City Council - 02/20/1979 APPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
UESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1979 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel , Dean Edstrom, Dave
Osterholt, Sidney Pauly and Paul Redpath
COUNCIL STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Roger Ulstad; City Attorney
Roger Pauly; Director of Community
Services Bob Lambert; Planning Director
Chris Enger; City Engineer Carl Jullie;
and Joyce Provo, Recording Secretary
INVOCATION: City Manager Roger Ulstad
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: All members present.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The following items were requested to be added to the agenda under the "New
Business" category:
A. Request from the Human Rights & Services Commission for a Joint
Work Session with the Council
B. Discussion on County Road 18 and Anderson Lakes Parkway
C. Cutting down on material submitted to Council in the Council
packets
MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the agenda as amended
and published. Motion carried unanimously.
II. MINUTES OF THE JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PARKS, RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
MEETING HELD THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1979
Under "Commission Members Absent:" on the first page, strike " Robert Kruell ".
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve the minutes of the
February 8, 1979 Joint City Council/Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources
Commission meeting as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk' s License List
B. Set Public Hearing for Shady Oak PUD for concept approval of Highway
Commercial , Office and multiple family uses on a 100 acre site by D. H.
Gustafson for Mare 20, 1979
C. Receive 100q petition for improvements in Shady Oak Industrial Park, I.C.
51-344 Resolution No. 9-42
D. Set hearing date to vacate storm sewer easement in Edenvale Industrial
Park Resolution No. 79-43
Council Minutes - 2 - Tues. ,February 20, 1979
III. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
j E. Final plat approval for Menard' s Addition (Resolution No. 79-41 )
t
F. RLS approval for Bar Mil Search Corporation
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve items A - F on
the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously.
IV. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
No reports.
V. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Request by Richard Hi Hi 's Mitchell Heights Fourth Addition, to
preliminary plat 13 acres zoned RM 6. 5 into 29 duplex lots 58 units)
The site i.s located in the southwest corner of Tamarack Trail and Mitchell
Road (Resolution No. 79-21 ) Continued from February 6, 1979 Council meeting.
Don Sorensen, legal counsel for Mr, Hipp, asked the Council to keep in mind
that this is a fairly difficult parcel to work with due to the shape,
topography and surrounding land. Sorensen addressed the concerns of the
Council at the February 6th Council meeting: 1) Length of the cul-de-sac -
the proponents have attempted to see whether or not a connection of the
2 cul-de-sacs across the property to make it a "U" would be appropriate
and possible. Such a connection results in an 8 - 8 112% grade which is not
acceptable to the City Engineer. Secondarily it would lose three structures or
{ a total of 6 - 8 units and makes the project unfeasible as far as the developer
is concerned, plus it would put some double frontage lots which would front
on two streets and would appear from a planning concept to be undesirable.
The proponent tried to find out if having another cul-de-sac would work, making
3 cul-de-sacs. This did not work because the distance between the intersection
would be less than 300 feet and does not result in desirable plans, and the
location of the southerly cul-de-sac is fixed because of the improvements
that were put in sometime ago when the City put in sewer and water.
(Mr. Filippi of Filippi & Associates, Inc. , outlined in detail the 3 cul-de-sac
plan and why it would not work) . 2) Retaining walls - these were originally
placed on the property in response to a request from staff and Mr. Sorensen
displayed a design layout for the Council to review along with a topo of the
property. In discussing the retaining wall with the City Attorney
and developer, Mr. Sorensen stated the developer is willing to contain in his
Covenants a requirement upon the landowners who own the land adjoining
the retaining walls , a positive duty to maintain those in a proper manner.
This was done to accomplish compliance with the setback and rear yard elevation
by the City.
Sorensen then answered concerns of the citizens expressed at the February 6th
Council meeting: 1 ) The Park - the developer cannot control much about the
park. It is the adjoining landowners and City's situation to decide what to do.
This development can aid in the acquisition of that park as this development
is going to pay the cash park fee and in addition dedication of land.
2) Physical appearance of the development and suggestion of berming being
used - Sorensen stated that because of the topo view of this site which is 1
extremely elevated, any berming would not hide or mask much of the development
whatsoever from its view on Mitchell Road. If berming is to be done on
the front of Mitchell Road, Sorensen felt it would be a safety hazard more
than anything else. Any traffic trying to enter Mitchell Road with a large
berm and the 4 driveways could not see the cars exiting until they are out in
Council Minutes - 3 - Tues. ,February 20, 1979
:
A. Request by Richard Hipp, Hipp' s Mitchell Heights Fourth Addition (continued) ;
the roadway so it would not appear to be advisable. 3) Concept change -
the reasons for the concept change are: a) townhouse financing is not
available, b) market for townhouses is currently very poor, and c) duplexes
are readily salable and duplexes provide a transition situation from the
surrounding land users. 4) Density - the density has been changed. There is
approximately a 26Z density reduction and a ground cover reduction of about
30%. Sorensen stated the Planning Commission and the Parks, Recreation &
Natural Resources Commission have unanimously recommended approval to the
Council . .
Enger explained the Planning Staff spoke with Mr. Sorensen in trying to solve
some of the concerns that were brought up by citizens surrounding the area and
the Council 4t the February 6th Council meeting. The proponents do have a grade
problem which is not unsolvable - it is possible to connect the two cul-de-sacs
but it would be a long steep grade. Further, Enger stated, he has not had a
chance to -review the exact details of construction of the retaining walls and
s4ygested due to the heighth of the retaining walls that perhaps the top tier
of the retaining wall also include an extension as a fence for safety.
The gradinq with connection to the cul-de-sac is possible, although probably
not desirable from a topographic standpoint. There are other alternatives
available, but each one of them would probably lose units. The proponents
wish to pursue the request as presented.
Osterholt felt two main objections in the plat and the alternate shown are
the road layout and safety. Further he does not feel the extensive cul-de-sac
or the alternate with 3 cul-de-sacs presents an attractive solution to the
problem. Osterholt stated the matter calls for either a new plat or a restudy
of the old one to eliminate the long cul-de-sac and connecting of those
two in some manner, and also some action with the fencing at the dangerous
portions of the retaining walls where the grades are severe so somebody
doesn't injure themselves.
Sorensen asked Mr.Hipp if he would be willing to provide fencing for the
retaining walls. Mr. Hipp replied he has every intention to do so.
Jim Gratz, 8343 Mitchell Road, stated double cul-de-sacs will require
additional fire, public safety and snow removal costs, no guarantee that the
maintenance will be carried out on the retaning walls, does not feel single
garages will be sufficient for the homes, and that this type of housing isn't
what the people in the neighborhood want for a progressive community.
Darcy Peterson, 8357 Mitchell Road, questioned who is going to be liable for
the buyers that are not in there now, i .e. , for erosion of the retaining wall ,
drainage, or any problems that come from up above.' Sorensen replied: 1) the
responsibil-ity for maintaining the property until the time it is sold is the
responsibility of the present owner, Hipp' s Construction, and 2) he doesn't
know of any way to insure this other than by Covenants and Restrictions and
responsibility for lateral land support which is part of the common law of
the State of Minnesota.
Mr. Peterson further spoke to the traffic problems on Mitchell Road which will
be made greater with the duplexes "T" driveways exiting out on to Mitchell
Road. However, Peterson , stated his two main interests are the park and
preservation of the remaining corner which is still vacant.
Council Minutes - 4 - Tues. ,february 20, 1979
Y
A. y Richard pp Request b Hi ' )
q , Hipp s Mitchell Heights Fourth Addition (continued)
Mary Ann Toner, who lives on Hiawatha Avenue directly behind where the first t
cul-de-sac is proposed, explained she would prefer single family dwellings
as there are plenty of townhouses and she doesn ' t care for the designs of the
duplexes proposed. Further Mrs. Toner stated she feels the proposal will lower
the property values. - 3
Fred Baumann, 10805 Valley View Road, spoke in favor of the proposal as being
appropriate land use, but yet not as high in density as originally planned.
Baumann commented the project as planned allows two homes and keeps the price
down so it is affordable housing, but yet quality housing.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to continue the request from
Richard Hipp to the March 6th Council meeting to permit a review of the
street alignments, redesign for potential loop street, setback question
from the rear lot linesiand modification of the retaining wall problem.
Motion carried unanimously.
B_ Reauest from Tim Eller, Centex Homes, for a 60-day extension on his
develo er' s agreement for Ridgewood West Subdivision
Osterholt moved, seconded by Edstrom, to grant the request of Tim
Eller, Centex Homes, for a 60-day extension on his developer' s agreement
for Ridgewood West Subdivision. Motion carried unanimously.
x.
C. Request for reduction of special assessments on Lot 10, Block 2, Edenview
2nd, from Larry Keller
Mr. Keller requested the Council consider reducing the assessments on
Lot 10, Block 2, Edenview 2nd, to the price when they were originally
deferred (1973) , and adding to the original assessments a compounded
interest for each delinquent year. (Communication from Mr. Keller dated
2/14/79 attached as part of minutes) .
Osterholt asked if Staff had a recommendation. City Manager Ulstad replied
Staff' s recommendation would be the Council not consider granting a
deferment of this type because there are other properties that have similar
problems.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to move denial of the request
from Mr. Keller for reduction in special assessments on Lot 10, Block 2,
Edenview 2nd. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Keller requested that his realtor, Mr. Hallman, speak on his behalf.
MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Pauly, to reconsider the previous motion
allowing Mr. Keller to have his realtor speak on his behalf. Motion carried
unanimously'.
Jim Hallman, Edina Realty, spoke in favor of Mr. Keller's request, noting
that any area that has possible flood problems should reflect it in the price,
and prices should be substantially less than land in a high or dry area.
Penzel explained it is not the choice of the City to set property values, it
is the free market which determines the value of property in reflection of all
of the given circumstances which might affect that value. That includes the
degree of buiidability of a given parcel of land. He does not feel the City is
in a role or •a position to make or not make that kind of a decision, it is
something between the seller and the potential buyer.
Council Minutes - 5 - Tues. ,February 20, 1979 ``
C. Request for reduction of special assessments on Lot 10, Block 2, Edenview
2nd, from Larry Keller continued
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Edstrom, to move denial of the request
from Mr. Keller for reduction in special assessments on Lot 10, Block 2,
Edenview 2nd. Motion carried unanimously.
VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
A. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 293, rezoning from Rural to RM 2.5 for Parkview
Apartments and approval of developer' s agreement
City Planner Enger explained this is a 2nd Reading for Parkview Apartments,
the 1st Reading being given in 1975. Subsequent to that time the City has
drafted a new developer's agreement based on the plans now before the Council .
Enger spoke to the amendments in the developer' s agreement stating that the
proponents, are in agreement with the amendments, and introduced Mr. Jan
Susee, the ultimate builder of the apartment project.
Mr. Susee' stated the way the project is presently structured is a FHA Loan,
and he would be in partnership with Eden Land Corporation during the construc-
tion phase, after which time Eden Land would disappear from the ownership
picture.
Penzel asked City Attorney Pauly to speak to the idea of cross easements
and how those might be affected by conversion to condominiums. Pauly
responded if the cross easements are given and filed against the property,
they will run with the property. Even though the property would be
conceivably split up in the future, those easements would still be effective.
If they go into a condominium arrangement, that would not have to come back
before the Council for approval .
MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the 2nd Reading
of Ordinance No. 293, rezoning from Rural to RM 2.5 for Parkview Apartments
(Burning Tree) . Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION; Edstrom moved, seconded by Pauly, to approve the developar's
agreement as amended, the open space to be divided or proper cross easements
provided to insure that the open space would be useable by both phase 1 and
phase 2 of the project. Motion carried unanimously.
B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 78-31 , rezoning .from Rural to RM 6.5 for Prairie
East 7th Addition and developer' s agreement
City Planner Enger went over amendments to the developer' s agreement which
have been worked out by City Attorney Pauly and Windsor Development Corporation's
attorney.
Jim Ostenson, Hustad Development Corporation, distributed additional changes the
proponents are requesting in the developer's agreement
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the developer's
agreement for Prairie East 7th Addition with changes requested by the
proponents, with the exception that July 1 , 1979 should be substituted
in lieu of September 1 , 1979 in item 8, and "building permits" should be
left in item 9 rather than "occupancy permits
Council Minutes - 6 - Tues. ,February 20, 1979
B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 78-31 rezoning from Rural to RM 6.5 for '
Prairie East 7th Addition and developer's agreement continued
City Attorney Pauly suggested adding new language to item 14, which will a
read as follows: "Owner shall dedicate additional right-of-way for that
part of County Road 18 abutting Prairie East 7th, 8th and 9th, which will
result in said right-of-way being 60 feet wide as measured from center
line of County Road 18 westerly thereof." Council members agreed to this 5
addition in the developer' s agreement.
MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Redpath, to amend the motion by
striking "building permits" in item 9 and inserting "occupancy permits" as
requested by the proponents. Edstrom, Redpath and Pauly voted "aye" ,
Osterholt and Penzel voted "nay". Motion :arried. 7
Penzel requested on page 2, 6th paragraph, that the date be filled in
where the blank appears. Council members agreed with this request.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the
Developer's Agreement. All Council members voted in favor of the
developer's agreement as amended.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Pauly, to approve the 2nd Reading
of Ordinance No. 78-31 , rezoning from Rural to RM 6. 5 for Prairie East 7th
Addition. Motion carried unanimously. '
VII . REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
1. Appointments to the Citizens Advisory Commission on Cable TV
Mayor Penzel recommended the appointment of Mrs. Ismail Ismail to the
Citizens Advisory Commission on Cable TV.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Edstrom, to appoint Mrs. Ismail
Ismail to the Citizens Advisory Commission on Cable TV. Motion carried
unanimously.
2. Airport runway extension
Edstrom reported on the public information meeting he attended a couple j
of weeks ago sponsored by the Metropolitan Airports Commission on the
proposal to extend the southeasterly east/west runway which was originally
scheduled for about March 8. The date of March 8th has been deferred
to sometime in April because it is taking longer to develop the
environmental impact assessment than they had originally anticipated,
Edstrom suggested the Council monitor this very closely and that this
item be placed on the agenda as soon as more information is available.
Enger commented he expects the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission
will be forthcoming with a recommendation. Council requested to be
notified when meetings of the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission
are being held.
No action necessary.
Council Minutes - 7 - Tues. ,February 20, 1979
3. 1 Appointment to the Planning Commission to fill an unexpired term
to 2/28/81
ff Penzel placed the name of Virginia Gartner into nomination to fill the
1. unexpired term on the Planning Commission to 2/28/81 .
Edstrom placed the name of Fred Baumann into nomination.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, that nominations be
closed. Motion carried unanimously.
Upon tabulation of ballots , Virginia Gartner was selected to fill the
unexpired term on the Planning Commission to 2/28/81 .
4. Status of Highway #212
Councilwoman Pauly reported on the meeting of the Highway #212 Task
Force held February 14, 1979 at the Chaska City Hal ) . Pauly recommended
sending individual letters to Governor Quie, Senators Durenberger and
Boschwitz, Congressman Frenzel , State Representative Ewald and
Senator John Keefe, and form letters to the rest of our Congressional
delegation and to the legislators in the #212 area plus a different form
letter to the rest of the legislators. Four points that should be brought
out, Pauly commented, should be as follows: 1) safety - use of our
own Public Safety Department for what is mainly through traffic;
2) southwest is the only area in and out of the area without a four-lane
highway; 3) Highway Department' s historical position and promise to
build Highway #212, and 4) development pressure.
Penzel requested that letters be drafted by Staff for Council 's review.
Fred Baumann, 10805 Valley View Road, commented if community meetings
are going to be held regarding Highway #212, that they be held in
September rather than in August.
B. Report of City Manager
No report.
C. Report of City Attorney
No report.
D. Report of Director of Community Services
1. Eden Prairie Stables
Director of Community Services Lambert spoke to his memo dated
2/15/79, recommending that the Eden Prairie Stables be closed at the
end of February and that the City advertise for a new leasee. Lambert
further pointed out he has contacted the Vo-Tech as they have started
a stable management program and are now using Malkerson Stables. There
might be a possibility for Vo-Tech to use Eden Prairie Stables and
Mr. Lambert will be meeting with the person in charge for program
development for all the Vo-Techs to pursue this possibility.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Penzel , to authorize Staff to
close the Eden Prairie Stables the end of February and advertise for
a new leasee. Motion carried unanimously.
Council. Minutes - 8 - Tues. ,February 20, 1979
E. Report of City Engineer
3
I. Consider bids for quicklime
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, to award the bid
for quicklime to the lowest responsible bidder, Cutler-Magner, Co. ,
in the amount of $55.70 per ton + fuel clause. Roll Call Vote:
Osterholt, Redpath, Edstrom, Pauly and Penzel voted "aye". Motion s'
carried unanimously.
2. Consider bids for dump truck
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Pauly, to award the bid
for one 27,500 GVW truck cab and chasis with a diesel engine
to Boyer Ford Trucks in the amount of $19,140.46,as recommended
by City Engineer in memo dated February 15, 1979. Roil Call
Vote: Osterholt, Pauly, Edstrom, Redpath and Penzel voted "aye" .
Motion carried unanimously.
3. Finil nlat approval for Hinn's Mif -hell Heights 4th Addition
Resolution No. 79-32
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Edstrom, to continue the final
plat approval for Hipps Mitchell Heights 4th Addition to the
March 6, 1979 Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
4. Release of 10% retainage - HNTB
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve the release
of the 10% retainage to HNTB (Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff) .
Roll Cali Vote: Redpath, Osterholt, Edstrom, Pauly and Penzel voted
"aye". Motion carried unanimously.
5. Change Order #1 , I.C. 51-326, Dell Road project
MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Osterholt, to refer this item
to the City Attorney for his advice on 1) whether this is the
appropriate course of action to take and 2) whether there is any recourse
to the City in connection to this matter. Motion carried unanimously.
Penzel recommended giving the contractor the go ahead on the Change Order
and settle who is going to pay for it. Council members agreed with this
procedure.
F. Report of Finance 'Di rector
1. Payment of Claims Nos, 3151 - 3351
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve Payment of
Claims Nos. 3151 - 3351 . Roll Call Vote: Redpath, Osterholt, Edstrom,
Pauly and Penzel voted "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
VIII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Request from the Human Rights & Services Commission for a Joint Work Session
with the Council
City Manager 'Ul stad explained he wi11 find out what the Human Rights & Services
Commission wishes to meet with the Council on, and also a date.
Council Minutes 9 - Tues. ,February 20, 1979
B. Discussion on County Road 18 and Anderson Lakes Parkway
City Engineer Jullie explained he met today with Hennepin County and
Bloomington officials regarding the intersection improvements at County Road
18 and Anderson Lakes Parkway. Jullie commented apparently Bloomington
is not prepared to approve the intersection plans as shown by Hennepin County
at this time. Further that Bloomington is strongly suggesting we look toward.
reserving sufficient right-of-way in terms of the long range plans for County
Road 18.
i
City Planner Enger noted the City has received a copy of Hennepin County's
proposed transportation plan for 1990 and the system does show in the County
System an intermediary arterial on County Road 18, which is a freeway, and they
project 40,000 trips per day on that road. Enger stated he called the
Metropolitan Council transportation staff and they have informed him again, as
they did last year when they were reviewing our guide plan, that the County
is really -in contradiction to the Metropolitan Council ' s thoughts on Ccunty Road
18, and that Eden Prairie' s guide plan update as proposed showing County Road
18 as a minor arterial is what the Metropolitan Council supports.
Osterholt reiterated Eden Prairie has a position in the contemplated guide
plan showing County Road 18 as a minor arterial and City Staff should go to ,
the County and express our position, and even to the County Board of
Commissioners, and point out the reasons why Eden Prairie would like to see it
left as a minor arterial . Osterholt further suggested Staff advise the-
Metropolitan Council when we take our guide plan in that this is a very
r important part of that guide plan.
Edstrom asked how the Staff intended to uroceed? Jullie replied he will go back
in at the present intersection hat our intent is and we would like the signal put
C. Cutting down on material submitted to Council in the Council packets
Council suggested that a list be made up of types of items that are included
in the Council packets and also in the "For Your Information% and that
Council members indicate which items they would like to receive and which
items they do not feel- are important.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, to adjourn the-Council meeting at
10:45 PM. Motion carried unanimously.
s _ u
7"T"'`
Feb. 14, 1979
FEB . 5 19079
Dear City Council of Eden Prairie, k
It is the desire of my wife and I to live in Eden Prairie; therefore we
purchased a piece of property,contingent on our acceptance of the attached soil
test, having plans to build. However, we have encountered a problem in regards
.to the building of our home, and are in need of your help in this matter. > ,
This is how the situation stands. The lot we purchased (on the corner of
South Lund Drive and Creeicview Lane) is in need of extensive excavation and
fill before any attempt to' build a home would be possible. The cost of such
an endeavor would be in the $5000.00 to $7000.00 range. Adding this charge to
the assessments. back Mixes and price of the lot brings the total cost out of
range, not onlyourselves but anyone• who might be interested in building. Do
` to this added expense it is unlikely that this lot will be sold before the
seven year delinquency period of back taxes, (the original owners have not paid
their taxes slnce 19.75) at that time Eden Prairie would be responsible for a
lot that is non-buildable. We would like to build on the lot for a reasonable
price, and I'm sure that Eden prairie would benefit from the taxes on a new
e, but how can this situation be solved?
What I would like the city council to consider is this: Reducing the
assessments to the price when they were originally deferxed(1973), and adding
to the original assessments a compounded interest for each delinquent year.
(The current assessments stand at approximately $6200.00)
If the City Council would act on the afore mentioned request, it would
enhance the possibility of our building on that particular lot. It not, it
Is unlikely that we or anyone else would be able to build as the situation
stands.
Thankyou for your time in considering this matter. I am anxiously
awaiting your decision.
Sincerely,
Larry Keller
770D Penn Ave. So. Apt. 4
Richfield M. 55423