Loading...
City Council - 06/03/1980 APPROVEU MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL UESDAY, JUNE 3, 1980 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; Planning Director Chris Enger; Finance Director John Frane; Director of Community Services Bob Lambert; City Engineer Carl Jullie; and Joyce Provo, Recording Secretary INVOCATION: City Manager Roger K. Ulstad PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Edstrom, Osterholt, Paul and Redpath present; Penzel absent. (Edstrom excused z from the meeting at 10:00 PM) In the absence of Mayor Penzel , the meeting was conducted by Acting Mayor Sidney Pauly. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Item VII. E. 2. Extend bid opening date for Valley View Road/Dell Road, Phase 2, I.C. 51-325 was added to the Consent Calendar. 4LMOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve the agenda as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously. II. MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, MAY 20, 1980 Pg. 3, 1st para. , last line, strike "sustain itself" and insert in lieu thereof "be self-sustaining"; Pg. 7, 2nd para. , 2nd line, strike "aye" and insert in lieu thereof "nay"; and on Pg. 10, last para. , 2nd line, strike "West of County Road 4 to County Road 1" and insert in lieu thereof "to County Road 4" . MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve the minutes of the Council meeting held Tuesday, May 20, 1980, as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. Resolution regarding funding for County Road 4 Bikeway ro 'ect (Resolution No. 80-108 C. Resolution for appropriation of MSA funds to T.H. 5/W.78th Street signal project, I.C. 51-327 Resolution No. 80-1 9 D. Approval of final agreement with Hennepin County for traffic signal project 7841 , I .C. 51 -338, Co. Rd. 18 at Anderson Lakes Parkwa 80- 10 Resolution No. r E. Amend Resolution No. 1210 relating to def-erment of s f.ccial ass-s-,,lens Ma for Senior Citizens (Reso utionNo.- 80-111 ) City Council Minutes - 2 - Tues. ,June 3, 1980 F. Final ap royal for Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of 287,250.00 for Alston and Jean Lundgren Resolution No. 80-101 itG. Final approval for Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of 6,000,000.00 for the Minnesota Vikings Facility Resolution No. 80-103 X H. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 80-10, rezoning 22 acres from Rural to R1-13. 5 for Rymarland Camp 2nd Addition by Milt Quam and developer' s agreement I . 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 80-11 , rezoning 8 acres from Rural to Office for Cardarelle & Associates, Inc. , and developer's agreement ' J. Resolution No. 80-105 , requesting approval for transferring of $10,000 from Community Development Block Grant County Road 4 bike trail to Valley View Road bike trail K. Resolution No. 80-104, requesting the release of 1980 LAWCON funds and to restore 1981 LAWCON funding level L. Extend bid opening date for Valley View Road/Dell Road, Phase 2, I .C. 51-325 (formerly item VI 1. E. 2. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Edstrom, to approve items A - L on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Braun's Fashions , Inc. by Rauenhorst Corporation. Request to rezone from Rural to I-2 and preliminary plat 9.95 acres into 1 lot and 1 outlot. Located north of Valley View Road across from 9955 Valley View Road (Ordinance No. 80-13 and Resolution No. 80-98) Bob Worthington, Rauenhorst Corporation, representing the proponents, spoke to the proposal and showed graphics depicting same. Worthington added that this project will supersede the Briarfield Estates proposal . Planning Director Enger explained this item was considered at the April 14 and April 28, 1980 Planning Commission meetings. The Commission recommended approval of the proposal to the Council on a 5 - 0 vote with 1 "abstention" , subject to the Staff Report dated April 11 , 1980. Director of Community Services Lambert reported the Parks , Recreation & Natural Resources Commission reviewed this proposal on May 19th and the Commission recommended denial to the Council on a 6 - 1 vote. Lambert added the majority of the discussion centered around the hill that is being cut about 50 feet between the LeParc property and the building. Six members of the Commission were upset with what the development looks like to the north and felt that by removing the hill the whole gravel pit is opened up to what is supposedly going to be residential to the south. The Commission felt this was a good place to make a stand as far as stopping the leveling. If a proposal could be developed that could maintain the hill it is acceptable. but with the hill coming down they were opposed to it. Pauly asked if Mr. Enger recalled how the cut and fill was proposed on Briarfield Estates compared to the cut and fill on this proposal . Enger explained the Briarfield Estates proposal was for a preliminary plat and rezoning of the western portion of this property for duplexes. The proposal on this site is for concept approval for apartment complexes and a restaurant. Although a grading plan was not prepared for Briarfield Estates, their proposal would have Tues. ,June 3, 1980 A. �$raun's Fashions , Inc. by Rauenhorst Corporation (continued) required a substantial cut on that site as well . The hill is 50 feet high and some uses could perhaps cut 20 feet, others 30 feet, etc. Braun's has responded to the concern about leaving the hill which is largely unvegetated. Once the hill is gone it opens up the entire industrial park to view and that is why they have provided in their grading an interruption in the sight line up near Valley View Road so that it wouldn' t be opened up to the entire industrial park. The proponents have tried to replace the sight line interruption where the hill was, with interruptions consisting of berms and landscaping. Osterholt questioned when we get into the grading of Valley View Road (County Road 39) on the final phase, will there be County participation on that? City Engineer Jullie replied he would hope so, however, the County has said they don't have any funds and they don't have it in their five-year capital improvement program. Right now the City' s State Aid. Funds are programmed for several other projects and the County has reviewed the access points and find that the sight distances are okay and the road structure is sufficient to handle additional traffic. Jullie added it surely would be better to have the grade lowered at this time but there is just not the wherewithal to do it. Discussion took place regarding outside storage, and Osterholt asked if the proponents know outside storage is not permitted on this property. Worthington acknowledged they do understand they cannot have outside storage on the property. Osterholt asked if Braun's intends to ask for MIDB' s. Worthington replied in the affirmative. Pauly questioned how firm the planned residential is for the remainder of the parcel. Worthington replied the entire parcel is going to be owned by Braun's . They, in turn, once this development has taken place will be brokering the balance of the property to a residential developer. Pauly further asked how logical it is to put in a residential development which is pretty much surrounded by industrial . Worthington responded he felt that is a policy that should be made by the City. If the Planning Commission and City Council after studying this feel it should be something else, that is fine, but it should be initiated by the City and not by Braun's. City Planner Enger added both the Smetana Lake Sector Study, the 1968 Comprehensive Guide Plan and the 1979 Comprehensive Guide Plan all illustrate industrial or high density residential for this general area. Jay Peterson, 11179 Windrow Drive, asked if Braun's is going to have a rear access for the semis for sure. Worthington explained they have been in contact with the owners of the LeParc property and they have consented to an access. Worthington added if there is a choice they prefer to go with sanding of the road first, as opposed to being forced to go through the LeParc development even though the consent is granted. In the long run there may be some legal issues that may, even though they have good intentions, create some problems as to who is going to be responsible for upkeep and maintenance, liability, etc. Osterholt added he has problems relying on private enterprise to sand the road. Mr. Peterson felt another access is necessary because if a truck gets stuck ! ' it is impossible to pass on the hill . : i Pauly asked if the Council were to approve this proposal with the Valley View Road option allowing Braun's to sand it, can the City enforce that in a developer's agreement? , Lity councii Minutes - w - iues. ,June 3, $ 980 A. BrAun's Fashions ,Inc. by Rauenhorst Corporation (continued) City Attorney Pauly replied his reaction to having a private party sand public roads is inviting some problems as he does not know if it can be enforced and how the standards could be drawn. City Manager Ulstad added sanding Valley View Road is a County responsibility, and the County would have to respond to it in the same manner they respond to k. residential streets. If Braun' s chose to sand with some kind of rig, it is up to the County to say "no" they can' t, or "yes", they can. Councilwoman Pauly asked if this could be one of those situations if it were allowed to happen would become so bad the County would have to come and do something about it. Jullie replied it certainly would add to the warrants for upgrading, but as he sees it on those days when it is that bad the trucks are just going to have to go the other direction (as they are leaving Braun's turn and go west on Valley View Road to Hwy. 169 rather than attempt to go up a steep grade) . Ulstad explained the County does not have any funds and as that area continues to develop as it has in the past, he feels the City is going to make a request . to the County to make some improvements. Ulstad envisions the City as having to carry the ball and assess the improvements over the entire area. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Osterholt, to continue the Public Hearing for Braun's Fashions,and directed Staff to research if there is a way to resolve the matter of grade and access to the property. Motion carried unanimously. B. Northmark East by Ban-Con. Request to rezone 5.2 acres from Rural to RM 6.5 and preliminary plat the property for 32 quadra-minium units. Located West of Center Way, across from Hyland Terrace and Northmark Drive. (Ordinance No. 80-14 and Resolution No. 80-99) Hans Hagen, Ban-Con Corporation, presented the development plans to the Council . City Planner Enger explained this item was reviewed by the Planning Commission on April 28, 1980. The Commission recommended approval of the proposal on a 4 0 vote with 1 "abstention", subject to the Planning Staff Report dated April 23, 1980, which Mr. Enger detailed for the Council . Director of Community Services Lambert reported the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission reviewed this proposal on May 19, 1980, and the Commission recommended approval unanimously to the Council as per the Planning Staff Report dated April 23, 1980. Wayne Jorgenson, 11240 Windrow Drive, asked why Center Way was terminated as a flow through road. Enger replied last year Hartford Development Corporation proposed on 163 acres north of this residential area an office park. Originally 10 years ago when Center Way was contemplated the City felt and developers felt that there may be an additional higher residential area up north of the existing residential , and it was for this purpose that Center Way was continued. When that concept slowly changed over the years to the point where it is office land use and when that land use was reviewed the residents in the area were particularly opposed to the connection of Center Way to the more commercial area. Their feeling was commercial traffic would shortcut through the I residential area , thus Center Way was terminated. City Council Minutes - 5 - Tues. ,June 3, 1980 y5 k B. Northmark East by Ban-Con (continued) x Jorgenson added the Ban-Con quadra-miniums proposed seem fine, however, there are a lot of quads in Bloomington across County Road 18 which he feels do not look very nice, and asked the Council in the future whenever quads are being considered in Eden Prairie that the Council be careful about the quality of the homes and the compactness so that there is essential living space. In the Preserve area there is one park in the center of the area which is serving - an awful lot of children and he thinks it is important to allow for living spaces s whether they be called tot lots or park areas, and also be aware of the beauty of the homes and the aesthetics of the area not just trying to cram them in. r Pauly thanked Mr. Jorgenson for his comments and complimented Mr. Hagen on the attractive design of the proposed quadra-miniums. i Jay Peterson, 11179 Windrow Drive, commented he sees this project as adding a tremendous amount of traffic to Center Way, which is already a lot busier Y road than he expected to be living on. Mr. Peterson asked if it is possible to return the access to the area directly to Preserve Boulevard. Enger recited two reasons for not returning the access to the area directly to Preserve Boulevard: 1) the Northmark East and Northmark West parcels are independent parcels, not connected by common ownership. The parcel inbetween ` is owned and zoned as a part of the Hartford Insurance proposal which would be for berms and the parking lot areas and that type of thing and 2) it would create a cul-de-sac in excess of perhaps a 1/4 to 1/2 mile in length. From a technical standpoint the City would like to try and stay away from long dead- end cul-de-sacs. Center Way was designed originally as a through road, so it was designed to carry significantly higher traffic volumes than it is now carrying, and certainly does have the capacity, to carry 32 additional units. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and give a 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 80-14, rezoning 5.2 acres from Rural to RM 6.5 for 32 quadra-minium units for Northmark East by Ban -Con. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Osterholt, to adopt Resolution No. 80-99, approving the preliminary plat for Northmark East by Ban-Con. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Osterholt, to direct staff to draft a developer's agreement incorporating the recommendations of the Planning Commission/Parks , Recreation & Natural Resources Commission and Staff Report dated April 23, 1980, including map on page 4 of the Report. Motion carried unanimously. Larry Peterson, representing The Preserve, requested the Council to consider granting a grading permit allowing them to start grading on Northmark West subject to the approval of the Watershed District. MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Redpath , to grant the request by Mr. Peterson for the issuance of a grading permit for Northmark West subject to the approval of the Watershed District and review in advance by City Staff. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes - 6 - Tues. ,June 3, 1980 C. Northmark West by Ban-Con. Request to rezone 11 .7 acres from Rural to RM 6.5 and preliminary plat the property for 68 quadra-minium units. Located east of Preserve Boulevard and North of Westwind Addition. (Ordinance No. 80-15 and Resolution No. 80-100) Hans Hagen, Ban-Con Corporation, spoke to the proposal and displayed graphics depicting same. ',- City Planner Enger explained this item was heard at the May 12, 1980 Planning Commission meeting, and the Commission recommended approval to the Council on a 4 - 0 vote with 1 "abstention" as per the Staff Report dated April 22, 1980. Director of Community Services Lambert added the Parks , Recreation & Natural Resources Commission considered this item on May 19, 1980 and recommended unanimous approval to the Council as per the Planning Staff Report dated April 22, 1980. Osterholt referred to concerns expressed by residents regarding the storm drainage, and requested that any problems be resolved with the Engineering Department prior to any construction. Osterholt further added it was the indication of the developer that people moving into the quadra-miniums do not intend to have families so there is not a need for tot lots; however, he asked Staff b-afore a 2nd Reading to make inquiries of the areas where there are quadra-miniums in Eden Prairie and Bloomington and find out from the School District how many children are enrolled in those areas. If we find the opposite is true, we should have some kind of playfields or play areas for the children. 4LLambert commented there was some discussion at the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission regarding this situation, and it was pointed out the developer's are willing to construct a tot lot. However, there is a tot lot located not very far south of Northmark West so the Commission suggested a rest area with bench, picnic table, etc. , to be put along the trailway instead of putting in a tot lot which may not be used. Osterholt asked that the figures still be provided to the Council , as residents of Northmark may feel this development should provide some of those amenities. Don Irving, 11345 Lanewood Circle, asked if the developer could take some of the nice big rocks that are located within the development and put in his area for a berm as the 3 houses, one of which he owns , do not have a berm or any land- scaping. Mr. Hagen stated he could move the rocks if Mr. Irving so desired and displayed a new landscaping plan which does define the area which Mr. Irving expressed concern about. The new plan consists of different size and types of plant materials and Mr. Hagen added they are planning to meet with City Staff to review the landscaping plan. If the landscaping plan meets the staff's approval , they will be willing to proceed with same. Mr. Irving felt the new landscaping plan as detailed by Mr. Hagen would seem to satisfy his request. Council suggested Mr. Hagen meet with Mr. Irving on the landscaping plan, which Loth parties agreed to do. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Osterholt, to close the Public Hearing and give a 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 80-15, rezoning 11 .7 acres from Rural to RM 6. 5 for 68 quadra-minium units for Northmark West by Ban-Con. Motion carried unanimously. .x MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 80-100, approving the preliminary plat for Northmark West by Ban-Con. Motion, carried una ni,mously. City Council Minutes - 7 - Tues. ,June 3, 1980 C. Northmark West by Ban-Con (continued) MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, to direct Staff to draft a developer' s agreement incorporating the recommendations of the Planning Commission/Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission and Staff Report dated April 22, 1980. Further that the concerns be addressed regarding storm drainage, tot lot, and landscaping plan. Motion carried unanimously. D. Request for Municipal Industrial Development Bond approval in the amount of 1 ,750,000.00 for Wilson Learning Corporation Resolution No. 80-102. Steve Jacobs, Dain Bosworth Incorporated, representing the proponents as the agent in the proposed transaction,spo ke to the application as submitted to the Council . Jacobs believes this project satisfies both State and Federal law and will add substantially to the tax base, and it is presently anticipated that they will be employing approximately 30 additional people after the completion of the project. Dain Bosworth Incorporated will be representing Wilson Learning Corporation as an agent and the bond will be placed privately with a financial institution. Jacobs added Wilson Learning is a private company and they wish to stay that way. They are looking at mid-summer for the sale of the bonds. Osterholt asked what is the anticipated life of the equipment and length of terms of the bonds. Mr. Jacobs replied typically what they do is structure the bond issue in two parts: 1) a shorter term maturity that represents the investment in equipment, and 2) a longer maturity term for brick and mortar. Wayne Jorgenson, 11240 Windrow Drive (Assistant Vice President and registered !. ... representative of Piper, Jaffray & Hopwood) , spoke against the request for MIDB's for Wilson Learning Corporation and asked the Council to consider what the original purpose of municipal bond offerings or IDR's were when they were established many years ago. Municipal bond offers or IDR's, according to Mr. Jorgenson, were oftentimes brought about to help industry to bring in employment to the community. Jorgenson added along with that should be considered the fact that Wilson Learning Corporation is already established, that they are an ongoing concern, and consider the fact they should not be using taxpayers money to subsidize that corporation's expansion. It is altogether possible, Jorgenson stated, this corporation could go out and privately place their own funds, which is called corporate bonds or corporate debt, and not use R government subsidies to do so. Also Jorgenson asked the Council to consider what the government funds are being used for as far as resale value of the equipment, reuse of the property and building, should the company default. Mr. Jacobs replied Wilson Learning Corporation did apply to Twin City Federal for conventional financing and Twin City Federal said "no". Wilson Learning has had an 8-year history with TCF in the past and they are current on their obligations with. TCF. Revenue bonds are not subsidized by taxpayers; revenue bonds are sold to institutions, individuals and banks. The interest on revenue bonds is tax exempt in the hands -of the holder. There is no governmental assistance and there is no subsidy by residents of Eden Prairie and there is nothing that affects their individual taxes. In fact, it can be argued that the new facility proposed when it goes on the real estate taxes will supply additional services. In 1933, Mississippi was the first state to adopt industrial revenue bond financing. Their purpose which was taken right from Federal Statutes , was to balance industry with agriculture. They had a significant amount of agriculture and very little industry, and they said that the public purpose is to bring in new or endure existing firms to stay within the State. Mississippi has been the example that every other state had adopted some states have adopted a little more conservative law and others a more liberal 2 ty Council Minutes - 8 - Tues. ,June 3, 1980 D. Request for MIDB' s for Wilson Learning Corporation (continued) law. In the literal interpretation of the State laws this is not a subsidy, this is a corporate debt, guaranteed by Wilson Learning Corporation, and it meets all the State and Federal guidelines. Edstrom asked why Wilson Learning Corporation was turned down by Twin City Federal . Matthew Juechter, President of Wilson Learning Corporation, replied the only reason TCF turned them down was because TCF didn' t have any money as they are only able to raise money through the deposits that they have in their institutions on which they pay 8, 9 or 10%, and there are opportunities for people to deposit money elsewhere where they can earnl2, 13, 14 or 15%, thus leaving the savings and loan institution with no money to give to their customers. Juechter addea TCF is very happy with Wilson Learning Corporation' s financial picture. The following is the employment record of Wilson Learning Corporation as supplied by Mr. Juechter: 1977 - 66 employees; 1978 - 78 employees; 1979 - 93 employees; and 130 employees anticipated in 1980. The actual number of total employees in the company at the end of the fiscal year on April 30 has already reached 161 , of which approximately 30 are not residents of Eden Prairie, Wilson Learning Corporation has been growing approximately 35 to 40% a year, and the majority of employees live in Eden Prairie. Osterholt stated he appreciated Mr. Jorgenson' s remarks and by way of information the City has developed a set of guidelines which he invited Mr. Jorgenson to look at. Further Osterholt invited Mr. Jorgenson to submit any suggestions to the Council which he may have. Osterholt added the Council in the past has not approved all requests for MIDB' s. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to close the Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No. 80-102, approving the request for Municipal. Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of $1 ,750,000.00 for Wilson Learning Corporation. Motion carried unanimously. E. Establishment of an F1RA (Housing & Redevelopment Authority) for Tax Increment financing Resolution ',o. 83-112 a Finance Director Frane spoke to his memo dated May 15, 1980, and the two additional Public Hearings which must be held by the Council in order for the HRA to proceed on a given project as per State Statutes. City Attorney Pauly explained the real objective of considering the adoption of a Housing & Redevelopment Area this evening is ultimately to adopt a Tax Increment Plan for a Tax Increment District, specifically in the Major Center Area and specifically for the construction of improvements such as roads, etc. , to complete the Ring Route and other access and feeder roads. In order to adopt a tax increment financing plan it is necessary to have a vehicle, in the first instance, for that plan. One of those vehicles is a Housing & Redevelopment Authority such as is being proposed this evening. City Attorney Pauly added another of those vehicles is a so-called Development District under another Minnesota Statutes (Chapter 472A. ). He has discussed with various people the possibility of the viability of utilizing the Development District other than the Housing & Redevelopment Authority as that vehicle. Pauly explained the Development District vehicle has some legal questions because of some language in the act which spells out the legislative intention or purpose of the act. It is the opinion of some of the people from the Dorsey firm that the language which talks about development of a built-up type of area would indicate that particular chapter ' is not suitable for this specific kind of development. x r, City Council Minutes - 9 Tues. ,June 3, 1980 E. Establishment of an HRA (Housing & Redevelopment Authority) for Tax Increment Financing continued City Attorney Pauly stated on the other hand, the representative from the Dorsey office recognizes that the Major Center Area is "A" typical of a district to which a Housing & Redevelopment Authority would apply, and they do feel that there is sufficient authority granted by the Legislature in the act through amendments , etc. , which would make a reasonable case for the use of Tax Increment Financing Pauly continued, there will be a series of Public Hearings after this one tonight if the Council chooses to adopt the HRA approach - the second hearing with reference to a development project, and the third hearing with reference to a Tax Increment District. It is felt that through that process of Public Hearings it will give everyone an opportunity to sense the appropriateness and the acceptance of this plan. The Council is under certain time constraints because of the Tax Increment Law. The City may be able to pick up some of the increased assessed valuations attributable to certain projects which are even now in the building if all of this can be adopted prior to this Fall. On the basis of his review and discussions , Pauly suggested that the only viable alternative at this point is the adoption of the Housing & Redevelopment Act. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath , to close the Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No. 80-112, establishing a Housing & Redevelopment Authority for the City of Eden Prairie, and instructing staff to pursue the alternative of a Development District approach with a report to the Council prior to the 2nd Hearing. Motion carried unanimously. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 1703 - 1859' MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Estrom, to approve Payment of Claims Nos. 1703 - 1859. Roll Call Vote: Edstrom and Redpath voted "aye" on Claims Nos. 1703 - 1859; Osterholt "abstained" on Claim No. 1820 and voted "aye" on all other Claims Nos. ; and Pauly "abstained" on Claim No. 1794 and voted "aye" on all other Claims Nos. Motion carried. VI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS A. Report from the Hunting/Shooting Zone Committee City Manager Ulstad explained Captain Keith Wall was the staff representative to the Hunting/Shooting Zone Committee and at this point the committee is submitting a report to the Council as requested. At some point in time the Council may want to, based on this report, change some of the hunting boundaries and also incorporate some of the restrictions that are recommended relative to the Mitchell Lake area. Osterholt requested that maps be provided to the Council delineating the specific areas for hunting as the map the Council received was too broad. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Osterholt, to instruct the Staff and City Attorney to draft an ordinance to be submitted to the Council for review at the July 1 , 1980 Council meeting incorporating the recomr*enations of the Hunting/Shooting Zone Committee. Motion carried unanimously. VII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS t'y A. Reports of Council Members 1. Appointment of 2 members to CAG (Citizens Advisory Group) MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Osterholt, to appoint James Osberg as a member of CAG (Citizens Advisory Group) . Motion carried unanimously. A second appointment to the Citizens Advisory Group was continued to the June 17, 1980 Council meeting. B. Report of Ci try Attorney No report. Edstrom was excused fron the meeting at this time (10:00 PM). C. Report of City Manager F 1. Discussion on Dog Impounding Fees (Ordinance No. 1341 ry ' City Manager Ulstad spoke to memo from Chief Hacking on the impounding fees charged by other communities, Eden Prairie being the lowest. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath , to instruct the City Attorney to upgrade the Fee Ordinance (Ordinance No. 280) , and draft an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 134 (Dog impounding fees) to include the following fees: $25.00 for the first impoundment, $50.00 for the second impoundment, and $100.00 for the third impoundment. Motion carried unanimously. IL D. Report of City Engineer 1. Approve RLS and right-of-way trade-off for Schooner Boulevard extension north of W. 78th Street City Engineer Jullie spoke to his memo dated May 29, 1980, and answered questions of Council members. MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Redpath, to receive and file the memo from City Engineer Jullie dated May 29, 1980, and that this item be brought back to the Council for approval of the final purchase price. Motion carried unanimously. 2. Extend bid opening date for Valley View Road/Dell Road, Phase 2, I .C. 5 -325 This item was moved to the Consent Calendar (III. L. ). E. Report of Finance Director 1. 1979 Audit Report Because of the absence of two Council members, Osterholt requested that this item be continued to July 15, 1980. Pauly and Redpath concurred with Osterholt' request. III. NEW BUSINESS No "New Business" . IX. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Osterholt, to adjourn the Council meeting at 10: 11 PM. Motion carried unanimously.