HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 04/22/2014 APPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY,APRIL 22, 2014 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. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
Mayor Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. All Council Members were
present.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION
IV. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS
A. EP GIVES WEEK PROCLAMATION
Mayor Tyra-Lukens read and presented a proclamation proclaiming May 3-10,
2014, as "EP Gives Week" in Eden Prairie to Mark Weber, Eden Prairie
Community Foundation Director. Mr. Weber said the purpose of "EP Gives
Week" is to spotlight charitable giving and community service and to motivate
additional people to get involved in giving back to the community.
B. ARBOR DAY PROCLAMATION
Mayor Tyra-Lukens read a proclamation proclaiming May 3, 2014, as Arbor Day
in the City of Eden Prairie. She noted Arbor Day is a long-standing tradition in
Eden Prairie and Eden Prairie has been recognized as a Tree City USA by the
National Arbor Day Foundation for 30 years.
V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
Case add Item XIV.A.1.
MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Nelson, to approve the agenda as amended. Motion
carried 5-0.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 22, 2014
Page 2
VI. MINUTES
A. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY, MARCH 18, 2014
MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Nelson, to approve the minutes of the Council
workshop held Tuesday, March 18, 2014, as published. Motion carried 4-0-1, with
Case abstaining.
B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, MARCH 18, 2014
MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Nelson, to approve the minutes
of the City Council meeting held Tuesday, March 18, 2014, as published. Motion
carried 4-0-1, with Case abstaining.
VII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
VIII. CONSENT CALENDAR
Getschow said the last four items are related to the UHG project and should be addressed
separately.
A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST
B. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-39 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF ST.
ANDREWS HAVEN
C. APPROVE 2013 UNBUDGETED FUND TRANSFERS
D. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-40 DECLARING THE CITY'S
OFFICIAL INTENT TO REIMBURSE ITSELF FOR PRIOR
EXPENDITURES OUT OF THE PROCEEDS OF A SUBSEQUENTLY
ISSUED SERIES OF BONDS
E. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-41 AUTHORIZING CONSENT TO
AMENDMENT OF THE DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS,
RESTRICTIONS AND EASEMENTS FOR ENTREVAUX HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION
F. APPROVE RENEWAL OF TOWING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH
MATT'S AUTO SERVICE FOR 2014
G. AWARD CONTRACT FOR 2014 STREET STRIPING PROJECT TO AAA
STRIPING SERVICE COMPANY
H. AWARD CONTRACT FOR 2014 CRACKSEAL PROJECT TO ASTECH
CORPORATION
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 22, 2014
Page 3
I. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-42 APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE RIVERVIEW ROAD CULVERT
REPLACEMENT PROJECT
J. DECLARE "SURPLUS PROPERTY"
K. APPROVE GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF
MINNESOTA AND THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE FOR MANHOLE
RECONSTRUCTION RESEARCH
L. AWARD CONTRACT TO BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC. FOR
RECONSTRUCTION OF PARKING LOTS AND TRAILS WITHIN
HOMEWARD HILLS PARK
M. AWARD CONTRACT TO NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC FOR OVERLAY
AND RECONSTRUCTION OF BITUMINOUS BIKE TRAILS ALONG RICK
MARSH LAKE PARK,ANDERSON LAKES PARKWAY AND CHESTNUT
DRIVE
N. APPROVE ENTRY MONUMENT SIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT
O. ACCEPT 100% PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT FROM
UNITED HEALTHCARE SERVICES, INC.
P. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-43 AUTHORIZING ACQUISITION OF
PROPERTY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A TRAIL FOR THE CITY WEST
PARKWAY TRAIL CONNECTION
Q. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH AMERICAN
ENGINEERING TESTING INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MATERIAL
TESTING FOR SOUTH SHADY OAK ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
R. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SRF
CONSULTING GROUP INC. FOR SOUTH SHADY OAK ROAD
IMPROVEMENTS IN-CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to approve Items A-N of
the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0.
Rosow said there is a replacement for Item VIII.R. on goldenrod paper that
clarifies the amount of the contract with SRF Consulting Group. He noted there is
a slight revision to the description for Item VIII.O.
MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to approve Items O-R of
the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 4-0-1, with Case abstaining.
IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 22, 2014
Page 4
A. REEDER RIDGE AND EDEN PRAIRIE WOODS REASSESSMENTS
(RESOLUTION NO. 2014-44)
Getschow said it is necessary to reallocate the assessment amounts on the Reeder
Ridge and Eden Prairie Woods properties because of changes in watershed district
boundaries and platted lot sizes. He said official notice of this public hearing was
published in the April 3, 2014, Eden Prairie News and sent to 12 property owners.
Getschow said Reeder Ridge was assessed in October 2013 and the levy was
certified to the 2014 property taxes prior to the recording of the Reeder Ridge plat. It
is now necessary to reallocate the assessment amounts on the underlying parcels so
they can be divided equally on to the new Reeder Ridge lots. All other aspects of the
assessment will remain the same.
Getschow said Eden Prairie Woods was assessed in October 2012, but an error was
made in allocating an assessment to Outlot C during the division of the lots. Outlot
C should have no assessments. This action will reallocate the assessments over the
remaining parcels.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to close the public
hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 2014-44 approving the Reeder Ridge and
Eden Prairie Woods reassessments. Motion carried 5-0.
B. MAC DEVELOPMENT PARCEL 6 by Metropolitan Airports Commission.
Request for Zoning District Change from Rural & R1-13.5 to Airport Office on
20.02 acres. Location: Flying Cloud Airport (Ordinance for Zoning District
Change)
Regarding Items IX.B and C., Getschow said the Council held a public hearing in
February related to seven development parcels for the MAC. All but two of the
seven parcels were approved at the February meeting. Parcels 2 and 6 were
continued to March 18 and then to April 22. The MAC has informed City staff that
it is withdrawing its application for rezoning of Parcel 6 at this time.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Case, to accept the withdrawal of the
application by MAC for the rezoning of MAC Development Parcel 6 and return
the plans to the applicant without prejudice. Motion carried 5-0.
C. MAC DEVELOPMENT PARCEL 2 by Metropolitan Airports Commission.
Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to Airport Office on 39 acres.
Location: Flying Cloud Airport(Ordinance for Zoning District Change)
Getschow said official notice of this public hearing was published in the April 10,
2014, Eden Prairie News and sent to 304 property owners.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 22, 2014
Page 5
Kayla Abbas, 16101 Valley Road, said there is an easement on their deed from the
airport that covers their property. She asked if the airport will be lifting the
easement on her property and others in the neighborhood since they are lifting the
easement for the airport. She asked how the City determined it was safe to build in
a no-build safety zone.
Bridget Rief, Director for Airport Development, said there are no easements on the
MAC property that would need to be lifted. There is a navigation easement on Ms
Abbas'property. Parcel 2 lies outside of Safety Zone A but is within Zone B
which does allow development of a certain type. The MAC controls the height of
structures on their property so there is no need for an easement on Parcel 2.
Rosow added the navigation easement restricts the height of buildings. He said the
owner of a property would grant an easement to allow a third party access;
however, an owner does not need to grant an easement to himself.
Vince Tashe, 10101 Hilltop Road, said he has a nice view from his property and
would like MAC to consider leaving this parcel as rural. If the property is
developed, he would like them to move it to the eastern side or build a more
minimal structure that would not impact the view of the existing properties in
order to keep the value of the properties.
Getschow said the action the City Council took previously on the other five
parcels was to simply rezone the parcels, and this is a request for the same action
on Parcel 2. At a future date the Council would have to consider any site plans or
approvals of these projects. We don't know when that would occur for any of the
MAC parcels. He said the MAC took some time to present some concepts for the
development of the parcels. We do have standards in terms of heights and setbacks
and design standards we would expect them to follow.
Mr. Tashe said he would prefer to leave the property as it is. Tyra-Lukens replied
the entire Council would most likely want that as well,but the Council doesn't
have control over that. When, and if, a proposal comes for any of these parcels,
neighbors will be notified about the process and plans so they can attend all the
public hearings.
Mike Abbas, 16101 Valley Road, asked about the State guidelines regarding
protection Zone A. Rosow said the State guidelines are a model ordinance
promulgated by the Joint Airport Zoning Board (JAZB) that came up with specific
zoning regulations for the City and covers about 2/3 of the City. That is before the
Commissioner for consideration. He said none of that interferes with the City's
power to zone property. There is specific language in the statute that it does not
interfere with the City's regular process, so the City can zone any property within
the City without concern. Once, and if, the JAZB ordinance goes into effect, it will
be an overlay district and will provide height regulations to our zoning code. Staff
has analyzed whether there are any existing properties that would violate the
height restrictions, and there are none.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 22, 2014
Page 6
Byron Schmidt, 16071 Hilltop Road, said his lot goes down to Valley Road. He
was wondering how much this will affect property values. He said they were led to
believe this is an airport safety zone and would never be built on. He would like to
keep the property rural.
Mr. Abbas expressed concerned about the City Council deciding it is okay to build
on Parcel 2. Rosow replied the situation is that the MAC has indicated they want
to develop the properties and assert their right as an independent unit of
government to go ahead and develop the properties without City permission. We
negotiated a process by which they would have to go through our process to
receive the zoning authority and to go through our site plan review process so that
anything built there would be subject to any standards the City has applied for all
property City-wide. This is the operator of the airport who is governed by its own
regulations with respect to safety zones and the use of all property around the
airport. Any development around there would have to comply with FAA
guidelines on uses in and around airports.
Tyra-Lukens said most of the building that is currently on MAC property is
construction that didn't have to go through our process with our building
standards. This offers an opportunity to raise development on this parcel to our
standards. Rosow said the property that pre-dates this are for aviation use, and we
have no authority to zone for property with aviation use.
Moraly Alykrishnan, a resident in the area, asked why Parcel 2 could not be
withdrawn in the same way Parcel 6 was withdrawn because there are so many
residences nearby that would be affected.
Case noted there is often a difference between the emotions we feel and local
decisions based on the law. He said if we were looking at Parcel 6 again his
concerns would be to look at it as if this were not the airport but rather a private
developer who came in with a request for office development here. There is no
way we would consider anything other than residential on Parcel 6 since office
development would be jumping up three zoning levels. Parcel 2 has a different
kind of zoning feel than Parcel 6 and is across the road and next to a church. A
private owner who brings a piece of land before us for development approval is
allowed to actualize the greatest potential on that land. While he did have some
concerns about Parcel 2, he thought we would consider allowing office use if this
request were being brought forth by a private developer.
MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Aho, to close the public
hearing and to approve 1 st reading of the ordinance for Zoning District change
from Rural to Airport Office (A-OFC) subject to the following conditions:
Rezoning only that portion of the property located north of the line identified as
Runway 1OL/28R as shown on Figures C1.1 and C2.1; Any site plan application
will conform to all requirements of the City Code.
Tyra-Lukens said she received a number of emails about Parcel 2 prior to the
meeting. While she was sympathetic to those who want the property left rural, she
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 22, 2014
Page 7
did not think we have a choice in this. She would prefer the land stay empty, but
by approving the rezoning we have an opportunity to get a nicer product than we
might have if we had no input in the process. She thought we could get the MAC
to work with us to give the property a more residential look.
Case said we should be cognizant of the neighbors. He suggested we start to look
at proactive measures to protect the contiguous properties.
VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried 5-0.
D. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER
12 RELATING TO PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL AND FINAL PLAT
RELEASE AND RECORDING
Getschow said staff has prepared an amendment to the City Code that:
• Increases the validity period for a preliminary plat from 6 months to 2 years
• Adds requirements to be completed prior to the release of the final plat;
• Adds a time frame of 90 days for recording of the final plat.
Getschow said the Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the
code amendment at the March 24, 2014 meeting.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Nelson, to close the public hearing and to
approve 1st reading of the ordinance amending Chapter 12 relating to preliminary
plat approval and final plat release &recording. Motion carried 5-0.
X. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Case, 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
XII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
XIII. APPOINTMENTS
XIV. REPORTS
A. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS
1. Parking in Residential Areas -- Council Member Case
Case said he received a call recently concerning a neighbor in a residential
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 22, 2014
Page 8
area who might have, for example, four-five cars, two boats and a camper
parked on the property. This has come up before and, in most cases, they are
legally parked on pavement. He was interested in checking on how other
cities deal with this type of situation. He thought staff might get some
background and bring a report back at a later meeting. It might be an issue of
the aging of the city so we might want to be proactive. Getschow said staff
would look into it.
B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER
1. Aquatic Center Financing Options
Getschow said at the last City Council meeting we had a public hearing for
site plan approval for the proposed Aquatic Center upgrade. The Council
indicated a desire to have an overview of the financing options prior to the
consideration of the bids which is scheduled for May 6.
Rusty Fifield, representing Northland Securities, gave a PowerPoint
presentation that reviewed the four options available: voter-approved general
obligation bonds, general obligation tax abatement bonds, Housing and
Redevelopment Authority (HRA) lease revenue bonds, and HRA lease
revenue bonds secured with an HRA levy. He said the general obligation
bonds approved by the voters are subject to the lowest interest rate that can
be achieved in the bond market place. Voter approved general obligation
bonds are limited to 3% of the total estimated market value of property in
Eden Prairie. The general obligation tax abatement bonds would need to be
approved by the City Council after holding a public hearing. Tax abatement
bonds will attract identical interest rates to the voter approved bonds. Tax
abatement bonds do not count against the debt limit of the City.
Mr. Fifield said the HRA has the ability to issue lease revenue bonds and can
issue a lease with the City to make lease payments sufficient to pay bonds
back. The City Council must appropriate money to make the lease payment
each year and would get the revenue for the lease payments from a property
tax levy. The lease revenue bonds would have a higher interest rate because
of the potential for non-appropriation.
Mr. Fifield said the HRA lease revenue bonds are more expensive, generally
0.5 to 1% higher than for general obligation bonds. The HRA issues the
bonds and the City Council approves the lease purchase agreement. The
variant of this is to use the HRA levy as a backup security which would
increase the security to the bond holder and would somewhat reduce the
difference in the interest cost.
Mr. Fifield noted there is currently a lack of supply in the bond market place.
The debt in Eden Prairie is very high quality and will certainly attract
investors.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 22, 2014
Page 9
Nelson asked if there would be a reason not to use the general obligation tax
abatement bonds. Mr. Fifield said there is no reason from a financial
perspective. Nelson asked what the real disadvantage of those bonds would
be. Mr. Fifield replied it would be a policy decision, but he had no reason to
say the Council isn't advised to use this type of bonding.
Tyra-Lukens asked if the cost of issuance and cost of debt is the same for
both types of general obligation bonds and if he knew what Edina uses for
recreational facilities. Mr. Fifield said the cost is the same. He thought Edina
has an option to issue general obligation recreational facility bonds without a
referendum. Tyra-Lukens said she was somewhat leery of the HRA bonds
that would need to be appropriated each year.
Aho said it looks like the general obligation referendum bonds versus the
general obligation tax abatement bonds end up with the same cost of money.
The referendum bonds count against our debt limit, whereas the tax
abatement bonds do not count against the limit so there is some advantage
with the tax abatement bonds.
Tyra-Lukens asked Mr. Getschow to outline what will happen on May 6.
Getschow said by that date we should have the bids so the City Council
would be considering the bids and possibly awarding the bids on May 6. If
the Council considers the tax abatement route, there would have to be a
public hearing at a later date. There would be a presentation on the bids and
the project, a public hearing related to the project, actions related to the bids
and then action related to the financing. At a future meeting our financial
advisor would come back and present the bids related to the bonding process.
Tyra-Lukens noted this has been an interesting process and has involved a
lot of public input. She reviewed the list of meetings and information made
available on the subject. We have been hearing about pool issues for the last
10-12 years, and she was pleased with all the public input. She noted a
public hearing is not required for the accepting of bids. A public hearing
would be required for the general obligation tax abatement bonds. She
anticipated we will have a healthy number of people attending a public
hearing and wanted to clarify the ground rules. Each speaker will be given a
maximum of three minutes to speak. It will not be an interactive event,but
rather an opportunity to state an opinion. If individuals need to get answers
to questions, they should contact the Parks & Recreation Director, the City
Manager or a City Council Member. Staff will not answer questions at the
public hearing but will get back to an individual with answers.
C. REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
1. Thrive MSP 2040
Jeremiah said the Metropolitan Council has released the Thrive MSP 2040
vision for the next 30 years. Thrive MSP 2040 has identified five outcomes
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 22, 2014
Page 10
for the region: stewardship, prosperity, equity, livability, and sustainability.
The five outcomes need to be addressed in our next comprehensive plan due
to the Met Council in 2018. She noted there are some comments from staff in
the Planning Commission report with regard to the new outcomes and the
types of additional items that will need to be addressed in a future
comprehensive plan. During 2014 and 2015 the Met Council will put out
more detailed policy plans. She said the Met Council has forecasted growth
for Eden Prairie to 2040 to be 1000 additional households and about 4500
new employees. Staff has looked to see if we can accommodate additional
growth and it does look feasible, depending on a more detailed analysis of
our infrastructure capacity. She asked for comments from the Council before
staff writes the comment letter to the Met Council.
Aho said he attended a forum on Thrive MSP 2040 today where experts gave
their take on the project. He had some concerns about the direction the Met
Council is taking in terms of forcing high density and transit oriented
development. He thought we have to look carefully at what is being planned
and what is being promoted to see if that is something we want. He said
some of their guidelines and thoughts are contrary to the market and really
drive a lower standard of living.
Case said the market has really driven our growth. In 1980 the Met Council
projected Eden Prairie's population to be over 100,000. He thought we can
really trust the market as we go along; however we may find the millennial
generation bringing a change in our demographics. He thought we could
accept incentives they might offer if we want them.
Tyra-Lukens said there was some discussion at the Southwest Corridor
opportunity meetings about having the same kind of zoning around all of the
transit stops, which we opposed. She shared some of the concerns expressed
about the Met Council's growth forecasts. She asked if they looked at the
density of land because she thought it is pretty hard to intensify development
in Eden Prairie. Jeremiah replied that is a good question that staff has also
asked. Staff asked the Met Council to bring back information for the traffic
area zones to see where they projected growth. They showed growth in areas
that have very established single family neighborhoods; whereas we
anticipate growth may occur in the Major Center Area and the Golden
Triangle. We asked them to look at that. We did our own analysis about the
accommodation of growth in areas where we anticipated growth, and the
question comes back to the infrastructure issue.
Tyra-Lukens asked if these are mandates or just a planning document.
Jeremiah replied it is a planning document that guides implementation
policies. Generally the Met Council overestimates the amount of growth that
might occur. The market really dictates whether growth will come and
where, so it is by no means a mandate.
Nelson asked if they also looked at the fact we have a lot of acreage in areas
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 22, 2014
Page 11
like the airport and the former dump. We are close to being built out at this
point, and they have to take that into account. We won't just take away a
business to build more residential. She hoped we can underline that we have
a comprehensive plan, and we have had planned development. We are not
going to sell our parks to build on parkland.
Butcher Wickstrom asked if this is part of the livable communities initiative.
Jeremiah said they try to integrate the two. One of the five outcomes is
livability, and they try to integrate livable communities into the
comprehensive plan. The livable communities program is evolving, and part
of the funding is going to transit oriented development. Butcher Wickstrom
said in some ways she saw the livable communities to be a stick more than a
carrot. We have about 35% of our land in green or open space, and that is a
value the residents have cherished for decades.
D. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR
1. Miracle Field Fund Raising Update
Lotthammer said some community builders are here tonight to tell about
their fund raising efforts for the Miracle Field.
Several representatives of the Baseball Association and three players gave an
update on the community events and fundraising efforts for the Miracle
Field. Mike Espe said they plan to have a community event this summer
after they have raised enough money to start building the field. They will be
trying to recruit kids to sign up to play in the Miracle League. John
McCarthy said they have been working on the website and corporate
sponsorships and can feel the momentum building.
Tyra-Lukens asked if they have visited a Miracle Field in another
community. One of the baseball players said he played in a tournament in
Lakeville and saw their Miracle Field.
E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
F. REPORT OF POLICE CHIEF
G. REPORT OF FIRE CHIEF
H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY
XV. OTHER BUSINESS
XVI. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Case, to adjourn the meeting.
Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Tyra-Lukens adjourned the meeting at 8:37 PM.