Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 05/02/1989 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 7 : --0 PM CITY HALL COUt°.CIL CiiI-MEERS 7600 Executive Drive COUNCIL MEMBERS : Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, Patricia Pidco-.:k , and Douglas Tenpas CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J . ?ullie, A.:7sistant to the City Manager. Craig D-awon, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Diroctcr of Planning Chris Enger , Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Rcbert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A . Diet^, and Recording Secretary Deb Edlund FLEDGE OF .',LLEGIANCE ROLL ^S.LL COMMENDATIONS FOR THE EDEN PRAIRIE HIGH SCHOOL GYMN,,STICS TEAM AND THE 3 ff EDEN PRAIRIE HIGH SCHOOL BASKETBALL TEAM t Mayor Peterson presented the commendations to StE:ve Schultz, representing Eden Prairie Hi(3h School . Schultz thanked the City for { Its continuing support, not only in written form, but also shown by .-attendance at the High School events . 13 J I . A�?CROVB�.F OF -Er! A AND OTH R ITEMS OF BUSINES tOTT()N 3 R fiarr i s moved, Seconded by Anderson to approve the Agenda as; amended. ADDITIONS : Add Item VrI . E, Eden Prairie Center Plans for Remodeling of Entrances . Add Item X . A. 1 , Sneed Control on Pioneer Trail . Add Item X. A . 2 , Report on Park Bond Referendum. Add Item X . A. 3, Action taken on Item, L of the February 21, 1989 Consent Calendar . A(ld Item X. A . 4. Y.ce•:r Letter . Add Item X.F . 1 , Resolution No . 39 -90 Accepting Bid For Flusher Unit . Add Item X . F .•2, Resolution No . 89-92 Accepting Bid For. 1989 Seal Coating . Remove Item I from the C01-4slent Calendar . Motion carried unanimously. t ' d City Council M1riutt:s 2 M•_zy 2, 1939 I 1 . MINUTES A. R 1tlar City Ca .- eti�zg held Tize ;dad F 1999 MOTION Pidcuck moved, seconded by Harr !::, to approve t:ie Minutes of the February 21, Z939 City Council meeting as emended . rage 4 , Paragraph 3, sentence 5, should read : to make its Position known . . . . Page 10, Itrm It, paragraph 2, should read : in the past , inform.-ation about the companies shoule be . . . . . Page 10, Item B, paragraph 6, sentence 2, should r,aad : and t1oere were environmental -Otudie:s t 9 Notation added above 2nd Ballot and 3rd Ballot, should read : Tine following ballots were cast for appointment to ) the two-year term remaining from a vacancy on the Commission . Mutton carried unanimously . � H . �_iZ� ty_ C2uLc 1. M eting till T�� �_y,^1�1r i 1 113, 1911 Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the Minutes of the April 18, 1989 City Council Meeting as amended . Page 14, Item IX .A, Motion 2, should read : Dan Dryer . Page 15, T tem X.A . 4, Motion, should read : Cleanup Day on April 15, 1989 Motion carried unanimously. III . _CON ,ENT C LENDAj CI rk Is Liu n`g__.Li B . R c-moo 1 11 p s.I Ili - n A iL me n t !R .ii b e C ti Q aD_O Qg_;5_i q n tur-ly P-�?��t: _. o �z?i= ?: (Resolution No . 89-79 ) c- Y eP_0_Kt f 9 r St3!_eet_ t vtilities_ fOT SUMmit1!_KP._ wva1c;Rcd -Ity MI :�utes May 2 ' 1989 ( Resolution Nu . 89- 30 ) D . Receive Fe 1—b .,y_--t Drainage ILDI)royt--M'Orit� inc' Set Public Hearinct, T . C . ( Resolution No . 89--- 74 ) E . Starview Terrace ) by Patrick Bauer . 2nd Reading of Ordinance No . 60-88, Rezoning from Rtiral to R1-13 . 5 on 15 . 72 acres; Approval of Developer 's Ajreement for Kingston Ridge; and Adoption of Resolution No . 89-87, Authorizing S;umm,,..1.r-, of Ordinance No . Gn-138 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. Location : East of East Staring Lane, west of Mitchell Road, north of County Road No . 1 . 15 . 72 ,acres into 26 single family lots . (Ordinance No. 60-88 - Ro-zonint3; Resolution No . 89-87 - Authorizing Summary and Publicaticin) F . Final for Kingston Ridge ( fnrmerly Starview 72rrace ) located N .W. of Mitchell Rgad a31d West of Staring ( Peso"lution No . 39-82 ) G - (--I—Ia H . PgVLPE-R---P0TNjjF ( aka Red Rock Ranch ) by Mason Homes . 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 4-89-pud-2-89, Planned Unit Development District Review Amendment within the R1-13 . 5 Zoning District ; Approval of Supplement to Developer ' s Agreement to Overall Red Rock Ranch; and Adoption of Resolution No . 89-71, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 4-89 -pud-2 -,119 , and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 1 60 acres within the RI-13 . 5 Zoning District with waivers from front and -side yard setback Code requirements. Location: West of Mitchell Road, east of Red Rock Lake . ( Ordinance No . 4 -89-PUD-2 -89; Resolution No 89-71, Authorizing Summary and Publication ) 1 . Rq! 0 1 it on t tL qriZjj0S the %suaDpq._of $465'.-Q0a _9f Refunding odds for Kind!CX-C.are Lgarning Centcr5. Tng , (EEMOVED FROK THE jjQEN-QA) J. Resgluta-Qn No . 89-a-9 . utborizIng the _IL-puo._Mq_C__gf iZ2, 489 , 000 In Refundinci Bonds and 2400 , 501) In ReEjzfUna Q-apLtal_Appreciation Bonds ( zero g_oup-on honds S1 . 500 . 000 face ) Y, L. 4 tb--Q-f M. FL(If-,- i 13 1 dp onstrUCtion at Pranlo Ind Wyndham Knoll P!2r%3 City Council Minutes, 4 M,�y 2, 1939 MOTION : Anderson moved, seconded by Harris to ,:approve the Consent Calendar as amended, with the Removal of Item I . ITEM G Tenpas asked Lambert what wlis the approximate square footage of the additional painting done . L,imbet t replied the wall where the compressors were located had been added to the contract . Tenpas stated that the change seamed high . ' Motion to approve the items on the Consent Calendar 1 carried unanimously. IV . PUBLIC, .__R y r 2 LG S A. CEDAR F I r) STORM FEWER MPROVEMEb'T�S� ..,_ ( Resolution No . 39-81) City Manager Jullie reported that notice of this Public Hearing had been mailed to the affected property owners and was published in the April 19 and 26, 1989 issues of the Eden Prairie News . { Dir_,tz reported the area to be served would be the Fairfield Subdivision, the former Cheyenne Place Subdivision, the school district, and ocome City property. A storm sewer would run from the ponding area and a short segment of sanitary sewer would be included in the project; however, the sanitary sewer would be assessed as part of another project . The estimated total cost of the project was $463, 905; the City cost 'Co be $74, 866, the County cost to be $26, 084 , and the assessed amount approximately $362, 955 . Dietz noted that a number of the properties would not be developed at this time and therefore , deferments would be allowed . Approximately $240, 000 would be assessed for the project originally, with the assessments to be scheduled for the Special Assessment Hearing in the fall of 1989 . The project was expected to be completed September 30, 1989 . Peterson asked Dietz if this project would be ready to be part of the Assessment Hearings in Augnst: with a completion date of September 30, 1989 . Dietz replied that most of the costs would be establi:;hed by the Special Assessment Hearing in August . Anderson asked Dietz if there would be any advantage to h.avinr3 ea ements for the Red Rock area for sanitary sewer . Dietz r_eplled that a feasibility study for sanitary sewer In the area of Summit Avenue and Red Oak nrive would be part of another project . City Goi_►nc: 11 ml nute May ?, 1989 Harris -a-;ked for clar i fication on the .as,ey,ment . Harris a_:ked if both utilities .and storm -ewer would be assessed this fall . Dietz replied that only the 4 term ;;ewer would be assessed the _, fell . Jack VanRemortc 1 , 16031 Summit Drive, commended Staff for the foresight to include the sanitlary s.ewex at the same time as the storm sewer . He questioned if the detail pre--ented had the sanitary sewer in the right location . Staff replied that the location dei?i.c_ti�d w:j;; g.!rier. ,l in nature . Harris moved, seconded by Pldcock to <<1:::,e l.he rlublic Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 89-11 ordering thf- improvements and preparation of plans> and f.pecifications . Motion carried unanimously. B . MEN :'fit►ARE SF(9.PQ_JNG CEN= by The Robert Larsen Partners . A request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment Review and Planned Unit Development District Review on 9 . 59 acres within the C-Reg-Ser zoning district with waivers, preliminary plat of 11. 72 acres into 3 lots for construction of a 60, 794 square foot commercial development . Location : Northeast corner of Highway #169 and Prairie Center Drive. ( Resolution No . 89-93 - PUD Concept Amendment to Overall Eden Square PUD; Ordinance No . 5-89-PUD--3-39 - Planned Unit Development District and Zoning District Amendment within C-Reg-Ser District; Resolution No . 39-84 - Preliminary Plat ) Jullie reported that notice of this Public Hearing had been sent to owners of 28 surrounding properties and published in they April 19, 1989 issue of the Eden Prairie News . Chris Galle, representing the proponent, presented the plans for a 5-buiildinc3 development on 9 . 5 acres, to include 2 fast-food restaurants . Galle otated that the buildings would be one story buildings with an 8 ' canopied walkway along the front of the stores . The project was 50 percent leased at this time . r Enger reported that this: item had been reviewed by the [Manning Commission at its April 24, 1939 meeting anti ,unanimously recommended -approval subJect to Staff re^ommcnd.at i ons of the I►pr i 1 21, 1989 Staff Report . Enger believed that the revised plan with the three free- ::tariding buildings would be more marketable than the original plans of two years sago. The developer had provided criteria by which the free-standing facilities would be compatibly: with the main facility . An irrigation system was proposed . Enger stated that the signage issue City Council M inu t:es 6 May 2, 1989 h.-,id not been resolved and added the options were .� single shared pylon sign or individual signage on each facility. Enger reported thhat the proponent would 1 ike to proceed with construction this spring . Lambert reported that this item had been reviewed by the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission at its May 1, 1989 meeting and unanimously recommended approval based on the Planning Department Staff Report of April 21, 1989 . Tenpat; aokvd if the trail would be at grade level of Highway #169 or would it be higher . Engel replied it would be at grade level and a stairway would tie the trail Into the shopping center sidewalk system. Tenpas asked how close the trail would be to Highway 0169 . Enger replied the trail would be approximately 20 feet away from Highway 11169 due to the practical difficulties of getting the trail on top. Tenpas suggested that the trail be kept as far away as possible from the highway . Enger replied that Staff would relook .at the trail. Peterson asked If there could be a fence installed between the trail and the highway and if the tra i 1 would be out:.-.;de the snowplow zone. Dietz replied that it should be out:.side the snowplowing zone . Peterson asked what type of pedestrian traffic w,:ts anticipated on this trail during the winter and who would be responsible to keep the trail open during the winter . Lambert replied that the trail was not used heavily now because the trail deadended; however, once the connections were made he anticipated increased usage and the City would eventually be responsible to maintain the trail . Anderson asked whose responsibility the stairs would be to maintain . Lambert replied that the stairs would be considered part of the :.hopping center ' s interior walkway Sys tern and the center could be responsible for the ma i ntenance . Anderson asked the proponent if it had a :,11yned contract with the Pannekoeken Huis . Galle replied yes . Harriz asked what color the canopy would be . Galle replied that the color had not been determined at this time; however, consideration was being given to the burgundy color to match the Lunds store . Galle added that the center wanted to be compatible with the surrounding businesses, yet have its own identity. Peterson asked If there was any . 't he Planning. Commis:; ior) level regarding exterior I1,.:::.:4y and/or City ("ouncil Minute;- 7 May 2, 1989 parking lot lighting . Peterson that he had received calls rug,arding the lighting it the Lunds center and was concerned that this lighting wc►uld be more conspicuous . Enger replied that the lighting had not been discussed by the Planning Commission a_ a concern . The poles at the Lunds center were approximately 10.0 feet high . Enger said that typically whin c,{-)mmercial development was adjacent to residential areas Staff recommended that the maximum height nQt exceed 35 feet . Enger added that ^t.tff would work with the developer regarding the lighting. Peterson asked if there would be a uniform neon lighting color scheme . Galle replied that a uniform neon sign requirement had not been discussed with the tenants; however , the tenants would want z,Jme flexibility to assure individuality. Peterson added the l►A believed that the tie-on colors at the Lurnds center were acceptable ; however, there -sere some color combinations which would not be compatible . Enger replied that Staff had discussed at length what the proponent would be -allowed relating to 51gnage" . The signag4- would need to provide, consistency, there were to be designated areas for the signs, and height restrictions . Enger said that Staff had preferred allowing the proponent to have a choice limited to three colors choices rather than designate a �:;pccif_ ic color . Tcripas believed that the City needed to be sensitive to the success of the center and that appropriate signage was an important- factor In the retail bus i neos . Peterson asked what controls would be placed on the fast- food restaurants if they each chose to have individual pylon signs and if a specified distance: would be maintained between the signs. Enger replied that Staff had not discussed requiring a specific d istaracc between the signs . Enger added that Staff had (31zc:ussed a designated height not to exceed 20 feet .and that the maximum square footage per sign would be 36 square feet . Enger added that Staff would look into a rt:cjuirement related to the distance between the sighs . There were no further comments from the audience . M(]T 1M: Anderson moved, seconded by Harris to clo::e the Public 'Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 39-33 for PUD Concept Amendment . Motion carried unanimously. Anderson moved.. o.ecorided by Harris to approve 1st Reading of Ordinance Nu . 5-89-PUD-3-89 for PUD District and Zoning . District Amendments . Motion carried unanimously. r- 1--y S.. r, - 11 May 2, 1989 HOTTnN : Anderson muvQ0, -;t--(---ondt.!d by Harris to adopt Re. olution No . 69 -84 approvin(3 the Preliminary rlat and to AAirt-cl, "taff to prepare a nevelopment Agreement Incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations . Moti(--,n carried unanimously. V. PA.YM �tT OF .CLl1I MS Pldcoc-X moved, seconded by Anderson to approve Payment of Claims No . 50315 through No . 50612 . Tenpas .-Asked what type of Investigation was performed for :70 . 75, Claim No . 50435 . Jullie replied that lie would check on this item . Pldcock when uourdination of ordering between departments would be taking place . Jullie replied that the City C*ouncil had auLhcj-- I�t-!d a position responsible for central purchasing, and hiring would be forthcoming in the near future . Jullie added that the departments were m,iklng efforts to be careful in their purchases. ROLL CALL VOTE: Anderson,, Harris, Pldcock , Tenf)a-- and Peterson all voting "AYE" . VT . ORD Eso J .. ou� A . relating Ig the Ez)yironm!:j3tally AcceptablQ aging Peterson believed that the first consideration should be whether the Council wished to discuss this item at this timt- or to forward it to the waste Management Commission for review per the Commission ' s request. Pidcock stated that she would like to see this matter cons irl—ered tonight . Vidcock added that she had received a call from the League of Women Voters, which encouraged the City Council to pursue- this endeavor . Andor:son concurred with Councilmember Pidcor-k and added that he also had received several calls ftom butt-, ,Iridividualc sand groups . Anderson added that he would like to proceed with the approval of the Reading tonight =d tol-.cri to allow time for diucussion with interested groups prior to a 2nd Reading. Harrl�*, .coked City Attorney Pauly If a 21jd Reading could be - itc -)p 17)c I for a i (It-I a yt (.1 1 nde f I ii -ly to provide --kn ( tun ty f those who wi .:-,I*)r--d to be heard to comment on the IL;tsuc and Council MiT1U*,-f_•'-- Ila y to also forward the ordinance to the Waste Management Commission for review and comment . Pauly roplied that the City Council Could choose to adopt the 1-- t Reading of the Ordinance , refer the Ordinance to the Wacl,;e '.4,-:triacjem(-,.-nt Commission and allow time for public comment, prior to a 2nd Reading . Peterson quustione(l if it would be more cumbersome- rsome to amend the ordinance and how much of the ordnan(_e could be amended before another Ist Reading would be required . A Pauly replied that the 2nd Reading process way; required by the CI1-'-y Code only . Pauly added that notlln- inq in the City Code or the State Statutes provided guidplinc.l on how much of a document could be amended before requiring the process to start anew . Peterson --,-,tated that he would prefer this Item be reviewed by the Waste Management Commission prior to any action by the City Council . Peterson believed that by approving a 1st Reading a message would be given to the Waste Managemurit Cuntm1-s-- 1 (;;i that the Council approved rind supported the content of the ordinance . Petetsun believed that this issue was too serious to act hastily and, because the Waste Management Commission had specifically requested to be allowed to review the ordinance , he could not support the Ist Reading . Peterson could i;ce no benefit for approving a 1st Reading at thi .- time and believed that the process being taken was not in the proper order . Harris asked If tht--- City Council could receive public comment tonight and then forward the Ordinance to the! Waste Management Commission without approving a 1st Reading . Pauly replied that this process would be permitted . Tenpas stated that he was Inclined to approve the 1st Reading . He added that he too had received numerous phone calls both pro and con and would appreciate the opportunity to hear from the public . Pldcock stated that In response to a Sierra Club letter , she wanted the public to know that the City Council wao, behind recycling . Pidcock added that she had not been aware of inany of the issues until thi -. Item was brought befure the City Council . � Pldcock supported the approval of the lst Reading and than forwarding Uir, ordinarice, Lo the WaL;te Management Commizzion . Harries atated that she tuo had received calls both pro and con . ffarrl-s added the 011c would be more comfortable with addit- lon.--il ;:;tudy to be conducted by the jroup which the City Cuuncil had commlssloned to :study these exact Issues, t_ity Council Minutez the wzistt Man.�gemen`_ r't>>nstti _Sorr . Hatrl-., atat,:-d that she would abstain . Peterson asked if the ordinance was approved for a Reading if a caveat could be added ::Mating thiat City Council had rzct thor()ughly examined the documenit , which would allow the Waste K.lsn.at3ement Commission to r -commend mod i f i ca t i ons . Tenpas did not believe the iz.:.;ue Lo be as as the crr unc i l was making it out to be . He commented that recycling was new to the area and that the differ-grit c3teegoriPs of plastics made recycling a difficult process . Tenpas stated that he believed that recycling she-,uld be the £i::st alternative and that if recycling were :got possible that harmful plastic-s be banned as a tIf,-cond aIternL tive-. MOT I ntJ :_ ridcock moved, seconded by Anderson to -approve the tst Reading of Ordinance No . 12-39 . Peterson questioned the wording and the accuzacy of some of the information presented in the ordinance . Peterson f specifically took exception to the :statement that plastics i� were not recyclable . Anderson stated that even If products were core 1d* zed recyclable , a facility needed to be provided which could recycle them . Anderson believed that the plastid industry was not coming forth with any solutions for the recycling problems and that something needed to be done to create a catalyst to get the plastics indurtry' s attention . Anderson believed that the Minneapolis ordinance and the Ordinance before the Council tonight could be those catalyst!, . Peterson noted that County Commissioner Randy Johnson had been trying for over a year to get a plastic recycling program establishes] . Harr !::, stated that If an ordinance were approved It should be one which could be enforced and questioned how this would be acr. omplishe(l . Harris added that she believed that there needed to be a place to start;; however, She was uncomfortable with the information available at this time . Peterson believed there were inconsistencies in the ordinance which needed to be addressed and questions which needed to be answered be Core he would Ut- comfortable approving tht: ordinance . City C'c�t2nt 1 ,'; i iti.ktt i i M.-Ay 2, 1939 Pidcock stated I:h,,t exception could be taken with the wording iiz other ,locumentL; approved L,y the City Council . Pidcock nated that the ordinance had been prepared by the CiLy Attorney. Pauly stated that he had takers the majority of the warding in the ordinance directly from the Minneapolis draft as directed by the Counci1. Harris believed that it was important for the public to knew that every Cot_kncilmemher was concerned about: waste abatement . Harric was concerned that the: Council could be creating unnecessary hardships for businesses by .approving � thi:; ordinance . Tenpas stated that he, as well as other Councilmember , were 100 behind the recycling programs of the County; however , there was a void in the program related to thy- recycling of plastics . Tenpas believed that app:rovinG thu 1st Rtar;tding would still allow time for additional input by the C:.unci 1 , the Woste Management Commission, and the public . Tenpas stated that he believed the intent of the orditt.anre- war-, tn encotkrage recycling .and hoped that the ordinance might „pc-ed up the process by the private sector to begin recycl ine3 plastic. A di-ocussion tool: place among the Council members related f to the appropriate time for public input . It was \ determined that public comment would be heard after the vote for the motion currently on the floor was completed . Motion carried 3- 1 1 . Peterson voted "No" . Harris absta ined. Randy Johnson, Hennepin County Commissioner , stated that he .;hared the Council 's concern about plastics ; however, the Council needed to keep in mind what was .actually to be accomplished by the ordinance . Johnson stated that studies had indicated that the burning of plastics did not release dioxins into the air . He said that the plastics did not decompose rapidly; however, because of the lack of oxygen in landfills, very few items decomposed . A process called dcnsification was in the development :atages, which would hell, in the solutlon of the recycling of plastics . ThiL; procc;ss should be available early to 1990 . Johnson stated that currently a local firm was paying $640 per ton to a firm Iri Chicago for recycled plastic and, therefore, sic 1 !cved tft is demonstrated that there war a value to ,recycled plastic . Johnson believed that the local market for recycled pl ast i c wotil d ht-t st:ronc; . Juhn-on stated that the Minneapolis Cr,11nance was not a ban .=+t all because: the ordinance provided exemption for tht2 plaz-�tics which were part of a recycling plan and that the intent of the ordinance was to establish a Commission to study the issues . He said that: food container plastics were actually the most benign plastic available . The County CIt}7 COU11C" II MInUte:�: 12 May 2, 1939 Board ye—sterd.ay •a recjue:�;t for tf� operate a rn.�terial recovery facility for recyclablt--S . Johnson believed that *the City would lie more prca(?lictive if it supported the county' u Household Ha.,,ardouc Wa -te e f forts, worked hardor at cutting down on the volume of waste: produced, would buy recycled paper, ancl would begin making provlsiono. to colloct plaotic to be recycled . Johnson stated that currently a firm In Chippewa Falls, W cor::;in was recyclingj the Styrofoam contairzerL7 to make: insulation board . Johnoon concluded by stating that plastic was too valuable a commodity to L)an . Tenpas asked haw long it would take for 1ndu._.tric-s to usr up the volume: of recyclable material . Johnson reL�ii �d that ' '.�� qual t.y r:oed.a-d to be improved; however , the demand wa:3 otror.•; for recycled plastic _ Tenpa . asked Johnson ghat the impact of the Minneapolis and the proposed Eaen Prairie Ordinance would have on ::speeding up the process of recycling plastics on the private industry . Johnson replied that the Mi nncapol io OtdinancF: had alroady had a negative effect on negotiations by the County to recycle plastic . Anderson commended Johnson on his efforts . Ariaerson believed that a concentrated effort needed to be made to keep the Statle clean and added that private industry was supporting throw-away containers rather than returnable ones. Anderson believed that because of the Minneapoliz Ordinance the public now had the attention of the le-gic•lature . Arcduroon believed that this was too important an issue not be addressed . Johnson replied tht. problem Counc:ilmember Anderson was describing was a litter problem which was not the same as a solid waste problem . Johnson believed that a better job of educating the public was necessary and that the litter laws needed to be enforced . Johnson said that McDonalds in New York had started a program to recycle the "clam :hell" containers . Johnson added that refillable containers required more energy to produce: than the throw away ones and added that sometimes what appr.arc.:d to be an obvious _solution wa:3 not . Tom Tupper, a plastics engineer for Advance Machino Product-, :,tated that Proctor & Gamble was looking for 20 to 30 million pounds a year of pl,astlr, pop bottle: to make Lt.. :crap containers, . He believed that the Plastics industry was very intere ted in recycling plastic . Tupper said that a study had been conducted in Germany which found that If pla:':t1c containers wer«-� banned that solid waste volumes would actually increase and the landfill problem„ would be Far worse than what wa::; presently being C seen. Tupper said that the ;study also indicated that the cost to consumers: would increase by over 200% for p.;<ckag i ng If plastics were not used . City Coul)c:il Minutes 13 May 2, 1989 ( Elaine Sor.enzen, 7121 Willow Czuuk Road, believed that the plar�tic ban would not accomplish what It- was intended to do; however , t_>y raising the issue , th<<! public was being made more aw.::irc of the problems and because the issue was before the Council tonight resident: were able to hear the information ,available from Randy John-ion and TOM Tupper, which they would otherwi:,c not been i i vilcgec3 to hear . Sorensen bc: li(:v��d that the public needed to take a stand before the plastico industry wuulLl the A Lure were, no further comments from the audience . i Ul 2T i S,N Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson to send Ordnance No . 12-89 - r, the Waste. Management Cv^:mission for review and response prior to the 2nd Reading . Motion carrierl unanimously. VI I . LL C_�1V3�IZEQU ^ COMMSjNT CATT Q 1_ .'� . gLag fs t by rte ighbor. hood Rgs ldentz: j• rd i ng_ ery n Ong £or Pro Thigd Addition ( cuntinued from March 2, 1939 ) r Jullie reported that the residents had been informed a;3 to \. City Attorney Pauly' s response and had in turn submitted a letter dated May 1, 1989 with a series of :additional quest i ons. Jullie recommended that the May 1 , 1989 letter be forwarded to Sufi for review and :espon-sc to the residents and that a public-, hearing be scheduled if the resident_, wished to purl ue the issue further . There were no comments from the audience . MOTION ' Harris moved, seconded by Anderson to 'refer the May I , 1989 letter from the residents to Staff for further review and re--ponce . Motion carried unanimously.. E . Rga_v tzf, ,( jtlon t o goilt_(j1 Lf--ve1 Of Mitchell Lake Jullie reported that Staff had not reviewed this item in deta l at this time and therefore, recommended th,4It thin• ,item 1ie� ze fcrred back to Staff for further review and addc,01 th.jt -,taff would have a response prepared by the Jtiner 20 , 1939 City Council meeting. { T1QTI 0_U_;_ Harr i:- moved, seconded by Anderson to refer the request by Timber Lake Homeowners A::�sociat lun to Staff for further CO►;n_- i . Mit►utO 1 ; May review and to (nave a prepart­d IJ:j ti-►e J►_IIle 1989 City Council meeting . A resident in t}:e .iiidience asked if Red F.ock, Laku cou13 also be cons iderecl in the study. Di,_!tz replied that Staff would al-_-o look at Rc-d Rock Lake . Peterson asked if the storm sewer proposal presented earlier this evening would have an impact on the Red Roc'r. Lake level . Dietz replied that it cou13 bring the lake to a minimal level ; however, what was needed was �_- i �r t f i cant rainfall . Another resident -�tatcd than She would not be able to return on the 20th of June and wanted the to be aware that the north bay of Mitchell Lake was stagnant water . RcsiOlontJ risked the Council who would conduct the study . Peterson replied that City Staff would conduct the study and would d,_termine if Otutside consultants were necessary. Peterson c:ncouraGed the residents to contact Staff by phone or by letter with specific concerns prior to the! June 20, 1939 City Council meeting. There were no Eurthe r Qomments from the audience . Motion carried ►.ir►anI'nously. R D._ CJCK V w _& ?pZT by Mark Reque:�t for Preliminary Plat- of 5 . 7 acres into 9 �;inc31e family lot.. and road right-of-way. Location: West of Meadowvale Drive, east of Blue Sky First Addition. (Resolution No . 89-95 - Preliminary Plat ) Jullie reported that this was not a public hearing because the rezonlrig request had been withdrawn; however, he suggested that the Council follow the procedure for a development proposal and allow public comment . Frank Cardarelle, representing the proponent, stated that the original request for RI-13 . 5 zoning for 24 lots had been withdrawn based on recommendations by Staff and the Planning Commission and the revised plan would be to maintain the current R1-22 zoning with 11 lots . The average_ square footage of the lots would be 2711500 :.:quire feet . The 50 ' front yard Setbacks requested by the neighbors }►ad b(,--cn maintained along Meadowvale Drive ; however, the 125-foot lot: width requestNd t-)y the neighbor:- was not able to be accompl 1.hed due to the zhape of the prorcrty without: the rcm _)val of art add:tIon,11 lot . Frtger reported that this item had been reviewed by the: Planning Commisoion at the Ai-)ril 10 and April 24, 1989 City Cnunc1. 1 Minutes , 5 !a_�y 2, 1189 ` m,eetings . The major disr_u:,sicn at the meetings had c:ontered on Lots 2 and 3 being rotated to frace. Meadowvale Drive and they 125- f(.�ot lot width . The! plat .tad beF-n revised based on ^taff and Planning Cotami�: � ic�ri rc commendatiunu to reflect the rotation of thr. two lot.., and to mair:taln tht: 50-foot front yard setbac; ,s requested by the neighbors . The Planning Commi.�sion had approved the proposal haled on the Staff recom:;►e ndat ion of the April 21, 1989 Staff report with a 4 -1 vote . C!:ri stinea Doc ge had voted against the proposal to indicate to the Council tl:at :she believed there was merit for further discussion of the 125 foot lot widths. Lambert reported that the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission reviewed this proposal at it May 1, 1989 meeting and unanimously voted tc; recommend approval 3 of the proposal ba: ed on the Planning Department Staff Report dated April 21 , 1939 . a Peterson asked Cardarelle to address the 125 foot lot width request by the ne ighl;ors , Cardarelle replied t'haL. out of the 48 lots in the area 25`t of the lots had lot: widths lcss than 125 feet . Cardarelle staled that the lots had the same amount of square footage and that the lots were deeper and narrower. .J,.;hn Huffer, 8711 Meadowvale Drive, stated that the density of the project was the real issue and the fact that this proposal would alter the whole character of the existing neighborhood . Hoffer said that the existin,3 homes on Meadowvale: had a lot of :;pace between the heimes and that the proposed development would have large homes on narrow lots, which would give a crowded appearance. Tenpas asked Hoffer if lie was suggesting the removal of an additional Tot . Hoffer stated that the neighbors had o1gned petitions against the proposal . Hoffer added that original plan had shown five 100 ' lats along Meadowvale and the neighbors had requested that 1 lot be removed and the 25 feet be added to each of the 4 l at;; . Hoffer believed that of the three developments, this proposal had the greatest effect on the:.. neighborhoot! .and added that he did riot believe the developer had made .stay conce: sior-e:3 based on the neighbors3 concerns . Pidcock asked Cardarelle if the focitp,-acla had bet: n rletermine+d for each lot . ':ardarell e rclil ied no . He saddens that wi tlt the R1-22 zoning a mirtimum yard setb:.ack would he 15 feet and thc:refure, would provide a minimum of 30 feet between the hou.c�e- . Tenpaf:i asked Cardare':l .le what the economic impact would be for the project if :an additional lot were removed . Cardarelle replied that the cost of the one lat would have t,,- (-ounc 11 1 nute-- T C KAY 2, l 8 9 to be over lot_- -incl the of tl-itt- lot,-. would have to be incre'-4--ed . Claude Johnson, 87,110 R-01 Oak Drive, asked if the feasibility :.:;tudy projr-cl- area for Summit Drive and Red 01-1k Drive-- would be (:vmp .1t.-ted before- devulop.mtent d-at. complete(.] and wc)ulLl tle utreets be. torn up twic:t! . Diet-_ replied that Staff WOU113 look at the project az� a whole Bob S-atith, reprocojiting the Strawberry Hill prof-.:ct, stated that the poti tion for the public: lnipro--,iements hand been withdrawn and -.(Dme of the improvement.-c wool:] the done privately by the %Icvt- loper . Dietz- stated that two separate projects would be done and the City would try to coordinate the two projects . Dietz said 1-1--at tlic- major disturbance to Lho fzunt of the homes would b(! due to the road ` m1)rovemF--rjt-;i; . John Hofft.-r stated that he did not want t2he developer t.-() lose money un tho I roiect- , nor did he believe that the Council should gul-iL.intoe the developer PrUfit!; Orl the land - I ridcock a"-1-.t!d Hoffer bow wide his lot was . Hoffer replied 125 feet wide with a 50- foot front yard setback . Nancy !7auro, 8750 Xoadowvale Drive, stated that the land on the back of the proposed lots along Meadowvale Drlvt- would drop off .sharply and added that the l--i:E;t 100 feet of thP lot WOUld be U.11u:L;able . Sauro said that the rieleghbor-:-, were primarily obj(,-eating to how the neighborhood would change in Peterson stated that the City Council would need a legal position by which to deny a project or require a developer to make further changes to the plan . lie added that what the Council was being asked to consider was more than what the City Code required . Larry Moo:;;, SG51 Red Oak Drive, stated that part of the attraction for pe;--itioning for Utllitll'�S would be a reduction In co--ts t,-.) tit-t in with the anut-her City project and asked If this would still be possible . Dietz replied that now that there were two projects, there could still be a price advantage, lind the developer would be absorbing some of the cost:L; - r T T t:: Harris nioved,, 6c.-conded by rldcork to adopt Resolutlo.n No . 39 -95 approving the Preliminary Plat with the addition of the 17 to f f Recontmejidat 1 on-- Motion carrIed 4-1 . Tenpass votod "No" . (7 C-OLIZIC I I Mi nUtf:S M 2, 1989 D STRAWF3ERRY tII,1, L)y Mc-r.r,i:3 J . W i t t e n b c�-y Rt:rluest for Preliminary Plat of 3 acres into 5 cingle family lots and road right -of-w,--iy, with variances tc) be reviewed by the Board of Appea1z . Location: Ea::AC of County Road No . 4, north of Blue Sky First Addition . (Resolution No . 39- 86 - Preliminary Plat ) Bob Smith, repre,--entIrig the proponent, stater] "I'lat the original plan had be*.-n for 7 lots with RI-13 . 5 zoning and that based on Staff itrid Planning Cornmissinn recommendations the plan had been tevi --;.--d to 5 lotr, with the zoning remaining the current R1-22 . TA"Ic utilities would come from the Fairfield Subdivision, a per-nit from the 'DNR would be required, approval by they Watershed District, and a variance for one lot would Inc- necessary to proceed with the project . Eriger reported that -thl:. item had been revieweil L-,y the Plant-.lng Commisolon =-it its April 10 and April 24, 1989 meeting and had received unanimou!; approval based an the recomincridatiuns in tlh,-, Staff Report of April 21, 111-139 . En,jer I.iLldi--d that Staf-r- and the Planning Commi--- slon were reconxin#% ndinq approval. of the variance request . Lambert reported that thio, item had been nevi owed by the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission at its Hay 1 * 1989 meeting and had received unanimous approval based on the recommendationo as outlint:d in. the Planning Department Staff Report of April 21, 1989 . Anderson moved, seconded by Harris to adopt Resolution No . 89-86 approving the Preliminary Plat with the addition of the Staff Recommendations . Motion carried unanimously. E . EDEtjRENTER, Plans for Entrance Remodeling En-ger reported that the Council had reviewed at a previous meeting the redesign of the 4 entrances to the Eden Prairie Center and at thi---. time the Center had elected to proceed with those plat-is . Staff recommended approval of the plans . Tenpa-- joked Larry Jenzen, manager of the Eden Prairie Center , what the plaris were to increase the succe--.3 of the venter . Jensen replied that the center management had made a commitment for the interior and remodeling of th,? center . The Eden Prairie Center would be featured at on(-- of the major conventions in Las Vega-- this year . ien:;en noted that one of the biggeot. problems to overcome wa.s the pt-cviout; perception of the center and believed that the renovation proposed was the flr�-t -.- tep . Mt ,.ute_= ?3 11,_ty 2, 1939 Tfnrpas asked if thc: Mayo M1-211 propc,_:ec? fc,z BloomingtOCI would hurt or 'help the Eder: Prairie Center . Jt2nsen believed that it could l-;,_lp attract more .etailerz to the area and could attract _­.econd store loc.ationU tr«m, the Mega Mall to Eden Prairie Pidcock asked if the CarOon Pirie: Scott entrance would be remodeled . Jensen stated that the main intent was to change the appearance of the 4 main entrances from cold and uninviting to warm and inviting . Jerh:�;un added th-,4 the center did not have control ovor the department s{_r're entrances . 'ART 1= 1�I? 1 Cl'�I1. ,-,� c�N�,I V' II . F ; n V ^n c ^� g A . Hei-)ort from Waste Mar •,<- ement Cornmi;:;.: ion on PF•cvcling Yvonne Fiargens , a member of the Waste Management CommiL;,, ion, summarized the Commissi;on ':; report and reccom.mendat ionc . Peterson asked if the Commission knew if the County would allow Eden Pra trie to designate recyclables to the Reuter facility or would the County designate the destination . Hargens replied that it would seen reasonable for the County to allow the City to use the Reuter facility. Terhpas asked if the Waste Management Commission was aware of a bill before the, legislature which would allow the burning of the peilutz produced by Reuter Recycling, It:c . Hargens presentr_!d t'hc Council witch a copy taf t:he amendment . I'ei.crson questioned recommendation No . 6 and what purpose would be served by the City's contribution for the cost of recycling cor,t:aincrs . Peterson believed that the residents should recognize that they were responsible for the waste generation and, therefore , should share the burden of the expense . Peterson noted that this would not be fair to the businesses, the residents would receive a break for recycling; however, the bsisiries .p_s would not . Harris believed that the process :should be made as easy as poss able . She added that there was somr_thing festive and encourragin�j in offering :something free . Harris nutf,d that the containers wuuld be a one-time investment for the City. Pete-Zoorh stIAed that thz: once-time investment would co:;t the City approximately "47, COO and the ^ity would not know if the resident: were u:31rlrj the cont:,ainerz for recycling . Peterson believed the incentive would be the rate break . Pidcock commented that the City could buy goodwill . City (7our►cil MI'nutes 10 ;�'._iy 2, 1'' 39 Ten j)as stated that to buy the conta i ncrs was not the government ' s responsibility. Anderson statf°d that— he would 1ik.e to see what th- i,npact to the budget woc, ld be before approvin,; the City's participation in the cost of the containers . Haryen:; state : 1._3:at BrI. was willing to order the containers . Pidcock moved, ---t:conded by Narriz; to accept the Waste 4 Manag:2ment Comm , 4 on 's report , adopt Plan 4B, .and to delay the decision for City participation in Zurch sing 3 the containers, until further information was available while working with Hennepin County to minimize possible � City cost. Motion carried unanimously. I X . Ac PO I'VTHEN75 A X . RF.PJ OF OFFTCERS, BOARD COMMrSSInNS A . Reports. off, Col:nci "4rri�- ra CcUt7tr()i oI LO.n a 11 Harris asked what the City ' s plans were to reduce the speed in the vicinity of the Cedar Ridge School t.0 makc the passage L;afer .. Dietz replied that a slcpial would go In at County Roar? tf 4 and. C:-linty Road #1 . Harris asked whop that signal would be installed . Dietz replied that he helieveLl a temporary signal would be installed by this summer ; however, he had not had direct conversation with MnDut regarding the timing . Dietz added that there would not be pedeIrian traffic_ to the school, this would be a bus route . Harris believed it was important for the City to enhance the safety of the children crossing the road near the school . Dietz utated that he would contact the County. Harrl., muvcd, eco;icled by Tenpas to refer the i:::t:e of Speed Control on Country Road 91 to Staff for fur tht-r review and response . Anderc,on stated that the school was on the north - ide of Count-, Poad # 1 an,] thr- t.r.,il1 system was on the south -- !do- and believed that the City should look at providing ,i path on the north side uF Cuu:.ty Road #1 and County Road 114 . Ter,pas believed that a 4-way stop would slow duwre the traffic more effectively than a signal . Dietz replied i1 M 1 i)ute '. 20 2-lzf that r,either a ligInt or .a sl,-jri e_xi::t.cd, for cor►trnl and did not bellow;; that a 4-w.ay stop would work well for this area . Dietz- stated that Staff cola:d look into ;adding walk signal: at tY,e light In this area . Motion carried tinan i mou4 ly. MOTION : 3 Anderson moved , seconded by Harxic to request a report from Staff recommending what the nett steps should be to generate the funds for the park improvementz by the Jur:e 6, 1989 City Council meeting . Motion carried unanimou-5ly . . A t.i... ..___ __1ST' �_���S�l Fct�ruarY ?1st Cn �i^ ent � �D n T- t i c i'i L nr 4 Cal r Pidcock asked if the Staff recommendations had been f.orwatdetl to the Chamber of Commerce regarding the Clty 'z por;i t i un c;n new DNR Shor eland Management regulation; . a Enger t`zi:3 had nut been forwarded at this time and that he would zee that thin was done . Pidcurk inoved, seconr c-0 by Anderson to pre,�:pnt comm#7r ndationsl to Debt !(! Quaribeck and Julie W. gner for being recipients of the Athena Award . Motion cazrlod unanimously. 4 . Keefe Le ter Peterson asked Jullie if he would take part in the Metropolitan Council ' s airport study. Jullie replied he would B . Report of City mgnascg Adjust—meilt Peter,--on stated that because of the lone term of service with the City he recommended a 6% increase in salary for the City Ma naUe r . Harri: quer tiuried if the :---Lary should be comparable witli citif--; of equal r;ize, slnve Eden Prairie ' ; poc t t i c,r, m i yht bL• cha l l rsn<31 rig because of i t: ;stage: of development . Pldcock stated that she had had positive dealing with City Manager Jullie; however , she believed that at some point y Cl)t.e:ac11 Minute's 21 M,iy ?, 1989 ( consideration -should be mau've that the City Man-Ager live in Eden rzairie, anC added tI:at- she woua;l ' ` Ieee to slee the ev.alii,:O.Ion 7icidt: lines he more definitive- . Tonpac believed that to baize the alary lncr^ase on where the City Tl an,_,ycr lived would be in•apprrp r i.-ito . fie added that when ane3,'u: if City Manager Jul 1 i e Ie f t the position it would be appropriate to look at a residency requirement at that time . Harris moved, seccnded by Anderson to appruve a 6% salary increase for City Manager Jullic . I-Iotion carried unan i.Hour; ly. C . Rego t of C I t• _ 1to_�ncy D . f?e1 r� �� 2 �'G of Planning _Fecre.,i ..1on & Na for Cofntn:►IMLj.`Y CFt-L P.r__' Lambert noted that there were actually two separate issues, one for ti-_e of the swimming pool Land one for the use and charges of the ice arena for th(� hockey team . Lambert suggested that each issue be dealt with separ,itely . The 7irls swim team had expanded over the la:;t year and additional pool time waz required; however, if the pool time was 13iven to the school the Community Center would lose approximately $7, 000 to $1 , 000 In revenues from swimming lessons which would not be able to be scheduled . Lambert stated that Staff and the Parks, Rvcz•-.atlon,s & Natural Reaource s Commission both recommended granting the school most of the additional pool time. He noted that the City had originally agreed with the School District that the Community Center would be the primary practice Facility. Lambert stated that the School District was, requesting a charaye in the method uz;ed for charging fro the hockey game:;; . The current Vollcy was to charge the Di:.tr.lct 4 hours of ice time , split the workers cosL 50/50, and split the qat:: reccipts 50,150 . The District stated that it had lost money in 14 out of the last 18 game:�, pl.zyed . They rjew 'Staff proposal was to charge for the 4 hours of ice time., have the City pay the worYur:;, and �­ Ldlit the remaining date receipt:. 50/50 . The: Park!:-, Recreation & Natural Resour ,cer, Comm i i cn r ecortme•nded that the City char j., For 4 hours of ice time, pay the workers, and take 100% of the gate receipt:, . MCI- - z.k(:d what IMp.-Act therel- woulcl he oil wh(D V,=) id nieini)vr-ihlp fet'-_s to 'belong to the Coinvoinity Cf_rrlter . Laiiib-ort replied that some or the le:;::;u,,i proijram-_ would not be offcred duriny the. winter . Anderson believed that the times from 7 : 30 AM to 11 : 30 AM on Saturday morning should be kept for tpc!nin._j 5wiminirig and lessons . Lambczt stated that Stijff had" rucommerid4_,J the r1tinial of that pt::rtiun of the request . Lambert added that 35% of the total lesson:; were on Lambert noted that tl­ic majority of those taking lessons were not members of Community Center . Tenpas asked If the school had any other alternatives . Schultz replied that the only alternativc.! woulcl be tc seek anothcr location for practice and the :.school (IiJ riot prefer gninq to inother location. Andcrt,()n asked how lung the practices were currently scheduled . Schult-, ruplied that practices were schedilletl from 2 : 20 FM to 5: 00 PM . Schultz added that r;ince the zcht_;jll had j(:) izicd the C'WrifercnCO all the uther schools houo,(--d their own pools and, therefor(.,, the, Eden Prairie stuJ,--tit_:-, were at -,i disadvantage '-Irid needed the extra practice tine . Peterson -stated that the City had agreed to accommodate: the school for any Increzi.se in the program . Pic1cack --t-atecl that she did not warit to see the member-, of the Community '­erjLer or. the younger tnernberL of the community excluded from use of the pool . Anderson stated that the City was expanding and rioted that many other communities had two or three pools . Anderson added that he did not want to see the practice time wasted . Schultz stated that when the-- District oX191nally j9to-cd to the current arran(]eirent it had assumed the huckey gamed, would 1,,iy for thems(.-IveLi . S)chultz stated thdt tho District had looked Into what other schools In the area were doing and found that nio,­,t had a 50.0,'50 split with the City. He added that Edina had a 70/30 splitj but the City did not charge the .school for the Ice time . Schultz believed that because It was a school activity that at some of the revenue should come back to the -_-choul . He said that the Di strict was under budget restraints ai,10 waL; riot sure how long It could continue to support the program . Schultz ;,�ug,3ested the posc; 1U.111ty of lookin(j at ,idjuutlrjg the rental, rate. for the ice time . Schultz '11 7 t the rarks, Recroatlon AA Natural Resources recommendation would be sending out the wrong message and that the Staff recommendation recognized the ro,-:r,c.-.i 1 Minutes ?? M`.,f` 2, 1`�3`� --haring czaturo e: tablished betwu,_,n the City and the Dist:r ict . t-1-..3t sc:hulttz haOl offerc:d r+��1 ;lJi�:� t 1 Cila2ic�v the arrangement:; �iU1.:G't'l i , ,:�� ejuest iaZlt'c� why any czg r, i : by u ild expect to usc, City d F.,ncl operated facilities at a profit . Anderson stated that he would agrce with the .^.t.:ff --ccornmerlcl..ation . n(! �-,l1ggeotcd that- the schoUi i.iC:r1 ?l: f' 1 tJ admin:;1on fee to y2 . 00 . Anderson beli (­ved that the crow control should be the responsibility of tt:r- ^i =t- ict . Tenpa-- statccl that he concurred with the Staff recommend:at. ion . HP believed that the District and the City were one community. MOT 10711 f Tenpa�, moved, LIy An(Jerson to upj.)tov,: the changes request:rd by t1se E,3Ltn Prairie School. Dist-rlc.t, i>k.r Staff r..ere�n.rne;lc:.ttivlia . ':c,t �.r� carried unanii.nouzly . F. R j o L' o f D 3 JS k� 4 _r3-� P u j �t; W e:j Y. a , !71, -90 tinti the Did for the Flusher , r.:idcoc_k moved, seconded co n ed by Ten a s to adopt Resolution N c• . 89-90 accepting the bid for the Flusher Truck . Motion carried unanimously. 2 . �?e 2t� j� L ` .�.'�'�' t i n ct t h�_ G. t.ice. Pidcock moved, secoriOled by Harris to adopt. Resolution No . t39-92 accepting the bid of Allied Blacktop for the :3ea1 Coating for 1969 . Motion carried unanimously . X I . N F,W 1 I,V.-,�-,-Z,. P.._N.M_NT The meeting recesz;ecl to a cluwL.(] cession at 12 : 25 AM. T1-1E: contested case hearing pros-es r.egArding the propoSud exp4i n -, ion cJ the raying i louI Sanitary Landfill was d iscuDsed ( untt '. 1 . 00 AM.