Loading...
City Council - 05/04/1982 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, MAY 4, 1982 7: 30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel , George Bentley, Dean Edstrom, Paul Redpath and George Tangen COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Planning Director Chris Enger, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Community Services Bob Lambert, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael INVOCATION: Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Councilman Tangen arrived at 8: 50 p.m. I . APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Edstrom, to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried unanimously. (� II . MINUTES A. Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, April 20, 1982 Page 3, para. 5, line 1: change "feels" to "felt" Page 4, para. 7, line 1: change "srow" to "snow" Page 6, para. 5, Tine 1: change "one of two or three Creekwood homeowners whose property would be affected" to "Creekwood homeowner whose property is adjacent to this development" Page 8, para. -7, last line: change "watching the types of businesses requesting licenses in the future" to "monitoring future requests for liquor licenses. " Page 11, third para. under D. , line 2: change "Grill" to "Girls" Page 11, fourth para. under D. , line 2: change "averse" to "adverse" MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, April 20, 1982, as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously. B. Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, April 27, 1982 MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, April 27, 1982., as published. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes -2- May 4, 1982 III . CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk' s License List B. Resolutions appropriating Municipal State Aid Funds for Improvements on TH 169 and Anderson Lakes Parkway, I .C. 51-341 A & B Anderson Lakes Parkway - Resolution Nos. 82-87 & 82-88 C. Contract Amendment #2, Lake Eden Park Project, I . C. 51-341, K01 D. Approve plans and specifications and set bid opening for May 27, 1982, at 10:00 a.m. for Martin Drive Drainage Improvements , I .C. 52-007 Resolution No. 82-89 w E. Approve plans and specifications for Schooner Boulevard SW quadrant of MCA 3 Road Im ruvements and set bid opening for June 11, 1982 at 10:00 a.m. , I .C. 51-398 Resolution No. 82-96 m F. Approve plans and specifications for Schooner Boulevard NE quadrant I-494 by- pass construction for MCA Road im rovements and set bid opening for June 11 , 1982, at 1:00 p.m. , I.C. 51-308A Resolution No. 82-97 G. Resolution supporting nomination of Cummins-Grill House to National Register Resolution No. 82-85 H. Approval of Restoration Committee I. Final plat approval for Timber Lakes Townhouses 3rd Addition (Resolution No. 82-98 J. Request from I .T.T. Schadow for MIDB's in the amount of $2,000,000.00 Resolution No. 82-79, amending final Resolution No. 82-55 passed on March 16, 1982) MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve items A - J on the Consent Calendar.. Motion carried with Edstrom abstaining on item I. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Public Hearing to consider feasibility of storm sewer and street improvements or Ontario Boulevard and adjacent properties, I .C. 51- 98B Reso ution No. 82-93) City Manager Jullie explained the feasibility report covering this project was received at the April 6th meeting. The City has since learned that 18 of the . 22 lots shown to be assessed for the proposed street improvements have become tax forfeit. In view of this , Jullie recommended the Council close the public hearing and consider denial of the proposed street improvements and the pro- posed drainage improvements be referred back to Staff for potential redesign utilizing a drainage channel in lieu of piping. The drainage project could be reopened at such time when development of the Gonyea property is imminent. Jullie also recommended the City indicate to Hennepin County that the City desires ownership of the tax forfeit lots so the open channel drainage for the t area can be provided. Y City Council Minutes -3- May 4, 1982 MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to close the Public Hearing and to deny the proposed improvements as recommended by Staff and to accept the additional recommendations from Staff regarding the tax forfeit lots. Motion carried unanimously. B. DEER CREEK PUD & 1st ADDITION REZONING by Ruscon Homes Inc. Request for Planned Unit Development a'pproval of residential on 26 acres, rezoning of 19 of the 26 acres from Rural to R1-13.5 for first phase development, con- struction of 68 single family detached homes , and preliminary plat approval upon the entire 26 acres. Included in the Public Hearing will be the con- sideration of the granting of variances pursuant to Sec. 11, Ord. 135 from the provisions of said ordinance applicable to the R1-13.5 District for: lot size, density, lot width, lot depth, and sideyard setbacks . Located south of Morgan Lane and Sorrel Way, and east of Mitchell Road (Resolution No. 82-81 - PUD, Ordinance No. 82-08 - rezoning, and Resolution No. 82-82 - preliminary plat) Bill Dolan, vice president of Koehlein Lightowier & Johnson, Inc. , Architects, and Marshall Oakes, Ruscon Homes, spoke to the proposal . Planning Director Enger stated the Planning Commission had reviewed this proposal at its March 22 and April 12, 1982 meetings. The Commission recommended approval subject to the recommendations included in the Staff Report of April 8, 1982, and additional recommendations as included in the Plannning Commission minutes of April 12, 1982. Director of Community Services Lambert said the Parks, Recreation & Natural .. Resources Commission had reviewed the proposal at its April 19th meeting and had recommended approval subject to the recommendations contained in the Staff Report as well as the recommendations of the Planning Commission. Redpath asked about the amount of finished floor area. Enger said there would be no more than 1100 square feet of finished floor area, but there would be roughly 500 - 800 square feet of space available for expansion. These would be split foyer homes with the expandable space in the lower level . Edstrom asked for clarification on the alignment of the eastern most road. Enger stated the final plat does show it connecting to the street to the south. Edstrom asked if the ponds would remain in the hands of the abutting property owners. Enger said they would. Bentley asked about the storm water drainage. Dolan said the plan had been reviewed by the Watershed District and the ponds do connect and provide for overflow. Penzel inquired about the proximity of the Anderson Lakes Parkway connection. Dietz said the connection does not come to the eastern boundary of the property -- it is about 700' from the proposed development. City Council Minutes -4- May 4, 1982 Ken Geason, 7621 Atherton Way, said it is the City's obligation to see to { it that the houses built on these lots conform to City codes . Penzel said all City homes must conform to the Uniform Building Code and to Taws dealing with the health and safety of residents, Redpath recalled the housing mar- ket of the early 1950's where expansion homes were the only affordable housing. Ron Roche, 14175 Valley View Road, said he is presently a renter in Eden Prairie who is interested in buying a home in Eden Prairie; he would like to be able to go home for lunch. MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 82-81, approving the Deer Creek Planned Unit Development. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Redpath, to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 82-08, rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Redpath, to instruct Staff to draft the Developer' s Agreement incorporating recommendations in the Staff Report dated April 8, 1982, Planning Commission, and Parks , Recreation & Natural Resources Commission. Also to be included is a floor area ratio maximum and a street connection stub to the south. Motion carried unanimously. � MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 82-82, approving the preliminary plat of Deer Creek. Motion carried unanimously. Dolan requested that the developer be allowed to do preliminary grading of 25% of the lots prior to 2nd Reading. Penzel noted the developer could be back with a signed Developer' s Agreement in two weeks. Jullie said from the viewpoint of Staff two weeks is often less time than is necessary for every- thing to be completed. City Attorney Pauly stated the restrictions regarding floor area ratio will take some time to complete; two weeks would probably not be adequate time even if everything were pushed. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to approve the relocation of plantings and. preliminary grading of the site. Motion carried with Bentley voting "no." C. LORENCE ADDITION by K P Properties, Inc. Request for Planned Unit Development. approval of residential on 32 acres, rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 for 47 single family homes on 16 acres and from Rural to RM 6.5 for 56 attached units on 8 acres, preliminary plat approval over the entire 32 acres, variances for: lot size, lot width, setbacks, and density and approval of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Located north of Round Lake Estates 2nd Addition (Resolution No. 82-83 - PUD, Ordinance No. 82-09 - rezoning, Resolution No. 82-84 - preliminary plat, and Resolution No. 82-86 - EAW. ) Don Peterson of K P Properties, Inc. , addressed the proposal . He introduced Gary Nelson and David Williams who will be builders in the area. Councilman Tangen arrived at 8:50 p.m. during Peterson's presentation. City Council Minutes -5- May 4, 1982 Planning Director Enger said this item was considered at the April 12, 1982 meeting of the Planning Commission. The Commission recommended approval subject to the conditions outlined in the April 8, 1982 Staff Report. Director of Community Services Lambert noted the Parks, Recreation $ Natural Resources Commission had reviewed the proposal at its April 19, 1982 meeting at which time it voted to approve subject to recommendations contained in the April 8, 1982 Staff Report and recommendations of the Planning Commission. Edstrom asked if the Staff foresees any problems in maintaining the walkway spine separating the manor homes from the single family residential . Lambert said he would prefer not to accept it, but he can foresee problems if it is left in the hands of the homeowner's association. Penzel asked about the roof heights of the manor homes in relation to the railroad right-of-way. Peterson said the roofs would be below the right-of- way. The location is similar to that of the manor homes located on Normandale Road and Old Shakopee Road in Bloomington. Penzel asked where a tot lot might be located. Lambert said it was his feeling that the parents will be going with their children to the tot lot which will be located in the western section of Round Lake Park -- to be built by Peterson. E There is no room in the development for a tot lot and since there is a need for one in the western portion of the Park it was felt it would be best to have one built there which will then be used by residents in the Lorence Addition as well as others. Penzel was concerned about children crossing streets to get to the tot lot. Edstrom asked what age children would be using this tot lot. Lambert said those ages 2 - 5 years. Edstrom asked about the lots on the west side of Hames Way. Peterson said they would be willing to make 4 lots into 3 as this is where they will be building model homes which will be more expensive. Edstrom's concern was that homes along the east side of this street will be larger homes and in the past this has created problems in other areas of the City. Cheryl Peterson, 7460 Hames Way, stated the reason they chose this area in which to live'was because of the types of homes which had been built and the Guide Plan showed that the area under consideration would have homes of a similar size. Eugene Peterson, 7460 Hames Way, said it would seem that this highly desirable property near a lake would be reserved for lower density and more desirable type housing. Ken Meuwissen, 17260 Park Circle, asked the rationale for changing the Guide Plan. Penzel said there is no low cost housing in Eden Prairie and there is very little moderate cost housing in Eden Prairie according to information received from the Metropolitan Council from their statistical data. The City has been flexible in responding to the needs of the community and it has been City policy to provide a variation of housing for its residents. Penzel went on to say the Guide Plan is merely a guide and should be flexible in that it reflects the needs of the community. City Council Minutes -6- May 4, 1982 Bob Busch, 16002 Valley View Road, said he had recently purchased a lot near the proposed development. He has lived in Eden Prairie for 16 years and had hoped to build. He had questions about the size of the homes to be built. Builder Gary Nelson noted the Planning Commission had wished to have minimum sized homes in the center of this development -- the homes will have about 800 square feet per floor (footprint. ) i Gail Tvson, 15980 Hillcrest Court, felt the taxpayers of Eden Prairie have put a lot of money into Round Lake Park which is beautiful and something to be proud of. She thinks this development will ruin the area. Jim Brix, 16520 Luther Way, did not feel this development is appropriate for the area and said he does not like it at all . Barb Johnson, 7660 Atherton Way, said their street leads into the proposed development and was not built to handle the traffic which will be generated by the new residents. She asked if the City has any minimum square footage requirements. Penzel stated no. Johnson asked if garages are required. Penzel said City Ordinance does require one enclosed space for each dwelling unit. Penzel said the City's policy has been to provide for variety and different opportunities for residents. Steven Webster, 14399 Chestnut Drive, felt he represented the younger, lower income City resident and expressed a desire to see affordable housing built in Eden Prairie as he would like to go from renter to homeowner. Jack Wiley, 17266 Round Lake Road, asked what the market value of his home will be after these homes are built. Penzel said the market determines that, not the City. Redpath stated that it has been the case in other areas of the City that whenever residents have expressed this concern prior to a development of this type after the development has gone in the value of the adjacent homes has increased -- people want to be in the more expensive homes. Beverly Schiro, 7510 Atherton Way, said she has had three reactors in her home and they have all told her that the value of her home will drop if this passes. Al Hendrickson, owner of properties at 15271 Trillium, 8912 Neill Lake Road, among others, said Williams has built 5 homes for him in Eden Prairie. -Fie owns homes in other areas also. 0f ali the builders he has had, Williams is by far the best. He said The Preserve is his favorite place and that has a mixture of housing types in close proximity. It is a highly desirable place to live. Busch asked if there was an Environmental Assessment Woeksheet completed for this project. Enger said there had been and it was before the Council tonight. Don Sethre, 16150 North Hillcrest Court, asked if any consideration had been given to the traffic problems which will occur on Valley View Road as a result of this development. He -added people with lots of children will be attracted to this low cost housing which will mean more police calls to that particular area. He said we cannot afford to pay for our teachers now and if this low cost housing comes in we won' t be able to pay our teachers next year. City Council Minutes -7- May 4, 1982 k Mike Boen, 7760 Heritage Road, expressed concern about the traffic problems in the area. Penzel noted Valley View Road exists today and did not a year or two ago when there were some problems. Enger said between 800 and 900 trips per day would be generated out of the area. Most of these would use Valley View Road as the routes to the south are circuitous. Valley View is a community collector road and is designed for 8,000 - 9,000 trips per day. By placing medium density housing closer to Valley View, the development is better served by a collector road. Elizabeth Brown, 18195 South Shore Lane, was concerned about the high incidence of crime which :night occur with higher density housing. Mike Zastera, 18042 South Shore Lane, asked about Phase III of the project. Peterson said he has an option on the entire piece of property but so far no plans have been formally developed for that phase. Ken Geason, 7621 Atherton Way, noted this proposal has a condo-type ehviron- ment. He felt the Council must consider the effect of that on the entire neighborhood. He said the City is lax in making sure that tot lots exist for children within a neighborhood. He is certain apartments will be built in Phase III. if the rest of this development is allowed. Meuwissen suggested this will become a race area for cars. He said the traffic problem must be addressed. Eugene Peterson asked what can be done to prevent investors from coming in and buying these low cost units and turning them into rental property. Mel Cook, 6920 Park View Lane, asked if there is any government subsidy for these units. Peterson said FHA approval has been applied for but that is the extent of government involvement. David Williams, 10701 Ziegler Drive, Brooklyn Park, builder, said he had recently completed two 40 unit projects in Eden Prairie which were sold out before they were completed. He expects this project will be equally desirable. Jeff Williams , 7301 River Shore Lane, Champlin, stated he works for David Williams Construction and said they will be building a Parade Home in Round Lake Estates. If they felt the proposed development was going to be detrimental to the area, they would not be building a Parade Home nearby. B. Matke, 17196 Round Lake Road, said no one present would dispute the fact that these are desirable lots. He said he moved here because it is a show case area. He felt the Park will become run down due to over use. The people in the area directly affected have a say in what is going to happen in their area. Timothy Flynn, 14377 Chestnut Drive, stated he now lives in a William's townhome and can attest to the quality of the construction. He bought the townhome because it was something he could afford and he wished to live in Eden Prairie. He does not feel that a $70,000 home qualifies for low cost housing. City Council Minutes -8- May 4, 1982 Eugene Peterson said he has a petition with over 200 signatures. He also said 98ro of the people approached were willing to sign the petition. He k said additional signatures will be obtained. He added that with all the additional traffic on Valley View Road it will soon have to be 4-lanes. Penzel said it was designed as a 4-lane road. F q Bentley said he does not agree with the arguments tonight that this develop- ment will impact Round Lake Park. Round Lake Park was designed as a community park and was built to handle many people. He felt there is a strong need for lower cost housing -- he does not feel the housing under discussion can be categorized as low cost housing. The City needs affordable housing. He said he has been involved in a number of studies which have shown that housing in Eden Prairie is prohibitive. This has not been the City's policy. He noted The Preserve' s lot sizes are not much different than those in the proposed J development. Redpath concurred with Bentley's statement. He said he had asked about the addresses on the petition since they were from all over the City. He was told that people were asked to sign as being opposed to low cost housing. Eugene Peterson said she diversity of the location of the petition signers indicates the concern of residents on the use of the Park. Penzel stated the point of tonight' s discussion is to decide whether or not the proposal is in keeping with the rules adopted by the City. C Edstrom said the irony is that a petition such as this can be generated by any neighborhood in the City. He felt this is an imaginative approach to the use of the land in this area. Redpath noted there was opposition by the neighbors when Round Lake 1, Round Lake 2 and Atherton were proposed. No one wants neighbors. Edstrom asked if it is possible to include a tot lot west of Hanes Way. Lambert said there is no half acre spot available. Tangen said this is a difficult decision because it is of a moderately higher density. Because of the church, school , park, railroad tracks this is a difficult piece of property to develop. It is his feeling that putting a moderately higher density on this property has merit because of its proximity to public services. He said he does have some difficulty with going to smaller lot sizes and smaller homes but he fully realizes that we must provide for all people. He feels the tot lot does not belong inside the development. Penzel said there is a very great need for moderate cost housing in the City. He has a problem with the intensity of the eightplexes along Valley View Road. Unless the scale is reduced he cannot support the proposal as it is too massive. Peterson said any change from what has been proposed this evening would add to the cost as that would have to be spread over the entire project. City Council Minutes -9- May 4, 1982 Peterson said the base price of a two bedroom manor home would be $54,900, a two bedroom with dinette with about 1220 square feet would be $60,900, and a three bedroom unit would be $62,900 for 1550 square feet of space. David Williams said they are figuring very closely with these prices. i MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Edstrom, to close the Public Hearing t and to adopt Resolution No. 82-83, approving the Lorence Addition Planned _ Unit Development and amending the Guide Plan. Motion carried with Penzel voting "no." MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Edstrom, to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 82-09, rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and Rural to RM 6.5.. Motion carried with Penzel voting "no." MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to direct Staff to draft the Developer' s Agreement taking into consideration the recommendations of the April 8, 1982 Staff Report, recommendations of the Planning Commission and the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission, and Council recommenda- tions including: changing the eightplex on the corner of Hames Way and Valley View Road to a fourplex (an exchange) , platting three lots rather than four on the west side of Hames Way, and consideration regarding the floor area ratio as was discussed previously in the Deer Creek development. Also th- tot lot is to be built by the developer at Round Lake Park. Motion Carrie r unanimously. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No. 82-84, approving the preliminary plat of Lorence Addition. Motion carried with Penzel voting "no." MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 82-86, finding the environmental assessment worksheet for Lorence Addition a private action which does not require an environmental impact statement. Motion carried undnimously. D. Public Hearing to consider feasibility of Golden Ridge Drive Improvements, I . C. 52-008 Resolution No. 82-92 Councilman Redpath announced he would abstain from discussion on this ttem because of interest in property in the area. Director of Public Works Dietz indicated no one has spoken for this project and there does not appear to be a need for the public improvements at this time in light of the cost. } MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Tangen, to close the Public Hearing 1 and to deny Resolution No. 82-91, ordering preparation of plans and specifi- cations for Golden Ridge Drive improvements. Motion carried with Redpath abstaining. I City Council Minutes -10- May 4, 1982 E. Public Hearing to consider feasibility of Kilmer Avenue and Atherton Way Utility Improvements, I .C. 52-013 Resolution No. 82-92 Director of Public Works Dietz spoke to the project and noted there is a need for this improvement. g Residents from the area in the audience were in favor of the project. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 82-92, ordering preparation of plans and speci- fications for Kilmer Avenue and Atherton Way utility improvements- I .C. 52-013. Motion carried unanimously. F. Consider revoking variance granted by the Board of Apnals & Adjustments for a property division on Sunn brook Road Eckert Resolution No. 82-94 Penzel called the Council 's attention to a letter recieved today from Joyce C. De Lecour regarding this item (letter attached to Minutes.) City Manager Jullie reviewed this item.. Dennis Moriarity, attorney for the estate, said the sale of the property is contingent on this plan being approved. He noted the topography of the land precludes higher density housing on the property, if that is what is creating a a problem in passing the division. It was his opinion that the highest and best use of this land is for single family dwellings. He asked the Council to not reconsider the action of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. ' Penzel stated the Zoning Ordinance is clear in that residential lots in Rural zoned areas cannot be on less than 5 acres of land. Moriarity asked Staff to give the Council the reasons the Board of Appeals and Adjustments saw fit to grant the variance. Jullie said he did not know all of the reasons for the granting of the variance, but after it had been granted it was sent back to Staff. Staff noted the discrepancy and sent it on to the Council for their review. Moriarity said he still could not understand why the variance was granted. Penzel stated that Ordinance No. 162 restricts 3 subdivision splits to two lots. Three lots were asked for in the split. Moriarity said he understands the Council has the authority to review, but he wondered what the rationale was behind the Board of Appeals decision. Penzel asked for the Minutes of the Board of Appeals meeting. Jullie said they had not been approved and therefore had not come to the Council , but he would get them. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath,to recess this Public Hearing until after item "G" so the Minutes of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments could be found and read. Motion carried unanimously. Y City Council Minutes -11- May 4, 1982 { u. Public Hearing to consider the feasibility of connecting existing Valley View Road to proposed Valley View Road at Topview Acres, I.C. 51-340A Penzel noted letters had been received from William M. Verkuilen, Chuck Porta, and Peter and Marilyn Rasmussen relative to this proposal . (These letters are attached to the Minutes. ) Director of Public Works Dietz showed four alternative connections between old and new Valley View Roads and reviewed the costs of each as well as the advantages and disadvantages. Alternative 3 appears to be the most workable at a cost of $71,900; this is the recommendation of the consultant and Staff. Mary Ellen Anderson, 12966 Valley View Road, said she had not received the petition which had been sent around the neighborhood and from which this proposal has resulted. Gene Jacobson, 7274 Topview Road, said he and two other residents had initiated the survey which outlined reasons for a connection. On this survey form resi- dents were asked to check "in favor" or "opposed. " They attempted to contact all Topview residents, but they realize some were missed. This survey was then presented to the Council . The rationale behind the survey was accessibility for emergency service, added driving required by residents and emergency vehi- cies , and the practicality of a second access to the area. He stated 90% of the people contacted were in favor of the connection. James McCracken, 12655 Valley View Road, said he had not seen the petition. He stated he is a minister at New Testament Church. He had several questions: why a cul-de-sac dead end in the first place, why not some study as to the effects on the Topview residents of the connection, what traffic controls will be used at Baker and the new Valley View Road, and what will the speed limits be and what traffic signs will be used? Penzel reviewed the history of the Valley View/Schooner projects and what might be done with traffic controls. Vicki Koenig, 7239 Topview Road, expressed concern that the trees on the south side of the present Valley View Road which now provide screening, will be lost. Jim Duncan, 12771 Vina Lane, said he did not realize where the connection would be when he signed the survey. He did not expect it at Valley View and Topview. He showed a sketch with another alternative. Dietz said the grades at the location shown by Duncan are such that a Connection is not feasible. Tangen asked how much of the screening will be taken and how much will be left. Dietz said much of it would be taken because there would be an 80, swath through the area. Bentley asked if a knock down barrier at old and new Valley View Roads might be an answer. City Council Minutes -12- May 4, 1982 q Redpath asked how much actual time will be saved by the connection. He said there will be much more traffic on Valley View Road as a result of the connection. Dietz said without the connection there would be a two- mile long cul-de-sac. It is his opinion traffic will be reduced some. Joyce Lienemann, 12760 Valley View Road, said there are three fire stations with the farthest one being 2.7 miles away. It is her feeling that Topview is about the best served area when it comes to emergency service. She said It will be .7 of a mile to get to the new access at Valley View and Baker.. Bob Grant, 7203 Topview, was one of the people who collected the data he did not think of it as a petition. He stated the 3 - 5 minute delay in response time for emergency vehicles could be the difference between life and death. Tangen asked if there will be an additional loss of trees in the construction of new Valley View Road. Dietz said there may be at the easterly end where the new and old portions of the road meet. "=- -- "39 Gerard, asked the reason for the connection; said it . vC.� :J VIIIIJViI / 1J will strip out what is left. Penzel said the residents of Topview had brought the need for a second access to the attention of the Council . Anderson stated she would like to see old and new Valley View Roads connected. She asked about the connection south of Stewart Highlands. Dietz stated the connection to the south of Stewart Highlands and the Sundquist Addition is only a proposal . Grant stated the removal of the trees would make this a major intersection. This would add slot of traffic onto Valley View Road and Topview. Jacobson said the Valley View Road residents and the Stewart Highlands resi- dents were not included in the survey. Not all the Topview residents received notice of tonight' s meeting , he added. John Rochford, 12770 Gerard Drive, asked when the Crosstown will be extended. City Manager Jullie said it is still on the County program for 1984. He is in favor of the proposed connection. Charles Tebelius , 7174 Topview Drive, is opposed to the connection. He said the safety of children moving in and about the Topview area should be taken into consideration. Without the connection the children would be able to bike along Valley View (present alignment) to get to the Community Center. Edstrom noted there will be trails provided which will be safe for the resi- dents to travel . Tebelius said he does not mind driving a bit farther to have less traffic in his neighborhood. Bentley asked about a letter from Chuck Po rta representing New Testament Church in support of Alternate #3. He questioned McCracken's position relative to the position taken by the Church in the letter. McCracken said the letter had been written prior to his coming in to talk with Dietz. It was his impression that it was not a question of whether or not there would be a connecting road, but rather which of the alternatives would be best. It was with that in mind that the letter was drafted. City Council Minutes -13- May 4, 1982 Tangen asked if this were not done at this time, how much more would it ( cost a year from now. Dietz said probably in the area of 30% more. Tangen asked if would be possible to do all the work on the new Valley View and not make the final connection between old and new Valley View Roads. MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Tangen, to continue the meeting to 12:30 a.m. Motion carried unanimously. Dietz said the question really comes down to that of the one access issue. He noted with a 60" watermain it would only take 30 minutes after a break in the watermain for the road to be gone. Penzel said if this were to come before the Council as a new proposal , the 11 mile long cul-de-sac would never be approved. i Tangen stated one of the reasons he is on the Council is due to the desecration of the area around Menard's . He can see the need for an additional access due to the long cul-de-sac and realizes the importance of two accesses both from the safety standpoint as well as practical standpoint. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Edstrom, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Alternative #3, connecting Valley View Road to proposed Valley View l Road at Topview Acres, I .C. 51-340A. Motion carried unanimously. T included Tangen asked Staff to look for additional screening which might be inclu e in the construction of this road which would minimize the impact on the neigh- bors . Edstrom asked Staff to report on the trails which are scheduled for the area. Penzel asked that Menard!s Developer's Agreement be looked at to see if f there is a provision in that for additional screening. Jullie said the speed limit on Valley View (old) within the Topview area could be reduced to 30 miles per hour, load limit restrictions could be added, and stop signs could be put up to reduce traffic and speed on that portion of the road. F. CONTINUED Moriarity said this is a natural division of land not a problem of aesthetics. There is no question of ability of the land to sustain two houses. Edstrom said he cannot go along with the variance procedure; he has strong feelings on lots of less than five acres being allowed in areas zoned Rural . Edstrom noted this is not a question of rezoning but one of procedure. Tangen expressed concern that the variance request contained other factors than land division. An additional factor is that Purgatory Creek runs through the property. He felt there are other channels to go through. Bentley asked how this had gotten to the Board of Appeals. City Manager Jullie explained the procedure. Tangen expressed difficulty with the process used. He said there are circumstances where divisions such as this should be allowed. Penzel asked how much of the land could be developed. Planning Director Enger said the flood plain does come quite far up onto the property, about half the property would be developable. City Council Minutes -14- May 4, 1982 Moriarity spoke to the merits of the proposal before the Council . Discussion as to how to proceed ensued. City Attorney Pauly explained the Board of Appeals and Adjustments had been asked if there would be a variance and they had answered there would be on the assumption the divisions were made. Tangen asked if it would be proper to have the administrative land divisions f reviewed by the Planning Commission and the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission before coming to the Council . Pauly said that can be requested. City Engineer Dietz explained why Staff had reviewed the decision of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. Tangen said perhaps easements could be granted to the City for the area along Purgatory Creek. Moriarity said he was confident the owners are interested in preserving the integrity of the Creek and would agree to whatever the City might wish in regard to the Creek. Bentley asked if the land is not an administrative land division is it a replat? Pauly said not necessarily and further explained what might occur. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and to take no action on the Board of Appeals and Adjustments action and to request that prior to finalization of the land division appropriate easements to the area along Purgatory Creek will be granted to the City. Motion carried with Edstrom voting "no." Bentley stated his "yes" vote was due to unusual circumstances in this parti- cular case. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to continue the meeting until the Agenda is finished. Motion carried unanimously. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 1493 - 1707 MOTION: Edstrom moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve the Payment of Claims Nos. 1493 - 1707. Roll call voter Bentley, Edstrom, Repath, Tangen, and Penzel all voted "aye. " . Motion carried unanimously. VI . REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS There were no reports. VII . PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A: Plan approval of Valley View Road County Road 39) from Washington Avenue to 1/2 mile west, I .C. 51-335 (Resolution No. 82-9O) Penzel called attention to the letter of May 3, 1982 from William J. Bearman regarding the proposed improvement (letter attached. ) Bearman, 9955 Valley View Road, said the project is of no benefit to his property and would only have an adverse effect. Bearman wished to go on record as opposing the plan. City Council Minutes -15- May 4, 1982 City Manager Jullie stated the City would be aware of Bearman's concerns when preparing the assessment rolls. Bearman noted the County states there is not right-of-way acquisition necessary and he disagrees with this. The severe cuts necessary for construction easements will alter the way the Bearman property looks as well as the adjacent properties. He is objecting to the assessment as well as what the plan will do to his property. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Edstrom, to adopt Resolution No. 82-90, approving plans for Valley View Road (CSAH #39) from CSAH #18 to approximately 1/2 mile west. Motion carried unanimously. B. Red Rock Lake 3rd by James L. Simons. Request to preliminary plat the property zoned R1-22 into 4 lots. Located north of the northerly terminous of Summit Drive and adjacent to Red. Rock Lake, 15607, 17603, 15601, and 8701 Summit Drive (Resolution No. 82-80) "s MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No. 82-80, approving the preliminary plat of Red Rock Lake Third Addition. Motion carried unanimously. C. Request from Mr. Lyman Olson regarding retaining wall and grading adjacent to his property at 7360 Scot Terrace City Manager Jullie referred to his memorandum of April 29, 1982, in which he addressed the situation. City Attorney Pauly asked if the City wishes to get involved in a private dispute. Both parties have been in violation of the building code. It has been said the City could go in and build a retaining wall and then assess t the private properties. In order to do that there must be a City Ordinance authorizing the City to do so; the City does not have one at this time. Pauly said the City could ask the Court to advance the matter for early disposition. Lyman Olson, 7360 Scot Terrace, showed pictures of the area under discussion. He also showed a drawing of what is proposed to be done. Discussion centered on what the City might do to assist in the disposition of this matter without jeopardizing the City. Olson asked the City to pass an Ordinance so the City could build the retaining wall and then assess the property owner. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Edstrom, to instruct the City Attorney to cite Ahmed Sonbol with a misdemeanor and to direct the City Attorney to assist with the quick disposition of this case in any manner deemed right and proper. Motion carried unanimously. Bentley requested the City Attorney to look into the merits of drafting an Ordinance to protect residents in situations like this. I City Council Minutes -16- May 4, 1982 f tl VIII . REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members 1. Penzel — reminded Council members of the dinner to be held Friday evening to honor State Small Business Person of the Year Bob Carling. 9 B. Report of City Manager 1. Proposal from City of Richfield for Joint Radio Communications Services MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to instruct Staff to pursue a Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Richfield for joint radio . communications service and to instruct Bell Telephone to provide the proper equipment so the telephone system will not have to be changed g when the 911 service is accomplished. Motion carried unanimously. C. Report of City Attorney There was no report. D. Report of City Engineer 1. Consider alternate street names for Schooner Boulevard (Ordinance No. 82-10) Director of Public Works Dietz spoke to the reasons for the changes and how the proposed names had come about. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to change the name of Schooner Boulevard south of Valley View Road to Prairie Center Drive. Motion carried with Penzel voting "no. " MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Edstrom, to name the street connecting old and new Valley View Roads Topview Road. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Edstrom, to change to name of Valley View Road from Baker Road to Mitchell Road to St. Andrews Drive. Motion carried unanimously. It was the consensus of the Council to send a letter to residents along present Valley View Road between Baker and Topview Roads to ask their opinion for a new name for this stretch of roadway. Wm. Wells Lane has been suggested by the Engineering Department -- a major landholder in the area according to an 1873 Atlas was William Wells. MOTION: Redpath raved, seconded by Edstrom, to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 82-10, approving the street names as shown above, to become effective September 1, 1982. Motion carried with Penzel voting •'no. " 5 t City Council Minutes -17- May 4, 1982 2. Approve plans and specifications for Valley View Road Schooner Boulevard NW Quadrant of MCA land im rovements and set bid iipening for June 11 1982, at 9:00 a.m. , . C. -340 Resolution No. 82-95 MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to adopt Resolution No. 82-95, approving plans and specifications and ordering advertisement for bids for Valley View Road/Schooner Boulevard. Motion carried unanimously. IX. NEW BUSINESS There was none. X. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to adjourn the meeting at 1:25 a.m. Motion carried unanimously.