Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 08/19/1986 �g*3. y irN ,a APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY , AUGUST 19 , 1986 7:30 PM, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BOARD- ROOM r COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock and Paul Redpath CITY COUNCIL STAFF : City Manager Carl J . Jullie , Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D . Frane , Planning Director Chris Enger, Director of Community Services Robert Lambert , Director of Public Works Eugene A . Dietz , and Recording Secretary Jan Nelson PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE v ROLL CALL: All members were present . I . APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS The following items were added to the Agendas IX . A . 1 . Pidcock - Comments on City Manager's Report; IX . A . 2 . Pid- cock - Meeting with Auditors= IX. A . 3 . Pidcock - Trees on Red Rock Heights ; IX . A . 4. Peterson - Process for discus- sion regarding Thursday meeting. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Agenda and Other Items of Business as amended and published . Motion carried unanimously. II . CONSENT CALENDAR A . Resolution requesting signal modifications @ CSAH 4 & TH (Resolution No . -20 B . Approval of Agreement for Architectural Services for Fire Stations C . RIDGE . Denial of 2nd Reading of Ordinance #58-83, CRESCENT R g � Rezoning of 26 .6 acres from Rural and RI-22 to RI-13 .5 and 20 acres from Industrial General and Rural to RM-6 .5, with variances, for mixed residential development . Location: North of Highway #5, South of Lorene Way and West of Ather- ton Way. D . DONNAY' S ROUND LAKE ESTATES, by LAD Properties, Inc . 2nd Reading of Ord nance - -PUD-1-86, Zoning District Change tom: rr'r` t City Council Meeting -2 August 19, 1986 from Rural to PUD-1 -86, including the R1 -13 .5 on 9 .58 acres and RM-6 .5 , with variances, on 14. 71 acres ; Approval of Developer' s Agreement for Donnay's Round Lake Estates; and Adoption of Resolution #86-201 , Authorizing Summary of Ordinance #12-86-PUD-1-86 , and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 34 .92 acres into 69 lots and one outlot . Location: North of Highway #5, south of Lorene Way and west of Atherton Way. (Ordinance #12-86-PUD-1-86, Rezoning and PUD; Resolution #86-201 , Authorizing Summary and Publi- cation) E . Final Pia'z approval for Donnay Round Lake Estates (Resolu- tion No . -205 F. BLUFFS EAST 4TH AND 5TH ADDITIONS, by Hustad Development . 2nd Heading of Ordinance 2 - -P1 -3-86 , Zoning District Change from Rural to PUD-3-86 , including the R1-13 .5 Dist- rict ; Approval of Developer' s Agreement for Bluffs East 4th and 5th Additions ; and Adoption of Resolution #86-154, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance #24-86-PUD-3-86 and Order- ing Publication of Said Summary . PUD on 184 acres, PUD District Review and Zoning on 38 .15 acres for 72 single a family lots and nine outlots . Location: West of County ,( Road #18 , northwest of Bluff Road, and west of Franlo Road . (Ordinance #24-86-PUD-3-86, PUD District and Rezoningt Resolution #86-154, Authorizing Summary and Publication) G. Reschedule Special City Council meeting set for August 21 1�86 at : 00 PM from the Media Center at Prairie View School to the School Administration Boardroom H. Resolution Supj2ortin the United Wa ' s Salute to Small Busi- ness on September 17, 1986 (Resolution No. 86-218"7— I . Resolution Sponsoring a Request for Funding by the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development for Eden Prairie Rideshare (Resolution No . -220 J . Satisfaction of Development A Bement Conditions - Mitchell Heights 4th Addition Resolution No . -2 7 K . Resolution 12roclaiming September as Eden Prairie History Month Resolution No . -221 Peterson expressed concern about whether it was appropriate , in regard to Item G. to move the location if it had been published as a Public Meeting. City Manager Jullie said that it was not an official Public Hearing and was not ,pub- lished as such and that the process would involve stationing i b. J ,y { City Council Meeting -3- August 19, 1986 a Community Service officer at Prairie View and putting notices on the door at the school . Peterson noted that the School District had requested the change . Pidcock expressed her concern regarding Item H since she thought it was singling out certain causes and thereby ignoring others . Bentley said that we have passed simi- lar resolutions for other groups in the past but that the practice should probably be monitored in the future . MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve Items A - K on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried with Pidcock opposed on Item H. III . PUBLIC HEARINGS A . FEASIBILITY STUDY BAKER ROAD SANITARY SEWER (north of St . Andrew Drive ) Resolution No . -20 C ity Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published and property owners within the project vicinity had been notified . Rodney Rue, Staff Design Engineer, reviewed the recommen- dations of the Feasibility Study and noted that assessment reports had been sent to residents in the vicinity. He presented the three alternative locations (under Baker Road , along Baker Road or through the middle of the affec- ted properties) and the approximate costs for each alterna- tive . He also presented the assessment rolls and the proj- ect schedule and said that staff is recommending approval of Option 2 because it is the most cost effective based on the additional cost to extend it . He said, however, that Option 2 may be more difficult because of the eight proper- ty owners affected . He also called attention to the letter from Glen and Karen Bowen objecting to the assessment on their lot, but not objecting to the feasibility study. Bentley asked what the justification for the project was . Rue said that the City received a petition from four home- owners for the sewer. Bentley then asked if there are currently any proposals for development of the property. Enger said there were none . Bentley said he was mystified by what appears to } be pre-zoning of an area without any proposals on harm. ! Director of Public Works Dietz said that the proposed align- ment provided a net savings to the property owners but that they were not proposing the plat be approved . Dietz noted that the alignment along Baker Road would have extra cost . i .a City Council Meeting -4- August 190 1986 Peterson asked what the immediate impact on existing homes would be under Option 2 . Dietz said that there are no homes in the area now but that the severe topography there lends itself to cul-de-sacs . Redpath said he thought it was logical to put the sewer where it will do the most good . Bentley said that he thought it would make sense to have the sewer available , Y' then when development takes place they would apply to have the sewer extended into the property. Anderson said he thought it was an advantage to the City to have an overall concept available for the neighbors to get together and consider. Bentley said he thought if that was the case , then let the people put together the plan, get it approved and then talk about the sewer. Pidcock said Option 2 appears to be the most cost effec- tive but that she thought it would be up to the property owners to decide . i E Peterson said that he was not sure we should be doing more than voting on the request in the petition. Lorena Wright , a resident , said she approved the sewer line being run through the center of the property . Mike Sutton, 11341 Pioneer Trail , said that he owned two lots and commended the staff on the design. He further said he thought it would have to be tied into rezoning to_ . 13 .5 lots in order to make it work properly . Norm Franks , 7036 Baker Road , said that he had experienced problems so he was in favor of the sewer and that he liked the plan going through the middle . John Smith said that he owns the parcel in the southwest corner and that he thought the plan was very good but he wasn't sure one particular property owner would agree . Don Flom, 7128 Baker Road, said that he was in favor of the plan. Glen Bowen, 7025 Mariann Drive, said that he objected to the assessment on the extension of one of his lots because ° it is not buildable and has a protective covenant . Redpath noted that assedsments would be discussed at the Assessment Hearing. Wilbur Gjersvik, 7102 Baker Road , said that there should be four lots to be assessed instead of three and that he City Council Meeting -5- August 19, 1986 believed Mr. Bowen' s lot was buildable . He said he was in favor of the project except that he thought it needed more planning. Dietz said he thought that, with the consent of the proper- ty owners, the appropriate action might be to continue the hearing for a month or two and try to arrange a meeting among the property owners to form an alliance and bring something into the Planning Dept . He said Option 2 could riot be completed this fall anyway. He further said that if the meeting was not successful, it would still be pos- sible to go ahead with the Baker Road alternative . Peterson said that he wanted to commend Mr. Dietz and his department for a creative alternative . MOTION: Redpath moved , seconded by Anderson, to continue the item to the second meeting in October to allow time for a meeting among the property owners . Bentley said he would be more comfortable with moving for- ward on this if there was something from the Planning Dept . on the project . VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously . d B . FEASIBILITY STUDY RIVERV IEW ROAD & RIVERV IEW DRIVE STREET IMPROVEMENTS, I .0 . 52- 0 Resolution No . -209 City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published and property owners listed on the pre- liminary assessment rolls had been notified . Director of Public Works Dietz reviewed the proposal to construct sanitary sewer and water, pave Riverview Drive and extend Riverview Road . He said the total estimated cost for the project would be about $500,000 and that a lot unit basis had been devised to assess the homes to be developed . He said property owners had received copies of ' the assessment rolls and noted that some deferments may be required on some of the undeveloped property. He said the project schedule calls for plans being completed by September 2nd and the project getting underway this fall as the developer is anxious to .proceed . Gayle Diehl, 10530 Riverview Drive, commented on the his- tory of this development including a promise by the developer N at a meeting on October 2, 1984, to assume the cost for the sanitary sewer and water. She said she would be wil- ling to pay the assessment for the storm sewer. A lit City Council Meeting -6- August 19, 1986 discussion followed as to whether the meeting in question was a Planning Commission meeting or a Council meeting. Chuck Koshenina, 10541 Riverview Drive E. , noted instances where existing adjacent land owners were not assessed when the developer petitioned for the improvements and objected to the landowners being asked to participate in the costs of this project as he has no need for sewer and water and will not profit from the development . James Diehl, 10530 Riverview Dr. , noted the history of the development regarding the zoning of the center parcel and said that 2t neighbors were opposed to rezoning of that parcel . He said he thought this was unfair and was, in effect , changing the rules in the middle of the game . Peterson noted the need to review the minutes of the 1984 meeting to see what was promised . a Bentley commented that this is a feasibility hearing, not an assessment hearing, and that what will be assessed can only be resolved at an assessment hearing. He said the numbers presented are proposed assessments only. Peterson asked if there had been any discussion among staff or the neighbors to defer assessments on the exist- ing properties with their existing utilities until their request is made . Dietz responded that there was none and said that to his knowledge there was no agreement with the developer as previously suggested . Wally Hustad, developer, commented on what he was willing to do with the assessments and said that they were willing to pay $50,000 of extra storm sewer costs for the people in the Bluffs West area but that he had never considered paying for the sewer and water in the undeveloped horse- shoe area. Lorraine Christopher, 10550 Riverview Drive W. , said that she has finally sold her house and will now be faced with a $12 ,000 assessment . Richard Condon, 10561 Riverview Drive , said that he had been led to believe nothing would happen for some time so he had just redone the sewer and water on his property. He asked where the utilities would be located on his proper- ty. Peterson said he could have input as to where it goes and when it goes in. i James Brown, 11551 Riverview Rd . , said that he had paid for the sewer put through by Hustad . ; i City Council Meeting -7- August 19, 1986 Tom Brown, 10531 Riverview Drive E. , said he is in favor of the street but not the sewer. Redpath suggested that the development be serviced inter- nally off Riverview Road . A discussion followed regarding the feasibility of that approach. Mr. Diehl said that he thought there should be a grand- father clause to allow their assessment to be postponed until hookup. A discussion followed regarding the pos- sibilities of postponing the assessment until hookup. Pidcock said that she believed some of the statements made in the preceding discussion were totally inappropriate and she objected to them strongly. She said that we are here to look at the feasibility of putting in sewer and water and not the ability of people to pay for it . MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public Hearin; and adopt Resolution No. 86-209 ordering preparation of plans and specifications for I .C . 52-101 , Riverview Road and Riverview Drive . Motion carried unani- mously . C . FEASIBILITY STUDY, CRESTWOOD TERRACE STREET IMPROVEMENTS . I .C . 52-079 (Resolution No . 86-210) City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published and property owners within the project vicinity had been notified . Director of Public Works Dietz reviewed the details of the project and said that the petition came from several proper- ty owners to get the unpaved segment of Crestwood Terrace paved . He said that , since the petition did not come from any of the owners of property on the unpaved section, staff developed the proposed improvements to include an overlay of the currently-paved segment of Crestwood Terrace. He noted that it will probably be the year 2000 before sewer and water is available in the area . He said the total cost of the project is about $74,000 and said that the project schedule calls for development to start this fall or first thing next spring. He called attention to a letter from Jill Grier, 9848 Crestwood Terrace , countersigned by Irene Schwartz and Jane Schwartz, agreeing with paving the gravel portion but not repaving the currently-paved segment. Redpath asked why the paving of Dell Road wasn't included. Dietz said that the request was only for Crestwood Terrace so that they could have access to County Road 1 via a paved road . r City Council Meeting -8- August 19 , 1986 Peterson asked what was the rationale behind assessing property owners for the repaving of an existing street . Dietz said that the existing street was an interim pave- ment until utilities became available but that utilities a are taking much longer than expected . Dietz further said that it is not paved to the current standards for a new subdivision and that an overlay would extend the useful line of the street until the permanent improvements are made . Pidcock asked if the street would have to be torn up again when sewer and water come in and if there is any less ex- pensive way to put an overlay in. Dietz replied that this proposal is as cheap as possible and that the street would have to be torn up for the utilities . a Bentley said he saw two possible options in that the resi- dents could agree to the overlay and pawing of the gravel section or there would be no project since he could not see the owners of the property along the gravel portion agreeing to pay for it . Dietz said he thought a third option would be to just pave the gravel portion as reques- ted , but that he wasn' t sure how that would fare in an assessment hearing. Redpath asked what the cost of paving the gravel portion would be . Dietz said it would be $28,536 for construc- tion costs without fees . Bert Skatrud, 9824 Crestwood Terrace , said that he had paid for the finished pavement when he moved in and that he will have to pay twice for the same road if he is asses- sed again. He said that Cedar Forest was overlaid and they were not assessed . He asked how long the overlay would last . Dietz said they hoped it would last until the utili- ties come in around 2000 and that the original road was not built to last that long. 1 I, Walter Bentz, 9802 Crestwood Terrace , said that he was not aware that Crestwood was a temporary rt.,ad and that he assumed there were some standards set for roads. He asked if his taxes were not meant to include road maintenance such as overlays . Dietz said that was a valid point as Cedar Forest Road had been overlaid as a maintenance measure . Bentz further commented that some residents want to share in the cost of paving the gravel area but that the problem is with the overlay of the paved section. Peterson asked if the consensus was that the residents were willing to share in the cost of paving the gravel portion. Several of the residents present agreed . yl ; rrP: �f City Council Meeting -9- August 19, 1986 Craig Morton, 9860 Crestwood Terrace, said he thought it was a good feasibility study and that he agreed to pay for the unpaved portion but said he thought the overlay should be paid for the same as Cedar Forest . He also said the drainage should be looked at very carefully when the gravel section is paved and that he would like to see a 17-year pay-off period rather than a 10-year period . Bentley said he thought staff should contact residents in the area and circulate a petition stating that the resi- dents agree to pay the assessments for the unpaved portion because it enhances the value of their property accordingly and revise the cost figures to reflect paving of the unpaved portion only . Anderson said he agreed with that suggestion. Gerald Harris , 9844 Crestwood Terrace , said he thought they shouldn' t be assessed for the currently-paved portion. Jeff Kallevig, 9804 Dell Road , presented a letter to Mayor Peterson dated August 19, 1986, which outlined his concerns with the project . (Attachment A ) He said he questioned the continuity of the street if the gravel portion is paved *our feet narrower than the currently-paved portion. He said he thought a seal coating would be all that was re- quired on the paved portion . Paul Langenfeld , 9655 Crestwood Terrace, said he also wanted the unpaved portion paved but didn't want to pay for a road he had already paid for. Norbert Rogers, 9836 Crestwood Terrace, said he recalled that the road had been built according to existing City specifications at the time of construction. Al Prentice, 9653 Crestwood Terrace , said that he thought the paved portion needed resurfacing but that it should be done at the City ' s expense . Bentley said he thought a new petition was necessary in case the project is challenged since it would be difficult to prove it enhances the property that is not adjacent to the unpaved portion . Peterson asked what happens if a few residents don 't agree to sign the petition. City Attorney Pauly said he thought it would .be difficult to get 100% agreement on such a petition but the Council could still make a determination to assess the property owners that did not agree . Peterson asked Pauly if we could show benefit to the de- veloped properties by paving the gravel portion. Pauly said it was a possibility but that it would be better to get c one urrenc e . City Council Meeting -10- August 19, 1986 k A Dietz said he thought it would be best to allow a two- month continuance since construction could not begin until spring anyway . MOTION: Bentley moved , seconded by Anderson, to continue the item to the second meeting in October in order to allow time for a new petition from the residents concerned . Motion carried unanimously . a D . BLUESTEM HILLS, by Brown Land Company. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13 .5 on 26 .86 acres and Preliminary Plat of 31 .56 acres into 64 single family lots, one outlot and road right-of-way . Location: South of Bennett Place , north of Purgatory Creek . (Ordinance #45-86, Rezoning; Resolution #86-204, Preliminary Plat ) City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published and property owners within the project vicinity had been notified . w Peter Knaeble , representing proponent , addressed the pro- posal . ( Planning Director Enger said that the Planning Commission reviewed this item at its July 28th meeting and again at its August 11th meeting. He said the Commission recom- mended approval of the project at the August 11th meeting on a 7-0 vote subject to the recommendations contained in the July 25th and August 8th staff reports. He said some of the recommendations included were the replacement of trees, installation of a five-foot concrete sidewalk through the project and the continuance of Meade Lane to the north . He also noted the Staff Report of August 15. 1986 which recommended a change in the location of the proposed ex- tension of Meade Lane from that included in the July 25th report . Director of Community Services Lambert said the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission reviewed the project last night and recommended approval, subject to the Planning Commission and staff recommendations. Bentley asked how many housing. units were shown on the map. Knaeble said there are 64. Bentley then asked if the pro- ponent was going to agree to the preliminary plat of 62 a units that would result from the proposed extension of Meade Lane even though the request was for 64 units . Knaeble said they would . t Peterson asked, since the lots along the creek bluffs are to be graded as they are sold, how much control can be City Council Meeting -11 - August 19, 1986 exercised in such a situation. Enger said that the Planning and Engineering staff were concerned that the pads for the homes were close to the grading plan for the proposal. He said such an approach would only be approved where the natural grade lies reasonably close to the proposed devel- opment pad . Redpath asked what the grade was on the north side of the extension of Meade Dane . Enger said it was about 20 feet higher than Jackson Drive . Anderson noted that he didn't see anything in the staff s recommendations as to the dedication of Outlot A . Lambert said it should be included . Anderson asked about the loca- tion of the sidewalk/trail system in the area . Lambert pointed out the location on the map of the project . Pidcock asked for a clarification of how the Meade Lane extension was to be developed . Enger showed the proposed extension on the map. A discussion of the proposed exten- sion followed . Mr. Wagner, 10841 Blossom Road, said that the current prop- erty owners to the west of him don't have plans for devel- opment and so they would prefer to see Meade Sane extended to Jackson. Peterson responded that the exact location is not part of the proposal and the Council is not determining the alignment of the road but rather is providing for a future extension to the north . Bentley said he thought that the intent would be that the road would ultimately go through depending on what occurs in the development to the north. Peterson said he thought it might be a good idea to extend Meade Lane to the northern edge of the property line to avoid future problems with the adjacent property owners . Enger said that one of the reasons for the proposed extension of Meade Lane was that there are a number of current proposals for the area. 4 Tim Koloski , 10076 Meade Lane, said he was concerned about the traffic coming in on Meade rather than Bennett Place and said he u;dn't think there would be any benefit in running Meade past Jackson. He asked about the require- ments for parks or totlots in the area. Lambert said the neighborhood park would be Franlo Park and that mini-parks are riot usually required unless it is a multi-family proposal . Knaeble said there were restrictive covenants proposed for each of the bluff lots so that the builder would have to get overall grading and development plan approval . Peterson asked who would be responsible for the ongoing maintenance ' City Council Meeting -12 August 19. 1986 and supervision of the covenants . Knaeble said that it typically would be the responsibility of the City staff. Anderson said he understood that restrictive covenants such as those dealing with the conservancy area along the creek have not always been included in the deeds, there- fore lie wanted to make sure that was done . City Attorney Pauly said that, with regard to conservation-type ease- ments, we do include them but for non-conservation-type restrictions we do not . MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public Hearing and approve 1st Reading of Ordinance } No . 45-86 for rezoning from Rural to R1-13 .5 on 26 .86 acres . Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved , seconded by Anderson, to adopt Resolution No . 86-204 approving the Preliminary Plat of Bluestem Hills for Brown Land Company consisting of 31 .56 acres into 62 single family lots, the two lots at the end of Meade Lame platted as one outlot in addition to the originally proposed outlot and road right-of-way. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations and including the following items : the agreement regarding dedication of Outlot A, the requirement that a specific plan for the grading of the southern lots be worked out in writing prior to 2nd Reading and the requirement that the restrictive covenants regarding the floodplain be finalized prior to 2nd Reading. Motion carried unanimously. Bentley asked Director of Public Works Dietz to place a sign on the outlot stating that the road will be continued through at that point . E . FEASIBILITY STUDY UTILITY AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS FOR BLUFFS EAST 4TH ADDITION east of Franlo Road and south of CSAH I .C . 2-0 Resolution No. -2 APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE BIDS tResolut on No . -212 1 City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published in the August 6th and August 13th issues of the Eden Prairie News . Director of Public Works Dietz reviewed the details of the feasibility report and pointed out the location of the sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer and the street system on a map of the project . He said the total estimated cost City Council Meeting -13- August 19, 1986 for the project is $1 , 771,000 and the cost for the Bluffs East 4th Addition constitutes $1 , 000, 000 of the total cost leaving a cost of $7?1 , 000 for the area outside Bluffs East 4th . He explained the method of prorating the cost for the project and the preliminary assessment rolls for the project . Bentley asked Dietz if he thought in an assessment hearing those properties that are not currently being developed 3 are potential candidates for assessment deferments until they hookup or development takes place . Dietz replied that they proposed all the subtrunk assessments be deferred until utilities become available . Bentley then asked about the lateral assessments . Dietz said that all lateral assessments are proposed to be levied but that there are some provisions that might allow deferments in an assess- ment hearing. i Mr. Brigs, 9715 Pioneer Trail, said that he is opposed to over OO,000 of assessments put in on property over their objections . Dean Luke, 10450 Whitetail Crossing, said he had lived in the area 15 years waiting for a sewer system and so he was in favor of the project . Mrs . Munson, 10240 County Rd . 18, said that she understood that their assessment could be deferred . Peterson res- ponded that deferments would have to be discussed at the assessment hearing but that it was a possibility . Bentley noted that in the past , depending on the circum- stances, a cap has been placed on the interest payments on the assessment but that this again would be taken up at the assessment hearing. Pidcock asked Dietz for a clarification of the situation with the existing three lots near the Bluffs East 4th prop- erty. Dietz explained how the lots were situated and how they would benefit from the construction. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 86-211 orderingg preparation of plans and specifications for I .C . 52-09b, Utility and Street Improvements for Bluffs East 4th Addi- tion. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No . 86-212 approving plans and specifications q R r k City Council Meeting -14- August 19, 1986 a and ordering advertisement for bids for I.0 . 52-096 . Motion carried unanimously. F. FEASIBILITY STUDY VALLEY VIEW ROAD WEST OF GOLDEN TRI- ANGLE DRIVE* _5Z-D 9 . - Resolution -Na.._ -2 3 APPROVE PANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE BIDS (Resolution No . -2 3 City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published and property owners within the project vicinity had been notified . Director of . Public Works Dietz reviewed the details of the project and said that Steiner Development had peti- tioned for the project . He said the total cost was approxi- mately $89, 000 and that the assessment to the property owners would be split between Steiner Development and Helle Construction. There were no comments from the audience . MCTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No. 86-213 ordering preparation of plans and specifications for I .C . 52-089, Improvements to Valley View Road West of Golden Triangle Drive. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No . 86-214 approving plans and specifications and ordering advertisement for bids for I .C . 52-089. Motion carried unanimously . G. VACATION OF EASEMENT PRAIRIE EAST 4TH ADDITION north of Nottingham Drive and east of Franlo Road) Resolution No. -2 5 City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing was published in the July 23 , 1986 issue of the Eden Prairie News . He said the item deals with vacating a utility ease- ment in the Prairie East 4th Addition. There were no comments from the audience . MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to close the .Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 86-215 vacating a utility easement on Lot 10, Block 1 Prairie East 4th Addition . Motion carried unanimously. IV . PAYMENT -OF CLAIMS NOS . 28987 29299 4 MOTIONs Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley, to continue the Payment of Claims to Thursday, August 21 . Motion carried unani- mously , Y�yT h City Council Meeting -15- August 19, 1986 V . ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS A . Resolution giving final a royal _to transfer of controllin interest in the Cit 's Cable TV Franchise Resolution No . -2 9 MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath to adopt Resolution No . 86-219 giving final approval to a transfer of controlling interest in the City's cable television franchise . Motion carried unanimously. VI . PETITIONS .__REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS s ff A . Request from Olympic Hills and the Department of Natural Resources to address.problem of geese at Olympic Hills r City Manager Jullie referred to. Director of Community Services Lambert ' s memo dated August 14 and the letter from Jon Parker of the D .N.R . to Lambert dated August 1 , 1986 which outlined the proposal for controlling the goose population around Olympic Hills . He said the D .N.R. is proposing a controlled goose hunt and that representatives of the D .N.R. . University of Minnesota and Olympic dills are present tonight to explain the proposal and answer questions. Dave Van House, attorney for Olympic Hills, addressed the proposal . He said that in order to discharge firearms within the City limits the Public Safety Dept . has to issue a permit but because of the possibly controversial nature of -the issue they decided to bring it before the Council . He presented a petition he said was from 50 members of the golf club who are also property owners requesting authori- zation of the hunt . (Attachment B) Jon Parker, Area Wildlife Nanag6r for the D .N.R . , outlined the problems that are occurring with the increasing goose population. He said they had been contacted about trapping q the geese this summer but he said that process takes about a year to begin. He said they are proposing a hunting sea- son from October 4th to December 12th twice a week between the hours of 8 AM to noon. He pointed out the proposed locution of the blinds on a map of the golf course area. Jim Cooper. of the University of Minnesota reviewed the methods used in other areas to control the goose popula- tion. He said capture and removal is effective but is very expensive since it takes several years to remove all of the geese . He said the geese had been banded this summer so that the effectiveness of the hunt could be measured and that the hunt would provide a means of testing the effective- ness of hunting as a method of control . rt� ;v z� City Council Meeting -16- August 19, 1986 Pidcock asked about the droppings being hazardous to health . Cooper said there are very few diseases transmit- ted between humans and birds . r. 3 Bentley said he had concern about the safety for the resi- dents in the area and about setting a precedent for the 31 future means of goose control in the City. He noted that there are similar problems with goose control in other areas of the City and asked how we intend to deal with this problem overall. He thought we should work on a better or a different solution. Capt . Jim Clark of Public Safety said the ballistics ex- perts reported that the hunt could be done safely. He said it would have to be supervised carefully and that he expected the main problem may be with noise complaints . ti Peterson asked if they proposed that certain hunters be registered and permitted to hunt . Clark said they pro- posed to find hunters within the club who are very experi- enced and issue permits to the individual hunters . Peterson asked how the process of checking permits and controlling access would be handled . Clark said that would be the responsibility of the golf course . Jack Adams of Olympic Hills said that they planned to author- ize people to come on the course and would tell them how and when they can shoot . He said there would be only 8-10 hunters at one time . A discussion followed regarding the time set for the hunt . Anderson said the D .N.R . and others successfully super- vised deer hunting last year on the Minnesota river bottoms . He said he F+1 ou6•ht 11 Luis were cl'.1 ed vil an expo ".-Ime-iL I al basis with the golf course being responsible for the hunters and with the hunt being strictly supervised by the D.N.R . he would agree to it , Bentley asked City Attorney Pauly if there would be any value in our requesting a special liability policy and a hold harmless agreement signed by the golf course . Pauly said that: would add a measure of additional protection to the City. Van House said Olympic Hills has general liability coverage and that he thought they would agree to give the City a hold harmless agreement . Redpath said he thought we haven't required such measures in other authorized areas . Pauly said that was correct. Pidcock asked about the possibility of damage from a rlco- cheting shot . Clark said the effective range of the type f City Council Meeting -17- August 19, 1986 of shot proposed is 40 yards and the area proposed for the hunt is very large . Director of Community Services Lambert asked Dr. Cooper how effective they expect the hunt to be in reducing the numbers of the flock . Cooper said they have had experi- ence with Canada geese in rural areas but they don't know if hunting can reduce flocks in urban areas such as this . Lambert asked how marry birds are currently in the flock. Cooper said they estimate 300 . Lambert said that at the rate of two birds Der day per hunter that would not have a big impact on the flock. Cooper said he thought a total of 100-125 birds could be killed but that would not cause the population to decline . Lambert asked what the cost for a trap and transplant pro- cedure would be . Cooper said it would be $700-$800 per year plus the cost of transporting them and that it would have to be done for several years . Lambert asked how much lead time would be required . Cooper said it takes six to nine months for the permit process . Lambert noted that would mean we would have to decide on a funding process by the end of the year in order to start trapping next year. Peterson said that it appears to him the hunting might be- come an annual event that simply maintains the current popu- lation. Cooper said the number of hunters could be increased to increase the effectiveness. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to authorize the hunt per staff recommendations and including the follow- ing recommendations : 1 . The hunt will '.o cloea't_y monitored by the Public Safety Dept with attention to all areas of concern discussed tonight and Public Safety will have the authority to terminate the hunt at ark• time they feel a problem is being created . t 2 . The City staff and Olympic Hills should get together with the D .N.R. to begin the process for live trapping for next year and return to the Council with a program for that . 3 . Keep the neighboring residents fully informed and re- port back to the Council on the progress of the hunt s and any problems or concerns from the neighbors. 4. All costs incurred by Public Safety would be picked up by Olympic Hills through the permit process or some other appropriate means . t: City Council Meeting -18- August 19, 1986 5 . Olympic Hills is to provide a hold harmless agreement to the City Attorney. Motion carried unanimously. B . Grading permit , Flying Cloud Landfill City Manager Jullie said that, in view of the current litigation with B .F.I. , he would turn the proceedings over to City Attorney Mick Hosow. City Attorney Rosow reviewed the history of the application from Woodlake Sanitary Service, Inc . for a land alteration permit . Planning Director Enger reviewed the history of the item and referred to his memo of August 15, 1986 which summarized the application. He said that staff is recommending that the application be denied and summarized the reasons for that recommendation. Director of Public Works Dietz referred to his memo of August 14th "Co City Manager Jullie and said that staff re- view cf the technical aspects of the grading plan submitted had determined the following deficiencies : 1 . The plans do not show any of the proposed erosion con- trol measures for the site . It would be necessary to install either staked hay bales or fabric siltation fence, or other appropriate measures, around the peri- meter of the excavation areas. This requirement will undoubtedly be required by the Watershed District as well . 2 . The work would have to be under a permit issued by the Watershed District. 3 . The plans do not indicate the method that will be used to stabilize the permanent slopes. For instance , the proposed 15 foot high perimeter berm has 3-1 slopes . Under normal circumstances, it could be expected that seeding and disc mulching would be satisfactory to re- vegetate the slopes . However, due to the sandy soil conditions, it may be necessary to supplement the slopes with top soil and perhaps utilize an erosion netting to preclude a continual erosion problem. These comments would hold true for the stock pile area for the proposed 5,00© cubic yards of fine grain soils. 4. Leaching of surface water through the proposed fill area has contaminated ground water. d City Council Meeting -19- August 19, 1986 City Attorney Rosow noted that there is a berm in the south- east area of the landfill and that this permit contemplates the removal of that berm and the excavation of what is Y referred to as Phase i of the proposed expansion of the landfill . He said this would entail removing the berm to ground level and continuing to dig 90 feet . He said the g total earth material to be removed would be approximately "S 1 ,350,000 cubic yards and that, prior to the temporary restraining order, approximately 97,000 cubic yards of soil had been removed from the berm. City Attorney Pauly enumerated the information contained in the Council agenda material as follows: 1 . Planning Director Enger 's report dated August 15, 1986 2 . Letter from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) dated July 15, 1985 to Mr. Rosow , 3 . Response Order by Consent from the MPCA in the Matter of the Flying Cloud Sanitary Landfill 4 . Letter from the MPCA dated May 7, 1986 to Woodlake Sanitary Services, Inc . 5 . Paa8gee 52 of deposition of Rodney B . Kager dated July 2, 19 6 . The partial transcript of proceedings with Rollin Smith at a hearing on February 6, 1986 7 . Letter from the MPCA to Mr. Rollin Smith dated April 16, 1986 8 . A copy of the Minnesota Code of Agency Rules Section 4410 .3100 . 9 . Letter from Mr. Pauly to Executive Director Michael Sullivan of the Environmental Quality Board dated February 14, 1986 10 . Response from Mr. Sullivan to Mr. Pauly dated February 19, 1986 11 . Letter from MPCA to Mr. John Curry, Regional Landfill Manager of Flying Cloud Sanitary Landfill, dated Feb- ruary 13, 1986 12 . Director of Public Works Dietz ' report dated August 14, 1986 Pauly also called attention to the application dated Feb- ruary 5, 1986 and the letter from Mr. Nowlin of Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Ltd . dated February 4, 1986 . He also referred to the plans submitted by Woodlake dated May 22, 1985 with a revision date of January 20, 1986 con- sisting of five sheets . Fred Hoisington, representing proponents, addressed the proposal . He noted that they feel they are here at the City' s request to make an application for the land altera- tion permit and that the request deals only with the south- east stockpile of approximately 50, 000 cubic yards used for daily cover. s ; City Council Meeting -20- August 19, 1986 A Redpath asked if it is a berm or a stockpile . Hoisington said for this purpose it is a stockpile . Peterson noted that it serves the function of a berm and that the applica- tion deals with a 90-foot excavation and a total of 1 ,350.000 cubic yards of material. Hoisington then said that the subject of this permit is removal and use of that portion of the berm above ground . Peterson then asked for clarification of what the permit is asking for. Rosow said that the application as sub- mitted in February and signed in July deals with the re- moval of not only the berm but also the excavation below that . He said the application does not contain specifics but rather refers to the plans submitted with it that show removal of the berm and excavation of the. expansion. Peterson commented that he thought we had to deal with what has been presented and not on what is intended . Peter Coyle, attorney with Larkin, Hoffman, said that they are here tonight asking for the Council' s approval of a request to remove the southeast stockpile and that they are deferring for a future time the question of whether excavation below grade is covered by the land alteration permit process . Peterson said he believed that the item is not in order because staff has been reviewing a request for excavation 90 feet below grade and has not addressed the issue of removal of the stockpile only. Coyle responded that he thought they were only asking for something less than what was asked for in the request for land alteration permit, not something different . Coyle said the removal of the stockpile was part of the request and thus should have been dealt with by staff in the review of the request . Bentley said he thought the issue before us is a grading permit that staff and legal counsel have reviewed and that he thought a specific grading proposal with those specific limitations would be in order for Council consideration. He said that he would definitely refuse to approve a grad- ing permit that had possibilities of more dirt being re- moved than is specified by the request and, further, that he would not promise to vote to approve even that limited a request . - r a r z City Council Meeting -21 - August 19, 1986 MOTION: Bentley moved , seconded by Redpath, to deny the request for a grading permit by Flying Cloud Landfill , based upon the attached Findings and Conclusions on the request prepared by City Attorney Pauly. (Attachment C) City Attorney Pauly suggested that proponent be permitted to continue their statement . Peterson said he agreed but that he wanted to know on what request they are speak- ing. Coyle said that they are here at the request of the Coun- cil and that they are here to request approval of the re- moval of the southeast stockpile and not to address the issue of whether there will be permitted under the land alteration ordinance excavation below grade . Bentley said he didn' t recall that the Council had re- quested that they come before the Council to make a request for a land alteration permit . Rosow replied that propo- nents had contended originally that they didn't have to submit an application for anything and that ' s why they went ahead . He said, after. the City said they had to, they submitted the application as an accommodation to the City, _ then requested withdrawal of the application and subsequent- ly said that they did not want it withdrawn . He said the application before the Council is for the 1 .350,000 cub- ic yards and that it is appropriate to act on that ve- que st . Bentley said he wanted the record to show that this Council has not requested that proponent come before us to make this request . Redpath said he believed that removing the berm or stock- pile would indicate an act of closure to the activities . there and there would be no further excavation. He said he was unsure if further excavation is requested and approved would the berm be put back . Hoisington said that the PUD shows that a berm would be constructed around the entire eastern perimeter of the landfill and that would require further excavation. Peterson said that he was sure we would entertain a re- quest to consider a land alteration permit for the remov- al of the present berm stockpile but that tonight the request under consideration is for the total excavation. s City Council Meeting -22- August 19, 1986 ti Hoisington said he believed it was usually possible to deal with something less than requested but not something t more . City Attorney Pauly said he thought we should take into consideration what they have said in that they are re- ducing the request to the removal of the berm. He said, however, that in reviewing the question staff had viewed the movement of all of the soil including the berm and so he thought the analysis and the recommendations apply to the parts as well as the whole . Planning Director Enger agreed . a Anderson called the question. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously . t C . Grading permit, Birchwood Mini-Storage south of Terry Pine Drive , east of CSAH City Manager Jullie referred to the Staff Report dated August 12 , 1986 that described the request for a grading permit . MOTION: Redpath moved , seconded by Anderson, to approve the request from Miller Companies for a grading permit for Birchwood Mini-Storage, subject to the recommendations of Staff. Motion carried unanimously . VII . REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS There were no reports . V I I I . APPOINTMENTS A . A pointment of member to the Development Commission to fill an unexpired term to 2 2 MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to continue this item to the Thursday, August 21 , 1986 meeting. Mo- tion carried unanimously. IX . REPORTS OF OFFICERS , BOARDS & COMMISSIONS l L City Council Meeting -2?- August 19, 1986 A . Reports of Council Members MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue the reports to the Thursday. August 21 , 1986 meeting. g Peterson distributed copies of a process to satisfy City administrative space needs and asked that councilmembers review the proposed process for debate and discussion on Thursday evening. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously . B . Report of City Manager There was no report . C . Report of City Attorney City Attorney Pauly said that the letter from John Sorenson the Council had received copies of would be responded to . D . Re ort of Director of Public Works 1 . Plan approval , TH 16 im roverments between CSAH 1 and Prairie Center Drive Resolution No . 8 -2 MOTION: Bentley moved to adopt Resolution No . 86-216 for layout approval, TH169 . Motion died for lack of a second . Director of Public Works Dietz said that such an item is often put on the Consent Calendar since it has al- ready had a Public Hearing. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to con- tinue this item to the September 2, 1986 meeting. Motion carried unanimously. 2 . Award contract for Valley View Road I.C. 1-2 2 Resolution No. -207 Director of Public Works Dietz noted that the bids had come in about $300, 000 over- the estimate . MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adopt Resolution No . 86-207 accepting the bid from Shafer Contracting Company, Inc . for improvements for Valley View Road , I .C . 51-272 . Roll call votes Anderson, Bentley, Pidcock, Redpath and Peterson voted "aye" . Motion carried unanimously. �a City Council Meeting -24- August 19, 1986 E . Report of Director of Community Services 1 . Appointment of Park Bond Referendum Committee Director of Community Services Lambert referred to his memo of August 14, 1986 listing the names of indi- viduals willing to serve on the Park Bond Referendum Committee . MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Redpath, to appoint the Park Bond Referendum Committee as listed in the staff memo of August 14th with the addition of Curt Connaughty and other citizens who express interest prior to the first meeting of the committee . Motion carried unani- mously. 2 . Selection of Architect for Community Center Addition Director of Community Services Lambert referred to his memo of August 11 , 1986 containing recommendations for the architectural services for expansion of the Community Center. MOTION: Pidcock moved to continue this item to the Thursday, August 21 . 1986 meeting. Motion died for lack of a second . MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to accept the recommendation of the staff to contract with Setter, Leach and Lindstrom for architectural design services for expansion of the Community Center. Bentley said he was concerned about the discrepancy between the low bid and the one that was accepted . Lambert said that the committee was unanimous in their ranking of the companies submitting bids and that the experience of the firm was given heavy consideration in the decision for Setter, Leach and Lindstrom. City Attorney Pauly said he thought we needed a firm with experience in similar situations because of the problems in the current building, therefore he supported the recommendations of the committee . Redpath called the question. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously. 3 . Selection of Park Planning ,Firm for Miller Park Director of Community Services Lambert referred to his memo of August 14, 1986 containing recommendations City Council Meeting -25- August 19, 1986 : regarding the selection of the Planner/Architect for the Miller Park project . e MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to accept the recommendation of the staff to contract with Brauer and Associates for the first phase of design work for Miller Park . Motion carried unanimously. X . NEW BUSINESS There was none . X I. ADJ 0 URNMENT i MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adjourn the meeting at 12 : 15 AM. Motion carried unanimously. t Z