Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 02/21/1989 i APPROVED MINUTES ( EDEN ^R?1IRIE CITY COUNCIL TC`E^PAY, FEERUARY ^1, 1`_?'3^ 7 : 0 FM CITY HALL COT.frlCIL CHAMBEF~, 7600 Executive Drive COUNCIL MEMBERS" : Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Juan Harris, Patricia Pidcock, and Douglas Tenpas CITY (70t?N11IL STAFF : City Manager Carl J . Jullie , Assistant to the City Manage: Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Director of Planning Chris Enger , Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary Deb Edlund ,1 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE x 4 4. ROLL CALL : All members present . fp I . pf'R�VAF,_CIF_11C 1`7DA__ jn f) R ITEMS OF BUSjN�SS 1 x MOTION • Ander,on moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the Agenda . Add Item X. A. 1, Kids Kingdom. Add Item X. A. 2, Update on Metro Ride Challenge . Add Item X .A. 3, Midwest Federal solvency effect on City's bonds . Add Item X.A . 4, Communication. Remove Items E and M from the Consent Calendar . Move Item K from the consent Calendar to Item VII .C. M,ot i<?n carried unanimously. I I . MI NtIT S A . S eoi.a_3�CitX._c'�auric_! Tug' S ax�__Janua .31 Council minutc.-- 2 Fehriz--iry 21 , 1989 MOTTON : Harris atoved, seconded by P-ldcock to approve i-ht:- Tnini-if- oi the Special City Council meeting held Tuesday, January 31 , 1039 as published . Motion carried unanimously. A - B . 2nd Rt:-cidina Ord Lng -e No . 2--89 , ame Sud :i . of the City Codt- to reduce the numb r of members ,troM nine to seven on _the _D.!2ar( of _.A :�p an( ur,tr ents C. nd a d i n Ig Qf OX_0 I n ct No_.,__ 1-89 . S f te- Plan and ite5-ft_gra- 1 Design _Review - Amendment tc.) C71-,I.X_Zonin-a 1_ttrna.te to B _fur bjshm(`nt o E. :7HQRFS. by Brauer & Associates . 2nd Reading of Ordinance No . 56-880 Zoning District Amendment within the RM-19 . 5 Zoning District on 8 . 36 acres with variances approved by the Board of Appeals; Approval cf Developer ' s Agreement for Elim Shores; and Adoption of Resolution No . 89-36, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No . 56-83 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 8 . 36 acres Into 3 lots for construction of a 61-unit senior housing development . Location : West of County Road No . 4, east of Mitchell Lake . (Ordinance No . 56-88 - Zoning District Amendment; Resolution No . 89- 36 -- Authorizing Summary and Publication) (Rpi4V5P F M TIJE A NPA ) F . U-LtL_SB_Q_Ua - Final Approval of Housing Revenue Bonds for Elim Shores In the amount of $4, 100, 000 (Resolution No . 89-41 ) G. ZACHMAN B_q.gjHERS 1ST ADDITION by Zachman Development Corporation . 2nd Reading of Ordinance No . 58-88, Zoning District Change from Rural and RM-6 . 5 to R1-9 . 5 on 5 acres with variances approved by the Board of Appeals ; Approval of Developer ' s Agreement for Zachman Brothers 1st Addition; and Adoption of Resolution No . 89-37, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No . 58-88 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 5 acres into 16 single family lots, and road right-of-way. Location: The s'outhwe-.t corner of Franlo Road and Preserve Boulevard . (Ordinance No . 58-88 - Rezoning; Resolution No . 89-37 - Authorizing Summary ant] Publication ) v . ...... --tnd sgu 11 of Eran-lo Resolution No . 89-31 tl Council Minuteo 3 Febrl.nlry 31 , 1989 _1L-,i.LDrnvemt_-nts ever Tra is A & B, Reqiz;te,rPd L. t,E9 _SLq e in n_ta ive and C.S,AH ....' (Resolution No . 89 -35) _q2peZ: ve Co 9 L lin D 2. T_ fQ_Z__qity ga-)articl - ion In cost to iriprov*,- T . H . 5 In 1�. - :L I U11IL-K C i Li 1 t Y cif r ITEM VI —. r-) aAH 4 ( Resolution No . 89 -39 ) QLQ_VE_2__.M 12 L . DNR­S-HOR'ELAY. Jn�RFVTEK - The DNR has new shore-land regulation that will affect land development in Eden Prairie M. Final slat Approval for North Ba of Timber Lakes 3rd Resolution No . 89-43 ) (R1p1!2vEr FROM THE N . R _.-s?L L L lon No . P39-42 in, nc A-M-f-!D5-1 far 11 3 7 Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to approve the Consent Calendar with the deletion of Items E, K, and M. X.7ML�D_ Harris asked when the fire engine would be delivered . Fire Chief Johnson replied that the first engine would be delivered in 1990 and the second engine in 1991 . ITEM -E Pauly reported there was a modified version of Resolution No . 89-41 . Pauly noted the change was the reference from assessed value or assessed evaluation to become gross tax capacity. Pauly stated the Resolution was contingent on the changes being made in the Tax Increment Financial Plan previously -approved to reflect the new terminology. He added the Resolutlon was also contingent on the signing of the Developers Agreement in relation to the project and a special Developers Agreement related to the financial aspects . Pauly noted that Item F could be approved without the approval of Item E. Peterson asked if it would be appropriate to -refer this item to the appropriate Chamber of Commerce Committee and/or the Developer 's Forum for comment and review before final approval by the City Council . . �, C��uncil Miriutc�; 4 F«gib-uary 21 , 1989 Ander;on asked Peters-,n why thoe City w-as yving through the ! Chamber of Comcnerr-e regarding City business . Ar (ler--on iiC ed tlli:7 14i[Xl. lteL C3. IU' 7IL) IUII(j It Li1C C7'-1aUIUCL tD Commerce for approval . Peterson replied he was not suggesting the need for the Ctiamber of Commerce approval . Peterson said that the City had entered into the Developers Forum to improve communications . Peterson believed the Chamber of Commerce would be interested in the proposed changes. Anderson -asked if there would be a Public Hearing for discussion of the Review . Peterson replied there would not be a Public Hearing and added that by .approving the Item on the Consent Calendar the Review policy would be adopted . Harris commeynt e-d that her understanding was that the City had 2 years: to adopt the Review policy. Enger replied that Staff was attempting to respond to the DNR ' s potential adoption of reyulat i ons in a timely fashion; however, the time frame was not long enough . Enger added the- legislation was beyond the time for the City to offer commenta which would have any effect on the legiuMature . Enger stated the DNR had already adopted its policy. Enger believed it was important for Eden Prairie to make its position known to the DNR as soon as possible . Enger said the City would be expected to adopt the DNR ' s criteria within two years . Pidcack scsggested sending the Chamber of Commerce a copy of the Review as ca courtesy. Motion carried unanimously to approve the Consent Calendar . I V. PU �.IS� HEF��NGS A. j 1_N T ' 'I� CE Al2PITION by Sam 'Thorpe and Frank Cardarelle . Request for Zoning District Change from R1- 22 to R1-13 . 5 on 1 . 48 .acres, and Preliminary Plat of 1 . 48 acres into 4 single family lots . Location ; East of Bennett Place, north of Blossom Road . (Ordinance No . 8-89 - Rezoning; Resolution No . 89-38 -- Preliminary Plat ) Jullie reported that notice of this Public Hearing was Sent to 41 property owners and was published in the February 8, 1989 isstae of the Eden Prairie News . Frank Cardarellt! , representing the proponent, presented the plan for :a 4-lot suhdivisiori located at Bennett Place and Blossom Road . Cardarelle st-ated the project was straightforward and added that utilities and streets were alreadyavailable . y r. _,�;nci1 Mir,ut� 5 Fr>bruary 21, 1989 F.nger reported that this item was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its January 23, 1989 ireetina anm rFcnmmnn.ioL approval on a 5-0-0 vote per the recommendation of the Staff Report dated January 20, 1989 . Enger noted the plan was not reviewed by the Park, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission . No comments from the audience . MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to cloe.e the Public Hearing and approve 1st Reading of Ordinance No . 3-89 for RezoninU . Notion carried unanimously. MOTI ON Harris moved, Seconded by Pidcock to aidopt Resolution No. 89-38 for Preliminary Plat Approval and to direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement according to Commission and Staff recommendations . Motion carried unanimously. A . VLkCATJQN 89 -0a, - Vacation of Temporary Turn-around Over Parts of Lot 10, Block 1 and Lot 9, Block 2, Purgatory Ridge (Resolution No . 89-32 ) Jullie reported that notice of this. Public Hearing was published in the February 8, 1989 issue of the Eden Prairie News . s No comments from the audience . M+7TI 4N Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson to close the Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 89-32 Vacating the Temporary Turn-around Easement in the Purgatory Ridge Subdivision . Motion carried unanimously. C. VA,!ZAZTO 89--0_Z - Vacation of Drainage and Utility Easements in LaVonne Industrial Park (Resolution No . 89- 33 ) Jullie reported that notice of this Public Hearing was published in the February 8, 1989 issue of the Eden Prairie News . No comments from the audience . Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to close the Public l Hearing .and adopt Resolution No . 89--33 approving the I rolincil Mit,utes 6 February 21, 1989 vacation of Drairiait— --Arid Utility Eat--e-llient:3 ill LaVonne a^ ustrlal Perk . Motion carried unanimously. D . Approval of an Amended Tax Increment Financin7 Plan and Amended Interest Rate Reduction Program (Resolution 89-40 ) Jullie reported that the document for Prairie Village Apartments were not ready and recommended this item be continued to the March 7, 1989 City Council Meeting . No comments from the audience . MGT—IQ U Pidcock moved, ;seconded by Anderson to continue this Public Hearing to the March 7, 1989 meeting of the City Council . Motion carried unanimously. V. PAYMENT (11 d1 R1 M=T—ON • Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to approve Payment of Claims No . 48824 through No . 49156 . rr Harris asked Lambert if handweights were provided by the City !, for the physical fitness classes at the Community Center . Lambert replied yes . Peterson a-�ked Dietz why a sound level Survey would be necessary at the water department . Dietz replied he would check into this item, but believed it would be to determine the depth of the water in the wells . Harris asked Jullie what type of investigation the City was paying First Western Bank to do . Jullie replied the investigation of liquor license applicants, Peterson ,asked Jullie what the Walden Book Store claim was for . Jullie replied he would check into this item . ROLL CALL VOTE: Anderson, Harris, Pidcock , Tenpas and Peterson all voting "AYE" . V I . n R Q t�i 1�:IV C-F� ._�_��(4 t�T.�.r H S A . . t__ 2P.,��7 _n:f_..2 ._0rd i n:.�.r�c�PJ�, �_ .._—?iLrz s��P_ 3f c7. d i n, nc-r� f.n I � ht'1 l ti. Red Rork LakSpa Jullie reported that Staff recommended approval of the 1st Reading of ordinance No . 6 -89 based on the Staff Memo of February 10, 1989 . Jullie noted that t1-it regulationF, for. f7cluncil MIX)Utes 7 February 21, 1989 Mitchell Lake and Rod Rock Lakf_ h.-Ad been approved by the DNR . Anderson asked if th:s was considered the Public Hearing for this Ordinance . Lambert replied no . Pauly ,added that a Public Hearing +was not required; this was not an amendment to the zoning code . L,amthert added that no changes had been made to the Ordinance since originally talking with the residents . Peterson .asked Lambert if variances would be givo-�ri by permit on an individual basis . Lambert replied thatanyone wishing a permit or variance would be required to come before the Council . Lambert d1seouraged the issuance of any variances . Anderson commentpd that on a lake of this_ size a 10- horsepower motor_ would be .adequate for a pantoon . Anderson .asked if :similar requests for permits pertained to Red Rock Lake . Lambert replied that the Park & Recreation Department ha(I not received inquires for Permits on Red Rock Lake . Pidcock had interpreted the Ordinance to read that permits would be issued . Lambert replied that residents would be required to come before the City Council and provide a good rationale for the request . � MOTI QN Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson to approve 1st Reading of Ordinance No . 6- 89 . Motion carried unanimously. B. Qr,c, .Larg V.cl 7-$ - Renaming Research Road and a Segment of Mitchell Road Harriz stated that Lake Caroline dId not seem an appropriate name . LI M I-0! Harris moved, seconded by Anderson to amend Ordinance No. 7-89 to read Staring Lake Parkway . Peterson asked if this would be actually considered a parkway . Anderson said the road was as much like a parkway as Minnehaha Parkway; the road followed thy: lako . Dietz informed the Council that Staff had had discussions with the developer of Boulder Point requesting a name charif3e . The City already ha�a a street using the root of Boulde-- and; therefore, had informed the developer that the name proposed would not be in compliance with the City ' s policy. Dietz noted that the name of Staring Lake a ' ^, ►:nc ; 1 Im1n►.tf,s !3 F+:bruary 21, 1989 t Parkway would not i:)-_ ill with the clty' s policy for the zame reason . He added the City already had a street with the roots of Staring . LoLand Kotke, 9190 Mitch,211 Road, concurred with the name Staring Lake Parkway . He believed the reference to a parkway added to the beRuty of the area . Motion carried unani:nou: ly. MOT Url Harris moved, seconded by Andersen to approve ordinance No . 7-89 as amended . Motion carried unanimously. i VI I . FF'TSTTQPIS. REQU 5TS _& cOMMUNIC1�TTnNS A. �tlt3t tl4tP3t &r a ''t►.xy - Approve Final L—aft Jullie reported that the process had been completed for the Southwest Area Study and added that. the Planning Commission had eridorceel the Study. Jullie stated that Staff was recommending the adoption of Southwest Area Study. Lee Johr►son, owner of property in the area, stated that he had written a Letter to the City Council addressing hi;:; ( concerns . Johnson believed that the road improvements, utility improvements , and development could be done at tho same time . Johnson stated that he would be responsible to install the service road as part of his development, which would require grading on the northern portion of his property. Johnson added that the utility and grading work volild he minimal, compared with the disturbance of the Highway #5 construction . Johnson believed that occupancy was the critical factor, not the construction or development of housing units . Peterson asked if the report precluded development . Enger replied that the study indicated that no subdivision construction was to begin before a safe access at Dell Road to Highway 45 was provided; this was written prior to the full evaluation of the alignment of Highway 45 and a .ervice: road which would be installed by the developer . En(3er noted that Staff concurred that US Homes and Tandem would need to start grading while Highway 05 was under construction . Enger stated that Staff would not agree to ir1low all of the development proposed by the developers for these areas prior to a safe access being provided :it Dell Puad . Enger added that Staff was concer tied about 11mitin<g Lhe occupancy permits due to the implication that the property had been platted arks !;old . Enger believed that the, c:ontrul the City had over the development wa:; the platting of lots, . Council Minute-. 9 T r_ bA-IIary ?1 , 1989 Peterson understood that the Southwe-3t Area Study was to we USeu as a Uu iclel ine only . jonnsc)rd that he did not: want to see the Southwest Area Sturdy as a .,et policy. Jullie stated that Johnson ' s letter would become part of the record . Dick Feerick, representing H D & D ^artners,:ip, stated that it planned to start some grading in 1989 and ,actual construction of homes in 1990 . lie ;add#--d that it R D & D Partnership' s desire to plat the property in 1989 . Feerick stated that adequate safety controls woulcl be provided . Enger :.Mated that Staff had indicated to Feerick that in order to facilitate his requests a MUSA Line change would be required . Enger said that with the letting of bids for Highway #5 not occurring until late 1989, and the recommendation that development not occur until the safe access at Dell Road was provided, construction of Feerick ' s property would not be possible In 1989 . Enger noted that both the MUSA Line change and the starting of construction before and/or during the construction of Highway #5 would be in direct conflict with the recommendations outlined in the Southwest Area Study. Dietz :.:.tated that the bid opening for the upgrading of Highway # 5 had been changed several times . Diet, empathized with the developers wanting to Mart grading, but added that once the grading had :.;tarted it would mean the developer,; had irzvcsted monies and would then be rushing to move the projects further along . Dietz said that .some grading could be done at the same time as the upgrading of Highway #5; however, a safe access to Dell Road would be necessary for construction traffic . Dietz wanted to be able to assure timing schedules that the contractors could meet to provide .access to the sites for r the developers . Feerick stated that he wished to bring the issues to the Council ' s attention . Feerick stated that the clock started when a developer purchased the property. He added that the developers wanted to be part of the City' s procc,ss . Pidcock asked Feerick If he was oppoL;od to the adoption of the- Southwest Area Study. Feerick replied that the developers wanted time frames established . Peterson complimented the consultant team for the excellent job in preparing the :.study. (7c,lincLl Minutt•:1 10 r-briz. ry 2Z , 1.933 ;Ic�'TI c�it Anderson moved, seconded by Harr i� to adopt thfa Southwest Area Study and endorse the findings, c011clu�:: ic)1is, sand recommendet i onc, . Piduucrk .joiked if a claus(? should be included to indicate the awareness that modifications may be necessary. Motion carried unanimously. A . da en its 1it:y Rp o for Dell Road be T_H �_�rid CS11H.__,__a n! Scenic He iahts Road between CSnH 4 and R i 7�_:,� _52-160^ (Resolution No . 39-34 ) P Dietz reported that this resolution would order a feasibility study for Dell Road and Scenic Heights Road . Diet-- recommended the firm of Strgar-Roscoe-Fauschf Inc . to PrQpare the feasibility :study for the City. T`npas suggested that when companies were being recommended, which the City had not dealt with in tl';e past, information about the companies should be included In the Council 's information package if possible . Bob Smith, Ron Krueger & hszociates, representing several of the developers in the southwest area, stated that the developers were concerned about the following : 1 . Expediency of the feasibility study. (Especially for the northern section of the southwest area . ) 2 . Location of Dell Road and Scenic Heights Road . 3 . Developers- participation in the approval of the road alignments . S d t developers co cu w e '5 Smith adds that heconcurred with the City . choice of the consulting firm . Smith stated that the developers were requesting the City have a preliminary feasibility study completed in 60 days and a final draft completed 30 days after the preliminary. Smith stated that the developer: would like to tender the several alignments which they had already prepared to the consulting f irm . Smith requested weekly meeting with the consultant and City Staff . Dietz stated that Staff was aware of the developer 's concern,; however, he believed the 60-day timeframe rot by the developers would be ambitious and was not practical . Dietz added that Staff would do everything to complete the roasibillty study as soon as possible . Paterson asked Dietz what timeframe he would propose . Dietz replied 4 to 6 months . Diet:, said that several alignments had been proposed and there were environmental studies to be completed related to the proposed alignments . Dietz stated that Staff was not prepared to r c'aianci l Mi_nirtes 11. February 21, 1989 commit to a 64-day draft and addc!d that he br.lievE:d weekly ( meet inas with the developers, the consultant -lnri Cuff would be counter-productive . Dieu said that he would work with the developers and would be in favor of publi:,hing a proli.minary draft pr1or to the public hearing for the developers . Anderson asked If an Environmental Impact Statement would be required . Enger replied that he did riot believe that Eden Prairie was yet at a "Related Action" stage of development . He added that the southwest Area would develop in phases which would take Place over several years . Enger noted that this need to expedite the feasibility study for Dell Road: and Scenic Heights Road was unnecessary due to the fact that development in these areas would not take place for at least two years because of the recommendations of the Southwest Area Study and added that the results of the feasibility study would accomplish two things : 1 ) determine :row the assessmentz for the improvements would be applied, and 2 ) establish the alignments of the roads . Tenp.:As was concerned about the relationship between an independent consulting firm and Ron Krueger & Associates . Dietz stated that Ron Krueger & Associates had offered to share the basic data and read alignments which they have collected, which would be of benefit to all of the developers in the southwest area . Dieu added that he did not see the City handling this project any differently than any other project, which would be that the developers propose possible road alignments and the City typically building the roads the way the developers have proposed unless environmental issues would prohibit that alignment . Dietz believed that the City had an obligation to represent all of the developers in the southwest area and added that currently 7 developers agreed on the proposed alignments for the road and 2 developers were not represented . Dietz stated that the premise of the feasibility study was that the City not pay for right-of- way and therefore , a consensus of all partles would be necessary to have the project pzoceed in an expedient manner . Tenpas stated that he would like to see the consultants ' ideas be as independent as possible, to have Lhe Council see the consultants ' ideas, and then work with the developers to come to a consensus . Ander. :,on was also concerned that the consultant conduct a totally independent stu(ly, without influence from outside ";irouias . Anderson :,fated that he had received letters from the developers not represented by Ron Krueger & A_;oc- i.attes, which had raised environmental issues which needed to be addressed . Anderson 1.)elieved that all the developers In the .3outhwest area should have the same opportunities and that all the developers in the southwest '_.y 1-ouncil Miniit�--:_ 12 February 21, 1989 azea be notified and ._illoved to part it•ij)-at(_ In mf_Ntings with the consultant . Dietz stated that he viewed the consultant as an extension of City Staff and would notify all the Involved p,a_tles . Bob Sjoxklund, developer, stated that the iritent of the developers was to be cooperative with SL-aff _-inn the consultant and to provide open channels of communication, not to create conflict . MOT—Tn- Harris moved, seccnded by Anderson to adopt Resolution No . 89-34 approving the feasibility study for Dell Road and Scenic Height-- Road . Motion carried unanimously. t Fiucock commenter) that in a letter to the Council , it was noted that in the Southwest Area Study reference was made- to "Lake Riley", which :should be corrected to read : Riley Lake. C _ ?DPP �?�`= c0 .�v�'� tx coon Agreement No . 65_ wOtt U1,20 ' for City ,participation in cost to improve T . H . 5 ir7, ►he / I inity_of CZ �.._..�. ( Resolution No . 89-39 ) Dietz reported that Staff had noted some number errors in the agreement which MnDot would like the City to sign . Dietz did not view these as a major problem and believed that MnDot would change the numbers once Staff brought it to MnDot ' s attention . Dietz noted that Staff would like to sec paragraph 1 on page 19 removed In its entirety, while MnDot was only willing at this time to take out part of the sentence which limits the: indemnification . Dietz stated that if the City did not sign the agreement by Friday, February 24 , 1989, MnDot would postpone the bid letting for 30 days . Staff did not believe it was in the City's interest to be the responsible for any delay on the Highway 05 project . Dietz noted the new language in the ordinance . He suggested that City Attorney Pauly be directed to negotiate the necessary changes and still try for a Friday bid letting . Peterson asked Dietz what the City '; exposure would be if the 1ndemn; ty clause was not changed . Dietz replied that the paragraph would set the State ' s responsibility to ifpgrade Highway # 5 and set the City' ; responsibility In the ;process . The State would do all of the construction and the City would be responsible at the end of the project for mainteriance work for utilities . Dietz noted that the lest agreement signed with MnDot did not include the following wording : " including an action or claim 13 February 21, 1989 which alleges neg11t3(.,nce of the SIC:i its agentz, (if f ice rs or employees . " i,iuix- cioLe-0 that page Q, rctiUn C, stated -hat the MnDot would' be perm i t;ted to m.aF: t:. c:t;ariges ' n t-he jil •an and pass the costs alor►c3 to the City . Pauly believed this section was too open-ended . Dietz states: that Staff toad noted this section; however, due to the good wor1king relationship with MnDot, .^.taff did riot . e!e tA-iis :is a major pr:sblem . Dietz stated that the City had worked on projr-cts before with the same type of wordage . Anderson stated that he was concerned about the wording in j this situation due to the railroad bridgp cost:; not being determined at this time . Dietz stated that the State h&d outlined what the City would be respon:,- ible for and the railroad bridge was riot included . Dietz added that .accord trig to the final plats there would be an at grade cr oss i n,g of the railroad cr osE;ing . Dietz stated that the City' c shares war:; a fixed amount . He added that tlic purpose of thi: paragraph was to deal with unexpected cast;.; which would be Shared by the City and the State ; such as soil corrections . Anclersori asked Dietz to clarify if it had already been determined that an on grade cro_-sing would be what was built . Dietz replied it was on the final plan as such . Pauly questioned the wording on pade 12, section C . 11e stated that the amount due from the City was computed by the State and was final, binding, and conclusive, which meant the City could not question or dispute the amount the (7ity would be responsible for . Pauly added that the same applied to acceptance of the completed construction on the project, the City would have no recourse action if the work was accepted by the State, yet found to be defective by the City. Dietz replied that City Attorney was correct in the interpretation; hs:wever, due to the; history of a good working relationship with MnDot, Staff would not be uncomfortable . Dietz added that the City had never had a problem in its dealings with MnDot and that some of the work to be completed would be based on specif ications written by Eden Prairie Staff . Dietz suggested that if the Council was uncomfortable with the wording and believed that too many open ended statemi_nts had been made , a 30-day continuance could be requested . Pauly note J on page: 15, section D, Lhe wording: "that i7either party to thi:1 -4greemant shall drain :any additional drainage into said storm sewer facil itic:s that is not Lnc] ticled in the drainage for which raid i;;tnrm sewer facilities, were design«--d without £ ir �,- t obtaining permi:» ion to do so from the other party . " Pauly stated that the City owns the utorm sewer fac: illty, but this dc­,ci mQnt would suggest that the City would neat be able to ty count:il Minute-. 14 Ft_-bruary 21, 1989 d r-a it-I a dd It I C,1-I'a 1 1-arl'i It-It(-) the <t;-,r fl! -I,- :we r f --I c:-. 11 Ity Without State Ipproval . Dietz stated that Staff was coffifoftlaDle W i LF, the des 1'31-1 Pr L-+- however , Staff did question the computation f .1gures for the exact drainage area. Pauly noted on page 16 , the State was rf--quiring the City to provide maintenance for the frontage road,_ , bikeways, sidewalks, and driveway pivement . pauly questioned what the City's position would be if It wished to vacate or abandon these items . The State did riot pr. ov ' dc for any time limits . Dietz asked Pauly if lie wcas coricerncd about if vacating or abandoriln4 rights to private propert1, owners . Pauly said that under this agreement the Cit.y wolll,d still be responsible for maintenance of those facilities- . Dietz --tated that he coult-l' not remember this being a problem, and questioned what would be the benefit to the private property owner . Pauly stated that he did not see the indemnification paragraph related to the City' s negligence on Page 360 as a major problem due to the fact that the City had worked with this similar language in other agreements and the City was insured; however, to include taking responsibility for the State 's negligence would be far- reaching and unacceptable . Pauly said that this paragraph would be acceptable with the following were removed : " .4ricluding an action or claim which alleges negligence of the State, Its agents, officers or employee::; . " Dletz stated that the State was willing to take out the afore mentioned phrase . Dietz added that he had requested the whole paragraph be taken out . Tenpas suggested that the City wait 30 days, until the document was worded exactly the way the City Attorney would suggest . Tenpas did not believe that 30 days was too long to wait to ensure a more secure document on behave of the City. Tenpas, believed that It was prudent to have City Attorney Pauly follow up on his recommendations to protect the City' s Interest . Peterson suggested that the Council give City Attorney Pauly direction on which items the Council believed to be vital . Pldcock stated that the CAlty' s history of dealing with MnDot has always been successful in the past and believed that the details coulLI be worked out . Dietz believed that if Council was comfortable with the removal of the wording on the Indemnification paragraph and the other details could be negotiated with MnDo4-,- to C"Ity Attorney Pailly's oatisfaction the Friday deadlIne could Ftill be met . renpas stated that he would be '.y Council Imihhute- is rebruary 21, 1989 comfortable with thi::, suggestion . P._au1.y stated that he f believed the Meta i Is c:_aul3 b,2 worka. d oi: t . Peterson stated that the indemnifiL:ation de£ initr•_ly needed to be reworded and a *modification to the pz;ragraph referencing that the State would conpute the amount owed by the City without any provision for recourse action by the City . Dietz believed this could he worked out . MOTION : Harri:; moved, seconded by I' dcock to adapt Ri:!solot:ion No . 89-39 . Motion carried unanimously. VI I . RFPOFt_S_] &p3LT SORY CC I I�_� S:ON a a A . Board of Appear & Adjustments - Request for Joint Meeting a with City Council 7 Peterson stated that they letter to the Council from the Board of Appear & Adjustments was a request for clarif icaticcn as to if the Council was giving a different i direction by which the Board should make it 's recommenCations. Pcterson believed that the Council had been clear on its reasoning for overturning the Board ' s recommendations. Peterson suggested a joint meeting with the Council .and the Board of Appeals & Adjustments in the near future . Peterson further suggested that Staff review the minutes of the meeting and respond to the Board of Appeals & Adjustments by outlining the reasons for the Council ' s decision . Peterson added that he would like to make it clear to the Board of Appeals & Adjustments that the two "NO" votes did not signal a change in the Council ' s policy. Peterson believed that the Board of Appeals & Adjustments was consistent in its issuance of variances; however, the Council had the right to review the data differently and come to different conclusions, without implying that the original decision was incorrect . Harris commented that it was uncommon for the Council to overturn a decision made by the City ' s commissions . MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Tenpas to direct Staff to write a letter to the Board of Appeals & Adjustments stating the City Council':; support in its decision process and to have Staff rttiearch the Council 's support of past decisions by the Board of Appeals & Adjuotments . Peterson stated that the Council wogald encourage any Commit':; ion or Board ineinhers in attendance at a City l cw"T�cil mi_ nutr.�­' lr February 21, 1989 Counc: _'Ll C-clit-icil on 15-lieS. Of motion carried i.inanimousl, . I X A . *-tee o n All of the Councilmembers had not been able to reach the individual they wished to appoint for this committee and; therefore, asked that th-_ Item be discus%sed -.It the next Council meeting . B . Vg�rj _of_ Appeals & Aajgstiients - 1 Appointment for 3-year Term commencing March 1 , 1939 MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson to nominate William Arockiasamy for the appointment to the Board of Appeals Adjustmentt; . Motion carried unanimously. ridco,­I� moved, seconded by Harris to close the nominations and cast a unanimous ballot for William Arocklasamy. Motion carried unanimously. C - ard - 2 hppointmc-tits for 3-year Term:3 commencing March 1, 191139 Pidcock nominated Marcia Kolb and Robert Lapic. Harris nominated John Schneider . Kolb received votes from: Tenpas, Peterson, Pidcock, Harris, Anderson . Schneider received votes from : Tenpas, Pidcock , Harris . Lapic received votes from: Peterson, Anderson . MOTION : Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to cast a unanimous ballot for Marcia Kolb and John Schneider . Motion carried unanimously. or (7prm 1 - ion - 2 Appointments 5�. f-*t:)r 3-Year Terms commencing Harch 1, 19 9 : 1 Appointment of -a Representative of the Flying Clond I3u:31nessmenls Association and 1 Appointment of a Citizen Representative ty Counc11 17 February 21, 1989 Mc7T z c�v Anderson moved, seconded by Harris to nominate W i l l i ,'am Aelker and Jay ols-on . Motion carried unanimously. MCAT I ON : Pidcock moved, seconded by Harries to the nominations and cast a unanimous ballot for William He lker and Jay Olson. Motion carried unanimously. E . Histor a� & �y3,t_u a1, ,omm _*_!qjQ r. - 2 Appointments fo: 3- Year Terms commencing March 1, 1939 MOTION : Fiarris mov<-d, ;Jc_conded by Pidcock to nominate Deb Potter and Robert McClu key. Kntion carried unanimously. MOTION s Pldcrck moved, seconded by Harris to c:lost- the nominations and c,:ict: a unanimous ball::t for Deb Patter and Robert MCCluskey. Motion carried unanimously . F . 14 um _RLghts & ervi_c -5 Commission - 4 Appointments : 1 to an unexpired term to 2/28/91 and three 3-Year terms commencing March 1, 1989 Anderson nominated William Jackson, Gall Leipold, Judy Schuck, and Bette Anderson. He added that Anderson would be his nomination for the unexpired term . Harris nominated Gary Perkins for the unexpired . FIRST BALLOT Jackson received votes from: Peterson, Harri3, Pldc_ock, Anderson Leipold received votes from: Peterson, Tenpas, Harris, Pidcock, Anderson . Anderson received votes from : Peterson, Tenpas, Harris, Anderson . Perkins received votes from: Peterson, Tenpas, Harris , Pidcock . Schuck, received vote3 from: Terjpas, Pidcock, Anderson . f i (7 1-1 tic 11 MI n U t e S is February 21, 1989 The following wire cal-It for _appointment to the two-year term remaining from a vacancy on the Commission . '7 N Q Jackson received votes from : Tenpas . Anderson received votes from : Harris, Pidcock . Perkins received votes from: Peterson, Anderson . 3RD BALLOT Anderson rec-elvt:!d votes from : Tenpas, PiOcrick, Harris . Perkins received votes from: Peterson, Anderson . Pidcock moved, seconded by Harri -- to cast a unanimous ballot for William Jackson, Gail Leipold, and Cary Perkins for three-year terms and Bette Anderson for a 2 year term. Motion carried unanimously. G. POrkg , R c-eatig Nat!jr-al Resources Q 2 Appointments for 3-Year Terms commencing March 1, 1989 Harris nominated Pat Breitenstein. Pidcock nominated Karon Joyer . Anderson nominated David Kuechenmei5ter . MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to close the nominations . Motion carried unanimously. Breitenstein received votes from : Tenpas, Peterson, Pidcock, Anderson, Harris , Kuechenmeister received votes from : Tenpas, Anderson . Joyer received votes from Peterson, Pidcock, HarrIz; . to ON: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to cast a unanimously ballot for Pat Breitenstein and Karon Joyer . Motion carried unanimously. 0 Tenpas commented that he would have liked to have seen some new members on this committee . 1.9 Fvbruar y 21, 1989 fI . f? anning Commfsoion - 3 Appointment. for "-Year Term;; commencing March 1, 1939 -. a..xnatcta L.111L1e;.; Rue 7]llnrj . Atlder�;On nominated Robert Hallett . Pidcock rominated Tim Faber . Teni,.:i nominated Doug Sandstad . NOTION Pidcock moved , seconded by Harris to close the nomination3 . Motion carried unanimously. r Ruebling received votes frc.m: Harris, r'eter"on, nidcock , Tenpas, Anderson . Hallett received votes from : Harris, Peterson, Pidcock, Tenpa:�, Andercon . Sand tad received vot+! from: Harris , Pidcock, Teripas . Faber received votes from : Peterson . Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to cast a unanimous ballot for Charles Ruebling, Robert Hallett, and Doug Sandstad . Motion carried unanimously . X . RE:r1QFTS OF _OFFiCFT:S�_ 3t� tQS & COMMISSION A . 1? P� _o ._ 2uLzC M�'�mber� 1 . Kids , ' ngdom Memo Harris noted that the choice of locations for daycare centers might not always be where the, Council would desire them to be . Harris noted that the Council had previously expressed concerns related to health and safety issues . Harris stated that regarding this particular request she was concerned with the walkway, if sere access was provided between the play area and the facility. Harris added that she was not concerned with the location of the facility. Anderson stated that studies had shown that especially young children were affected by being close to heavily traveled roads due the increase in carbon monoxide . Amderoon stated that he would be concerned about the location of daycare centers directly on the main highway such as Highway tl169 . Enger stated that every daycare center was located on the main roadways . Enger :, aid that he had ol.)served that the play areas were typically located in the frontyard r Coun{-iI Mi <<ut 20 FQbruary 21, 1981 �.� tl+._,e:k, which I-)I a ce cl t.hY i+last :_et(_a right al )n9 thy_ Mali., road . Anderson asked Enger what the City expected the traffic volumes to be in this area . Anderson believed that the City was responsible for the health and safety of the children . Enger believed that the Council would be looking at more of these types of plans for additional d-aycare facilities in the community . Enger noted that private daycare facilities would be decreasing because of the new laws and the increased insurance expenses . Enger suggested that this would be an issue for the Human Rights & Services Commission to look into . Harris believed that the daycare issue wat7. a very complex one—, which needed further :study. Enger believed that minor modifications could be made to the zoning district standards which would require a play area to be •a set distance from the roadway. Peterson asked if there were any published data on this subject . Enger replied yes . Peterson suggested to direct th13 issue to the Human nights & Services Commission . Pidcock stated that she was very concerned about the children playing out::,ide sus close to the ma l n roadway: with the higher speed limits . MrTT" Anderson moved, seco•ided by Pidcock to direct the Human Right., & Services Commission to investigate the daycare location issue and its relation to both carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide affect on nearby day care centers . Harris stated that she would not like this action, to delay progress on the Kids Kingdom proposal for the Lariat Center . Motion carried unanimously. 2 . 11 w e?s?t_F c? � 'i ..+�i? �✓F'[l�Y-� �i� be- City ' * -Z1n-d., Harris asked Jullie if the City' -- honds would be impacted t?y the recent solvency of Midwest Federal . Jullie replied that the bonds were federally iruaured; however , tie would verify this with Finance Director Frane . r '-.y 21 February 21, 1989 3 . LU}O.1att oli the Challr:n<jc rY -letridp 3 s�iris t Suu h3jest z —__ o P_ Yam. . Metro Harris asked if the Commission had awarded a contract and what liability may be faced by the City as it i:; a party to this joint--powers organization . Peterson stated that this would not be resolved for some time and added that the challenge had not been formally filed at this time . 4 Harris asked for an update on the solicitation proces:; for bids accepted by the City and suggested that requests be; sent to as wide an audience as possible and consider as many vendors as permitted . Pidcock n.tated that; she had not: beard of several of the bidders for the carpet at the Community Center . B. H-q. ao 1: t of C. Beoort of r.tv Attorney Pauly noted that the City had finalized the purchase of the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area . Pauly stated that he was still investigating the lugalitier related to prohibiting plastic containers . Peterson asked Assistant City Manajer Dawson to advise the Waste Management Commission to keep updated on the processes taking place in Minnenapoll:;>/St . Paul . D• BgpQrt of QiXegtor of P ning E . Qir!gctor of Parks , Recreatiot&a ur. RPsotA F . Renort o.f DJ.rec:.S r Of PUI21.1r. Wgrks G. 8 e ,ate r t_ o.f.._F ID A n c g.Vireo XI . W BU,S•_TNESg X I I A.0-J Q-Y Pidcdck moved, seconded by Harris to adjourn the meeting at 10 : 00 PM. Motion carried unanimously.