Loading...
City Council - 01/16/2001 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY,JANUARY 16,2001 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher, Ronald Case, Jan Mosman, and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger, Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert, Public Safety Director Jim Clark, Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram, Management Services Director Natalie Swaggert, City Attorney Ric Rosow and Council Recorder Peggy Rasmussen I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION Mayor Harris said Council Forum is held the first and third Tuesdays of the month from 6:30 to 6:55 p.m. in Heritage Room II. This will be scheduled time following City Council Workshops and immediately preceding regular City Council Meetings. It is important, if you wish to visit with the City Council and Service Area Directors at this time, that you notify the City Manager's office by noon of the meeting date with your request. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Mayor Harris moved Items C. and D. under IX. Ordinances and Resolutions, to immediately follow VI. Consent Calendar. Mayor Harris added a presentation by John Mallow under X1V. Other Business. Mosman added a discussion on the structure of the February 10 Council meeting, under XIII.A. Reports of Councilmembers. Rosow added a closed session to discuss pending litigation. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve the agenda as published and amended. Motion carried 5-0. V. MINUTES A. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY,DECEMBER 19,2000 MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Mosman, to approve the minutes of the Council Workshop held Tuesday, December 19, 2000, as published. Motion carried 5-0. CITY COUNCIL AIU*NT ES January 16,2001 Page 2 B. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY, JANUARY 2, 2001 MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Mosman, to approve the minutes of the Council Workshop held Tuesday, January 2, 2001, as published. Motion carried 5-0. C. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY,JANUARY 2,2001 Mayor Harris made a correction on page 14, the second paragraph, which should read "Mayor Harris said this isn't a matter of the dollars involved, but rather the City maintaining the integrity of this ordinance." Case questioned the amended motion on expansion of Flying Cloud Airport on page 11. He did not realize that the Chamber of Commerce and Flying Cloud Business Association were to be invited and to have presentation time. His intent in seconding the motion was to have information on alternatives to prevent the expansion of the airport, and not to invite people to discuss whether or not the airport should be expanded. Mayor Harris said it is a public hearing and Council would be inviting groups to present both sides of the issue in order to gain new information. Council has taken a formal position against the expansion. Case said he respectfully disagreed with the Mayor on the purpose of the meeting. He would not want to exclude the Chamber of Commerce and Flying Cloud Business Association if they can give Council some feedback, but he didn't want to hear reasons for expansion of the airport. Mayor Harris said once it is a public hearing that opens it to the general public. Council spoke specifically about wanting new information so they don't need to go back over old information. Council should be looking for short, succinct presentations to help them in discussions to make the best possible decision. They have been through the whole discussion on whether or not they want to have expansion of the airport. Tyra-Lukens said she thought the public hearing was going to be focused on legal alternatives and financial implications of a lawsuit. There are only three hours allocated for the public hearing. Council needs to focus in on what will truly help them make a decision. Otherwise they will be delaying any progress on this issue. Butcher said she understood the purpose of the public hearing was for financial implications and the legal implications were for the executive session afterward. Case said he felt the motion was slightly changed from what he thought he seconded and voted on. If there is a misunderstanding, then later in the meeting he would make a motion to clarify what he believed should be happening at the meeting on February 10. CITY COUNUL NIMUTES January 16,2001 Page 3 Rosow said this subject is on the agenda under Reports of Councilmembers, and that would be a good time to clarify it. Council needs to be very clear on the purpose of the public hearing so that the hearing doesn't get further afield than they want, in order to protect the City's interests. A closed session is the appropriate time to discuss pending and potential litigation. A public hearing to discuss those types of things raised concerns because of what the Council may have to respond to, and he didn't want to put the Council in that position. Case said he could accept these minutes if Council clarifies the matter further during the meeting. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Case, to approve the minutes of the Council Meeting held Tuesday, January 2, 2001, as published and amended. Motion carried 5-0. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-12 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF BLUFF COUNTRY TOWNHOMES 2"ADDITION C. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH TKDA FOR PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION TO REPAINT INTERIOR OF THE WASH WATER RESERVOIR AT THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT D. APPROVE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 1 FOR GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS FOR EDEN CROSSINGS STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT E. APPROVE LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH SPRINT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY F. APPROVE RENEWAL OF AGREEMENT FOR TOWING SERVICES WITH MATT'S AUTO SERVICE FOR 2001 G. APPROVE AGREEMENT FOR STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF FORFEITED VEHICLES WITH AUCTION BROADCASTING FOR 2001 H. APPROVE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH MNDOT FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF TH 212/SHADY OAK ROAD HOV SLIP RAMP AND AUTHORIZE SRF TO PROCEED WITH SLIP RAMP DESIGN I. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-13 AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2000-202 RELATING TO NON-PRU%1E ROOM RENTALS AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 16,2001 Page 4 J. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-14 AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2001-08 SETTING MEETING PLACES AND TIMES FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS FOR 2001 K. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-15 APPROVING THE PREMISES PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE EDEN PRAIRIE HOCKEY ASSOCIATION L. APPROVE PURCHASE OF REPLACEMENT VEHICLES AS LISTED IN 2001 BUDGET GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES AND DEBT SERVICE M. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-16 AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR A STATE GRANT FOR BIRCH ISLAND PARK EXPANSION N. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-17 REJECTING BIDS FOR REROOFING DORMITORY AND DINING HALL BUILDINGS AT EDEN WOOD CAMP O. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-18 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR REROOFING THE DORMITORY AND DINING HALL AT EDEN WOOD CAMP MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Case to approve Items A-O on the Consent Calendar. Butcher said there is information in Item M, regarding an application for a state grant for Birch Island Park expansion, which she would like to give the public because of the interest in this matter. The City wrote a letter to the County requesting it to delay selling Birch Island Woods, and the County Board agreed to delay until the summer. The results of a joint appraisal of the property is expected by January 24. The City will be applying for a Metro Greenways Grant and, if successful, the City will be required to pay 50 percent of the appraised value of the property and the grant would cover the remainder. Motion carried 5-0. IX. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS C. FIRST AND SECOND READINGS OF ORDINANCE No. 2-2001 GRANTING A CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE TO EVEREST MINNESOTA LICENSING, LLC, AND ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001- 26 APPROVING SUMMARY FOR PUBLICATION D. FIRST AND SECOND READINGS OF ORDINANCE NO. 3-2001 GRANTING A CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE TO WIDEOPENWEST MINNESOTA, LLC, AND ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-27 APPROVING SUMMARY FOR PUBLICATION CITY COUNCIL AIINUTES January 16,2001 Page 5 Enger introduced Brian Grogan, an attorney with the law firm of Moss and Barnett and legal counsel for Southwest Cable Commission. Grogan said this matter pertains to approval of cable television franchises for two companies, Everest Minnesota and WideOpenWest (WOW). This request for approval has been part of an advisory process of review by Southwest Cable Commission (SCC) and is now ready for official action by the City Council. These franchises would duplicate the services of Time Warner Cable and compete against that company. The two companies went through the public hearing process and were approved by the City Council. The legal counsel for the SCC prepared reports regarding the qualifications of Everest Minnesota and WOW. On September 5, 2000, the City Council adopted Resolutions regarding findings of fact with respect to the companies' proposals for cable communications franchises. The main difference between the two documents is that WOW will have a shorter franchise term tied to the expiration date of Time Warner. They propose to construct an institutional network that will serve the City buildings, schools, etc., throughout the City with optic fiber provided at no cost to the City. They are proposing a 48-month build- out schedule. Everest is seeking a 15-year franchise and shorter build-out schedule of 36 months. They are proposing to construct an institutional network plan that would cost the users an incremental charge commensurate with the additional fiber cost that would be necessary to add in to whatever is already constructed. These documents have been provided to the City Attorney for review and they have been forwarded to the legal counsels for Everest, WOW and Time Warner. As of that time no objections had been raised. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Case, to approve the First and Second Reading of Ordinance No. 2-2001 granting a cable television franchise to Everest Minnesota Licensee, LLC and adopt Resolution No.2001-26 approving Summary for Publication. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Mosman, to approve the First and Second Reading of Ordinance No. 3-2001 granting a cable television franchise to WideOpenWest Minnesota, LLC, and adopt Resolution No. 2001-27 approving Summary for Publication. Motion carried 5-0. VH. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. AZTEC TOWN OFFICE PARK by DaVern, Inc. Request for Guide Plan Change from Neighborhood Commercial to Office on 6.48 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 6.48 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.46 acres,Zoning District Change from Rural to Office on 4.46 acres, Site Plan Review on 4.46 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 6.48 acres into 1 lot and 1 outlot. Location: Aztec Drive. (Resolution No. 2001-19 for Guide Plan Change, Resolution No. 2001-20 for PUD Concept Amendment, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change, and Resolution No.2001-21 for Preliminary Plat) CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 16,2001 Page 6 Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published in the January 4, 2001,Eden Prairie News and sent to 63 property owners. David Fitzick, of DaVern,Inc., said this is a 6.48-acre site east of Aztec Drive and south of Anderson Lakes Parkway. The proposal is for an office park with 21 "town home-type" office units in eight buildings totaling 40,000 square feet on 4.46 acres. The buildings will be partial brick and glass. He showed a picture of a completed project the company built in Little Canada. Uram said the developer has resolved the issues raised by the Community Planning Board, which voted 6-0 at the January 8, 2001, meeting to recommend approval of the project to the Council. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council on this proposal. No one did. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to close the Public Hearing; and adopt Resolution No. 2001-19 for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Neighborhood Commercial to office on 6.48 acres; and adopt Resolution 2001-20 for PUD Concept Review on 6.48 acres; and approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District change from Rural to Office on 4.46 acres; and adopt Resolution No. 2001-21 for Preliminary Plat on 6.48 acres into one lot and one outlot; and direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Board and Staff recommendations. Motion carried 5-0. B. ANSON REZONING by K. Dawn Anson. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 Zoning District on .80 acres. Location: 16850 Duck Lake Trail. (Ordinance for Zoning District Change) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published in the January 4, 2001, Eden Prairie News and sent to 46 property owners. As this is a straightforward request for rezoning of private property, he asked Uram to give the presentation. Uram said the Community Planning Board voted 6-0 at the December 11, 2000, meeting to recommend approval of the project to the City Council. The request is for a rezoning of a single-family lot from Rural to R1-13.5, which is consistent with the zoning in the area. The owner wishes to rebuild his house, which was burned down. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council on this request. No one did. MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Case, to close the public hearing and approve the lst Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on .80 acres. Motion carried 5-0. CITY COUNCIL MEWTES January 16,2001 Page 7 C. VALLEY VIEW CORPORATE CENTER by CSM Equities, L.L.C. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Medium Density Residential to Office on 2.39 acres and from Regional Commercial to Office on 4.79 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 7.18 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 7.18 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to I-2 on 7.18 acres, Site Plan Review on 7.18 acres, and Preliminary Plat on 7.18 acres into 1 lot and road right of way. Location: Northwest Quadrant of Valley View Road and Topview Road. (Resolution No. 2001-22 for Guide Plan Change, Resolution No. 2001-23 for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change, and Resolution No. 2001-24 for Preliminary Plat) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published in the January 4, 2001,Eden Prairie News and sent to 25 property owners. Becky Sonmore, project architect with the architectural firm of CMS Equities, said the company proposed building a two-story, 100,000-square foot office building. It will have a brick and glass exterior. The project is located north of Valley View Road and west of Topview Road. Uram said the project being proposed is by CMS Equities, which developed the project immediately adjacent to it. They are requesting a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Medium Density Residential to Office. They are also requesting a height waiver from 30 feet to 34 feet, because they are using a parapet on top of the building to screen mechanical equipment and for visual interest. On the western boundary they are requesting a waiver for driveway setback from ten to zero feet, and this is considered a reasonable request since the green area from parking to parking on both sites meets the 20-foot separation required. They are also requesting an increase in office use from 50% to 100%, which is similar to the building to the west. The Community Program Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project at the December 11, 2001, meeting. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council on this proposal. Katie Grant, 7203 Topview Road, said she had been a resident of Eden Prairie for 24 years. She said she supported the proposal, except for the entrance driveway to be connected to Topview Road. She collected 118 signatures on a neighborhood petition in just two evenings. There are 112 homes in her neighborhood. Her main concern is that Topview is a steep, curving road coming down to Valley View Road. There is a blind intersection at Roberts Drive. Because of heavy traffic in the morning and evening rush hours, there is a backup of cars at Valley View Road. Adding more traffic from employees entering and exiting onto Topview would cause congestion and could be dangerous. There are also many walkers using Topview; and because the sidewalk is not plowed people walk in the street in the winter months. Their safety is a cause for concern. Ms. Grant read a letter from Robert and Jenifer Prince, 13190 Beehive Court,who are CITY COUNCIL MN MS January 16,2001 Page 8 opposed to having access onto Topview Road from the proposed Valley View Corporate Center. Another resident of the area,who did not give his name or address, said he was in total agreement with Ms. Grant. An additional point she did not mention is that "S"-shaped Topview Road is used by drivers as a short-cut to Baker Road, through the Cardinal Creek area, and so it is very much used by people who don't live in the neighborhood. Topview Road has no clear visibility going up or down. If there has to be another entrance to the corporate center, he would prefer having it come onto Roberts Road. Blaine Patrick, 12740 Gerard Drive, said Topview is a steep, winding, narrow road. Also, this is the primary access for at least three adjacent neighborhoods going to I-494. This is primary a residential road to and from a major freeway. There has to be a better place to put an entrance than into a residential area. Gene Price said he lives on Donlea Lane and is a new resident in Eden Prairie. He chose this location in which to retire. He believed Eden Prairie had done a fine job of segregating residential areas from commercial and industrial ones. He agreed with all that the previous speakers said. There is a lot of pedestrian traffic through that area. People walk on the streets even when it is dark. He recommended keeping traffic on Valley View and not introducing it to a residential neighborhood. Jim Duncan said he lives one block west of Topview Road. He believed putting in a drive leading to Topview from the corporate center complex would cause a real traffic problem. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. Dietz said there is apparently a lot of concern about traffic in the area. StafFs recommendation was to have access to the corporate center on Topview Road. One traffic issue is how to maintain traffic to and from the community north of Valley View Road. There are only six east-west corridors in Eden Prairie, and Valley View Road is one of them. The City needs to protect Valley View Road from side traffic and other disruptions to the traffic. Staff looked at how best to preserve access to Valley View Road. Another traffic signal is a possibility,but it would be too close to the next signal. There is a right in,right out on Valley View Road at the corporate office center,but that does not provide for traffic going east. There will be about 170 vehicles leaving the corporate center lot in the afternoon, and about 30 percent will want to go east on Valley View. A driveway at Topview seemed to be the best possibility. The direction of the traffic going to and from the complex would be opposite to the direction of traffic going to and from the Topview neighborhood. Dietz said traffic projections indicate that by 2015 there will be 320 vehicles coming from the Topview neighborhood in the peak morning hour and 480 going CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 16,2001 Page 9 into it in the peak afternoon rush hour, 90 of which would be coming into the site. So the balance between the morning and afternoon would be about the same. In the afternoon, it is projected that 110 would be coming out of the Topview neighborhood to Valley View Road, and 80 of those would be coming from the corporate center. So the combined total in the afternoon from the center will be less than the volumes in the morning. In the morning there are only 150 vehicles going up Topview and 90 of those would be turning left into the new corporate center. Dietz said altogether it is anticipated only 10 vehicles from the corporate center will use Topview to go north in the afternoon; most will be going to Valley View Road to go to the east. The signal at Topview Road and Valley View Road is being underutilized at present. Traffic is expected grow significantly, and the only way the City has to keep traffic on the main corridor, Valley View Road, is to maintain a driveway on Topview. Dietz strongly recommended the entrances be kept as presented. He believed this will work and the impact to the neighborhood will not be as bad as the neighbors believe. Mayor Harris asked if relocation of that entrance further to the north would alleviate some of the neighbors' concerns. Dietz said, with the site constraints on the property he didn't believe it was practical to get onto Topview farther to the north. It is a very difficult site to work with. Because of the City's traffic analysis staff strongly urges access to Topview Road. Mosman inquired if staff had looked at the possibility of limiting the access onto Topview to right-in,right-out. Dietz said they had not. Mosman asked if the City owns the property east of Topview. Dietz said he believed the City owns an outlot there. Mosman asked if there was a possibility of using that outlot to widen Topview and add a turn lane going into the site in order to make it safer. She lived in that area for a time and agreed the road is steep and dangerous. Dietz said he believed a dedicated, right-turn lane could be added into the site. Using the numbers from the traffic study, it is projected that about 90 people would use that access in the morning. Butcher agreed with Mosman's suggestion. The third way in and out of the site is on the far side, which would make Topview appealing for those working at the corporate center. Case asked Dietz if consideration could be given to having a median cut and signal at the main entrance to the corporate center on Valley View Road. Dietz replied that is County State Aid Highway 39 in this location, and the County is very concerned about the integrity of the highway. Each time a signal is inserted into the situation, all the traffic is stopped on the main road. The more delay there is, the more drivers are willing to take risks. Dietz said he would not want to put in a signal that the County would not approve of. The volumes being generated from this site are fairly nominal. The issue is how to get traffic in and out of it as safely as possible without interrupting traffic on Valley View Road. CITY COUNCIL AI MUTES January 16,2001 Page 10 Case said he is concerned about the safety issue on Topview. The proposed entrance would be adding another problem into a situation that already has problems. Dietz said there will be as much traffic using southbound Topview in the morning as in the afternoon. This will not overload any one direction of this roadway to a higher extent than if there were no driveway at all. Case said the problem is sight lines, a slippery, steep road, etc. If the City owns the land on the east side of Topview, there should be a couple of ways to fix the problems. Dietz said the driveway will have a steep grade but will have a level landing at the top leading onto the road. He believed drivers would be able to see each other going in and out of the site. When a driver is trying to exit the site,the car will be sitting on a level spot and the driver would be able to see oncoming traffic. Case proposed widening Topview Road and creating right-turn lanes for entering and exiting from the site. Case said without the ability to signalize the main entrance into the site on Valley View Road and no median cut, he was not comfortable with the safety issues. Mosman asked if this project could be turned back to staff to look at the possibility of improving the safety of Topview Road. She was told that could be part of the motion included in Council Conditions. Enger asked if Council planned to grant the First Reading and have these conditions investigated by staff before the Second Reading. He told the audience there would be no further notification to the neighbors before the Second Reading on the third Tuesday in February, and no additional testimony would be taken. MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Case, to adopt Resolution No. 2001-22 for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Medium Density Residential to Office on 2.39 acres and from Regional Commercial to Office on 4.79 acres; and adopt Resolution No. 2001-23 for PUD Concept Review on 7.18 acres; and approve lst Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review and zoning District change from Rural to Industrial on 7.18; and adopt Resolution No. 2002- 24 for Preliminary Plat on 7.18 acres into one lot; and direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations; and Council conditions to research the possibilities of a right-in,right-out only, or right-out only, access onto Topview Road, look at the possibility of widening Topview Road, adding a sidewalk, and any other safety conditions, to come up with the safest solution. Discussion followed. Case inquired about the .19 acre, low-quality wetland along the west property line. The Staff Report states that part of the required replacement of.38 acre is a Public Value Credit for the treatment pond and plantings, and part is offsite wetland creation. Case wondered when the City started using treatment ponds as mitigation for wetlands and also concerned the plantings. He was concerned about this precedent. CITY COUNCIL NBNUTES January 16,2001 Page 11 Dietz said when wetland is mitigated, the general rule is to mitigate 2:1. Using treatment ponds for Public Value Credits has been done in the past , but can only be used for half of the replacement, so they end up getting at least 1:1 replacement. Case said he didn't recall every using a NITRP pond as any form of replacement value for wetlands. Dietz said he believed this has been used on a consistent basis. It is in accordance with the City's wetland guide for Public Value Credits only. He agreed to investigate the use of it. Case said if treatment ponds and plantings can be used for mitigation, that has major implications for future projects. He expressed his concern and asked to amend the motion to include a full replacement of.38 acre of wetland mitigation. Tyra-Lukens agreed. One purpose of NURP ponds is to minimise the impact on wetlands, and in this case the NURP pond is being called a wetland. AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to amend the Council Conditions to include full replacement of .38 acre of wetland mitigation. The amendment to the motion carried 5-0. The main motion carried 5-0. D. ISSUANCE OF MULTI-FAMHLY HOUSING REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS (EDEN GLEN APARTMENTS PROJECT) SERIES 2001 (Resolution No. 2001-25) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published in the December 28, 2000,Eden Prairie News Uram said the City received a request to issue its Multi-Family Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds (Eden Glen Apartments Project) Series 2001 in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $2,490,000, to make a mortgage loan to Eden Investments Partnership, LLP. The proceeds would be used to pay and redeem the outstanding principal amount of the previously issued $2,715,000 City of Eden Prairie,Minnesota,Multi-Family Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds (Eden Investments Partnership Project) Series 1990. Proceeds from the original note were used to finance the acquisition, construction and equipping of a 70-unit multi-family rental housing development,known as Eden Glen Apartments. Pursuant to the laws of the State of Minnesota, particularly Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462C, as amended, the Issuer is authorized to carry out the public purposes described therein by issuing its revenue refunding bonds to refund all or a portion of the bonds. The bonds and the interest on the bonds shall be payable solely from the revenues pledged from the project and shall not constitute a debt of the Issuer. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council. No one did. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 16,2001 Page 12 MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to close the public hearing and adopt Resolution No. 2001-25 Authorizing Issuance of Multi-Family Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds (Eden Glen Apartments Project) Series 2001. Motion carried 5-0. E. VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR PART OF FRANLO ROAD IN THE SOUTHEAST 1/OF SECTION 25 (Resolution) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published in the December 28, 2001,Eden Prairie News and sent to 1 property owner. Dietz said the appropriate action would be to close the public hearing only. The developer needs time to deal with the utilities. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. VIH. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Case, to approve the Payment of Claims as submitted. Motion was approved on a roll call vote, with Butcher, Case, Mosman, Tyra-Lukens and Harris voting"aye." MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher, to recess the meeting for ten minutes. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Harris asked Council to deal with the Second Reading of the Anson rezoning ordinance before the recess. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to reopen the meeting. Motion carried 5-0. IX. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. ANSON REZONING by K. Dawn Anson. 2nd Reading for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 Zoning District on .80 acres. Location: 16850 Duck Lake Trail. (Ordinance No. 1-2001 for Zoning District Change) MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Case, to approve 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 1-2001 for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on .80 acres. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Case, to recess for 10 minutes. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Harris recessed the meeting at 8:50 p.m. and reopened it at 9:00 p.m. B. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 2.22 RELATING TO BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMISSIONS AND TASK FORCES CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 16,2001 Page 13 Enger said the modifications address two issues: 1) allowing for the appointment of a Councilmember to a City-sponsored Task Force; and 2) eliminating three consecutive absences of a Board or Commission member as an automatic VACANCY, and provides for a process for an advisory body to bring a Board of Commission member's absenteeism to the City Council's attention. The Councihnembers found they did not have copies of this resolution in their packets. Rosow suggested they vote on the First Reading, and the actual document would be available for the Second Reading. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve First Reading of an Ordinance amending City Code Section 2.22 relating to Boards, Commissions, Citizen Advisory Commissions and Task Forces. Motion carried 5-0. X. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. PROPOSAL FROM MICHAEL MCCOLLUM REGARDING LOT AT 9999 TURNBULL ROAD Michael McCollum said Bob Lambert had suggested he appear before the Council to present his proposal regarding the lot he owns on Turnbull Road. He owns 8.2 acres, bordering the south edge of the Riley Creek Big Woods and extending to the River Bluffs. He suggested placing a conservation easement over all his property south of the MUSA line, most of which is bluffs and Big Woods. This would preserve the bluffs and the Big Woods from development. In exchange he asked for approval to split the 8.2 acres into two four-acre parcels. He wondered why Bob Lambert recommended against that proposal. McCollum doesn't want to see houses being built up there and would like to keep development to a minimum. He said he is moving to Florida and so this offer would not be made again by him. He believed it would be in the best interests of the City to at least pursue this proposal. Mayor Harris asked if McCollum was asking for division of his current eight-acre lot to have two buildable lots of four acres each. McCollum said that was correct. Mayor Harris inquired if he was asking the City to purchase the property. McCollum said no. He would be giving the City the entire river bluff in a conservation easement. Mayor Harris said she had some questions about dividing City lots and extending the MUSA line. Mayor Harris said that City Code requires 10 acres of non- sewered or city water supplied areas and she has reservations about sub-dividing these eight lots further. She requested Lambert to expand on the existing protection of the Bluffs by current City and Met Council positions on the movement of the MUSA line. McCollum said he was not seeking extension of the MUSA line. There is already a lot of negative impact on the Riley Creek Conservation Area. Developers will want to develop his property and he has already been approached several times about selling to them. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 16,2001 Page 14 Butcher asked if the proposed conservation easement is outside the MUSA line. McCollum said it is. He will place it in the conservation easement, if it is possible for him to have one buildable, four-acre lot to use. He said City staff wants him to donate the property to the City but he could not do that. However, the same result would be achieved by placing it in the conservation easement. This will affect the value of the property. Lambert said he didn't have any dispute with Mr. McCollum. He has never asked him to donate any property to the City. They had talked about different options. Lambert agreed this is a nice proposal. The reason the Council should be cautious is the City has been very restrictive about allowing subdivision of any lots of less than ten acres without sewer and water. Once the City allows that, then there is less rationale to prevent subdivision of other property that has less than ten acres. The City has an ordinance in place regarding this. He applauded Mr. McCollum for trying to protect this bluff area. However, the MUSA line protects the area from development. There is no guarantee water and sewer would ever come in. If it does,there would be some pressure to develop the area. He believed the City would have more to lose than to gain by allowing a subdivision of less than ten acres. Tyra-Lukens asked Lambert how many land parcels of less than ten acres there are like this that could come up. Lambert said there might be another dozen or so on the bluffs. Dietz said Council went through a very protracted issue on Eden Prairie Road about property owners seeking building permits on splits to property made years ago, after the ordinance was in place. Case said he remembered that issue, which was south of the MUSA line. Mr. McCollum's property is near the Big Woods area that the City purchased. He asked McCollum if his property was contiguous with any City-owned land. McCollum replied that his northern boundary on Turnbull Road is immediately contiguous to the Big Woods. The west half of the property is wooded and the east half is meadow. Case asked McCollum if he would be willing to deed over in a conservation easement 50-to 100 feet off Turnbull Road,which would begin to accomplish the goal of a buffer to the Big Woods. McCollum replied he had no problem with putting everything in a conservation easement that isn't immediately required for his own house and the house to be constructed. He would have no problem in dedicating that as a buffer. Case said if the City would allow a second house pad to be put in so the City could get a conservation easement as a buffer, it seems there is an advantage to having these two homes with a significant conservation buffer, rather than the possibility of four homes that would take out whatever buffer might be there. Lambert said he would suggest they obtain additional information on the contours CITY COUNCIL DlIINUTES January 16,2001 Page 15 and trees that are on this property so they can see what kind of tree mass there would be, because the property is a fairly steep and comes right up to Turnbull Road. If it is developed now or in the future, there would be some major tree loss there. When we talk about a conservation easement, we need to agree to what language of a conservation easement is because the City's idea might be different from Mr. McCollum's idea. Case said his entire goal in this matter would be to protect the Big Woods. He would be interested in following up on that in years to come. If the parameters of this deal were so tightly restricted to protecting the Big Woods tree mass, and all the conservation easement, surely other potential land-splitters would not be able to meet all of those conditions, and this precedent would be fairly secure. He didn't believe he had enough information to say either yes or no to McCollum's proposal. He didn't want the potential for four houses being built here or the Big Woods being impacted in the future. McCollum said he and his wife were going to offer the property for sale, so he wasn't sure there would ever be another house built on the property. Dietz said it might be well to know that the City may never have to extend utilities out to that area regardless of what happens in the future. The City doesn't maintain Turnbull Road, and the more homes put on the property the likelihood is there would be more pressure to build the road. Butcher said she was concerned about the Council acting prematurely, because the land is protected now by the MUSA line. If the City allowed the lot to be split that would be more detrimental than not doing anything at the present time. McCollum said there is a lot of pressure to develop very quickly all over southwest Eden Prairie. That type of property will be heavily developed if it is within the MUSA line. The City might say it won't ever approve splitting lots, but the likelihood is someone will buy that property and combine it with other property, and then some developer will build houses all over the area. If the City turns down this proposal,McCollum said he will be selling this property. Mayor Harris said she believed the City has several protections in place to prevent development of the area. Case said he would like to have the opportunity to meet with Mr. Lambert to study this further. He was not comfortable closing the door on the proposal that night. He would be interested in walking through this area. McCollum said he would be happy to have any of the Councilmembers walk the area. Mayor Harris said she might wish to do that also. B. HARTFORD DEVELOPMENT LAND USE CONCEPT PRESENTATION Enger said Council heard a conceptual presentation by Rottlund Homes at the January 2 Council Workshop, on a mixed-use commercial and townhouse plan for CITY COUNCIL MMMS January 16,2001 Page 16 the Hartford property. The plan included 30,000 square feet of commercial space and 302 townhouses. The City Council asked staff to evaluate the plan. Staff has been working with Rottlund Homes on the financial analysis. The current analysis projects that a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District containing 194 housing units and 30,000 square feet of commercial space is required to fund a $2.5 million tax increment note. Total tax increment generated would be $6.8 million, requiring the City to make a local contribution of about $340,000 to the project. Because of this, staff has suggested to Rottlund that they develop plan alternatives that would eliminate or reduce the City's financial contribution. Staff has tried to work with the proponent to understand the real need for the subsidy. Staff cannot report that it recommends approval of the subsidy. Enger didn't know if the proponent had any new information to present. Mayor Harris asked the proponent if he had additional information to present to the Council. Richard Palmiter said he was representing David Bernard Builders &Developers, a division of Rottlund Homes. He said they have a strong interest in doing this particular project. Since the January 2, 2001, Council Workshop meeting, they have analyzed the project and are willing to commit to 94 affordable housing units, or one-third of the project. Enger asked Palmiter if the affordability component he was referring to is the Metro Council's affordability index of$134,900, or affordable housing that meets the City's goals for a qualified TIF district. Palmiter said it would be the Metro Council's goal of affordability he was referring to. Rottlund has analyzed the difference between a qualified and non-qualified TIF district. They believe it is extremely difficult to find people to qualify for affordable housing under the City's goals for a qualified TIF district. A qualified district restricts income to 70 percent of the median income of the area, which would be an income of$45,000 or less. In order for someone to qualify under those kinds of criteria, Rottlund would not be able to build a home and market it at this location. Enger said that is the same position described at the Workshop and does require a $340,000 equivalent general fund contribution from the City to this project. It does not meet the goals the City Council has established for affordable housing. It is for a higher income and market than the City's goals. So Council should be aware there has been no change from the Workshop presentation. Palmiter said he believed there is a significant change from the Workshop, when they looked at a non-standard TIF district, which would have restricted buyers to a particular income level but not to any particular price point of the home. His company is willing to fix that price point for 94 units. This really drops the price of the homes to an affordable level, as affordable as the Metro Council has established with its guidelines for the metro area. Uram said during staffs discussion of the Hartford Commons project, staff had presented a number of alternatives to Rottlund of ways to either eliminate or CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 16,2001 Page 17 reduce the City's contribution from a tax-increment standpoint and also try to reach an affordability index,which is at$134,900. Using 94 units, and based on a certain set of assumptions, the local contribution has gone from approximately $350,000 to less than $200,000 cost, which is five percent of the total tax increment generated. So that is a significant difference from the project presented at the previous Council Workshop meeting. There are still a number of questions staff would like to look at before they make an accurate report on what the tax increment district actually generates. Palmiter said at the Workshop they had talked in terms of generating$200 million for a TIF district. In order to do that, about 211 housing units would be part of the district itself, plus the retail area. Eighty-eight units would not be in the district itself. They continue to have that same approach, in that they will keep 211 units within the TIF district but they will keep the price lid of$134,000 on 94 of those units. For the 94 units people would have to qualify with regard to income and there would be a price cap. For the other homes in the district there would be no price cap for the home, but people would still have to have the income qualification of $68,000 or less. Rottlund has added an extra ingredient by keeping 94 homes at$134,000. Uram asked Palmiter if he was still talking about the TIF district including 200+ units. Palmiter replied yes. Uram said he had previously thought Palmiter was saying the number of units in the TIF district would be 94 rather than 200+, so that changes what he said before about the City's contribution being reduced, and Council should disregard it. Palmiter said Rottlund has tried to accomplish the goals of the City and appreciates the time staff has spent on this proposal. Tim Whitten, Senior Vice President for Architecture for Rottlund, explained the first proposal was for 211 out of 300 units to be in a TIF district. Rottlund's only obligation would have been to sell the 211 units to those to people who earn less than $68,000, and they would be sold for $160,000. In the new proposal, Rottlund would sell 94 of those 211 for$134,000 instead of$160,000, so they can offer the homes to many more people. Regarding other issues, the first question brought up at the Workshop meeting was if they could increase the density on that site and thereby absorb the land cost. Whitten said there is a point where density doesn't help them anymore. The density can be increased by making the units a little smaller or go higher in structure. Once you go smaller the price has to be reduced; once you go higher construction costs go higher and also there are code issues. But the bigger problem is it changes the parking structure. Once they go to a single-car garage their opportunity to sell homes for a certain price gets cut off. The number they can sell does not increase. They have found having 20-22 units per acre creates the most money they can put into the land. The second question was on whether they could move some of the product type around on the site. What they found is that the difference in cost per acre between the retail and the residential isn't great enough to make it feasible to move the product around. There was a question from staff on the issue of setbacks and parking ratios. They CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 16,2001 Page 18 did a site analysis that is available for review. Palmiter said he would try to describe the project itself and what the City would receive and give and what Rottlund would give. The City would receive 94 affordable housing units. In addition approximately 100 more units would be moderately priced and buyers would have to qualify according to an income of $68,000 or less. The City would receive a neighborhood retail center of approximately 30,000 square feet that would fit well into this community. The City would receive administrative fees off the district of an unknown amount. The City would establish a $2.5 million TIF non-qualified housing district. In addition, there would be a local contribution of$340,000 over a 15-year term, which equates to a maximum of$31,000 per year. Palmiter said these numbers came from Springsted, the City's financial adviser. According to Rottlund's calculations, it appeared the number of years before the City would break even would be close to 22 years rather than 40 years, as City staff said. The residential section creates more taxes than the commercial would, so the City is further ahead having residential rather than the Hartford Place's 150,000-square-foot retail center. Rottlund is taking a marketing risk by offering moderate-income housing. This is the most expensive land Rottlund has ever purchased. Rottlund would have to find somebody to do the commercial development for them and would take on that responsibility. There is a bond obligation also. This is a pay-as-you- go instrument, which means Rottlund is funding the dollars for this project, not the City, and they will receive a return on their investment over the next 15 years as money is being generated from the TIF itself. They would try to find buyers for a bond that may or may not be marketable. Finally, Rottlund is making a commitment to design new product types which they have not built before and which they believe are cutting edge; good quality housing with distinctive designs. Mayor Harris asked staff if all this information is so new they need to analyze it fizrther. Uram responded staff could not give an opinion on the proposal at that time. He has not seen the project in its entirety, and from the TIF standpoint he did not know what the final product will be. Mosman asked why TIF is needed over the whole piece of property and not just on the affordable housing portion. Uram replied he believed the reason Rottlund is putting the TIF district around the whole area is to generate the $2.5 million debt they say they have in doing the project. Palmiter said the 88 units will not be included in the TIF district and could be sold to anyone at any price. Butcher said this is a great mixed-use development and looks better with the affordable component. She appreciated the moderately priced housing component because it attracts young people to the City. Her concern was it would set a somewhat dangerous precedent to have a TIF district that is non-qualified because the City is subsidizing some of the housing that doesn't fit into the City's standards for affordable housing. It is difficult to comment about this until City CITY COUNCIL 1 IWN S January 16,2001 Page 19 staff looks at it in full. She realized the neighborhood liked it and it meets some of the City's goals. Palmiter said they have a short time frame for receiving approval from the City. They have a property owner who wants to go forward with the commercial component. However, he needs to know that this project will work for the City and is acceptable to the City. They needed to know that night. Mayor Harris said the philosophical issue is of subsidizing what could be market- rate housing. She liked the project. The issue is that of setting a real precedent for the future. The City needs both kinds of housing but questioned if it should be using public dollars to subsidize the housing in this project. Palmiter said what helps to offset the affordable housing is the other units. Some units are non-subsidized. They are providing a great benefit to the City. Tyra-Lukens said that is a good point; it is getting harder to provide affordable housing in the City and they may have to consider this type of project. Mayor Harris said the problem is the City has so many other needs it is looking at right now and this is a diversion of the City's revenue stream. The property could be developed totally as commercial and be profitable. They would like to have residential,but this project is not quite working for the City. Butcher said this is an important question for the Council because it is about the policy of the City, because if one developer asks the City to subsidize housing that could be sold at market rate, other developers could come after them for the same. Palmiter said they are providing a certain number of affordable and a certain number of moderately priced homes in an environment that would be hard to achieve again. They have been in other areas around the Twin Cities where the neighborhood doesn't accept those types of housing and this neighborhood does. There would be many different types of people living here. If this situation were repeated again and again, the City would have the opportunity to provide as much affordable housing as it wished. Whitten said in almost every project they do with TIF financing, a portion is retail to support the affordable housing. Even the other portion of the housing on this project has a restriction of$68,000 income. Rottlund does a lot of projects like this one. Having neighbors supporting affordable housing is very unique in this particular location. Case asked if the affordable housing component is lost on resale, because the $160,000 town home is being sold for $134,000 originally. Whitten replied they would work with the City and put some sort of hook on the mortgage so that wouldn't happen. CITY COUNCIL MIIN=S January 16,2001 Page 20 wouldn't happen. Case said supposedly this would just cost the City $31,659 a year according to Rottlund's numbers. He asked Uram, if he looked at the $15 million value of the four, small commercial boxes approved and ready to be built on this site, and compare the tax base off that to the tax base generated from the 106 non-TIF homes with the retail portion, and then subtracted the $31,659, what would that show compared with the four, small commercial boxes? Uram replied he couldn't respond to that because he didn't know what this project generates. Using current tax rates, the approved commercial project would generate about $675,000 in taxes. Case asked, when they take the non-TIF homes and put it with the commercial, and look at how much that generates, if it is possible the City would be close to a wash now,but in 15 years would have a great gain. Then the City is better off and would get the housing variety it wants. He said the Council needs those numbers to help make a decision. Mosman said it appeared that the numbers they received that night vary from the numbers the Council had before. The Council will have to tell the proponent to go back and work with staff. She asked Whitten,with the piece of property being where it is, could Rottlund be putting very expensive town homes on this site and have them sell? Whitten replied the difficulty is that with this density, Rottlund can't push the dollars up enough because of the number of units per acre. Whitten said he was confused because this is the same proposal and the same numbers they presented before at the Workshop on January 2. They hadn't changed the number of units and the numbers to generate for $2.9 million in tax increment. These were the same numbers run by Springsted. He asked Uram if he had that run. Uram replied he has seen so many different runs he didn't know which run Whitten was referring to. Whitten said it was dated December 28. Enger said staff has not seen this information in this format. He couldn't recall a situation where staff came to the Council with this degree of detail without having had a chance to examine it. Palmiter described the change in the proposal and staff hadn't reviewed that change or which of Springsted's runs would reflect that. Mayor Harris said the Council had already indicated its interest in the project. However, the Council is trying to determine what the City's responsibility would be if the project should go forward and the set of issues about subsidizing what could be market rate housing. She asked staff to come up with something the Council can understand to get a better fix on the numbers. Enger said staff will do that. However, there is the prospect of housing that meets the affordability index of the Metro Council but not of HUD, and he would call it a $340,000 Delta that the City has to come up with. His position, from a policy standpoint, is whether Council is willing to come up with$340,000 out of pocket, because that is different from the tax increment. The City has not done that before and they have not determined where that money would come from. He asked if Council would be interested in doing that. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 16,2001 Page 21 Mayor Harris asked if Council wanted to continue this item. This isn't going through the City's normal planning process and she was concerned with the directions Council would give. She was still struggling with what she considered a philosophical issue regarding subsidizing market-rate housing. Tyra-Lukens said she agreed that spending$340,000 to gain 94 units is a little too much. She would like to see scenarios where that amount could come down. Enger said there is a resident who asked to speak at the January 2 Council Workshop and has asked to speak at this Council meeting. Laura Bluml, 10540 West Riverview Drive, said she agreed with some of the information presented to the City Council. However, she strongly objected to subsidizing the project. This is not about the neighborhood wanting affordable housing; it wants a residential area adjacent to them rather than the retail that was approved for this site. They should have found out when they were purchasing their property that there was going to be a commercial area adjacent to the neighborhood. She believed the concern should be about how Eden Prairie Center is going to be supported. It would be supported best by having more retail businesses around it. She wondered if the people living in these low-income houses would have disposable income to spend at Eden Prairie Center. These people will be using the roads, putting more people on the roads, adding to the traffic congestion. What the neighborhood loses are the shopping opportunities they have been looking forward to. She wondered how these homes are going to be valued for tax purposes and if the houses would still be affordable Mayor Harris said this matter could be deferred to a date certain, or put it in the regular planning process. Mosman said she didn't think the Council could make a decision that evening because Councilmembers don't have a real understanding of it. She believed the Council has wanted to have this type of housing development close to the City Center. She would like to pursue it and recommended continuing this as soon as possible. Mayor Harris said at that time Council would have to give them its decision. Case asked how could $60 million of value for this property not be able to generate the tax base necessary to avoid a TIF district or, at the very least, minimize it, if a$15 million commercial project already approved for this site can pay its way. He asked if this $31,000 a year is a net cost, after everything else on the balance sheet has been subtracted, and the 106 homes outside the TIF and the commercial portion have been added in. Enger responded that for a non-qualified TIF district the City would always have to pay an out-of-pocket contribution of five percent of the total TIF district. Case said he would like to see a balance sheet and compare that with the $15 million project. Enger asked if Case wanted to know how many years past a TIF district the City can break even. Case said he would like to know if it is 22 years or 40 before the City breaks even. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 16,2001 Page 22 Palmiter suggested staff have Springsted prepare that information and see how many years it would take to break even. Palmiter said he would be willing to come back to the next Council meeting on February 6 and, in the meantime, they will work with staff and go through the various issues. Council needs to decide if it is willing to do a non-qualified district and the money to do that. The only new information would likely be how long it would take for the City to break even. Butcher said that would give the Council a chance to discuss if it wants to change the current policies. She believed everyone was feeling frustration. This proposal is being handled differently in terms of the usual process the City follows. When a proposal goes through staff and then the Community Planning Board, Council has a lot of information to help make a good, prudent decision. She hoped the Council would not have to handle future proposals this way again. XI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS XII. APPOINTMENTS X1H. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS Councilmember Mosman's Request to Determine the Structure of the Meeting on February 10,2001 Regarding Expansion of F1 ing Cloud Airport Mosman said she wanted to discuss the structure of the public hearing,who would be invited and the time frames. The purpose would be to look at all the different options to protect the City and the residents. Her assumption was that would be to control, limit or stop the expansion of the airport, and that the Council would not be hearing new arguments on why it should support the airport expansion. Mayor Hams said the City has an official position based on what it has supported over the years. However, her understanding was that the Council was going to make a determination based on new information that may or may not reshape its position. It is possible to control a public hearing, and this is done by defining very specifically the amount of time people have to testify. At the last meeting, Council identified groups that would be invited, which included the Flying Cloud Airport Commission because that group has worked most closely with the airport on this matter. The conversation steered toward having a public hearing and, therefore, it could be structured the way the landfill public hearing was structured, when various groups were identified and the amount of time they had to make a presentation. Case said, with due respect to the Mayor, she was reading into this her past Council experience on other issues. If the Council is holding a hearing to determine what it wanted to do, that would be a different matter. However, this Council is far beyond that point with regard to the expansion of Flying Cloud Airport. Case believed what was needed was a report from the City staff and a CITY COUNCIL AEffq=S January 16,2001 Page 23 report from the Flying Cloud Airport Commission. They need to hear from the City's legal counsel to know what the options are, and advice on a potential lawsuit. They might need to seek outside legal counsel also. Case said he believed they need to move in that direction with this public hearing and center it on the lawsuit issue. Time is getting short and they need to make a decision quickly. Tyra-Lukens said she agreed. She didn't want to hear a cost-benefit analysis about the airport expansion from the Chamber of Commerce, for example. The City is beyond that point. Mayor Harris said she was not sure all alternatives have been exhausted. Not inviting other groups to speak doesn't preclude all the options that might be available to the Council, but she had serious concerns about moving ahead before they have all the information possible. Tyra-Lukens said they have that information in the EIS. She wanted to be ready and be educated about litigation prior to the time they need to make a decision. Mosman said she believed all the groups invited would be going along with how to protect the City against the possible expansion. There are not necessarily just legal issues to consider, but there are other issues they should be looking at. Mosman said the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District should have been added to the list of groups to be invited. Butcher said she understood the motion that passed at the previous meeting was to hold a public hearing for the purpose of data collecting and evaluation. Case said he seconded the motion because it was to discuss legal options to fight the expansion. The emphasis needs to be on how the City can equip itself to fight the airport expansion. All the groups coming should come with information on how to stop that from happening. Enger said his recollection of the last meeting is that he asked for clarification about what groups the Council wanted to invite, and he didn't want to leave it to the discretion of the staff. Mayor Harris said the first part of the meeting is to listen for new information and the second part is to meet with our legal counsel afterward. She didn't want to confuse the two parts. That's why she suggested meeting with legal counsel after and not before. She agreed with Mosman that these groups listed in the motion could come and tell the Council their concerns. She said the primary presenter would be the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission Rosow said listening to this discussion of how the Council wants to have this meeting, it seemed to him that a public hearing does not suit the Councilmembers' purpose, and they should not hold it if they don't want to hear all the options. That is what they will have if they invite all those groups, and it would be hard to CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 16,2001 Page 24 control what they say. It would be appropriate to have a joint meeting with the City's Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission and the public,because it is an open meeting, but not let anyone speak unless spoken to. Council would invite the public to make presentations in the way it wishes. Case said he would like this meeting to be educational,bringing the Council up to date on how to fight the expansion, so he agreed that a public hearing didn't fit in with that. He asked Rosow if they could withdraw the public hearing motion made at the January 2 meeting. Rosow said a new motion should be made. MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Case, that the meeting by the Council on February 10, 2001, be a special meeting open to the public to which the following specific groups are invited to make presentations to the Council with respect to the City's options to oppose the expansion of the Flying Cloud Airport: the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission, City staff members Scott Kipp and Don Uram, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District, the Lower Minnesota Watershed District, the citizen group Zero Expansion, and former Representative Barb Haake. At the end of the above presentations, other persons who wish to provide input on this topic would be allowed to speak for two-to three minutes. A hearing officer will moderate the meeting. Motion carried 5-0. B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER C. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR 1. Task Force for Purgatory Creek Recreation Area Entry Lambert said staff is recommending the City Council consider appointing a citizens task force to assist City staff and a consultant in developing the program for the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area Entry and the concept design of the park entry based on the program. The Council may wish to consider including on the task force a representative of the City Council, two members of the Program Board, two members of the Planning Board, one member of the Parks and Recreation Citizens Advisory Commission and two residents at large. Lambert said the task force would begin meetings in February and submit final recommendations to the City Council in July. The Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District is ready to dredge north of the creek. He hopes this will be a joint project with the watershed district in developing the first phase of the park. He anticipated the task force would submit three alternate concept plans to the Program Board,the Planning Board and the City Council to provide an opportunity for input during the process prior to submitting a final recommendation in July. Mayor Harris said they don't have to appoint specific people that night, but the Councilmembers could come back to the next meeting with CITY COUNCIL AHNUTES January 16,2001 Page 25 suggestions. Tyra-Lukens said it would be a nice thing to do to get the opinion of the Southwest Metro Transit Commission. Lambert said staff would contact the Southwest Metro Commission representatives, as well as ADC Telecommunications and other companies nearby, on what they feel is important and how they would use the entry area, and the potential for nodes around this area that perhaps would be developed in the future, or that homeowners in the area may want to build in the future. Tyra-Lukens said she would like to keep Southwest Metro apprised of the process. Enger said the Council would be involved at the beginning, middle and end of the process. The Boards and Commissions will be used. The most important part of this is whether or not the Council feels the mission and charter of the task force is what it wants to see. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Mosman,to create a PCRA Task Force and adopt a mission and charter; and to authorize a Request for Proposal for consultant services for Developing the Program and Design of the Purgatory Creek Area Entry. D. REPORT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES DIRECTOR 1. I-494 Update and Authorization for Consulting Services Dietz said the Minnesota Department of Transportation has completed its final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on adding a third lane in each direction on I-494—east of TH 212 in 2003 and north of TH 212 in 2007. In Eden Prairie that means there will be a third lane in each direction, north and south of TH 212. The state has not studied the impacts of not providing an entry at Prairie Center Drive. It is important to the area to have full access there. The City sent a letter to MnDOT stating these are needs that have been long identified. Dietz didn't think there is any possibility of adding access as part of the third-lane project, but MnDOT has agreed that they will look at it for a future project. MnDOT proposes to bring the final layout plans for these two projects to the Council for approval in the spring. Unfortunately, coming to an agreement on how best to provide access to the Market Center Area will not receive the kind of attention, due to the timing,that staff believes it deserves. Dietz said that is why he is asking the Council for authorization to select and hire an engineering consultant to select alternatives that may exist for additional access to the Market Center Area. The goal will be to develop ideas on solutions to the problem, in preparation for meeting with MnDOT in February. Dietz plans to meet with the consulting firm SEH later in the week to discuss a contract. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 16,2001 Page 26 The last issue that Council should be aware of is the change in design requirements for the installation of noise walls. The Draft EIS contemplated two noise walls — one near the motels at TH 212/I-494 and the other along the westerly side of I-494, north of Valley View Road. The current MnDOT design standards and associated analysis do not support the installation of either wall and therefore they are not being proposed. A noise wall near the motels would be beyond the City's expectations; however, the other noise wall would have been for the benefit of some of the residents in the Topview neighborhood. This is likely to be an issue that MnDOT will have to address at the informational meeting with area residents on February 12 at Central Middle School, where there will be an opportunity to come and see the project. MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve staff solicitation of professional services for preliminary design of improved access to the Market Center Area from I-494 and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the resulting professional services agreement. Motion carried 5-0. F. REPORT OF PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES DIRECTOR G. REPORT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XIV. OTHER BUSINESS John Mallow, 14000 Forest Hill Road, had asked to make a presentation regarding the City's responsibility for the sale of alcohol and what that entails regarding selling to minors. He said the City had failed in that responsibility. It is also responsible for protecting innocent citizens from those who would abuse alcohol. Mr. Mallow noted that the City authorized a $10,000 contribution toward the Minnesota Municipal Beverage Association (MMBA) and the Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association (MLBA) to lobby against legislation for the sale of wine in grocery stores. However,he said that the MMBA is also lobbying against reducing the legal limit of blood alcohol to .08 for issuing a DWI. The reason the MMBA is lobbying against this is the economic impact to businesses selling alcoholic beverages. Police Chief Clark said this legislation would not result in more arrests but the perception would change people's attitude. Eden Prairie sold $7.2 million worth of alcohol at its liquor stores last year, with a net profit of around$500,000. Mallow said if the MMBA does not represent what is best for the City, then why should it belong to that organization. He asked the City to drop its membership in it. Case responded that the MMBA is the City's lobbying group and usually lobbies well for the City. Case said he supports legislation lowering the blood alcohol level to .08, and would support the Mayor writing a letter to the MMBA expressing the City's concern and CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 16,2001 Page 27 disagreement with them on this issue. The Council is not aware of all the stands the MMBA takes on various issues; however, Case would not drop its association with that group because it benefits the City. Mayor Harris said she believed it was appropriate that the City takes a position that is different from what the MMBA lobbies for regarding blood alcohol legislation. The City should express its disagreement with the MMBA by means of a letter. Mayor Harris said she is on the National Committee to Keep Children Alcohol Free. Tyra-Lukens said she would like copies of the letter to go to all state legislators. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to have the Mayor send the Council's support for the bill to lower the legal limit of blood alcohol content to .08 to both the MMBA and all state legislative representatives. Motion carried 5-0. XV. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to adjourn to a closed session to discuss pending litigation. Mayor Harris adjourned the meeting at 11:40 p.m.