Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 03/20/2012 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 20, 2012 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Council Members Brad Aho, Sherry Butcher Wickstrom, Ron Case, and Kathy Nelson CITY STAFF: City Manager Rick Getschow, Public Works Director Robert Ellis, Community Development Director Janet Jeremiah, Parks and Recreation Director Jay Lotthammer, City Attorney Ric Rosow and Council Recorder Jan Curielli I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:03 PM. All Council Members were present. Mayor Tyra-Lukens noted there were quite a few people at the meeting tonight for the public hearing regarding Hennepin Village. She said anyone wishing to speak this evening should put their name and address on the sign-up sheet. II. COLOR GUARD/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. OPEN PODIUM INVITATION IV. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Getschow said Mr. Lotthammer has an update on invasive species to add as Item XIV.D.3. There is also a change to the resolution regarding Item IX.A. for the layout of Shady Oak Road. He added Item VIII.P., a resolution to extend the franchise with Comcast Cable to July 31, 2012. MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to approve the agenda as amended. Motion carried 5-0. VI. MINUTES A. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY, MARCH 6, 2012 MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to approve the minutes of the Council workshop held Tuesday, March 6, 2012 as published. Motion carried 5- 0. B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, MARCH 6, 2012 MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Aho, to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting held Tuesday, March 6, 2012 as published. Motion carried 5-0. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 2 VII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS VIII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. NOTTING HILL by Pulte Homes of MN, LLC. Second Reading of Ordinance 5- 2012-PUD-2-2012 for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 8.35 acres and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 9.87 acres, Location: 15640 Pioneer Trail. (Ordinance No. 5-2012-PUD-2-2012 for PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Change) C. EDEN PRAIRIE OFFICE RETAIL by Fendler Patterson. Second Reading of Ordinance 6-2012-PUD-3-2012 for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 3.84 acres and Zoning District Amendment in the I-2 Zoning District on 3.84 acres ; Resolution 2012-44 for Site Plan Review on 3.84 acres. Location: 14675 and 14711 Martin Drive (Ordinance No. 6-2012-PUD-3-2012 for PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Amendment; Resolution 2012-44 for Site Plan Review) D. JURIS ADDITION by Rehder & Associates. Second Reading of Ordinance 7-2012- PUD-4-2012 for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 14.16 acres and Zoning District Amendment in the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District on 14.16 acres. Location: 12790 Plaza Drive. (Ordinance No. 7-2012-PUD-4-2012 for PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Amendment) E. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2012-45 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF JURIS ADDITION F. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SRF CONSULTING GROUP FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE SOUTHERN SEGMENT OF SHADY OAK ROAD IMPROVEMENTS G. APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE WATERMAIN PROJECT H. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BLUE WATER SCIENCE FOR 2012 WATER MONITORING PROGRAM I. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2012-46 CONCURRING WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY REVOCATION J. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2012-47 AUTHORIZING ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS FOR THE NORTHERN SEGMENT OF SHADY OAK ROAD IMPROVEMENTS K. APPROVE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WITH MINNETONKA FOR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 3 THE NORTHERN SEGMENT OF SHADY OAK IMPROVEMENTS L. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2012-48 ESTABLISHING PRECINCTS AND POLLING PLACES M. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2012-49 DECLARING PROPERTY AS "ABANDONED PROPERTY" N. APPROVE GRANT PROGRAM AGREEMENT FOR CORNERSTONE ADVOCACY SERVICES O. APPROVE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE GRANT PROGRAM AGREEMENT TO REHABILITATE LUANN'S PLACE,A SENIOR GROUP HOME P. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2012-58 GRANTING COMCAST A FRANCHISE EXTENSION TO JULY 31, 2012 MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Case, to approve Items A-P on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. LAYOUT NO. 1A FOR THE SHADY OAK ROAD (COUNTY ROAD 61) IMPROVEMENTS (Resolution No. 2012-50) Getschow said this item is connected to the United Health Group (UHG)project. It is a request for approval of the proposed layout for Shady Oak Road improvements which provides a continuous four-lane divided roadway with left and right turn lanes on Shady Oak Road. Multi-use trails will be provided on both sides of Shady Oak Road for the entire length of the project. Randy Newton, City Engineer, reviewed the proposed improvements and noted it will begin in late 2012 and will be completed in 2013. Staff and UHG have discussed moving up the construction of the roundabout on their property to coincide with construction of Shady Oak Road. The proposed layout has been approved by MNDoT, Hennepin County and the City of Minnetonka. The layout shows a traffic signal on West 62nd Street at the UHG access;however, that would not be constructed until a future phase of the UHG project. The streetscape for the project will be similar to what Minnetonka did on the northern portion of Shady Oak Road. There will be one change to the layout for the BP gas station to add another access point in order to accommodate truck movements on their site. If the project is approved, there is an aggressive schedule proposed. Offers for the property will be made in early April and condemnation proceedings will be filed in early May if negotiations have not been completed. Staff has been communicating with property owners so they should be aware of the project. Most of the cost of the project will be paid by UHG except for$300,000 from Hennepin County for the trail on the west side of the road and $400,000 from Eden Prairie for the rest of the trail and the right turn lane on City West Parkway. Staff will bring final design plans to the Council in CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 4 July with construction to start in October 2012. Tyra-Lukens liked the idea that the landscaping will replicate what Minnetonka did on their portion of the road. She asked if the trail will connect to the regional rail trail. Newton said that is dependent on Minnetonka completing their segment of the trail,but they appear to be committed to doing so. Tyra-Lukens noted construction needs to happen on some of these improvements before UHG can start construction. She asked if UHG is responsible for maintaining the roadway to a certain standard even if it deteriorated with their construction. Newton said road construction would be concurrent with the UHG development, so either our contractor or their contractor would be responsible for any damage that would occur. Nelson asked how the roundabouts being constructed at the I-494/Hwy 169 interchange are working out. Newton said only one is open at this time but there is not enough traffic to see how they will work out. We have seen that they work well in other communities. Nelson asked why they did not choose a traffic signal rather than a roundabout at this location. Newton said it was because the number of vehicles making a left turn into the UHG site could easily cause traffic to back up at a traffic signal. Nelson asked how many cars at a time can be accommodated on a roundabout. Newton said traffic is constantly moving on a roundabout so it is hard to say what the total number could be. Nelson said she believes roundabouts work in some places but not in others. Newton said they hired a nationally-recognized roundabout consultant to provide oversight of the design because we wanted to make sure it was constructed to the best standards. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Aho, to close the public hearing and to adopt Resolution 2012-50 approving Layout No. lA for the Shady Oak Road (County Road 61) improvements. Motion carried 5-0. B. HENNEPIN VILLAGE—SITE B by Toll Brothers. Request for: Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 71.5 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 71.5 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 24.37 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 71.5 acres into 52 lots and 3 outlots. Location: 71.5 acres east of Eden Prairie Road and south and west of Riley Creek. (Resolution No. 2012-51 for PUD Concept Review; Resolution No. 2012-52 for Preliminary Plat) Getschow said the proposed plan is for 52 single family lots on 71.5 acres. Official notice of this public hearing was published in the March 8, 2012, Eden Prairie News and sent to 199 property owners. The Planning Commission first reviewed this project at the February 27, 2012 meeting. The hearing was continued to March 12, 2012 with direction for the city attorney to review developer obligations to provide access for all residents of Hennepin Village to the pool and clubhouse amenities that will be constructed on Site B. At the March 12, 2012 meeting, the Planning Commission voted 8-0 to recommend approval of the project. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 5 Alex Martin, Division Vice President of Toll Brothers, said this is the final phase of the larger Hennepin Village master plan project. He noted the plans proposed prior to this plan had 109-180 lots in the same space. They hope to break ground around June 1 and have a model home open this fall. Nelson asked that maps of the project be displayed so the audience could see the project. She asked Mr. Martin to review the changes proposed. Martin said the site is approximately 72 acres in size, but they plan to develop on only 24 acres. He said the biggest change from the original plan is that there were many more units on the previous plan. As a result of reducing the number of units, the trip counts will be reduced. Prior to the airport expansion it was assumed no residential homes could be built on Street D; however, the results of noise level testing in the area indicated homes could be built there. That allowed them to relocate the amenity package onto Lot 5. Nelson asked Mr. Martin to point out the variances that are required. Martin said they are asking for a deviation from the front yard setback in order to respect the boundaries on the bluff line. The side yard setbacks will deviate from R1-13.5 in certain sections to allow homes to fit within the confines. Case said he was able to walk the property last night. He was curious about the amazing tree line along Lots 11-23. He asked if it will be possible to preserve some of the tree line. An engineer from Toll Brothers said one of the main constraints is the topography change from Beverly Lane to the bluff line. Case asked if some of the actual tree line will be preserved. The Toll Brothers engineer said they are trying to preserve as much as possible on Lots 10, 11 and 12, but it will be on a case by case basis. Case said it would be great for new residents and also those across the valley if the tree line could be preserved. He noted sometimes even insignificant trees can create a tree mass or a border. He would like as much of the tree line as possible to be preserved. Martin said the outer perimeter of the project is in a similar location as the original one proposed. They are respecting a little more of the topography than the original plan. Case said, while we are all grateful for the 40 acre donation, preserving trees would benefit the new development as well as current residents in the area. Tyra-Lukens noted we are blessed to have open space in the community. One of the problems we have is many of the homeowners whose homes overlook park and open space have a tendency to expand their yards into the open space. She asked what they are planning to do that would avoid that problem for their project. Martin said they will require signage on each property line. As part of their contracts they use an "Exhibit H" which includes all the encumbrances like drainage and utility easements and an explanation of what a homeowner can do within their lot. Tyra- Lukens noted it is very difficult to deal with situations where, for example, people build pools or a major retaining wall on City property. Martin said they have preconstruction meetings and the home buyers are asked to acknowledge receipt of an approved City survey. Butcher Wickstrom asked what their price points are. Martin said the base price is CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 6 projected to be in the $600,000 range,but will probably average in the $700,000 range with buyer upgrades. Tyra-Lukens encouraged proponent to work with the Heritage Preservation Commission and the Historical Society on street names. Martin said they will work with City staff to approve the names and will try to have a linkage to something appropriate to the area. Tyra-Lukens thought it would be interesting to work in the ski and golf club heritage. Case noted W. A. Frederick was the one who capped Miller Spring and it would be nice to honor him. The Sohm family has a connection in that area as well. Director of Public Works Ellis said the development of Hennepin Village Site B brings with it Prospect Road. He reviewed the history of Prospect Road as it has developed since 1999 when the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) line was extended. In 2006 and 2007 a discretionary Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was conducted for the area. In 2007 we approved Alternative 6 for the future design and construction of Prospect Road. Alternative 6 included a culvert crossing, not a bridge. Some of the concerns we have heard about the proposed construction of Prospect Road relate to traffic. About 700 vehicles per day use the existing Prospect Road over to Spring Road. Because there are fewer units in this project than the earlier one, the number of trips per day will be quite a bit less than the 1300 projected by the original traffic study. The original estimate of 1300 trips per day would compare to traffic levels on Duck Lake Trail and Twin Lakes Crossing. There were concerns about the potential for heavier traffic to cause more accidents at the intersection of Prospect Road and Spring Road. They reviewed the accident reports for the last three years and found there were seven accidents in the entire area, including one at that intersection. The traffic study determined that a traffic signal would not be needed at Prospect Road and Spring Road. Ellis said another concern expressed was the culvert crossing of Riley Creek. He said there is an existing culvert there today that has been converted into a fish barrier and that will continue to be in place after the project is completed. The new culvert will be much bigger and will not restrict the flow of the creek beyond what the restriction is today. Case asked why the old culvert would not be pulled out. Ellis replied we discussed that with the DNR and found out it would cost$40,000 to incorporate the fish barrier in the new culvert. The culvert also provides the opportunity to transport stormwater runoff from the west side to the east side so the construction of a stormwater treatment facility on the west side was not required. Ellis said they investigated with the DNR and local water professionals the potential impact of the development on Miller Springs. We learned the spring shed moves water from west to east, and the Prospect Road project is on the northern boundary of this development. There is no evidence that the development of Site B or Prospect Road would impair the spring. They have not seen any detrimental impact on the spring from development on Site A. He noted Alternative 6 had the smallest amount of grading of all the alternatives considered and also impacted the least number of trees. The road construction and all the right-of-way required are being dedicated by the developer, while the $1,000,000 cost for the other CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 7 alternatives would have been paid for by the taxpayers. Alternative 6 does provide a secondary access to Site A, which is a paramount concern of the City's Public Works and Fire Departments. He noted we are not taking action on Eden Prairie Road at this time. The future of Eden Prairie Road will be discussed at public hearings and will be taken up by the City Council at a later date. Nelson said she remembered the previous discussion about Prospect Road when Alternative 6 was passed. She asked if that is something that is back before the City Council tonight. Ellis said the project before the Council tonight includes the extension of Prospect Road. Nelson said technically the City could have done the extension at any time,but she was not sure if the whole discussion of Prospect Road is before us tonight. Ellis said the decision on Prospect Road was made by a previous City Council., Nelson noted the people in Hennepin Village believe $400,000 had been set aside for construction of a pool area. She asked what happened to those funds. Rosow said the original developer would have knowledge of that and would be the one to answer that question. It was not included in the development agreement between the City and the developer. Nelson asked what happens in other projects where the developer walked away from the project. Rosow said he is not familiar with a housing project in Eden Prairie where a developer walked away. There was a commercial project that went to foreclosure,but the City had security for public amenities such as landscaping and eventually got the amount required to complete the amenities. Nelson asked if we could make a requirement of the new owner regarding the homeowners' association on Site A. Rosow said in his memo to the City Council he gave an opinion that we could not require the owner of this site to make the pool available to the other homeowners' association. There is a process in the development agreement itself for Site A that provided additional property could be added to the entire master community declaration;however there is not an agreement that this property be added to it. His opinion is we don't have the right to tell one property owner they must make a portion of their property available to another property. Nelson asked if Outlots A and B along with the river bluff were part of the original agreement. Rosow said Outlots A and B were part of the development agreement process. The developer could add additional property to the existing declaration and subject the existing property to all the rules and requirements. Now that there are different owners it takes both owners to agree as to whether to subject the property to the declarations. That hasn't happened and will not happen. Nelson asked if Outlots A and B were part of the original PUD. Rosow said it was part of the original PUD of the property, and the City has received what was bargained for in terms of transfer of density. That issue is separate from the question of what will be built in terms of private amenities. Case said in his legal brief Mr. Rosow seemed to say that State statute governs what we as a City can force an owner of one site to allow to those of another site. He asked if the Council has any role to play in facilitating a conversation between the two, or if there is anything we can do as a City in a case where the developer CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 8 has not been forthright. Rosow said the City can act in a facilitative process rather than a regulative one. These are residents of the City and they have concerns about the manner in which their developer has developed the property. It would perhaps be unwise for the City to insert itself in the controversy without knowing more of the facts. We may be able to act as a facilitator to bring the parties together,but we don't have the statutory right to require one property owner to allow access to another property owner. Tyra-Lukens noted this might be an appropriate situation for something like the Metropolitan Mediation Services. Tyra-Lukens opened the public hearing. Jack Rhode, 15859 Porchlight Lane, said one of the big issues with this project is the extension of Prospect Road across the valley. He said that was a bad decision when it was made but it could be changed now so the view of the entire valley is not gone forever. He also believed if the developer wants to develop Site B they should be required to pay for the building of a bridge on Prospect Road. He suggested the City could then tell the developer the City was not building Prospect Road but instead would use the money to improve Eden Prairie Road. He said the intersection of Prospect and Spring is an accident waiting to happen. He said the homeowners in Site A will get their pool and clubhouse in one way or another. Deborah Ho-Beckstrom, representing the Management Association for Hennepin Village, said the situation the homeowners in Site A are left with is one of the most egregious she has ever seen. She said Ryland invited the homeowners to an open house and asked them what their desires would be for additional recreation facilities. She said the density of the traffic is a big concern because they have children who must cross the road to get to the existing pool. She asked the Council to give extra time to consider the homeowners in Site A because this project is unfair to those homeowners. Paul Moskalik, 10077 Indigo Drive, said he had signed up on the sign-in sheet but his wife was going to speak. Mrs. Moskalik said in Hennepin Village Wooddale Builders have created homes in the $600,000 range in Site A and four of them are still vacant. She was concerned about adding 52 new homes in the same price range. Ashley Smith, 10011 Liatris Lane, said she signed up on the sheet but her father will speak for her. Kelsey Smith said the master development plan for Hennepin Village was approved in 2001. Mr. Smith asked about the original ownership and transfers of the property. He and City Attorney Rosow then discussed the transfers of the property and the responsibility of Toll Brothers to carry out promises made by Ryland. Mr. Smith said the Planning Commission Chair made a statement that the attorneys for Toll Brothers and the City would work together to work out the situation but did not say anything about the residents of Hennepin Village Site A. Mr. Smith said the proposed pool and clubhouse has no parking and the residents of Site A would have to walk to the pool if they bought a membership at the new pool and clubhouse. He was concerned the project will be an elitist country club community for 52 homeowners on Site B. He suggested the City set aside some CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 9 acreage for Site A to have a clubhouse and pool in the 40 acres that will be dedicated to the City since the residents of Site A have already paid for that amenity. Jeff Strate, 15021 Summerhill Drive, said he has been following this project since 1999 and sat through the AUR hearings. The EAW approved by the previous City Council for this project means there is no need for an environmental impact statement. Part of the EAW was to look at six road options for Prospect Road. One of the important points made then was that the best option for access in and out of that part of Eden Prairie was none of the six options but rather was Option 7 to continue along the current alignment of Eden Prairie Road. The extension of Prospect Road over the valley is going to disturb many more people, and there is no reason to justify putting it in. He thought the developer should be required to set money aside for Option 7 rather than for building Prospect Road. Raghu Venkateshwar, 9784 Cupola Lane, said there are over 50 children in the neighborhood and they bike across Spring Road to get to the playground. Drivers go quite slowly on that road now because they know there are children in the area; however, once Prospect Road is opened up there will be increased traffic and speeds will increase. Eugenis Spivek, 15602 Lilac Drive, said the approval of Prospect Road in 2001 was supposed to connect residents from Site A to the pool and clubhouse in Site B, but now the residents won't have access to the new pool and clubhouse so it has become two different developments. She was very concerned about the impact of Prospect Road on the environment. Duncan Thomasen, 10065 Eden Prairie Road, and Rodney Rue, City Engineer, discussed Mr. Thomasen's questions about public utilities planned for Eden Prairie Road and the possibility of assessments for any utilities and road improvements. Rue said a feasibility study will be prepared and presented to the City Council for consideration at a later date, but Eden Prairie Road is a separate project from this one. Tyra-Lukens said their discussion sounds like it is peripheral to the discussion of Hennepin Village Site B. She suggested Mr. Thomasen continue the discussion with Mr. Rue outside of the Council Chamber. Dean Edstrom, 10133 Eden Prairie Road, said the City Council, the Planning Commission and staff have been talking about this for years and there are very rational reasons for Prospect Road to be built. There is a public safety issue that will be alleviated by having a secondary access to the neighborhood. Eden Prairie Road is in very bad shape, but Beverly Drive and Eden Prairie Road are separate issues. Shobha Belur, 9784 Cupola Lane, said the residents of Site A do not want Prospect Road to be built. She was concerned about putting a main road inside a small compact neighborhood. More than fifty kids live in that area, and the residents don't need the road. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 10 George Magdal, 9769 Picket Drive, said he agreed with the Fire Chief that we need two accesses in the area but it doesn't have to be a through road. Ryland made a promise to 633 homeowners that there would be something more than there is now. He has heard the City has no power over that,but the developer broke a promise to the homeowners. He would like to see this fixed without spending money for litigation. John Higgins, 9755 Gable Drive, thought there are other alternatives that could be evaluated one more time before making the decision to build the road across this piece of land. Judy Gentry, 9776 Picket Drive, said the children here do not have a playground, and there is just one small grassy area for sports. She asked the Council to reconsider and not extend Prospect Road. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Nelson, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0., Aho asked if the extended Prospect Road would be used for construction traffic for the new development. Ellis said the intentions are to begin construction of Prospect Road this year and have it open by September of 2013. That would be followed by construction of Eden Prairie Road which would require a full closure of Eden Prairie Road. During that time Prospect Road would have some construction traffic. Aho asked if the current Prospect Road would be used just during the extension of Prospect Road. Ellis said it would. Tyra-Lukens said the packet information suggested construction traffic would go north on Eden Prairie Road. Ellis said that would be for site development of Hennepin Village. Rosow said he had some additional concerns brought to him by Mr. Notermann, who lives immediately to the south of this project. His concern is with access for the development of his property. He noted staff would be willing to sit down with Mr. Notermann but it seemed this is not a factor in the development of Hennepin Village Site B. Nelson asked if the idea that Eden Prairie Road would not stay open would change the recommendation on this project. The issue of a cul de sac for Eden Prairie Road has not come before the Council and she was not sure it would be approved if it did. She thought Prospect Road is one thing if it is just a neighborhood road,but it doesn't seem to be wide enough to be a major connection. Ellis said he agreed that assuming Eden Prairie Road would be closed is a strong assumption. Prospect Road will provide emergency access, and they were looking for some connectivity that allows traffic to move through the area. They realize the closure of Eden Prairie Road is not a certainty and will involve a long discussion. The decision to connect Prospect Road is not tied to the future of Eden Prairie Road. Tyra-Lukens asked about the width of Prospect Road in relation to Twin Lakes Crossing and Duck Lake Trail. Ellis said Prospect Road will be similar to a neighborhood road with a trail on the south side, not a three or four lane road like CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 11 Twin Lakes Crossing and Duck Lake Trail. Tyra-Lukens asked if a narrower road would slow down traffic. Ellis said a two lane road will restrict traffic and will give the perception of a neighborhood road. Case said many of us have been at this for a long time and three of us have spent a decade struggling with it. He voted for the idea of it in 2002 because it made sense perceptually but he did not vote for the final layout in 2007. This time he wanted to see if there are alternatives so he reread the information about the six alternatives presented in 2007. There will be several hundred homes in this area, probably within the next ten years. The one big problem we have had in Eden Prairie over the years is that we don't have "moveability" between sites. Every time we have looked at this we have come up with the same conclusion--we must have Prospect Road. Because of safety concerns, staff has never varied on their recommendation. After deciding we had to have Prospect Road we looked at the bridge concept. While constructing a bridge would help with some of his concerns, there is a problem of finding the money to construct a bridge. We already have a culvert in place, so a larger culvert would serve to improve the water flow. The construction would not be in an area that would affect Miller Spring. Experts have looked at the situation, and each of them said that the flow to the spring doesn't come this direction. Case said he would love to be able to help the homeowners with access to the pool, but we don't have statutory rights to do anything about that situation. He would, however, like to help them in any way we can. In regard to the traffic concerns, there are about 700 trips on Prospect Road per day now. Our estimate indicates there will be an additional 240 trips with this project. When he walked the property he noted there is no driveway that comes out on the road. Prospect Road has always been planned and is consistent with the goals of the City for safety. Tyra-Lukens said she read all the emails she received and tried to respond to them. She said there were many who expressed concerns about the environment, and she would love to have those people get involved with the City's Conservation Commission. She said the City Council faces audiences who have a narrower view of a project than the Council is able to take. We have to consider many aspects such as financial implications, transportation, environmental issues and public safety. The Council is in the position of having to balance all the issues from a City-wide perspective. With regard to the environmental issues that were raised, preservation obviously would be the best thing. However a referendum was put out to see if there would be support to purchase much of this land and make it open space. The purchase of the land would have resulted in a tax increase but would have saved the land. The referendum failed so we then worked with the developer to try to preserve as much land as we could. We got over 40 acres in this area dedicated to the City for the enjoyment of all the people of Eden Prairie. Part of the original plan for Hennepin Village included this road. Everybody moved in here knowing the road was planned to go through. From a City-wide perspective the road needs to go through. Our experience has been that there are too many cul de sacs in Eden Prairie and too few connecting streets. We need to take every opportunity we have to make sure roads go through. She believes the environmental issues have been CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 12 addressed with the EAW. The road design with a culvert has the least impact on the land. Having an alternate route is important for public safety and it will allow school buses and snow plows to get through the community. As a City we are working to try to save taxpayers' money by being more energy and fuel efficient with our 20-40-15 program. Creating more cul de sacs makes it more difficult to run the City. Tyra-Lukens said she was also concerned about the pool issue. Mr. Smith raised the issue of whether obligations went with the transfer of land. She suggested we have a Council condition for approval of this project to study that issue. She would like to know more about the land ownership because the pool was in the plans and obviously some promises were made to the homeowners by Ryland. Butcher-Wickstrom said the Council makes difficult decisions about how we move people and how we develop the land. We made a commitment when we created the Comprehensive Guide Plan. We have followed that plan and now we have almost 40% of our land as open space. The City Council cares very much about the land, open space, the environment and recreation. For her the primary issue of Prospect Road is safety and moving people. We have researched the issue, have discussed it, and have had public meetings about it. She said she supports Prospect Road and also supports the new development. Nelson said she is somewhat conflicted. She likes the Toll Brothers development better than the previous plan,but she is concerned about what Ryland left the homeowners' association with. Since this project was started in 2001 we have changed how we approve things so that before a project goes to final reading we have everything finalized but that was not the case when the original project was approved. She was concerned about the safety aspect. If there were only a one way access here, there would be a bottleneck for safety vehicles. We have to plan for a disaster when there is a neighborhood full of children. She would like to get a response back from staff about the pool situation. Aho said this is a tough spot. It is hard when we have residents with concerns about their property and their children. When people are concerned about safety of their kids we are all concerned; however, that concern for children also includes being able to access the area. Prospect Road was decided by a previous City Council, and we really aren't here to revisit that issue. He liked the development that Toll Brothers has come to us with tonight. He heard some concerns about how that will affect the sale of vacant properties and that is a valid concern. He thought a developer wouldn't develop homes they couldn't sell. Ultimately having nice homes in the area will improve the property values for everyone. It was exciting to see more development in the community. Properties in the City have held value much better than property in many other communities. He was in favor of the project. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to adopt Resolution No. 2012-51 for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 71.5 acres; to approve 1 st Reading of the ordinance for Planned Unit Development district review with waivers, and Zoning District change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 24.37 acres; to CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 13 adopt Resolution 2012-52 for Preliminary Plat on 71.5 acres into 52 lots and 3 outlots; and to direct staff to prepare a development agreement incorporating staff and commission recommendations and Council conditions which included suggestions regarding street names,preservation of as much of the tree line as possible and directing staff to facilitate research and discussion of the homeowners' association concerns regarding access to the new pool and clubhouse. Motion carried 5-0. C. NEW HORIZON ACADEMY by Rylaur, LLC on behalf of Blue Hills Solutions LLC. Request for: Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.17 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers within the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District on 1.17 acres, and Site Plan Review on 1.17 acres. Location: Southeast corner of Dell Rd & Linwood Ct. (Resolution No. 2012-53 for PUD Concept Review) Getschow said this is a project for construction of a day care facility on City property near the fire station on Dell Road. The project will require waivers for the parking setback, the sign setback, the lot size and the building height. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Aho, to close the public hearing; to adopt Resolution No. 2012-53 for Planned Unit Development concept review on 1.17 acres; to approve 1 st Reading of the ordinance for Planned Unit Development district review with waivers, and Zoning District amendment in the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district on 1.17acres; and to direct staff to prepare a development agreement incorporating staff and commission recommendations and Council conditions. Motion carried 5-0. X. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to approve the payment of claims as submitted. Motion was approved on a roll call vote, with Aho,Butcher Wickstrom, Case, Nelson and Tyra-Lukens voting "aye." XI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2012-54 INACTIVATING THE ARTS AND CULTURE COMMISSION AND ASSIGNING ITS DUTIES TO THE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION Getschow said the Council recently had an opportunity to make appointments to several of our commissions. Through that process we came to the suggestion that the duties of the Arts and Culture Commission should be put into the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. He said the City Council can pass a resolution to inactivate a commission and give the duties to another commission. At a later date the Council can reverse that process. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 14 MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Case, to adopt Resolution No. 2012-54 inactivating the Arts and Culture Commission and assigning its duties to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. Motion carried 5-0. XII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS XIII. APPOINTMENTS A. CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR OF BUDGET ADVISORY COMMISSION Getschow said the current Chair of the Budget Advisory Commission (BAC) thought it might be better to step down as Chair due to some travel and other issues. The Council discussed this during the commission interview process. The proposal is to swap the Chair and Vice Chair positions. Nelson thought Mr. King has done an excellent job as BAC Chair, and she would like to see him stay as Chair. She was sure that Mr. Muilenburg will do a fine job as Vice Chair if Mr. King is not there. She would prefer to leave the positions as they are through the end of the year. Case asked when we would appoint members of the BAC. Getschow said the current appointments would last through the end of the year. Case said he would support keeping the positions as is for now for the purpose of consistency. Getschow said if the Council does not take action to change the two positions, it will stay the same as it is. The consensus of the Council was to leave it as is. XIV. REPORTS A. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS 1. Mayor's Water Conservation Challenge Tyra-Lukens said she is challenging Eden Prairie residents to make a commitment to conserve water and cut pollution by participating in the Mayor's Water Conservation Challenge. It is a national program with a free contest sponsored on the website, www.mywaterpledge.com. Eden Prairie would be competing with other cities in the Midwest to see which ones can be the most water wise by following a series of conservation measures. She said she is doing this an extension of her broader interest in environmental stewardship. The contest is in celebration of the 40th anniversary of the Clean Water Act. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to adopt Resolution No. 2012-57 supporting the "Mayor's Challenge for Water Conservation." Motion carried 5-0. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 15 Nelson noted she went on the website to pre-register and found she already does most of the items. 2. City Manager's Performance Review Tyra-Lukens said the Council had a closed session to evaluate the City Manager after the March 6 meeting. Harry Bruhl of PDI was retained to help with the review. He sent out a survey requesting feedback on several topics. She said overall the City Council found Mr. Getschow's performance to be outstanding,particularly his work on the 2012 budget,his quick learning of City issues and the quality of his new hires. She said the Council recommended Mr. Getschow receive a salary increase of 4%. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to commend City Manager Getschow on his outstanding performance and to increase his salary by 4%, effective January 2012. Motion carried 5-0. B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER C. REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR D. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR 1. Accept Art Center Donation—Resolution No. 2012-55 Lotthammer said another individual is contributing $750 for supplies at the pottery studio. MOTION: Nelson moved, seconded by Aho, to adopt Resolution No. 2012-55 accepting the donation in the amount of$750 from an anonymous donor for the purchase of supplies for the Eden Prairie Art Center pottery studio. Motion carried 5-0. 2. Accept Grant from the Minnesota Recreation and Parks Foundation for Edible Playgrounds—Resolution No. 2012-56 Lotthammer said this is a grant from the Minnesota Recreation & Parks Foundation for edible playgrounds. It is a new initiative aimed at combating youth obesity. He said Nicole Weedman has worked very hard on this and she will be part of a panel at a state conference to promote the use of the program as a best practice that other cities might adopt. He said Mayor Tyra-Lukens went to a national convention where a concept like this was talked about. We had been looking at integrating this type of program into our summer program. This program will give kids an education of where their food comes from and perhaps interject more healthy eating habits. The grant helps us get the program started and we are looking at other fund raising opportunities in order to expand to other locations. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 21, 2012 Page 16 Tyra-Lukens said this is a very interesting program. Some cities have gotten pretty elaborate with their gardens and do amazing fundraising events. There are a lot of kids that don't have a concept of where food comes from. She noted a community member who is very interested in the program wants to get involved with it. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Nelson, to adopt Resolution No. 2012-56 accepting the 2012 New Initiatives Grant in the amount of$800 from Minnesota Recreation & Parks Foundation to fund an Edible School Yard Program. Motion carried 5-0. 3. Aquatic Invasive Species Update Lotthammer said the situation with invasive species is very fluid. On Thursday we will have a meeting with the City of Chanhassen and Bolt, a work force organization. We will discuss using Bolt as contractors to do on- site inspection at Riley Lake and some random mobile inspection at other sites. We have some funds budgeted for Riley Lake, and the Watershed District recently approved $25,000 for Eden Prairie to help with this inspection. He noted several individuals and homeowners' associations have filed a law suit against the City of Chanhassen and the DNR to force them to take more aggressive action in the fight against invasive species. E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR F. REPORT OF POLICE CHIEF G. REPORT OF FIRE CHIEF H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XV. OTHER BUSINESS Getschow said next Wednesday, March 28, is the first of a series of town hall meetings with the City Council and staff. This meeting will be aimed at seniors and will be held at Summit Place at 4:00 PM. He noted there is only one City Council meeting scheduled in April and that will be on April 17. XVI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to adjourn the City Council Meeting. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Tyra-Lukens adjourned the meeting at 9:53 PM.