, Block 2, for the purpose of maintaining a clear zone for proper sight distance at the intersection. (4) Concurrent with street construction, the proponent would replace the portion of Duck Lake Road bituminous curb and trail with concrete curb and gutter and a 5-foot-wide concrete sidewalk. (5) The proponent shall install a 5-foot-wide concrete sidewalk along the north side of Pavelka Drive. (6) The proponent was requested to erect a sign indicating a future through road at the terminus of Pavelka Drive as part of the second addition road construction. (7) The proponent would pay the Cash Park Fee. Lambert said the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission recommended approval of the project on a unanimous vote at its May 20, 1991 meeting, as outlined in the May 10, 1991 planning staff report. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION Anderson moved, seconded by Harris, that Resolution No. 91-117 for Preliminary Plat be adopted. Motion approved 4-0-1 with Pidcock abstaining. Eden Prairie 7 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved MOTION Anderson moved, seconded by Harris, to approve first reading of Ordinance No. 14-91 for Zoning District Change, and direct staff to prepare a development agreement incorporating Commission and staff recommendations and Council conditions. Motion approved 4-0-1 with Pidcock abstaining. C. HIDDEN CREEK by Hidden Creek Development Corporation. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.8 acres, and from Rural to RM-6.5 on 3.1 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals; Adoption of Resolution No. 91-118, Preliminary Plat of 6.7 acres into 4 single-family lots, 10 townhouse lots and 5 outlots to be known ad Hidden Creek. Location: East of County Road 4 at Mere Drive. (Resolution No. 91-118 - Preliminary Plat; Ordinance No. 15-91 - Zoning District Change) Jullie said the notice for the public hearing had been properly published in the Eden Prairie News and mailed to 51 property owners in the project area. Jim Zachman, representing Hidden Creek Development Corporation, explained the project with the use of maps and drawings. He said that the units would be twinhomes with an average value of $150,000. The project would include the remodeling of several older residences in the area. He explained that by building attached units, more open space would be provided. There had been concern from neighbors about traffic from multi-family housing. The neighbors had also expressed concerned that the homeowners association for the project would allow the property to run down, but he said he believed that homeowners associations were interested in maintaining the value of the property. He requested Council consider variances on the setbacks and a private road. He said he believed these variances were necessary in order to develop the property. Enger said the Planning Commission reviewed the project at its May 13, 1991 meeting. On a 5-1-1 vote, the Commission recommended to deny the request of Hidden Creek Development Corporation for zoning district change from rural to R1-13.5 on 8.8 acres and from rural to RM-6.5 on 3.1 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, and preliminary plat of 6.7 acres into four single- family lots, ten townhouse lots, and five outlots to be known as Hidden Creek based upon the following findings: (1) The proposed development was inconsistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan designation for the property and did not represent the highest and best use of the land. That recommendation was based on the Planning Commission's understanding of past Council policy that the low density areas of the Comprehensive Guide Plan not be utilized for the R-19.5 smaller lot at a higher density than 2.5 units per acre Eden Prairie 8 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved and not to be used for attached housing. (2) The proposed development was incompatible with the existing surrounding neighborhood uses due to the density of the cluster homes. (3) The proposed multiple family portion of the development would constitute a "spot zoning" of higher intensity land use at a density of 3.2 units per acre surrounded by existing development at a density of 1.5 units per acre. Enger related individual Commission member's beliefs about the proposal. Hallett stated that he would vote for the denial of the project with several reservations. He added that more trees would be removed if developed as all single-family. Hallett stated that in this case he would not have a problem approving a cul-de-sac in this area. Kardell believed that compelling reasons were necessary before rules should be bent to change the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Norman believed that the development was nicely laid out; however, the density was too high. Sandstad stated that he had mixed feelings. He added that he could see the need for this type of housing. Sandstad believed that the topographical issues could justify a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change. Hawkins believed that the residents had stated a clear preference for single-family housing. Hawkins further believed that a zoning change from R1-22 to RI-6.5 was too dramatic. Hawkins believed that it was important to balance all the issues. Ruebling stated that was concerned with the high density and believed approval would be spot zoning. Lambert said the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission reviewed the proposal at its May 20, 1991 meeting, and voted to support the request. The issues it addressed were creek protection, tree preservation, and trail connection along County Road 4. The Commission discussed whether the outlot should be owned by the City or the homeowner association. It was pointed out by the developer that the portion of the creek valley down to the floodplain was mowed by the existing property owners and the City would not have access to it. If it were owned by a homeowners association, the association would maintain it. Therefore the Commission suggested it not be a City-owned outlot. Vote for approval was 5-0. Tenpas said he believed that it was necessary for the City to develop property that was already surrounded by homes in a way that would require the least amount of variances. He said he would like to see consistency on such developments. Enger pointed out that most of the projects approved over the last two or three years had been "in-fill" sites where the utilities surrounded the development project and there were some existing houses on the site. He said this particular project was unique because of its shape, width and depth, location of existing houses, were located, and high number of the trees on the site. He said that there were not a lot of sites of this type in the City. Eden Prairie 9 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved Mike Reutter, 6602 Rainbow Drive, spoke in opposition to the project because his property would be surrounded by roads on three sides if the project were to be developed with the present plan. He also said he did not like so many houses on the site, and asked whether there could be a shared driveway for several units. He requested that Council consider the financial situation of property owners in the area if they chose to develop their properties later. Peter DiBona, 15809 Park Terrace Drive, objected to the drastic change in zoning proposed by this project. He encouraged a gradual change in zoning. He also expressed concerned about the project generating more traffic which he said was already heavy in the area. He also encouraged Council to require saving as many trees as possible on the site. George Grantier, 6626 Rainbow Drive, spoke on behalf of David and Gail Beno. He read a letter from the Benos which stated their objection to the change in zoning because they believed it would adversely effect on the neighborhood and the property values. They also objected to the denser zoning of the twin-family houses. Attached to the letter was a petition signed by homeowners in the area requesting the Council to reject this proposal. Grantier said he objected to the project as well because he believed there was danger of a precedent being set for other properties of this type in the area. He said he also believed it would be detrimental to the wildlife area in the Purgatory Creek area. Richard Norell, 16184 Terracewood Drive, spoke in opposition to the project because he believed it was too dense for the size of the property. He said he also believed the project would detract from the value of the houses on Terracewood Drive. He was also concerned about the increased traffic in the area and tree loss because of the development. Ed Sieber, an Eden Prairie resident and real estate agent, said it had been his experience that the only way to sell the property owned by the Stodolas was to sell it for development purposes. He encouraged the Council to consider this aspect. Gerald Kimmel, 6610 Rainbow Drive, spoke in opposition to the development because he believed it would change the nature of the area with the rezoning. He was also concerned about increased traffic. There were no further comments from the audience. MOTION Harris moved to close the public hearing, table the item, encourage the proponent to ;,cork with City staff in developing a revised plan Eden Prairie 10 June>_-4, 1991 City Council Minutes Ag}pr_oved for the area, and return to the Planning Commission with the =revised plan for its review. Seconded by Anderson. Tenpas said that he believed the Council would be open to variances on this particular parcel and asked for a recommendation from;staff on what variances would be appropriate. Enger reminded Council that in a preliminary plat situation, concurrence from the proponent should be gained for any actRun taken unless it was an approval or a denial because, under Sty law, no action within a certain time period after making an application constituted an approval. Anderson said he was concerned that rezoning was not fair to; ttihe surrounding landowners and that the action on this project ccmild set a precedent. Harris said she would like the staff to investigate whether theme was a plan that could minimize the number of variances and at the-: Esame time provide a viable financial investment for development of the parcel. Tenpas asked if the developer would concur with action to tabl -- the item. Zachman agreed. Motion approved 4-0-1 with Pidcock abstaining. D. VACATION 90-09. Vacation and Drainage and Utility Easements With Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, Edenvale 15th Addition (Resolution No. 133) Jullie said this was a hearing relating to easements which were no longer necessary in the Edenvale 15th Addition. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the public hearing and adopt Resolution No. 91-133 for vacation of drainage and utility easements with Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, Edenvale 15th Addition. Motion approved 5-0. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Jessen, to approve payment of claims. Eden Prairie 11 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved Payment of claims approved with Jessen, Pidcock, Harris, Anderson, and Tenpas all voting "AYE". Motion approved 5-0. VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. 1ST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 17-91 CONTROLLING WEEDS AND GRASS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 9 SECTION 9.71, SUBDIVISION 1 Jullie said the current ordinance limiting the height of grass and weeds to 12 inches did not clearly indicate that property owners were responsible for mowing out to the curb line. The ordinance amendment would clarify this responsibility. MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve 1st reading of Ordinance No. 17-91, controlling weeds and grass on private property, amending City Code, Chapter 9, Section 9.71, Subdivision 1. Jessen asked what the City was doing to enforce violations of this ordinance. Lambert said the City must receive a complaint before the ordinance would be enforced. Pidcock asked if police or building inspectors or other City employees who were moving about the City on a regular basis could report violations. Jullie said often it was a matter of priority and the City was attempting to concentrate its resources where people had a major concern, and this was the reason for the complaint process. Jessen suggested the City could write a letter or postcard to the homeowner when a violation of the ordinance was noted, and asking the homeowner to take care of the situation. Motion approved 3-2 with Anderson and Harris voting Nay. Later in the meeting Jessen reopened this item with the following motion. MOTION Jessen moved, seconded by Harris, to reconsider the Ordinance No. 17-91 and adopt the ordinance as recommended. He said that Anderson and Harris had believed that the previous vote was to request the police department issue tickets rather than a vote on the ordinance itself. Motion to approve first reading of the ordinance as passed, 5-0. Eden Prairie 12 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. REQUEST OF ENGINEERING DIVISION FOR AUTHORIZATION TO ACQUIRE SLOPE EASEMENTS ADJACENT TO MITCHELL ROAD (Resolution No. 91- 136) Alan Gray, City Engineer, explained the need for sloping easements on Mitchell Road with the use of drawings and charts. He said the reason for choosing sloping easements over a retaining walls was that the retaining wall was much more expensive. Estimated cost for sloped construction was $15,000; estimated cost for a retaining wall was $65,000. Shirley Larson, 15380 West Sunrise Circle, and Mr. Dowain LaCourse, 15982 West Sunrise Circle, said because they were concerned about the slope easement creating more traffic noise on their properties, they would favor a retaining wall. Dietz said the City's position was that the slope easement was the least expensive way to handle the situation. He said the cost of obtaining the easement would be $5,000 and the property owners would receive fair value for the easement on their property. Anderson said he would like a report on all costs involved such as purchasing the land, cost of replanting, cost of grading, cost of a possible berm, and whatever other cost might be involved before a decision was made on the project. Pidcock agreed. Tenpas suggested having staff put together a plan for sloping the property which would not affect the value of the property. Jessen asked Dietz who would eventually pay for this improvement. Dietz said the City would pay the initial cost and assess that cost back to the developer who requested the improvements, in this case Mason Homes. It would be the City's responsibility to maintain the retaining wall. MOTION Pidcock moved to request staff to continue negotiations with Mrs. Larson and Mr. LaCourse regarding an plan that would be acceptable to both the City and the property owners. Seconded by Harris. Harris said that she would like to see a projection of the maintenance cost to the City. Motion approved 5-0. Eden Prairie 13 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved (Council agreed to move Item X.C.1, Consideration for a 2nd Ice Rink at the Community Center, to this point in the meeting because of the large number of people present who had interest in the item) X. Reports of Officers C. Report of Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources 1. Consideration for 2nd Ice Rink at the Community Center Lambert reviewed the history of the need for a second ice rink. This item had been put on a 1987 Park Bond Referendum which had failed. The item failed again in 1989 on a Park Bond Referendum. Recently a number of members of the Hockey Association had reiterated the need for a second ice rink, citing the inability for the Hockey Association and the Figure Skating Club to expand with the growth of the community. Lambert the M.A. Mortensen Company had provided a detailed report on the cost estimates which would be between $1.6 million and $1.8 million depending on whether or not the second rink were to be a regulation size or an Olympic size. Lambert said a survey was done of other ice arenas in the state to determine what the trends were for expanded use of ice arenas. From that survey it had been determined that the demand would continue to increase with population growth. Staff at the Community Center was asked to estimate the operating costs for a second ice rink. He estimated that 1,666 hours would be available for sale at $90 an hour in the period October through March. $150,000 was estimated to be generated the first year. It was also recommended that there be a $2.50 per hour increase per year; this was taken into consideration in the calculations. The annual cost of the arena for operations was $94,000. He said another $30,000 could be generated toward operating costs, leaving approximately $60,000 a year as operating expense to the City. Lambert said the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission reviewed the proposal at its May 20, 1991 meeting and voted unanimously to support the concept for a second rink and agreed that there was a need for it. Pidcock said that she believed there was a need for a second rink but believed that consideration of this item should be balanced with the needs of other organizations in the community, such as baseball associations having lights for the baseball field. She said she would like to have information on when the second rink would be obsolete and when a third rink would be required. She also requested information on hoar many cities in the area had two ice rinks. Eden Prairie 14 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved Lambert said there were a number of cities in the metro area which had two ice rinks and mentioned Minnetonka, Bloomington, Edina, and Burnsville. He said there were approximately 550 young people in the Hockey Association and 24 young people in the Figure Skating Club, and these figures had been the same for a number of years. The reason for the lack of expansion in participants was because of the lack of ice time. He said there were about 1500 young people in the Baseball Association and their needs were for more fields, and particularly lighted fields at Miller Park. This would be a $3.5 million project. Harris said she was sympathetic to the needs of skaters and was also concerned that buying of ice time out of the City was taking revenue out of the City that could be used to support such a facility. However, she believed that the request for a second ice rink would need to be considered along with all the other needed facilities which would be discussed in the Capital Facilities Workshop. Harris asked Lambert about the reference to the need to buy out the North Stars' lease or add locker rooms. Lambert said the design and the numbers in the report assumed that the team locker rooms for the second rink would be built within the North Stars lockerroom space. Last year, the North Stars had asked if the City would be willing to buy its lease. That portion of the building the North Stars use was constructed by the North Stars, owned by the City, and leased back to the North Stars for 20 years. There was also a buy-out clause in the agreement which would cost $240,000 if the City were to force them out. However, he believed that since the North Stars had requested the buy-out, the cost could be negotiated for less. Anderson pointed out that a Park Bond Referendum had not passed since 1980 and the population had doubled since that time. He said he favored the ice rink and would like to discuss the matter on June 18 when Council had scheduled the Capital Facilities Study meeting. Jessen said he would like to know how the ice rink was performing today because users of ice arenas tended to pay more of the real cost than any other sport. He said that the way it was structured it was much less a capital facilities problem than it was an operating budget problem. Tenpas said he believed the community should be able to absorb the cost with population growth without affecting the existing tax rate. He believed there would be a benefit to the City by having a second ice rink but also believed that the project needed to be balanced with other needs in the community. He would like to see Council direct staff to get actual cost Eden Prairie 15 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved information for operation and construction of a second ice rink. and provide that information at the meeting on Capital Facilities. He said he would also like to hold a public meeting on the subject. MOTION Jessen moved to accept the report of the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Report and staff, direct staff to develop more detailed information on capital costs and financing options, and an operating schedule for a second ice rink. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, & COMMITTEES IX. APPOINTMENTS X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. Reports of Councilmembers 1. Award to Eden Prairie Girls' Gymnastics Team Pidcock said she had gone to the high school to award the team with their honor, and was disappointed that it was held in the practice room with only team members and the coach present. She suggested that perhaps in the future recognition could be made at the Council meeting or in another public place where the award would get more recognition. 2. Action Regarding Local Option Sales Tax Request from Hennepin County Commissioners Pidcock said at the A.M.M. meeting on Tuesday, May 28, 1991 those present were given information on an omnibus tax bill regarding the $.005 sales tax that the County had been asked to levy. If the County would choose not to levy the tax, it and the City would lose a considerable amount in State aid money over the next two years. Jullie explained that the purpose of the tax bill was to add a half-cent on the six percent sales tax. The Legislature had allowed the counties the option as to whether or not the half- cent tax would be effective in their jurisdictions. If the county supported the levy, the cities which represented a majority of the population in the county would have an opportunity to Eden Prairie 16 June -1, 12-3I Gity Council Minutes ,Appro%-?d override the decisions The other major part of the tax bill was that the highest tier of residential property valuation had been reduced. This had been done by injecting more money into the system by way of the sales tax so the loss of the reduction would not be passed on to the lower-valued properties. He said Hennepin County had asked the City to be supportive of the additional sales tax, and noted the City of Minneapolis would be faced with losing $86 million in State aid. He said a commission had been set up to determine a new LGA formula. Harris said she believed there were so many unanswered questions as to how the system would work, she would not be willing to vote in favor of the 1/2-cent tax. Jessen asked what the basis for the voting was and how many votes would each City have. Jullie said those cities which constituted a majority of the population in the county could override the County's decision. Jessen said he would not favor taking an position at the present time. He said he did not see this as an optional sales tax because the penalty for not taking it was so severe. He viewed it as a plan for the state to re:-:rn taxing responsibility to the local units of government. Tenpas said he would not vote the tax because he saw it orgy as • a tax shift around on the part of the Legislature and not .as any kind of tax reform. He believed this to be a bad decision on the part of the Legislature. MOTION Jessen moved that no action be taken on this item at the present time. Seconded by Harris. Harris asked the staff to monitor the situation very closely and bring additional information to Council as it became available. Motion approved 5-0. 3. Erosion Anderson expressed concern over the erosion situation because of heavy spring rains. He believed there should be a reasonable amount of time allowed for developers to repair silt fences and correct erosion problems. He asked staff to make a recommendation on the matter. Dietz said Council would receive a report on the situation very soon. 4. Eurasian Milfoil Anderson asked about the situation with Eurasian milfoil in Bryant Lake. Lambert said that marker buoys had been put up C Eden Prairie 17 .Tune _i, 19T� City Council Minutes Approved at both Riley and Bryant Lakes to marl: the area where milfoil had been discovered. The DNR had been contacted and it had not allowed the boat launches to be closed. However,, people were not staying out of the area and water skiers had been observed using the buoys as slalom markers. He said the lake would be treated on June 10,, but no one knew at this time how f r the moil had spread. Ander sore asked if the City could Dass an ordinance to hold boat owners responsible for transporting njilfoil. Lambert said he believed this legislation was passed two years ago but would check on it. He said the Park, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission had recommended the City spend money for treatment. Tenpas requested staff to check with the County and DNA about working on controlling access to the lakes to prevent the spread of milfoil. Tenpas said staff could make a decision within the next two weeks for a permanent solution. Council agreed. MOTION At 11:00 PM Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue the meeting for 30 minutes. Motion approved 5-0. 5. Water Towers Harris suggested that Eden Prairie's water towers be decorated with the City's logo. Dietz said that originally the specification for the towers had required the logo, but he had decided against the idea for the sake of making the towers inconspicuous. It was the consensus of the Council to leave the water towers as they were. 6. Discussion on Land Acquisition Issues Harris said the Popham Haik law firm had what appeared to be a good workshop on the constitutional issues of the taking of land, and she suggested that a similar workshop might be useful to the Council. 7. Special Guest at McDonalds in Eden Prairie Tenpas said that Chris Burke from the TV program, "Life Goes On," would be at the McDonalds by Eden Prairie Center on June 17, 1991 and asked if Council wanted to recognize his appearance. Pidcock suggested presenting him with a key to the City. Harris suggested giving T-shirts that said "Eden Prairie Loves its Kids." Staff was directed to come up with some ideas and Councilmembers were encouraged to attend the event. Eden Prairie 18 June #, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved 8. Billboards on Highway 494 Jessen asked how the investigation on the billboard situation along Highway #494 was progressing. Pauly said he was working on an analysis of the options. 9. Sidewalk on Anagram Development Jessen asked what Anagram's decision had been on the sidewalk. Enger said that Anagram had more tree replacement required than could be placed on the property, so the City had agreed to allow Anagram to plant fewer trees and in return, Anagram agreed to build the sidewalk. 10. Portable Toilets in the Park Jessen said that the portable toilets in Round Lake Park were in deplorable condition over the previous weekend. 11. Naegele Property and Major Center Area Discussions Jessen said that he had spoken with Mr. Naegele. Naegele and his financial and legal advisors were investigating options for the property. A meeting had also been held with Bruce Bermel and Kelly Doran which was less encouraging regarding proceeding with a Wal-Mart development. Bermel and Doran did not express an interest in the larger picture for the properties " in the Major Center area. Enger said the Naegele group had talked about potential interest in the City Hall proposal. B. Report of City Manager 1. Capital Needs Study Session, 6:00 PM, June 18, 1991 Councilmembers agreed to this date. C. Report of the Director of Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources (See pages 13-15 of minutes) D. Report of Director of Public Works 1. Award Contract for Recreational Trail Seal Coating, I.C. 52-230 MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to award the contract for recreational trail seal coating, I.C. 52-230, to Quality Seal, Inc. as the low bidder in the amount of $6,896.86. Motion approved 5-0. Eden Prairie 19 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Approved 2. "Adopt A Street" Program Gray explained the "Adopt A Street" Program to Council. This would be for public streets only and would be modeled after the State of Minnesota's program. The City would provide interested groups with safety vests, garbage bags, acknowledgement signs and literature. After discussion, it was the consensus of the Council to go ahead with the program without the signs as Pidcock and Jessen objected to posting more signs in the community. Groups participating in the program would be given recognition in the City's newspapers and in the City newsletter. XI. OTHER BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION Jessen moved, seconded by Harris, to adjourn at 11:25 PM. Motion approved 5-0. i i