Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 09/15/1981 y` - APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL ' z i��:.SDAY , SEPTEMBER 15 , 1981 7: 30 PM, CITY HALL COU'.CIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel , George Bentley, Dean Edstrom, Paul Redpath , and George Tangen COUN+ IL STAFF : City Manager Carl Jullie , City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John Frane, Planning Director Chris Enger, Director of Community Services Bob Lambert , City Engineer Eugene A. Dietz , and Recording Secretary Karen Michael INVOCATION: Councilman George Bentley PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: All members were present I . APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS F MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath,ath, to approve the Agenda as g published. Motion carried unanimously. 9 II . MI'. )F THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 1981 Page 9, para . 5, line 1: add "and" after "sewer;" line 8: change the word "or" to C "and," to read : "I' and a 10 0. Page 9, para . 6, line 1: correct word should be "signed. " Page 13, para. 1 : change "Moore" to "More. " Page 13, D. 2. : change "Jakes" to "Jacques . " Page 14, E. 3. , para. 2: change "protected" to "by-pass . " MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to approve the minutes of the September 1, 1981 , Council meeting as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously. III . CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk ' s License List B. 1st_Reading of Ordinance No. 81-24 ,man ordinance amend i a Qrdi nance No. 79-43 which �rovides re ulatio'_nslprohi,biting the parkin of vehicles an_d whichauthor- i zes the de_ s nation of areas where arki n i s ��— '~ _ — ._._� �_ 9 prohi b� ted and the orderi ng 'and. pllacin of signs relative thereto C. Award contract for Bennett Place Improvements, I .C. 52-001 (Resolution No. 81-192) l City Council Minutes -2- September 15, 1981 ;rt . D. Authorize Mayor and City Manager to execute a supplemental lease agreement with Physical Electronics Industries, which will allow an easement to the City to be '$ established Resolution No. 81-I94 E. Award bids for softball backstops MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve items A - E on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Public Hearing for creation of Development District No. 1 and Economic Develo ment District, and Tax Increment Financing Plan Resolution No. 81-190 City Manager Jullie stated copies of the plan had been forwarded to the Council on August 18, 1981, and on August 27, 1981 , were made available for public inspection. He said the City is proposing to use tax increment financing in conjunction with other funding sources in order to accomplish some much needed and long sought road improvements in and around the City's Major Center Area . Jullie cited the objectives (page 1-1 of the Plan , a copy of which is attached to these Minutes) which the City hopes to achieve through the Development Program. Jullie outlined the Development District on a map and described the parcels included in the Tax Increment District. Jullie explained the capital cost of the improvements as outlined on page 4-4 of the Plan as well as how these costs will be financed. He reviewed the traffic acci- dents which have occurred in this area in the past 62 years. Jullie said that in addition to City Staff, Jim Reyer and Dick Graves from the O'Connor & Hannan law firm, the City' s bond counsel , and Bill Fahey, the City's financial consultant, were present and would be happy to address any questions. City Attorney Pauly noted the documents contained in a brochure entitled, "Tax In- crement Finance Hearing" (a copy of which is attached to these Minutes. ) Included are memoranda from: City Manager Jullie dated September 14, 1981; City Engineer Dietz, dated September 8, 1981, regarding traffic safety resulting from Development District Improvements; City Engineer Dietz , dated September 10, 1981, in which he sets forth the conclusion that the areas included in the tax increment district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, and other improvements; City Engineer Dietz, September 8, 1981, in which he outlines the sources for the estimates of the project costs; Chief Building Inspector Sanders, dated September 9, 1981 , in which he reports the buildings on the land included in the District are not structurally sub- standard; City Assessor Martz , dated July 7, 1981, in which he describes the reduc- tions in assessed valuations in the shopping center due to sales levels; Planning Director Enger, dated July 7, 1981, in which he outlines the history of the concept for the improvements and expectations for the construction and implementation of the road system; Director of Public Safety Hacking, dated September 8, 1981, setting forth data relating to accidents in the area. Also included in the brochure are: excerpts of the August 24, 1981, Planning Commission minutes at which time the Plan was dis- cussed and found to conform to the general plan for the development of the municipal - ity; a September 2, 1980, letter to A.J. Lee from W.M. Crawford in support of certain of the contemplated improvements; a letter from G.L. McCoy on behalf of the Eden Prairie School Board setting forth its Resolution in support of the Plan; a letter from William E. Fahey, Ehlers and Associates, Inc. , verifying the financial projec- tions contained in the Plan as well as the feasibility of the Plan; Resolution No. ( 81-5-428R of the Hennepin County Board, adopted May 12, 1981 , requesting the City to prepare a plan for an Economic Development District as soon as possible and to submit City Council Minutes -3- September 15, 1981 such plan to the County Board of Commissioners ; a letter to the Eden Prairie School District, dated September 11, 1981, regarding a correction on page 4-8 of the Plan; letters dated September 3. 1981, to Members of, the County Board , AVTI School Dis- trict #287, and School District #272 regarding two replacement pages for the Plan; copies of receipts of certified mailings; copies of legal notices published in the Eden Prairie News ; City Clerk's affidavit of mailing notices; letters of transmittal , dated August 18, 1981 , to the County Board, School District #272 , and AVTI School District #287, at which time the Plan was submitted to these Boards; and an excerpt from the August 18, 1981, City Council minutes at which time a Resolution calling for a Public Hearing for creation of Development District No. 1 and Economic Devel - opment District was set for September 15, 1981 , was passed. Pauly also called attention to a memorandum dated ,September 15, 1981 , from the O'Connor & Hannan firm presenting the Plan to the Council for its consideration. Letters were also submitted by: Feeders , Incorporated, dated September 14, 1981; St. Andrew Lutheran Church, dated September 15, 1981 ; Homart Development Co, ? dated September 14, 1981; BRW to Mr. Gene Dietz, dated September 14, 1981 , all of which concern the Plan. Also available was the brochure."Major Center Area - Public Planned Unit Development." dated June 1973, Robert Boblett, 22 Greenway Gables , Minneapolis , a real estate broker specializing in industrial property, who is also an appraiser, counselor and property manager, W addressed the Plan. Boblett stated he has been in real estate since 1946; was a mem- ber of the Minneapolis City Planning Commission for nine years, latterly as its Pres- ident; served one year on the Metropolitan Planning Commission; and for a number of years served on the Minneapolis City Charter Commission. He said he has seen Eden Prairie emerge from a rural , pastoral , idyllic place of beauty to a bustling place of business. Eden Prairie is now probably one of the two or three outstanding pro- spective sites for industry as we now know it; industry in this metropolitan area is attractive and clean. Eden Prairie competes with Plymouth and Minnetonka for this industry. Boblett said he serves on a committee which advises Minnegasco on The Preserve; he served as a counselor to Minnegasco and Associated Dry Goods- (Powers) at the time the Eden Prairie Center was being established; his company sold the property now owned by Hartford to the Pillsbury Company, the sale of which was not concluded because Pillsbury opted to stay downtown; later his company sold the land to Hartford Insurance which he hopes will soon be of benefit to the City. Boblett said he does not claim to be an expert on Eden Prairie, but he does feel he has a degree of familiarity with the City. The firm of O'Connor & Hannan had shown him the Plan and asked him to respond. Boblett noted that over the years he has found it interesting that the Naegele' pro- perty has failed to develop and he has been aware of the struggles of the Shopping Center. It has become quite clear to him that the Shopping Center must really be made to succeed or the peripheral development will not occur. He cited the develop- ment of fast food, office buildings , clinics, and the like around Southdale, Brook- dale, and the other "Dales . " He does not think Eden Prairie is experiencing that to the degree which should be expected. That can be ascribed to troublesome egress and ingress. Boblett thinks the Plan certainly ought to be of great relief to the bottlenecking of access to the Center for one thing. 1 rct City Council Minutes -4- September 15, 1981 Boblett feels that the Plan will open the area up to development. It will also make existing development price sensitive or more valuable in the market. It has got to result in a substantial construction velocity - wages paid to people building buildings , suppliers of material , graders of ground, installers of pipe, etc. All of which, in his opinion, is going to amount to appreciation of the value of the land, which the Assessor will discover and levy taxes one and which will help the City coffers. Boblett was asked to respond to three preser- vation and enhancement of the tax base of Eden Prairie? He said it would. Will the Plan result in increased employment in the City? He said there is such mobility in employment now that he didn't know if a certain number of jobs could be ascribed to Eden Prairie, but it would be to the City's benefit. Will the Plan discourage commerce, industry, or manufacturing from moving operations to another State? Bob- lett stated that anything that is good in terms of encouragement of job opportunities cannot fail to achieve such an end. Boblett said, in his opinion, the Plan is an economic good for the City of Eden Prairie; and, as a real estate economist he could see no reason not to give the Plan favorable consideration. Redpath asked what specific dollar amount has been lost due to reduced or lost taxes from the Eden Prairie Center. Jullie said City Assessor Martz 's :memo noted approximately $750,000. Bentley asked to have the historical background addressed for those who might not be totally familiar with what has occurred. Enger spoke to the question, noting the Metropolitan Planning Commission had designated the 169/494/TH5 area as a con- stellation center in the 1960' s. Subsequent to that date, Eden Prairie took that lead and in its 1968 Guide Plan designated the area as a Major Center Area and recognized that access was poor. In that original concept a ring route was illustrated as a collector/distributor route. In the 1973 Major Center Area Task Force Report this concept was again refined and the need for a ring route was shown. The City attempted to put together financing in terms of identifying the various County, State and Fed- eral agencies that would help with the improvements. The City felt it had commitments from these groups and developers did rely on the City's plans and repre- sentations from the various governmental agencies that road improvements would be forthcoming. Over the course of time those commitments have faltered. The 1979 Guide Plan again reinforced the idea of the ring route as the only method of correctly dis- tributing traffic around the cloverleaf intersection. With the Federal , State and County funding cutbacks the City finds itself having to take on much of this respon- sibility. Martin Diestler, 9905 Bluff Road, questioned the method used for assessing the Shop- ping Center. He also asked what the Plan would cost him in tax dollars . Penzel ex- plained certain portions of the project were construed to be of community-wide bene- fit and therefore a general city-wide levy would be made. He also explained the Henne- pin County Assessor's Office is responsible for assessing the value of shopping centers in the County and this value is considered to be related to the total amount of busi- ness done. Diestler asked how long it would be before the increased taxation on the properties would take effect. Penzel explained the tax increment financing concept. City Council Minutes -5- September 15, 1981 Redpath asked what the value of the properties within the tax increment financing district is at this time and what it might be in the future. Fahey said the esti- mated current value is $5,863 ,000; the projected value of the property with just the projects underway now would be estimated at $26,864 ,000 or an increase in value of $21 million. E.J. Hopkins, 12395 Oxbow Drive, asked if the population estimate of 60,000 was an accurate projection. Penzel stated that estimates have varied widely in the past ten years but the estimate falls somewhere between 40,000 and 60,000. Hopkins asked if the Plan includes improving TH 169. Jullie explained that MnDOT has in- cluded upgrading of the bridge over I494 in its construction program, which will be a major improvement. Sidney Pauly, 17450 West 78th Street, expressed concern regarding the motives behind the Cooley letter. She noted the letter must have been an expensive proposition. It is her understanding Cooley has interest in commercial property about three miles north of the Major Center Area in Minnetonka . Although she believes he is philo- sophically opposed to tax increment districts , he applied for tax increment financing for his property. She feels it is in the best interests of Eden Prairie to proceed with the Plan. Ed Rollin , 15415 Morraine Way, asked what two mills means in terms of tax dollars . Finance Director Frane said a mill is equal to $23. Paul Sylvander, 16451 Hilltop Road, asked for reassurance these figures will not be skyrocketing. Penzel said the fact the properties on which the tax increments will be captured are now in existence means the costs of the project, except for C the two mill levy, are covered. There is not a question as to whether these things will materialize or not. One has to assume there will be substantial growth through- out the City; consequently the tax base of the City will grow and the need for City participation will diminish. Bradley Hoyt, 6985 Jeremy Court, further explained how commercial properties are taxed. As a commercial developer, he expressed the need for the projects proposed in the Plan. Once access into the area is achieved, development will, occur and the tax base will be further broadened. He feels it is not an increase in taxes , but rather something which must be done. It is his opinion that the Plan would be detrimental from Mr. Cooley's standpoint in that Cooley owns or controls a sizeable amount of land -- the closest area into the Loop that presently has fluid ingress and egress. William Cooley, 2202 Meeting Street, Minnetonka , introduced himself as the person who sent the letter to Eden Prairie residents (a copy of which is attached. ) He expressed concern as a Hennepin County and State of Minnesota taxpayer that tax monies will be used to build roads in the development area. He would prefer to see the cost assessed against the benefited property owners. He stated he does own 100 access of land north of this project, and he did apply for tax increment financing for $146,000 to do some subsurface road grading. He also said he will soon own a substantial amount of property in Bloomington - the Metropolitan Sta- dium site. He reviewed his involvement in the law suit which he filed against the City in December 1980. ity Council Minutes -6- September 15, 1981 City Attorney Pauly clarified points made by Cooley regarding the law suit. The litigation that Mr. Cooley spoke of earlier, that he commenced in Decem- ber, was terminated as a result of the City' s concluding during the course of the trial that it would be prudent to do so because of concerns expressed by members of the Legislature. The City then moved to dismiss the complaint for mootness since no issue remained after termination of the Plan. The Court issued an order rendering judgment for Mr. Cooley. However, it did not specify the nature of judgment. The City and HRA made a motion for clarification con- tending that it is inappropriate to render a judgment when the matter had not been tried on its merits. The trial terminated at a point where Mr. Cooley`s first witness, an employee of the City, who was called for cross-examination, under the rules, was still testifying. The Judge acknowledged in his order that the trial had not been concluded. The Court clarified its judgment and awarded $1 nominal damages to Mr. Cooley and his Court costs. The City and HRA have filed an appeal to the Supreme Court because, although we do not con- cede the point, we anticipate an argument may be made that the judgment has some bearing on a future plan. Jim Rylander, 9601 Crestwood Terrace, recently moved to the area and would not have done so had he realized the extent of development which is planned. Bob Cole, 7160 Park View Lane, asked what happens if revenues do not cover the cost of bonds. Frane explained that buildings are already in existence in the district and taxes will continue to be paid on them; revenues are not based or. just buildings to be built. Edward Pierre, 9275 Cedar of Road, asked if there were "hidden" costs in- cluded to cover the cost o services such as police and fire protection. Jullie said there is an existing valuation in all of the parcels which will not be cap- tured -- that is about $5,864,000. That will generate over $500,000 per year in taxes which will be spread in the normal way so these properties will be paying for services . Pierre felt this was a poorly attended public hearing and that the public address system was not adequate. Diestler asked if the $46 per year (2- mill ) levy was based on the number of people in Eden Prairie now or in the future. Penzel said it was based on the present value and present mill rate. Tim Pierce, 16669 Honeysuckle Lane, spoke to the issue of fiscal disparities and the fact that 40% of our new tax dollars leave the City coffers. Penzel asked if taxes within the District are subject to fiscal disparities. Fahey said they are. Redpath noted Cooley had attempted to have the tax increment financing law changed by the 1981 Legislature and was not successful therefore,the Legislature was in- dicating to cities that this was a viable financing method and of mutual benefit. A., F i. City Council Minutes -7- September 15, 1981 Roland Peterson, 9507 Creekwood Drive, expressed concern about the water problem residents faced this past summer and wondered how new development would affect this. Penzel explained the situation did not last very long and will be eased greatly when new wells, now under construction, and expansion of the water plant are completed in 1982. Duane Cable, Cedar Forest, has lived in Eden Prairie for three years and has not seen the growth which he had anticipated. He feels residents should take a look at the small levy amount which will be assessed versus the convenience which will be provided by additional commercial and service establishments. Bob Hanson, 6923 Rosemary Road, a 13 year resident, commended the Council for coming up with a Plan which will provide the community with a sound distribution system. Rochelle Diers, 11650 Riverview Road , asked how the area in the Plan •was determined, - if it was based on the tax revenues to be captured. Frane said that was basically correct -- as few parcels as could be found to get the job done as soon as possible. Jan Gerecke, 6622 Golden Ridge Drive, asked if there was any way th&t this could be put to a referendum. Reyer said a referendum is not required. Pauly said as a prac- tical matter, due to timing requirements, a referendum is not feasible. Vicki Koenig, 7239 Topview Road, asked if these roads will be sufficient to handle the additional traffic. Jullie said they should be adequate. Kim Weinzapfel , 6975 Tartan Curve. questioned whether this is an economic development } plan or a safety development plan. Reyer responded the intent of Chapter 472A is to foster economic development in certain areas. One of the elements of economic devel- opment and successful commercial development is safe ingress and egress from commer- cial areas; there is a direct connection between safe streets, access and egress, and commercial development. Penzel explained the benefits will accrue to the whole dis- trict and will promote economic development. Weinzapfel wondered if this is really feasible with today's economic situation. He feels the Plan is needed. Lorraine Conrad, 9081 Sunrise Circle, asked why it is necessary to have all of Eden Prairie developed. She lives here because it is a rural community. Frank Pfau, 9400 Garrison Way, believes "drawing card" stores are needed at the Eden Prairie Shopping Center. Clarence Schafer, 6618 Golden Ridge Drive, wondered whether or not the Shopping Center developers thought of the road system before they built. Penzel explained promises or commitments had been made by the State and Federal government, but these have been defaulted on so it now becomes our responsibility. City Council Minutes -8- September 15, 1981 MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and to a: continue Resolution No. 81-190 to the Special Council Meeting to be held on Tuesday, September 22, 1981. The record will remain open for submission of written material up to that time for review by the Council . Pierre asked where the meeting would be held. Penzel said it will be held in the Council Chambers. Hakon Torjesen, 6605 Rowland Road, expressed a desire to have the Public Hearing kept open and urged the Council members to vote against the motion. Sidney Pauly noted the public can still attend Tueday's meeting. Ed Rajek, 6258 Harborough Court, urged the Council to vote no on the motion because all the residents have not been heard. He said the only formal hearing notice he had received was for the Special Assessment Hearing to be held on September 22, 1981. Penzel explained the procedure for notifying residents for city wide benefit projects via the Eden Prairie News . < . VOTE ON MOTION : Motion carried unanimously. B. OVERLOOK PLACE by Hustad Development Corporation. Request to preliminary plat 30 duplex lots and 9 singe family lots. Located north of Pioneer Trail and East of Yorkshire Point. (Resolution No. 81-175) Continued from 9/1/81 Wally Hustad and Dick Putnam were present. Putnam spoke to the changes made in the plan since the September 1 , 1981, meeting. A change in the location of the tot- lot has been made; the nine lots on Creek Knoll will be developed as single family lots. Bentley asked if the same number of units as previously proposed are included in this request. Putnam said yes. Bentley asked if the lot sizes are according to Ordinance. Enger replied they are. Hustad said the reason the lots on Creek Knoll Road are now developable is because the road will become a cul-de-sac;whereas it is now quite heavily travelled because of the access it provides to TH 169. Tangen asked if the totlot is now adequate to serve the neighborhood and if there is sufficient access. Director of Community Services Lambert said he felt the lo- cation was better now. Also a 6' asphalt walkway will be constructed so everyone should know the way to the totlot. Tangen asked who would maintain the park and totlot. Lambert said the City would assume that responsibility. City Council Minutes -g- September 15, 1981 Edstrom asked if the size of the totlot had changed. Lambert said the first totlot was 10,900 square feet, the one shown this evening is 12,300 square feet. Patrick Prom, 12661 Pioneer Trail , lives across the street from the proposed devel- opment. His front yard has been greatly reduced by the new road alignment. He is concerned about drainage problems which might occur when the Creek Knoll lots are developed. He does not wish to have houses at his front door which he feels will be the case since some are shown fronting Pioneer Trail . John Kelley, 9576 Yorkshire Lane. asked if the totlots will open to a hazardous park area and has the density problem been addressed since Hustad came back with the same proposal . Lambert said no plans have been made to separate the totlot from the park area. Roland Peterson , 9507 Creekwood Drive, said he has been unable to find Creekwood Park. If the totlot is included on Overlook Place, it will be used by many child- ren from the Creekwood area and provisions should be made for them to get to the t area safely. Kelley asked if perhaps a fence with gates might be added to the totlot plans. 4 Carol Gallagher, 9448 Creekwood, asked if this totlot is adequate. Penzel said this is designed for the toddler to six or seven year old age group and not as a playfield for older children. Loralee Olson, 9523 Creekwood, questioned where the transition is if there is a cul-de-sac at Creek Knoll Road thereby making the triangle area under discussion a part of Creekwood which is less dense and less crowded . Penzel explained future plans for roads in the area whereby Creek Knoll will sometime connect with Sunny- ° brook Road. He also noted that there were five opinions relative to the transition question on the Council . Edstrom asked if there would be any access from Creekwood to the totlot. Lambert said the only access would be off of County Road 1 and the street system. Hustad said the reason a totlot was not included in Creekwood was because of the lot size and topography. Stuart Loper, 9506 Woodridge Circle, noted that single family lots and homes have been selling well just down the road a short way. in the BanCon Development. Hustad stated single family housing is no longer affordable housing and BanCon, now known as Hans Hagen, is concentrating on quadraminiums. Hans Hagen had looked at this property and would have liked to build single family homes here, but the market is just not there. John Nord, 9375 Creekwood, sees no reason to compromise a neighborhood just to unload land. Peterson wondered why there has not been a sign on the property advertising it for sale as single family lots. Mike Kodrich,9450 Woodridge Drive, feels the proposal is too dense. He feels the lots will not be marketable due to overcrowding. City Council Minutes -10- September 15, 1981 e . Phil Hummel , 9396 Creekwood, wondered if it is logical to assume that the single i family lots on Creek Knoll would be marketed as doubles should Hustad not be able X: to sell them as single family lots. Penzel said a letter had been submitted on September 14, 1981 , by Hustad committing them to single family lots via the Develop- er' s Agreement should this project be approved. Kodrich asked if this would be legally binding. Penzel said it would as it becomes an attachment to the deed. Edstrom asked Hummel if this satisfied his concern. Hummel said he was concerned about how close it would get to his house. Penzel said he had expressed concern over the density at the last meeting. He feels that transition is not shown. Edstrom said he concurs with Penzel . It is a very tough judgement to make and he realizes it is an economic problem. Penzel feels the developer ought to be given an opportunity to take another look at the density. Bentley does not disagree with the use of doubles as transition housing, but feels there is too much density on this piece of property. Tangen said he would support the proposal and would stand by his statement of the last meeting. He feels doubles are a transition in this area which has some unique features . Redpath said he would support the proposal and noted the mixed land use in the area. Penzel noted the concern of Bentley, Edstrom, and himself is one of density; the issue is not doubles. Hustad said he would like to discuss the matter of density and is willing to do whatever is necessary to make it work. MOTION: Moved by Tangen , seconded by Redpath , to continue the Public Hearing to October 6, 1981, and to have the Parks , Recreation & Natural Resources Commission review the proposal before that time. Motion carried unanimously. C. C _ . , WEST by Richard W. Anderson. Request for PUD Concept approval for office and c:;rimo_rcial upon 87 acres . (Resolution No. 81-177) Continued from 9-1-81. Dave Setlergren, attorney with Larkin Hoffman, Daly& Lindgren represented ADII He presented a petition signed by residents west of the propose development who support the project, That is attached to these minutes, 'He noted no environmental impact statement is required, as they are in compliance with existing rules, It is the view of his client that the Guide Plan should be changed just as circumstances have changed in the period since the Guide Plan was adopted, Settergren addressed the issues which had been raised at the September 1, 1981, Council meeting. ADI is willing to reduce the amount of surface parking by 25% with the addition of struc- tured parking;the first level of which would be at grade, the other below. They are also willing to pay for any and all traffic related improvements on Shady Oak Road including signals and surfacing necessitated by this proposal ; parking areas will be terraced; a pathway will be built around the lake and the roadway circling the area; consideration will be given to the site lines of the homes along Golden Ridge, ADI would be willing to do some planting for the residents in that area. Planning Director Enger stated he had just seen the plans for Phase I this afternoon and had not had time to review them. Edstrom asked what access is provided to the northeast corner of the area. Enger said access would be provided off the loop road on the north and also from the road along the Honeywell site. The road width has not been evaluated, but the lo- cation is adequate. City Council Minutes -11 September 15, 1981 Tangen said he has given this matter a great deal of consideration since the last meeting. He feels strongly that the Council should receive input from the Plan- ning Commission relative to the PUD concept. He would like to have the matter sent back to the Planning Commission to consider PUD concept approval . Tangen cannot support either one, PUD concept or Guide Plan, separately. Edstrom said he cannot find fault with the Planning Commission for only going as far as it did. Bentley noted the question before the Council is one of general land uses. He feels the Guide Plan and PUD are inseperable and sending it back to the Planning Commission won' t accomplish anything. Tangen said the Council is discussing issues which the Planning Commission has not addressed such as decked parking, more open space. He would like Planning Commission input as they are better able to look at specifics and the Council should not be doing the job of the Planning Commission. Bentley said the Planning Commission had chosen to look only at the land use issue and did not wish to look at the rest of the proposal until the Council had decided on the general land use in question. Redpath asked if there was any documentation regarding Honeywell 's plan. City Manages Jullie said he has not seen anything regarding Honeywell 's plans. Penzel said he had been contacted by corporate officers of the Residential Division of Honeywell over a year ago regarding the potential use of the site. They were con- sidering it as a research and development facility but that would take from 3 - 5 years to accomplish. i Penzel noted the residents seem to have a problem with the credibility of ADI as it is perceived -- such as with the advertising, grading, etc. How does ADI pro- pose to close this credibility gap? Richard Anderson responded that his firm has hired BRW to give them exacting and precise architectural plans. ADI plans to build the exact building BRW presents. They are working with a number of pension funds to fund the project. Penzel asked if a time limitation as to completion of the project would be acceptable. Anderson said they would be willing to listen to anything which was reasonable. Settergren said he presumed a Developer' s Agreement would be part of the development and that could be contained in that docu- ment. Penzel said the PUD process was designed to provide flexibility. He does not have an automatic negative reaction to this proposal ; many positives are presented in the j proposal . He would agree with Tangen to send it back to the Planning Commission but i not without noting their previous action was cursory at best. Bentley asked if Pen- ' zel was suggesting the Council should make specific recommendations about general land use and then send it back for their review. Penzel said he would say there is merit in this proposal , but he would not tell the Commission what to do. Bentley feels the main issue is, is this an appropriate land use. He spoke to his feelings regarding this specific proposal : there could be some residential on the site; office space could be on the site; there is a right to the validity of residents in an area to have certain expectations relative to anticipated land uses around them; and he is against regional commercial on this site because it is in direct compe- tition with the Major Center Area. Bentley said he would not be able to support the proposal as it now stands, if a vote were taken now. ly, City Council Minutes -i2- September 15, 1981 Tangen said he does not feel the Guide Plan is cast in concrete. This is a major project which should not be hurried through the process without all due deliberation. Anderson should be given the opportunity to modify the plan just as he has done during this past two week period. Edstrom said he feels a regional office use makes a great deal of sense at this location. The site must be treated with sensitivity and quality in appearance and development. The question of the amount of asphalt which will be seen by the resi- dents and those driving by must be examined not only by the Council but by the Plan- ning Commission. T Redpath said what changes are being discussed in the Guide Plan only affect the lower third of the property. One issue is involved -- multiple dwellings on that portion of the property. The Planning Commission did not do the Council any favors by not acting on this. He would like to see this sent back to the Planning Commission for their review. Tangen recommended asking the Planning Commission to look at the PUD concept only and not the Guide Plan change. Edstrom said he is not opposed to a hotel at that location. Penzel said he would be open to an appropriate proposal . He would like to see re- zoning done on a parcel by parcel basis rather than full-scale on this property so the City would have further control . Redpath noted the letters which were submitted at the September 1, 1981, meeting from various businesses referred to "possible" interest in this location. City Attorney Pauly called attention to his memorandum to the Council dated Septem- ber 15, 1981 , regarding City West. In that memorandum he addresses the necessity for the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing to consider the adoption of a resolution amending the Guide Plan , should that be necessary. MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Redpath, to refer the matter back to the Planning Commission for their recommendation on the PUD concept and for a public hearing on amending the Guide Plan if necessary. Bentley said he failed to see what would be gained by this. Penzel said the Planning Commission has not looked at the Guide Plan Bentley said he could not go along with the motion. Penzel said publication of a hearing on the Guide Plan by the Planning Commission had not occurred. John Herman, attorney for the Greater Bryant Lake residents, said they believe there is reasonable flexibility in the Guide Plan. His group would be happy to work with the developer. Julia Larson, 6509 Rowland Road, said she had not been notified of tonight's meeting. She is in favor of the development as proposed. City Council Minutes -13- September 15 , 1981 Phyllis Redpath, owner of property at 6609 Golden Ridge Drive , asked if the Council t was aware of any property owner in the City, other than Anderson , who has had 90 or more acres proposed for development who put in utilities prior to rezoning. Penzel said what Mr. Anderson did may have been unconventional , but it was permitted because it coincided with City plans. Gerald Steelman, 6601 Golden Ridge Drive, has met with Anderson. He feels the resi- dents are not opposed to everything and are not unreasonable. Bentley asked for a point of clarification: is it true the Council cannot legally act on the Guide Plan amendment without the Planning Commission first having a public hearing? Pauly said that was correct. VOTE ON THE MOTION: The motion carried unanimously. d b MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Edstrom, to extend the Council meeting to 12:30 a.m. s Motion carried unanimously. s f D. MEADOWS 2ND REZONING LOTS 1 - 8, BLOCK 1 by Central Investment Corporation. Re- r quest to rezone 8 lots from R1-13.5 to RM 6.5. Located at 7508 - 7578 Bittersweet Drive. (Ordinance No. 81-19) Herb Mason, representing Central Investment Corp. , reviewed the request. Jim Eder, Central Investment Corp. , said they have had various companies attempting to develop these lots for single family residences since 1978. Planning Director Enger spoke to the Staff Report dated August 12, 1981. The Plan- ning Commission reviewed the request at its August 24, 1981, meeting at which time it voted 6-0 to deny the rezoning. City Engineer Dietz noted a letter from Helen Richter of 7571 Bittersweet Drive in which she asked the Council to vote "no" on the request. The letter is attached to the Minutes . Penzel noted a letter from Jay and Linda Janda of 7582 Bittersweet Drive which statdd their opposition to the proposal . That letter is attached to the Minutes. Redpath asked how it happened that duplexes were built across from single family homes. Enger explained that was how the developer had proposed it -- mixed density largely due to poor soil conditions. Tangen wondered how the owner of lot 9 feels about the proposal as he is most directly affected by the proposal . Jay Janda, 7582 Bittersweet, noted he had written a letter previously referenced. He disagrees with the request. Dennis Dirlam, the original developer, proposed single family dwellings in this area and still does. He is con- cerned with the traffic congestion in the area right now. Many of the doubles are occupied by 6 renters which necessitates on street parking due to the number of cars per unit. He feels granting this request would be spot zoning. The present density is too high. City Council Minutes -14- September 15, 1981 Lorrayne Conrad, 9081 Sunrise Circle, spoke to the traffic problem in the area specifically in regard to children darting out into the street behind parked cars . 5 y Janda said he did not receive notice of this Public Hearing. He said five single family homes have been built within the area in the last year. It is his feeling there is a market for single family homes . f Spencer Conrad, 15518 Garfield Circle, is opposed to the request. Joyce Cram, 7586 Bittersweet, said she did not receive a notice of the Public Hear- ing before the Council but she did receive notice of the Public Hearing before the Planning Commission. b Conrad noted he has friends who are in the market for homes. Due to market condi- tions they are looking at double homes simply because they are affordable. If and when conditions change, these people will be looking for single family homes. Janet Conrad, 15518 Garfield Circle, said homes on a cul-de-sac have sold first in their area. Mason called attention to a letter from Steve Neitge who is in support of the zoning change. (Letter is attached. ) MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Bentley, to close the Public Hearing and to deny the request by Central Investment Corporation to rezone 8 lots from R1-13.5 to RM 6. 5 in Meadows 2nd - lots 1-8. Motion carried unanimously. E. WESTWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARK by Richard W. Anderson , Inc. Request for PUD approval of 42 acres as industrial , preliminary platting of 4 industrial lots, rezoning from Rural and 1-5 to 1-2, and approval of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Loca- ted south of Co. Rd. 67 and west of St. John's Woods Townhouses. (Ordinance No. 81-20 - rezoning; Resolution No. 81-188 - preliminary plat; Resolution No. 81-189 - EAW; and Resolution No. 81-187 - PUD) 4 . Michael Niemeyer and Janet Heinig of Hammel Green & Abrahamson, Inc. , architects , spoke to the proposal . The proposed site was formerly a gravel pit; the proposed development is an industrial office park. Planning Director Enger said this item had been considered on three different occa- sions by the Planning Commission: July 13, 1981 , August 8, 1981, and August 24 , 1981. At the August 8th meeting a recommendation to deny was made; alterations were made by the Developer; the modified plan and a new Public Hearing was given at the August 24th meeting. At that meeting approval was given by a 5-1 vote to grant the PUD, preliminary plat approval request, rezoning request, and Environmental Assessment Worksheet. This approval was subject to the recommendations contained in the Staff Report of August 13, 1981 . Enger stated he and City Engineer Dietz had met with property owners to the west and south of this site who are affected by construction of the road which is contemplated. This matter has not been considered by the Parks , Recreation & Natural Resources Commission because they have not met since the Planning Commission granted its approval . There would be adequate time for the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resouces Commission to consider this prior to the 2nd Reading of the Ordinance, should the Council vote favorably on the matter. City Council Minutes -15- September 15, 1981 1 i Penzel asked if this would be visible from St. John's Woods. Enger said the r moraine would protect their view. Redpath asked about the location of the realigned existing private road. Enger explained the location would be about 150 feet east of its present location and would improve site lines . Bentley asked if there was grading to be done in the floodplain. Enger said he had checked that and did not find any. Edstrom wondered what the impact of this project would be on the area to the south. Enger explained the land directly to the south is owned by the Centurion Company and is zoned residential . That property is about the same grade and a grading buffer would have to be provided between the two properties. The area to the south- west is shown on the Guide Plan as industrial . That property is very high in com- parison to this property and would be looking down on the proposed site. Bentley asked what type of buildings Anderson is intending to build. Anderson said they would be contemporary -- concrete with slanted fronts . They would be built for use by people in the computer industry. There will be seven buildings. Niemeyer said this will be a unique industrial park. Bentley asked if there will be adequate buffering of the site from the south. Enger explained the property which will be most affected is the Centurion site and that is yet to be developed. Edstrom inquired as to how this proposal fits in with the future of Townline Road. Enger said the County has indicated the right-of-way for Townline Road would be taken from the north side of the present alignment. The present road would become a frontage road. x Bentley asked if there would be adequate parking. Enger said there would be 3 spaces per thousand square feet which is according to Ordinance. Bentley wondered about the crossing of the railroad tracks . Enger explained there would be no need to cross the railroad tracks and the present road access would be moved further from the rail- road tracks. Richard Feerick, 6518 Leesborough Avenue, noted a letter he had seni to the Council , a copy of which is attached. His home would overlook the site. He questions the buffering and density; he would like to see higher quality development and questions the performance standards. Feerick stated he has always supported development in Eden Prairie as long as it reasonable and done by professional people. Joanne Irvine, 18930 Lotus View Drive, said no provision has been made for providing sanitary sewer to the area. She questions the access problems on Townline Road. Irvine also has difficulty with the density of the proposed project. Penzei asked what the ground coverage of the buildings is. Enger said it is lower than the Ordinance would allow. Enger explained the Planning Commission had looked at the question of egress out of the project. If the road were put in on the western boundary and Anderson were a benefiting property owner, the use of the road would be of benefit to the project and the Planning Commission can see nothing wrong with that. - I City Council Minutes -16- September 15, 1981 J MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to close the Public Hearing and to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 81-20, rezoning from Rural and I-5 to I-2, the area known as Westwood Industrial Park . This would be subject to review by the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission prior to the 2nd Reading of the Ordinance. Motion carried unanimously. Cecil Wyman, 6560 Leesborough Avenue, representing Wyco, Inc, of 14001 West 62nd St. , asked assurance that they can operate as they are now operating with the road access they have. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to request Staff to draft the Developer's Agreement including Staff Reports , Commission recommendations , provision of westerly access road as committed to by the developer -- details to be worked out prior to the 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 81-20 , and acceptable screening to the south. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 81-188, approving the preliminary platting of 4 industrial lots. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Penzel , to adopt Resolution No. 81-189, approving the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 81-187, granting the request for PUD approval . Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Redpath, to extend the meeting to 1: 15 a.m. Motion carried Canimously. Tangen expressed concern about the Council ' s ability to conduct business at this .�r. F. Drainage improvements for vicinity of West 69th Street and Washington Avenue, I .G. 52-004. Request to order improvements and authorize preparation of plans and specifications (Resolution No. 81-191) City Engineer Dietz spoke to the proposed request and recommended its approval , Gary Gandrud, representing Crown Plastics , 9915 West 69th .Street, asked that the duck pond behind Crown Plastics be included in the project due to drainage pro- blems it creates. Dietz said that would be feasible. Roger Ulstad, representing Viking Press, spoke in favor of the request. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 81-191, ordering improvements and authorizing preparation of plans and specifications for drainage improvements for the vicinity of West 69th Street and Washington Avenue, I .C. 52-004. Motion carried with Bentley abstaining. G. Request for Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of $306,000 for Town & Countr_y Claim Service, Inc. Bryant Lake Center - Lakeridge Office Project) Resolution No. 81-197. City Council Minutes -17 September 15, 1981 Bob Ryan of Ryan Development, developer/contractor of Lakeridge Office Park, spoke to the request. This is the sixth application of its kind for buildings at Lakeridge. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 81-197, authorizing the issuance of Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of $306,000 for Town & Country Claim Service, Inc. ; and to dispense with the reading of the Resolution. Motion carried unanimously. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 8274 - 8465 MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve Payment of Claims Nos. 8274 - 8465. Roll call vote: Bentley, Edstrom, Redpath, Tangen, and Penzel voted "aye" with Edstrom abstaining on claim number 8382. Motion carried. VI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS There were no reports. VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. Request from Timothy Gagner for time extension on rezoning for Alpine Estates j 2nd Addition City Manager Jullie stated Gagner has requested a 24 month extension of his Developer's Agreement. It has been 24 months since the preliminary plat and Developer' s Agreement were approved. The City recommends an 18 month extension. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Edstrom, to extend for 12 months the Develop- er` s Agreement and rezoning for Alpine Estates 2nd Addition. Motion carried unan- imously. VIII . REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members Tan en - would like to see an additional meeting added to the Council schedule rather than have meetings extend past 12:30 a.m. He feels judgments are affected when the meetings go beyond that time. Bentley asked if, historically, meetings have gone on like this. Penzel and Redpath said spring and summer have been rather slow times traditionally,but the number of items on the agenda increases during fall and winter when people are gearing up for the next building season. At one time the Council met three times a month -- and the Council met until 2 a.m. three times a month instead of twice a month. Penzel - a meeting of the South Hennepin Human Services Council will be held on Monday, September 21, 1981 , at the St. Louis Park Recreation Center. Total dele- tion of funding is being recommended by the Hennepin County Cormissioners' Staff.. Edstrom - would like a status report on the Slope Ordinance at the October 6, 1981 , Council meeting. C_ y City Council Minutes -IB- September 15, 1981 B. Report of City Attorney There was none. C. Report of City Manager City Manager Jullie spoke to his memo of September 11 , 1981 , in which he addressed the matter of City Services and the options for development. The Council discussed the merits of the various options addressed in the memo. Planning Director Enger stated the Planning Commission had looked at the options last evening and are in full support of the Mitchell Road site. MOTION: Redpath moved , seconded by Tangen, to approve Option 1 (A. Public Safety Building - with shooting range and maintenance garage to be added in the future - and shell only of the conference/classroom and exercise room; B. Park and Regrea- tion and Public Works facilities as in the revised program dated September 3, 1981. ) Motion carried with Penzel voting "no" because he disagreed with the option; he will , however, work for the passage of the bond issue. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to set November 17, 1981, as the date for the bond issue and to instruct Staff to prepare the necessary plans and support- ing documents. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Edstrom, to continue the meeting to 1:30 a.m. Motion Carried unanimously. City Manager Jullie noted the City has drafted an option agreement for the Wein- berg property. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Edstrom, to authorize the City Manager to enter into an option agreement,at a cost of $1,000.00, for the Weinberg property. Roll call vote: Bentley, Edstrom, Redpath, Tangen, and Penzel voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously. 3 D. Report of City Engineer 1. Resolution receiving petition from MTS and authorizing a feasibilit report for a comb ned_p oject to include Mifc—hell Road Scenic Heights to TH CPT Road/ MTS Road, I.C. 52-010 Resolution No. 81-193 City Manager Jullie spoke to the proposal . MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to adopt Resolution No. 81-193, receiving petition from MTS and authorizing a feasibility report for a com- bined project to include Mitchell Road (Scenic Heights to TH 5)/CPT Road/MTS Road, I .C. 52-010. Motion carried unanimously. r : City Council Minutes -19- September 15, 1981 2. Receive etition for improvements in and adjacent to Westwood Industrial Park and authorize feasibility stud - including trunk watermai_ n, lateral watermain, lateral sanitary sewer, roadway along west line of development and the interior cul-de-sac, I .C. 52-015 Resolution No. 81-195 MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 81-195, receiving petition and ordering feasibility report for street and associated utility improvements in Westwood Industrial Park, I .C. 52-025. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Receive 100X petition for improvements for Autumn Woods Phase i and authorize preparation of pans and specifications, I .C. 2-01 (Resolution No. 81-196 MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No. 81-196, receiving 100% petition, ordering improvements and preparation of plans and specifications for public improvements in Autumn Woods , Phase I , I .C. 52-016A. Motion carried unanimously. IX. NEW BUSINESS There was none X. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Edstrom, to adjourn the meeting at 1:21 a.m. Motion carried unanimously. 'I