City Council - 12/17/1985 �w
APPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
A.
TUESDAY, DFJMMER 17, 1985 7:30 PM, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BOARDROOM
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richazd Anderson,
George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock, and Paul
Redpath
CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to
the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attor-
ney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D.
Frane, Planning Director Chris Enger,
Director of Community Services Robert
Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A.
Dietz, and Recording Secretary Karen
Michael
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: All members were present.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The following changes were made to the Agendga: item III. F. became VII.
G. Final Plat approval for Allstate lst Addition (north of Norwest Bank)
and item III. 0. was added: Authorizing the appointment of Fox; McCue &
Murphy to coMlete the 1985 Audit.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Agenda and
Other Items of Business as amended and published. Motion carried
unanimously.
II. MINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, AUGUST 20, 1985
Page 4, line 1: change "anything" to "any information"
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Minutes of
the City Council Meeting held Tuesday, August 20, 1985, as amended and
published. Motion carried unanimously.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk's License List
B. Change Order No. 1, Contract for City Hall Architectural Services
i
C. Tax Forfeited Lands (Resolution No. 85-274)
C
City Council Minutes -2- December 17, 1985
s�
D. Final Plat Approval for Technology Park 4th Addition (Pearson Gravel
J
Pit Area) Resolution No. 85-278)
E. ALLSTATE DISTRICT CLAI14S OFFICE by Opus Corporation. 2nd Reading of
Ordinance No. 39-85, Zoning District change from Rural to Office;
approval of Developer's Agreement for Allstate District Claims Office;
and adoption of Resolution No. 85-283, approving SunTwry of Ordinance
No. 39-85 and ordering Publication of Said Summary. 2.62 acres for
the construction of an insurance claims office. Location: Highway
No. 5 and Prairie Center Drive. (Ordinance No. 39-85 - rezoning from
Rural to Office and Resolution No. 85-283 - approving Summary and
Publication.
F. Final Plat Approval for Allstate 1st Addition (north of Norwest Bank)
Resolution No. 85-279 - moved to item VII. G.
G. Development Commission Meeting Schedule
H. EDEN PRAIRIE CONVENIENCE CENTER by K. Charles Development Corporation.
2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 35-85, zoning District Change from Office
to Regional Service; approval of Developer's Agreement for Eden
Prairie Convenience Center; and adoption of Resolution No. 85-281,
approving Summary of Ordinance No. 35-85, and ordering publication of
Said Summary. 2.30 acres for restaurant-tenant retail space.
f Location: northwest corner of U.S. Highway 169 and Eden Road.
\, (Ordinance No. 35-85 - rezoning from Office to Commercial Regional
Service and Resoltuion No. 85-281 - approving Summary and Publication)
I. HOYT TECH 5, 6, & 7 by Technology Park Associates. 2nd Reading of
Ordinance No. 36-85-PUD-6-85, zoning district change from Rural to
PUD-6-85-Office for 3.21 acres from Rural to PUD-6-85-I-2-Park for
9.77 acres; approval of PUD Developer's Agreement for Hoyt Tech 5, 6,
& 7; and adoption of Resolution No. 85-282, approving Summary of
Ordinance No. 36-85-PUD-6-85, and ordering publication of Said
Summary. Location: east of Golden Triangle Road and south of West
76th Street. (Ordinance No. 36-85-PUD-6-85 rezoning frost Rural to
PUD-6-85-Office and to PUD-6-85-I-2-Park and Resolution No. 85-282 -
approving Summary and Publication)
J. FINAL APPROVAL OF MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BONS FOR RIALTO
(HAGEN SYSTEMS) IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,900,000 (Resolution No. 85-275)
K. FINAL APPROVAL OF MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BONDS MR RON-MAR
IN THE AMOUNT OF $750,000 (Resolution No. 85-277)
L. HOUSING REVENUE BOND APPROVAL FOR PARK AT CITY WEST IN THE AMDUNT OF
16,530,000 (Resolution No. 85-276)
M. 1ST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 42-85, PARK USE ORDINANCE
City Council Minutes -3- December 17, 1985
N. ADOPTION OF FEE RESOLUTION (Resolution No. 86-01)
O. AUTHORIZING FOX, MCCUE, & MURPHY TO COMPLETE THE 1985 AUDIT
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by R%4dpath, to approve items A - E and G
- O on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. PARKWAY OFFICE1SERVICE CENTER by The Brauer Group. Rezoning from
Rural to Community Commercial on 2.75 acres. Location: northeast
corner of Anderson Lakes Parkway and U.S. Highway No. 169/212.
(Ordinance No. 43-85 rezoning from Rural to Community Commercial)
continued from December 3, 1985.
City Manager Jullie noted this item had been continued from November
19, 1985. Jullie stated at that time concern was expressed regarding
the emergency access to Highway 169; the proponent has since shown an
emergency access with knock-down barriers.
Don Brauer, proponent, spoke to the proposal and specifically to the
changes in the interior circulation and the location of the gas pumps.
Planning Director Enger indicated Staff recommended approval of the
proposal per recommendations included in the Staff Report of October
25, 1985, and with the changes made as noted by Brauer.
Bentley asked Enger if he felt a gasoline tanker truck could get into
the facility without any problem. Enger said he would defer that
question to Brauer. Brauer said there would be no problem with the
smaller tankers; he indicated what the manuevering positions would be
with a larger tanker. Brauer noted the refueling of the tanks would
be done during "off" hours.
Peterson said he fall the la:xii-.;6ping and berm ing would hide the fact
that this is a gas station. Brauer said that was true but this was
intended to be a neighborhood convenience center; there would be signs
which would indicate what was at this location.
Anderson asked how far off the highway would the landscaping be
located. Brauer stated it would be within the property line.
Anderson expressed concern about the survival of the landscaping when
it is so close to the highway. Enger said a landscape bond is
required and would be used to replace the landscaping should it not
survive.
There were no comments from the audience.
_ -- 17 7,77Tr
J
iek
City Council Minutes -4- December 17, 1985
3
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public
Hearing and to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 43-85, rezoning.
Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to direct Staff to
prepare a Developer's Agreement as recommended by the Planning
Commission and Staff. Motion carried unanimously.
B. MENARDS EXPANSION by Menards Inc. Request for zoning district
amendment within C-Reg-Ser District for construction of an accessory
building. Location: Menards Building, adjacent to Plaza Drive.
(Ordinance No. 46-85 - amending Ordinance No. 78-45)
City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing was published
and property owners within the project vicinity were notified.
Gary Colby, representing Menards, addressed the request.
Planning Director Enger stated the Planning ConYnission had reviewed
this request at its meetings on October 7, October 28, and November
25,1985, at which time the Commission voted to recommend approval
subject to the recommendations included in the Staff Reports dated
October 25 and November 22, 1985, and based on plans dated November 19
and November 25, 1985.
Bentley asked if roof-top screening might be included during the
expansion. Colby said he thought that could be done.
Anderson said he felt the landscaping plan would be an inprovement in
the area, but he would like to see the proponent tied down as to the
type of materials to be planted. Enger said that would be specified
in the Developer's Agreement.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public
Hearing and to give lst Reading to Ordinance No. 46-85, amending
Ordinance No. 78-45 which granted current zoning to the property.
Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to direct Staff to
prepare an amendment to the Developer 's Agreement as recommended by
the Planning Commission and Staff with consideration being given as to
the type of materials used in the landscaping. Motion carried
unanimously. g'
C. EDEN SQUARE by Commercial Partners, Inc. Request for Planned Unit l
Development and zoning district amendment review within C-Reg-Ser
District and preliminary plat on 9.59 acres for the construction of
commercial/retail. Location: northeast quadrant of the intersection
F::
F
�Y
City Council Minutes -5- December 17, 1985
Highway #169 and Prairie Center Drive. (Resolution No. 85-284 -
approving Planned Unit Development District Amendment; Ordinance No.
47-85 - amending Ordinance No. 78-56; and Resolution No. 85--287 -
preliminary plat)
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been
published and property owners in the project vicinity had been
notified.
Harold Skjelbostad, landscape architect, and Peter Jarvis both
representing BRW and David . Shea, architect, Shea Architects, were
present. Skjelbostad addressed the request from site plan aspect.
Shea reviewed the architecture of the development.
Planning Director Enger stated this request had been reviewed by the
Planning Commission at its meeting on November 25, 1985, at which time
the Comission expressed concern about this being a strip mall. The
Commission, however, did vote (5 - 0) to recommend approval of the
request subject to the recommendations included in the November 22,
1985, Staff Report. Enger noted the Council had been provided with
revised Flans for. Eden Square which had also been provided to the
Planning Commission at its meeting.
Pidcock asked why there is no indoor circulation provided for
( pedestrians. Shea said the type of market they are going after does
` - not warrant that. He explainer] this would be an accessory center and
would house merchants such as Hirschfields (wallpaper store) . Bentley
asked if the walkways had been built so they might be enclosed at a
later date. Shea said it would be possible to do that.
Peterson inquired about the service areas on the street/highway side
of the buildings. Skjelbostad said they would be in a central
location and the merchants would bring their trash to this central
location.
Anderson expressed concern about the type of plan materials to be used
in landscaping the area, particularly in the area along Highway
169/212. Skjelbostad said they expected to use coniferous materials
along Highway 169. Anderson said he was concerned because it seems
that conifers can only take two or three years of salt spray before
they die. Skjelbostad stated the selection of plant materials has
been based on MnDOT studies.
r
Pidcock asked about the building setbacks. Enger said that 35' is
required; the setbacks for Eden Square are 35' on the north and 53' on
the south. Enger noted the November 27, 1985, Supplementary Staff
Report to the November 22, 1985, Planning Staff Report, prepared by
the Community Services Department which addressed the pedestrian
system in this area.
City Council Minutes -6- December 17, 1985
There were no comments from the audience.
MO•rION: Anderson moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public
Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-284, approving the Eden Square
Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment to the Eden Prairie
Neighborhood Center Planned Unit Development. Motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Redpath, to give 1st Reading to
Ordinance No. 47-85, amending Ordinance No. 78-56 which granted
current zoning to the property. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adopt Resolution No.
85-287, approving the preliminary plat of Eden Square for Commercial
Partners, Inc. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to direct Staff to
prepare a Developer 's Agreement Subject to the reconmendations
included in the Staff Report dated November 22, 1985; including the
cash park fee; review by the Watershed District; review by the
Engineering Department; variances required by the Board of Appeals;
sidewalks according to the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources
Commission; review of the lighting program; review of exterior
materials by the Staff; and approval of landscaping. Motion carried
unanimously.
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 24280 - 24544
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the Payment of
Claims Nos. 24280 - 24544. Roll call vote: Anderson, Bentley, Pidcock,
Redpath, and Peterson voted "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
VI . ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
There were none.
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS, & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Review of McGlynn Bakeries Variance est No. 85-40, and the Board
of Appeals & Adjustments Action of November 14, 1985, to delete the
Continuance of the Mansard Roof (continued from 12-3-85)
City Manager Jullie noted this item was continued from the December 3,
1985, meeting of the City Council. The proponent and Staff have
worked together with the result being a satisfactory solution to the
problem.
i
Farrell Johnson and Jim Evans, architects with Buetow Associates were
present along with Burton McGlynn. Johnson reviewed the solution
which had been reached in their discussions with Staff.
1'.
City Council Minutes -7- Decenber 17, 1985
d PlanningDirector Enger addressed the items which were still
outstanding including the elimination of a truck access in the rear of
the building. Enger noted that industrial buildings do not require
the same image which commercial buildings do. He said he felt the
mansard roof solution which had been reached along with the additional
landscaping which will be required is a good compromise.
Peterson said he felt the issue which was continued just dealt with f '
the mansard roof; he asked if the modification of the landscaping and
the modification of the loading area were also issues which were to be
decided. Enger said the mansard issue does include landscaping also;
the Council could choose to deal with the loading problem, if it so
desired.
Anderson asked for clarification of the lighting. Enger said there
would be dawn lighting which is different from what is presently
there.
Bentley said he felt there were three issues before the Council: 1)
do we like the plan, 2) what should be done regarding the landscaping
and 3) what action should be taken regarding the screening of the
loading dock. He noted the Board of Appeals decisions in regard to
those issues.
C MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to reverse the decision
of the Board of Appeals & Adjustments with these modifications: to
maintain the existing plan and to screen the loading area per the
original plan.
McGlynn stated, if the driveways are screened as had been proposed,
their truck drivers have problems backing up into the street. He said
his drivers have talked to him about the problems they have getting in
and out of the loading area. Johnson said there were three driveways
there originally and there are Mill three therein the new plan
although one was moved.
AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to
screen the loading docks so not eliminate what is currently there but
to adequately screen what is there. Motion carried unanimously.
VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: Motion carried unanimously.
B. CITY WEST REPLAT by Ryan Properties, Inc. Request for preliminary
plat of 19.5 acres into three lots within the City West Business
Center. Location: north of Shady Oak Road, west of City West
Parkway. (Resolution No. 85-285 - preliminary plat)
5
'J, F
City Council Minutes -8- December 17, 1985
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Meeting was published
and notices were sent to owners of surrounding properties. Jullie
noted the purpose of the proposed replat is to provide more land area
for phases I and III of the City West PUD in order to accon nodate an
additional raw of parking along the southeast property line.
Planning Director Enger said more of the City West area is going to
office use; this has increased the need for more parking. The
Planning Commission recommended approval of the replat at its November
25, 1985, meeting.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to Resolution No. 85-285,
approving the preliminary plat of City West Replat for Ryan
Properties, Inc.
Pidcock asked for clarification as to why this was a public meeting
and not a public hearing. Jullie said the City Code does not require
a public hearing be held on a replat, but the City chose to hold a
public meeting so those affected would be aware of what is happening.
There were no comments from the audience.
VOTE ON MOTION: Motion carried unanimously. t
r C. TRACKLINE II OFFICE/WAREHOUSE by Undiestad Investments. Request for
site plan review on 3.79 acres for office/warehouse. Location:
LaVonne Industrial Park.
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Meeting was published
and notices were sent to property owners within the project vicinity.
He noted that the LaVonne Industrial Park was approved in 1982 and is
zoned I-2 Park; Council review of the site plan is necessary for the
project to proceed.
Rich Keeman, Undestad-Brueggemann Constructors, and Bill Hendemth,
RCM, were present to address the request.
Planning Director Enger said this request had been reviewed by the
Planning Commission at its meeting on December 9, 1985, at which time
the Commission voted to recommend approval subject to the
recommendations included in the December 6, 1985, Staff Report.
Bentley asked if any variances were going to be requested. Enger said
there would be none.
Anderson asked that the type of trees be specified in the landscape
plan; he expressed concern that the term "Christmas-type tree" is
used.
'i
Zs
City Council Minutes -9-- December 17, 1985
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the site plan.
Motion carried unanimously.
D. NORMMALE TENNIS CLUB by ArtP.ka, Inc. Request for site plan review
for a tennis club. Location: southeast quadrant of Baker Road and
West 62nd Street.
City Manager Jullie noted that site plan review was included as part
of the resolution when the Council considered the Board of Appeals
decision regarding the tennis club. This has been reviewed by the
Planning Commission.
Peter Beck, attorney for Nomandale Tennis Club, addressed the request.
Planning Director Enger said this request had been reviewed by the
Planning Commission at its meeting on December 9, 1985r at which time
the Commission voted to reconnend approval subject to the
recommendations included in the December 6, 1985, Staff Report. Enger
said the Commission was concerned about the removal of the knoll on
the east side of the property; this would mean that I-494 would be on
the same grace level as St. John Woods. Enger said the proponent
would have to request a grading permit from the State Highway
Department in order to do this. Enger said the power pole would have
then be 16' higher than the parking lot. The actual building would
sit down behind this landform, and the proponent has agreed to leave
this landform as it is.
Director of Public Works Dietz stated the St. John Wood's residents
wanted the driveway into the tennis club to line up with their
driveway; this is not doing to be possible. The proponent stated they
have met with the residents of St. John Woods and the residents have
agreed the situation is okay as proposed. Enger said a considerable
problem might arise due to the headlights and their effect on St. John
Woods.
Redpath asked why a ram is not under consideration rather than
remving the knoll. He asked if made sense to take down a knoll to
provide parking for 40 cars. Anderson noted this is one of the
highest hills in the City and is a significant landform. Pidcock
concurred.
Director of Community Services Lambert said this request had been
reviewed by the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission at
its meeting on December 16, 1985. The two issues of concern to the
Commission were the retaining wall and the knoll. The Commission
voted to approve the request with the provision that as mach as
possible of the hill in the northeast corner of the property be
retained and with the approval of the retaining wall.
y�
{
City Co nci 1 Minutes -10- December 17, 1985
Anderson suggested that once the natural sound barrier in the form of
the knoll is gone, the residents would probably come back to the
Council to request that sound barriers be built.
Anderson asked why the proponent did not look to the south for
additional parking. Enger, using a graphic, explained why this was
not feasible. Bentley said he would like to have Staff and the
proponent work on this further rather than have the Council attempt to
determine what might work best.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to refer this issue back
to Staff and the developer for further consideration of the parking
issue as well as retention of the knoll. Motion carried unanimously.
Enger noted the floor area ratio for the proposed club amounts to 43%
of the area; this has pointed out a "glitch" in the Ordinance and is
being reviewed by Staff.
_ E. ARTEKA NURSERY by Arteka, Inc. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 45-85,
rezoning from Rural to Community Comiercial, approval of Developer's
Agreement, and adoption of Resolution No. 85-286, approving Summary of
Ordinance No. 45-85 and ordering publication of Said Summary.
Location: southeast quadrant of West 66th Street and Baker Road.
(Ordinance No. 45-85 - rezoning from Rural to Community Commercial and
Resolution No. 85-286 - approving Summary and Publication)
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue action on
this item to the time the request for site plan review for the tennis
club (item D.) is reconsidered by the City Council.
Peter Stalland, attorney for Arteka, stated he thought this was to be
a housekeeping matter. He said the closing on the property is
conditioned on 2nd Reading or zoning for the property. Stalland said
he would appreciate it if the City Council would approve this tonight
so 2nd Reading and the Developer's Agreement would allow the closing.
Bentley asked Enger if 2nd Reading would limit the Staffs ability to
deal with the proponent. Enger said the 2nd Reading does give the
City some leverage. Stalland said it was their understanding that if
this did not go through it would revert back to Rural zoning and the
City then would have complete control of whatever might be proposer].
Enger noted the majority of the site is already zoned. Peterson asked
if waiting until the first meeting in January to act on this would
create a real hardship to the proponent. Stalland said he was
surprised by the Council's discussion to postpone action. Enger noted
the Normandale Tennis Club was coming before the City through a
voluntary process rather than one which was mandated by Code.
Peterson said the issue now before the City Council has a great deal
of impact. Bentley said that while concern has been expressed, there
is no intent to kill the project. He said the Council is asking if
s
4
w±
A
4 r7�5'
Y^
City Council Minutes -11- December 17, 1985
l there might be a more imaginative way to deal with the parking issue.
Beck said they certainly will continue to work with the City. The
architect for the project said that until this evening they had not
realized the importance of the hill.
MOTION WITHDRAWN by Bentley with Anderson's consent.
MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley, to give 2nd Reading to
Ordinance No. 45-85. Motion was defeated with Redpath and Anderson
voting "no".
Enger said he felt there was a viable solution to the parking
situation without having to remove much of the knoll.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to reconsider the
previous motion. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley, to give 2nd Reading to
Ordinance No. 45-85.
Redpath asked. Enger what might be done. Enger explained how some
parking might be eliminated so the knoll could remain and a one-way
parking system might be installed which would create more spaces.
Anderson noted there is some City land adjacent to the property which
might be taken into consideration to save the knoll.
VOTE ON `M MOTION: Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No.
85-285, approving the Summary of Ordinance No. 45-85 and Ordering the
Publication of Said Summary. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the
Developer's Agreement as presented to the Council. Motion carried
unanimously.
F. Request from Cardinal Creek Homeowners' Association regarding Chimp
Develp,2Mnt Proposal
City Manager Jullie stated that PUD Concept Approval had been given by
the Council for the Cardinal Creek 4th Addition earlier this year. In
November the City Council adopted an inducement resolution giving
preliminary approval for housing revenue bonds for this project.
During the past week Council members and Staff have received written
commnications as well as telephone calls from property owners in the
Cardinal Creek neighborhood expressing their concerns about the City's
approval of this type of financing for the proposed development in
their area. Their concern is that by approving the inducement
resolution, tacit approval was given to the housing proposal. Jullie
City Council Minutes -12- December 17, 1985
noted he had several discussions with Gordon Alexander President of
the Cardinal Creek Homeowners' Association, regarding this matter.
said the Homeowners' Association would like to have the Council
reconsider its action regarding the inducement resolution for the '
housing revenue bonds.
Anderson said he would like to have City Attorney Pauly's view
regarding this. Pauly said he felt the Council should hear what the
Cardinal Creek representatives have to say as to what their specific
complaints are. Pauly said the proponent has indicated they do not
intend to proceed with the financing of this project prior to the end
of the year; the chances are very great they will not use this
financing at all due to the changes in the law.
Gordon Alexander, 6895 Sand Ridge Road, President of the Cardinal
Creek Homeowners' Association, said the Cardinal Creek Homeowners did
not wish to take an adversarial role; however, they did not think the
City Council was aware of the ramifications of its action of November
19th. Alexander said they did not think bonding should be allowed
prior to zoning. The bond type under consideration, they believe, is
for low-income housing and should be set aside until the zoning has
been achieved.
Floyd E. Siefferman, Jr., 6997 Eagebrook Place, asked the Mayor and
City Council to rescind Resolution No. 85-269. He stated the City
should not endanger its bonding authority by approving these bonds;
the City Council was stampeded into something it should not have dor.,e.
Siefferman said he did not believe an up-scale project such as what
had been proposed could be financed by this type of bond. Siefferman
said notice of the public hearing- for the inducement resolution was �
published in the Minneapolis Star and Tribune rather than the Eden
Prairie News which is the City's legal newspaper. He stated the
Cardinal Creek Homeowners' Association will take legal action if the
Council does not take immediate action to rescind Resolution No. 85-
269.
Roger Swigart, 13184 Cardinal Creek Road, offered comparisons of the
proposed project as it was defined at the time of concept approval and
at the time the financing was approved. Swigart said there was enough
of a difference between the two proposals so they should be regarded
as two separate requests.
Bentley said he understood any reconsideration of a previous action of j
the Council could take place only after the Council set a date for
such a hearing. City Attorney Pauly said he did not think that was i .
the case in this instance; the Council could act to rescind at any
time. Bentley asked if the notice of the November 19th Public Hearing
had been correctly published. Pauly said he had conferred with John
f Larson of Holmes and Graven and they determined it was legal. State
l
F
City Council Minutes -13- Deceirber 17, 1985
Statutes, Chapter 462C, under which these bonds are issued, state that
newspapers of general circulation within the community can be used for
public hearing notices. Pauly noted that the official city newspaper '
is necessary for the publication of City Ordinances. Bentley asked
why the Eden Prairie News was not used in the case of the November
19th hearing. Finance Director Frane said it was a matter of timing;
because the Eden Prairie News is a weekly, there was not enough time
to prepare the notice and get it published.
City Attorney Pauly said there is a considerable misapprehension
regarding this project and what is happening. Pauly stated the bonds
will not be sold on what has been done to date. There is no
indication the proponent is going to request the sale of these bonds;
final bond approval has not been request by the proponent. Pauly
stated the proponent would have to come to the City to get the proper
zoning before the bonds could be sold. The reason for so many
requests for preliminary approval for housing revenue bonds at this
time is due to the fact that no one knows what changes, if any, are
going to be made by Congress.
City Attorney Rosow noted that two resolutions are needed, preliminary
as well as final approval, before the bonds can be sold. Rosow
explained what is meant by the inducement resolution.
Bentley said he thought the concept had been approved for a top range
of 208 units all of which were not two bedroom units; unless the bond
approval could be amended in some way, they could not be sold as
proposed. Pauly concurred. Peterson asked if the housing revenue
bond action could be amended. Pauly said that might be possible.
Redpath asked where the numbers used to determine the rents
originated. Pauly said these were included in "The Program".
Bentley said he could see no need to take action at this time based on
what City Attorney Pauly had related to the Council.
Peterson said it seemed some what devious to him to approve an
inducement resolution which he had no intention of voting in favor of
at time of final approval.
Anderson asked if there was a problem with taking away the bonding
from Chimo. City Attorney Pauly said the original approval stated
there was no guarantee; he said he believed doing nothing would not
change the City's options at all.
Pidcock said she was uncomfortable with: the situation. She said she
resented the underlying threat of a lawsuit which had been brought up
by the Cardinal Creek representatives.
j
{
City Council Minutes -14- December 17, 1985
Redpath noted the Council had been faced with a similar situation last
year at the end of the year with industrial revenue bonds; there was a
last minute rush in anticipation of changes which might be made by
Congress.
Bentley stated he has never liked housing revenue bonds but had given
in to the concept the last time they were before the Council.
Alexander said the program states the bonds must be sold by December
31, 1985, and the Cardinal Creek homeowners believe they must protect
their property.
MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Peterson, to rescind the action of
November 19, 1985, at which time preliminary approval was given via
Resolution No. 85-269.
Redpath said, based on the information of this evening, he believed
the Council should leave its options open; no action can be taken on
the part of the proponent prior to final approval of the bonding.
Peterson said he thought it was inappropriate to induce someone with a
bond offer to 208 units as described.
Swigart said tae concern of the residents is that the financing being
proposed covers 208 one and two-bedroom apartment units; this leaves
the way open to a low and medium-income housing project.
City Attorney Rosow said if the proponent were to sell the bonds
before the end of 1985 then the proponent would be tied to that figure
(208) . The program can be amended; given the length of tune necessary
to do this via the public hearing process this would preclude its
being done in 1985 because there is not enough time. Rosvw noted the
proponent would be subject to stricter regulations after January 1,
1986. Peterson stated it would be in the City's best interest to
rescind the Resolution.
VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously.
G. Final Plat Approval for Allstate lst Addition (North of Norwest Bank)
(Resolution No. 85- 79) - - --- ---
Director of Public Works Dietz explained the question regarding this
matter was whether or not the Outlot to the north should be platted as
a part of the Allstate property or as an Outlot.
Bob Worthington, Director of Governmental Affairs for Opus
Corporation, stated there also was a question regarding the dedication
requirements.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adopt Resolution No.
85-279, approving final plat of Allstate lst Addition. Motion carried
unanimously.
City Council Minutes -15- December 17, 1985
l
VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
There were none.
'r
IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
1. Anointment of Site Selection Com nittee
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to appoint Rich
Anderson, Mike Eames, Norm Friedericks, Virginia Gartner, Gene
Haberman, Carolyn Lyngdal, Sue Osberg, and Betty Stehman to the
Site Selection Committee with Councilman Anderson, Director of
Ccmmanity Services Lambert and City Manager Jullie as City
representatives. Motion carried unanimously.
B. Report of City Manager
1. Amendment of Gambling Devices Ordinance
City Manager Jullie noted that changes in state law transferred
licensing of gambling devices and activities to the State with the
exception of four cases identified in the City Attorney's
/ memorandum of December 6, 1985. Jullie stated the City could
still veto a license which was issued by the State.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to repeal Section
5.40 of the City Code relating to licensing and permitting of
gambling devices. Motion carried unanimously.
C. Report of City Attorney
City Attorney Pauly said he and Rick Rosow of his office wished to
discuss their concerns regarding some of the housing revenue bonds
which are before the Council.
City Attorney Rosow stated that in order to issue the bonds, bond
counsel must give its opinion. The bond counsel relies on a
certificate of the city called the arbitrage certificate. The city,
in this certificate, must state that it reasonably believes the
project will be built as bonded and as planned in the bonding process.
The City has always put in its arbitrage certificate that it has not
conducted an independent investigation of the facts that the developer
has given the city but has relied on the developer's representation.
If the project does not have zoning, the City must have facts before
it from which it must be expected zoning will be achieved. Rosow said
in some cases a developer has taken the bond money and has earned
interest on the proceeds that is greater than the interest paid on the
r
l
✓9, o,
City Council Minutes -16- December 17, 1985
bonds which has resulted in making money. The consequence to the city
could be that the IRS could black list the city from issuing other
bonds. What the IRS is saying in that case is that the city's
arbitrage certificate cannot be relied upon. The question has been
raised with the CSM and HID proposals regarding the arbitrage
certificate. Bond counsel has wanted the City to say that the market
could bear the additional number of units proposed and could absorb
them. Rosow said he would not agree to this.
Rosow said in the case of Bay Point Manor there is no third party
guarantee although they do have zoning. In this instance they wish to
have the City issue the bonds and then have them "parked" with a bank
until they have a third-party guarantee at which time the bonds would
be sold. Rosow said the City has to reasonably expect they can get
the third-party guarantee and the kind of financing necessary to go
ahead. The City does not have that information at this time. City
Attorney Pauly said they are treating these three items in a cautious
manner; they might have to recomn?nd the Council not give approval to
the final resolutions.
Bentley said he believed it would be a good idea for the Council to
pass a resolution whereby the Council would take no action on bonds
unlass and until there was proper zoning and a signed developer's
agreement on hand.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcok, to adopt as policy that
the City Council will not, as a City Council, consider preliminary
resolutions for revenue bonds (housing revenue bonds and industrial
revenue bonds) until such time as appropriate zoning, development
plans and a developer's agreement have been approved and signed.
Motion carried unanimously.
Peterson asked that all developers in Eden Prairie be informed of this
policy.
D. Report of Director of Public Works
1. Award Contract for Technology Drive Improvements between Purga-
tory Creek and Prairie Center Drive, I.C. 52-DIOD (Resolution No.
85-280)
Director of Public Works Dietz noted problems which had evolved
with the awarding of the contract and recommended the bids be held
until the January 7, 1986, meeting of the Council.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to continue action
of this matter until the January 7, 1986, meeting of the City
Council. Motion carried unanimously.
l
City 1.ounci 1 Minutes -17- December 17, 1985
X. NEW BUSINESS
1. Peterson asked if there were any recommendations for changes to the
City Manager's Review Document. It was the concensus that the
document will be finalized at the January 7, 1986, Meeting of the City
Council.
2. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, that unless the City
Council so designates, all official public notices of the City shall
be published in the Eden Prairie News. Motion carried unanimously.
3. Pidcock asked if Staff would investigate the loan-a-seat car seat
program which was mentioned in the November issue of Minnesota Cities.
Staff will investigate.
Pidcock asked if the minutes could be done in a more timely manner.
Bentley said perhaps the amount of detail which is included in the
minutes might be discussed.
Pidcock noted an ethics conference which will be held and suggested
that this be considered by Council members. It was also noted a
League of Minnesota Cities Conferenve will be held February 5, 1986.
XI. ADJOUMO*WP
MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley, to adjourn the meeting at
1:25 a.m. Motion carried unanimously.
ro>