Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 09/22/1981 - Special Meeting APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1981 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel , George Bentley, Dean Edstrom, Paul Redpath, and George Tangen COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl Jullie, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Citv Attorney Richard F. Rosow Finance Director John 9. Frane, City (ngineer Eugene A. Dietz, City Forester Stu Fox, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael INVOCATION: Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL : All members were present - Tangen arrived late I . APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS MOTION: Edstrom moved , seconded by Redpath , to approval the Agenda as published. Motion carried unanimously. C .I . CONSENT CALENDAR A. Final plat approval for Willow Creek 2nd Addition (Resolution No. 81-199) B. Set Public Hearing for October 20, 1981 to consider request for Municipal Industrial Deve� lq2me�nt Bonds in the amount of_$378 000 for bean Spencer, Sr. Project MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath , to adopt items A and B on th'e Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously. II1 . PUBLIC BEARINGS A. Public Hearin for 1981 Assessment Projects (Resolution No. 81-200) City Manager Jullie spoke to the purpose of the Assessment Hearing. City Engineer Dietz spoke to the proposed assessment roll as outlined in Exhibit A of Resolution No. 81-200. (See attached) s I City Council Minutes -2- September 22, 1981 1. I.C. 51-325 (Valley View Road Extension) City Attorney Rosow questioned Russell Smith , an appraiser on behalf of the City, regarding his appraisal of the Pavelka property. Mr. Smith ' s appraisal concluded that the benefits to the property, by virtue of the improvements , exceeded the amount of the special assess- ments. Councilman Tangen arrived at 7:50 p.m. Rose Pavelka, 7120 Duck Lake Road, said they have requested an agriculture pre- serve designation. Penzel elaborated on the appropriateness and the timeliness of the project. Bill Bearman, 9955 Valley View Road, asked Smith if soil tests had been done on the Pavelka land. Smith said none had been made. Bearman also asked how familiar Smith is with City Ordinances. Smith said he checks on Ordinances with the Planning Department. This item was continued to the October 6, 1981, meeting. 2. I .C. 51-288 (Industrial Drive Improvements ) Redpath asked if there had been any discussion with property owners regarding previous street improvements. Dietz said there had been. An attorney for the property owners at 6340 Industrial Drive stated they have no objection to the assessment shown, but would be opposed to any credits being given. 3. I .C. 51-341 (Anderson Lakes Parkway) No questions were asked. 4. I .C. 51-343 - (Chatham Woods) Thomas Selseth, 15602 Fairwood Lane. Minnetgnka , one of the developers of Chatham Woods , said the per lot cost is very high. Bentley asked what caused this per lot cost to be so high. Dietz explained the contractor ran into bad soil conditions which meant additional excavating had to be done and then more materials brought in as a base for the roadway. Selseth asked if the assess- ment could be spread over a longer period. Penzel said the maximum would be 17 years . Dick Leisig, 16756 Whittington Walk, asked why the assessment was not known a year ago since the project was completed about that time, Penzel explained the assessment process . Y - -- City Council Minutes -3- Sep tembei 22, 1981 City Manager Jullie further explained the soil conditions found after the project had begun. Jullie stated no feasibility study was done because a 100'01 petition had been filed by the developers . None is required in that instance. The developers were made aware of the increased costs due to the soil conditions . John Muehlberg, 16772 Whittington Walk , one of the developers , said there is no way the lots can be sold with the assessments as they are now. Penzel said the City has no way of changing the total assessment, only the length of time over which it is paid can be changed. This item was continued to the October 6, 1981 , meeting. 5. I .C. 51-344C (Shady Oak Industrial Park W. 70th St. ) A letter from Robert Eggerichs , Partner, E & H Properties , Inc. , is attached. In this letter objections to the amount of the assessment are outlined. s 6. I .C. 51-359 (Norseman Industrial Park 4th Addition) George Hoff, attorney representing He rleiv Helle, spoke to the objections outlined in his letter to the Council dated September 21, 1981 (copy attached. ) Herleiv Helle, 6128 Arctic Way, believes the Condor assessment is unfair -- Condor should be assessed for at least four acres. This item was continued to the October 6, 1981 , meeting. 7. I .C. 51-360 (Meadow Park) No questions were asked. 8. I_C. 51-362 (Village Wdods II ) No questions were asked. 9. I .C. 51-366 (Valley View Road Watermain Extension, Brauns) Bruce Cris , attorney for Braun-Kaiser, spoke to the written objection which, had been submitted by Braun-Kaiser, ' Al Braun, Braun-Kaiser, said they had just found out thAs afternoon what is involved here. William Bearman, 9955 Valley View Road; asked how much his assessment would be, Dietz noted Bearman' s assessment would be deferred, 5 years at 12% was changed to 17 years at 12%. 10. I .C. 51-375 (Creekview Estates) No questions were asked, City Council Ninut-es -4- September 22, 1981 11. I.C. 51-376 (Cardinal Creek 2nd Addition) No questions were asked. °r 12. I.C. 51-380 (Hilltop Road) No questions were asked. 13. I.C. 51-382 (Willow Creek Road) Bert Sutton , 7190 Flying Cloud Drive, wanted to know about the feasibility report. He did not recall receiving a notice of that public hearing. 14. I.C. 51-383 (Rymarland Camp 2nd Addition) No questions were asked. 15. I.C. 51-385 (Lake Idelwild Drainage) Calvin Anderson, 7214 Topview Road, representing Eden Prairie Presbyterian Church , noted the ballpark behind the Church does not drain towards Lake Idelwild. The Church objects to all five acres being assessed, Burdell Wessels , 9980 Dell Road, was also present to represent the Church. The Council agreed to defer two acres of the Church property from the assess- ment until the property is actually graded to drain to the project. 16. I.C. 51-386 (T.H. 101 , 6 Lots North of Valley View Road) No questions were asked. 17. I.C. 51-392 (Sunset Trails) No questions were asked. 18. I.C. 51-395 (Kirk Meadows) Penzel noted a letter from Clifford and Laverne Wiese, 16680 Luther Way: objecting to the amount of the assessment, That letter is attached to the Minutes . Dietz explained there had been an error in the feasibility report. Jullie recommended this be referred back to Staff. Donald Jacobson, 16440 Luther Way, wanted to know what the actual cost was going to be. Ken Sconberg, 16560 Luther Way, wanted to know if there would be credit given for prior deposits. Penzel said there would, C City Council Minutes -5- September 22 , 1981 - Sconberg asked about the change in elevation of the road. It was explained this was done due to changes made by the County. Gerry Beauvais , 7735 Meadow Lane , asked about the increase in the rate of interest. It was explained the City now has to pay close to 12% and the policy has been to charge 1 - P o in addition to what the City pays to cover handling costs . This item was continued to the October 6, 1981 , meeting. 19. Supplementals Jim Simchuck, 9145 Flying Cloud Drive, questioned the assessment for lateral water service. Eugene Hansen, 9125 Flying Cloud, thought he had paid for a lateral water connection about ten years ago. Letters were received from Simchuck and Hansen and are attached. A letter was received from Mrs . Joseph W. Haynes regarding trunk sewer and water assessments PIN #s: 2-116-22-23-0006 2-116-22-23-0010 2-116-22-23-0007 2-116-22-23-u011 2-116-22-23-0008 3-116-22-14-0005 2-116-22-23-0009 3 } f The Haynes' assessments were continued to the October 6, 1981 , meeting . A letter was received from Donald F. Faulks regarding g g the problem they had in receiving mail relative to the removal of trees on their property. i Faulks spoke to the problem also. (Letter is attached. ) Tree Removal : 6-116-22-23-0003 $2123.00 was deleted. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 81-200. Motion carried unanimously. IV. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS A. Resolution No. 8_1-190, establishing and designating Development District No. 1 pursuant to the rovisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 472A.01 to 472A, 13-, inclusive, as amended, and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71 to 273.7811 inclusive, as amended, and establishing Tax Increment District No. 1 pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Sections 273.71 to 273.78, inclusive,as amended and adopting aed_appi oving a _Development Program and Finance Plan for said Development District and Tax Increment District Penzel noted letters had been received from Elaine Jacques , Minnesota Tree, Ged- ney Tutle, Hakon Torjesen, and the Board of Directors of the Eden Prairie Chamber of Commerce - all of which are attached. Tangen wished to acknowledge he had read the letters received this evening. He felt great efforts had been made by the Staff regarding the Plan and did not find the letters caused him to change his opinion of the Plan. City Council Minutes -6- September 22, 1981 Edstrom inquired W' `he repayr,,ent schedule is on the financing. Fahey said three factors will be relied upon: growth in the tax base within the tax in- �. crement district ; special ass--_, • ants and interest on those assessments ; and the two mill levy. The combination of those three elements will pay off $16 million worth of tax increment bonds issued by the City and they will run approx- imately 20 yearn. They will finance about $13,075,000 in project costs. Penzel noted it is based not on a speculative tax base but on existing buildings which have yet to be taxed. f MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to adopt Resolution No. 81-190, a Resolution establishing and designating Development District No. 1 and Tax Incre- ment District No. 1 , and adopting and approving a Development Program and Finance ; Plan for said Development District and Tax Increment District. Motion carried unanimously. 3 V. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Report of City Manager 1. Consideration of 1982 City Budget MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Penzel , to continue consideration of the 1982 City Budget to Thursday, September 24, 1981, at 8 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. VI . NEW BUSINESS City Attorney Rosow asked to meet briefly with the Council to discuss litigation. VII ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to adjourn the meeting at 11:31 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. The Council met in private session following the Council meeting to discuss litigation. MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Tangen, to authorize Staff to deposit Cat appropriate time) with the Court: $3,900 for Sutton, $5,400 for Blossom, $15,800 for Paivelka for possession of land. Roll call vote: Bentley , Edstrom, Redpath, Tangen ' and Penzel voted "aye. 4 Motion carried unanimously, il.