Loading...
City Council - 06/07/1988 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 1988 7 : 30 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7600 Executive Drive COUNCIL MEMBERS : Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Jean Harris, and Patricia Pidcock CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Director of Planning Chris Enger, Director of Community Services Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A . Dietz, and Recording Secretary Deb Edlund PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL : All members present . I . APPROVAL OF AgENDA_AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS C K0M.0 N: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson to approve the Agenda as published and amended . Additions to the Consent Calendar, Item W. Right of Refusal to Lease Space Adjacent to City Offices . Add Item VI .E, Request for Grading Permit for Wyndham Knob . Add under Item X .F, Discussion on Status of Highway 212 . Under Council Member Reports; Pidcock discussion about signs for animal crossings and the watering ban. MQTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock to amend the Agenda to include the addition of these Items to- the Agenda . Motion carried unanimously. II . MINUTES A. Spgcial JgInt City Qg ngil/HuMan Rights & Services ComMiss ion meeting held TUesdgy, Apr i 1 5. 1988 City Council Minutes 2 June 7, 1988 ( MOTION • Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to approve the Minutes of the Special Joint City Council/Human Rights & Services Commission meeting held Tuesday, April 5, 1988 as published and amended . Motion carried unanimously. B . Regular City Council meeting held Tuesday, March 15,, 1988 MOTION : The following correction was made : Page 5, paragraph 2 should read : participants to hear what they consider . . Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to approve the Minutes of the City Council meeting held Tuesday, March 15, 1988 ad published and amended . Motion carried unanimously. Pidcock questioned the time limit allowed for the Minutes to come back to Council for approval . Dawson replied the State Law is 30 days . Staff is aware of the time lines and is working to get the Minutes current . I I I . CQNSEN7! C&_LEN AR A. Clerk' * License List B. Fingl Plat A212roval for Mgnard 5th Addition (A - Z logAted south j2f Val1gy View Road sind w Plaza Drive(Resolution No . 88-90) C. Final ElAt Aporgyal for Idlewild Lake A!ddjt.iQn, lgcAted north of Eden Road and West of U. S . 169 (Resolution No . 88-91 ) D. north of Puck Lake Ira i l andwest of Boyd Avenue (Resolution No . 88-93 ) E. Eincil Plat ADDroval fo Egat Fifth: )gddi:tion. w slil (Resolution No . 88-94 ) F. angg G. A-Urove -S2eclaj AggessmentAgregmgOt for Southgate H. ece vP and Approve First- 2uarter Gengrfill Fund Report I • pprove Special As;2rsgMent AgreMeDt- for jtrarrwggd ;WdlAt I On City Council Minutes 3 June 7, 1988 J . rhange Order No . 2 I .C. 52-105 Bennett Place and-Blossom Road K . Charge Order No . 2, I .C. 52-096, Bluffs East 4th A!Idition L . Receive Petition £or Street and Ut i 2 ty Improv9men-ts for, Wyndham Ngh and Authorize Pre_ )ar t ' on o !g Feasibility Study, I .C . 52-145 (Resolution No . 88-95 ) M. Receive Feasibility Study, for Street j.mDxgvemCnts on fLamilton Road and set Public Hearing. I .C . 52-131 (Resolution No . 88-96 ) N. ApprovC Plans and Spgcifications for Sanitary w r,� Watermain and Storm Sewer Improvement- to Legion Park Addition, and authorize bids to be gggeived, I .C. 5 -133 (REs olution No . 88-97) 0. Approve Plans and Spec f ications .for Watermain and Street Improvements to Golden Tglangle Drive and authorize bids to be received , I .C. 52-110 (Resolution No 88-98 ) P . Approve Final Pl�r ���q Plan and Manenance Plan for MWCC Hiver Siphon it West Riverview Drivex Q . Change Order No . 3 for Well H!?uar. constKuction ,Project, I .C. 52-072B r w ( R . aluti n o fApDr er.jA.t.._on _. Part susrated InWh the 1988 Spina Chan-Un In gn Pr-airig (Resolution No 88-�1 S . Rgqugst from Edg,,f► Prai_r ie Chamj�, r,__o Commerce for C}tom to h l efray cogs for the E en Prairi $i1Rognt of S2, 28L 0 A T. Scaungt for Grading EgLMJ jZy Mn ..rk_& Rida Lgt at the Soutbwgst C v ahaady !2!2k Road (Ccntinued from May 17, 1988 ) U. BLUFFS E.A,ST 5TH ADDITIQN by Hustad Development Corporation . 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 7-88, Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13 . 5 on 17 . 68 acres; Approval of Developer 's Agreement for Bluffs East 5th Addition; and Adoption of Resoluti'bn No. 88 -81, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 7-88 and ordering Publication of Said Summary. 30 .1 acres in to 34 single family lots , 3 outlots, and road right-of-way. Location: Southeast of Meade Lane extension, west of Franlo Road, northwest of Antlers Ridge extension . (Ordinance No . 7- 88, Rezoning; Resolution No . 88-81 Authorizing Summary Publication ) r City Council Minutes 4 June 7, 1988 } V . FRANK SEDDOR PROPERTY by Fortier Associates, Inc . Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Public . Open Space to Industrial can 20 acres, Zoning District Change from I-GEn to I-5 on 18 . 7 acres, and from R1-22 to I -5 on 19 . 3 acres for construction of a 250, 000 square foot industrial building. Location : Northeast corner of Highway 5 and West 184th Street . (Resolution No . 88-100, Denial of Request ) W. ReJegt Right of Eirat Refpsallease MOTION • Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to approve the Consent Calendar as published and amended . Harris believed that Item H regarding the budget should require separate action. Bentley suggested that the next budget give us a more realistic idea as to where the City ti is at and also suggested a way of adjusting estimating budget to date . a 6 Harris commented that regarding Item S the brochure was very well done . Pidcock questioned that the City having funded part of the brochure should have gotten credit for underwriting part of this . Dawson replied that the City Logo appears in the lower right corner of the brochure . Anderson agreed that in the future if the City funds this type of brochure it should be noted . Motion carried unanimously. IV. EIJBLIC HEARINGS 2 A. DLUFFS SST f!rH by Hustad Development Company. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 186 . 3 acres , Planned Unit Development District Review on 45 . 16 acres with Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-6 . 5 on 6 . 94 acres, Preliminary Plat of 45 . 16 acres into 13 lots, 5 outiots, and road right-of-way for construction of 16 townhome units . Location : South of Franlo Road extension, south of Normandy Crest . (Resolution No. 88- 102, PUD Concept Amendment to Overall Bluff Country PUD; Ordinance No. 23-88-PUD-5-88, Rezoning; Resolution' No . 88- 103, Preliminary Plat ) Dawson reported that notice of this Public Hearing was sent to owners of 89 surrounding properties and published in the May 25, 1988 issue of the Eden Prairie News . Wallace Hustad, representing the proponent, present a brief outline of the project . The portion of the project area being presented was approved in 1986 for 20 single- i } City Council Minutes 5 ,tune 7, 1988 family lots . Hustad stated that now a double-home project consisting of 26 units was being proposed. This type of project was not increasing the density of the project, but was presenting a different type of unit . Hustad believed that the type of architecture and quality of construction being proposed had improved the project . The townhome units would range in price from $1800000 to $2200000 . Hustad introduced Steve Schwieters, builder and Bob Smith from Hedlund Engineering. Bob Smith stated that the land is predominantly grassland with a large stand of oaks . The land has varying grades . Erosion has taken place, but has been somewhat corrected by the introduction of a stand pipe which takes the water from Prairie Bluffs Addition and directs it to the bottom of the slope . Water has been diverted to the pond . The original plan presented to the Planning Commission proposed a significant tree loss and extensive grading . The new plan being proposed replaced the Y-Intersection with a T-intersection which allowed the buildings to be moved to save more trees . A retaining wall system would help to save trees . Smith stated that the Planning Commission was also concerned with the transition between the twinhomes and the future development of single family homes . A buffer would be provided with a variety of trees . Schwieters presented the marketing plan and general concepts for this project . Schwieters believed this type of twinhome unit would blend nicely with single family units . Architectural continuity was presented among the three different types of elevations being proposed . Schwieters requested that the plan show 26 individual lots for proper identification and financing. The project would still have an association with twinhomes, but should be platted as 26 lots with one lot line being the common wall . Enger reported that this item was reviewed at the May 9th and May 23rd, 1988 meetings of the Planning Commission. The Commission was concerned about the tree loss and grading . It appeared that the proposed revisions had improved the conditions; however, their success depended on the exact placement of the buildings as shown on the plan and the exact preparation of the building pads as shown on the development plan . There is a steep slope on the eastern portion of the north-south cul-de-sac and the Commission wanted to be sure the developer was comfortable with the grade as proposed . The saving of the trees on the west side of the project depended on the building of retaining walls and of limiting the building pads to the exact size and location shown. 1 I q. 4 G t City Council Minutes 6 June 7, 1988 Enger further reported that the Planning Commission recommended approval unanimously at the May 23rd meeting subject to the Staff Report of May 6th with a recommendation also from the Parks , Recreation and Natural Resources Commission that the plan should include a 51 - wide concrete sidewalk along the north of Franlo Road and a 8 ' -wide bituminous trail along the south of Franlo Road . Peterson asked what response the Planning Commission received from the builder regarding requiring that the building pads be placed exactly where shown. Enger replied that the builder indicated that the plans shown are the plans that represent the size and the location it proposes , and the backyard slopes and retaining wall locations are acceptable . The one item the Commission was looking for was a revision of the retaining walls to the west so that water would not drain over the walls . Bentley requested clarification on the terms of the platting request because the request indicated 13 lots, did it need to be revised to approve the 26 lots and thus have to be reviewed by the Planning Commission again to change to 26 lots . Dietz replied that there will be 26 lots . Bentley concerned about the legal and technical aspect for a properly filed Plat Request . Smith replied that they were requesting 13 lots at this time and after the buildings are complete will obtain an administrative r lot split to achieve the 26 lots . 1 Anderson asked Enger how can the City be assured that the pads will be exactly as shown. Enger replied that the difficulty comes when a developer sells to a builder and the builder has a different concept; in this instance the developer and the builder both have indicated what they plan to do with the property and are wanting to preclude disagreements at building permit issuance . Nustad stated that what has been shown was exactly what his firm intended to do . Schwieters stated that the exact plans have been finalized. Once the lot lines are set everything has to follow the front set back . Anderson commented that the reason for the question was because the Planning Commission had not stated before that the building pads and retaining walls had to be exactly as proposed for the project to work . Enger believed Anderson ' s question was actually If a builder looked at the Development Plan, building pad areas, where the slopes started behind the units and where the retaining wall started behind the units, would the unit size fit exactly on the pad as shown and would the slopes in the backyards acceptable . Schwieters replied that where the pads and buildings were shown was exactly where they would be built . Smith replied that the backyards are small, but a 2-to-1 slope was acceptable . Schwieters stated that on City Council Minutes 7 June 7, 1988 the 3 lots that would be affected he is prepared to build decks if necessary. Peterson asked if the slope would be problematic for the construction of these buildings . Schwieters replied that on two lots he has provided for the extra courses of blocks necessary. Pidcock commented that Schwieters is a very good builder . Smith commented that the footings will be poured as soon as lot line is set and a pinning process will be used to assure that there won' t be errors . Schwieters stated that the building will be staked by the surveyor, the hole dug, the footings poured and the surveyor will come again to Insure the party line is in place before the blocks laid . Enger still concerned and asked if the plans submitted by Hedlund Engineering for grading represent the exact floor plan for each individual lot . Schwieters replied yes . Bentley asked if the builder and developer were committed to building this plan as shown : grading, building placement . Hustad stated the project is reflecting what the builder wants and it will be developed as designed . Anderson questioned who would be responsible for the maintaining of the pond . Hustad stated that presently his firm had responsibility for the pond, but there were long- c range problems as to whether a gravity outlet would be present along with the drainage concerns along County Road � 1 . Hustad stated that the big issue is where will the water come from and how much will come into the pond, whether it will come from a larger drainage system to the north or just for this 50 to 60 acres . This question has not been answered to date . Anderson questioned how far the development would go before this issue was dealt with . Dietz replied that there were several issues yet with the holding pond; the real issue was whether to put a gravity outlet east across County Road 1 at some elevation and let the water go up and down. Anderson stated that this was exactly his point-this area had no drainage and the level of the pond could not be controlled . Eventually trees and vegetation could be lost, whose responsibility this would ( be was a concern. Dietz replied that ultimately this 3 would be the City's as this will be part of the storm sewer system. Another possibility was putting in a pumping station. Engineers that have looked at the area have indicated that an outlot was not needed and probably won ' t see a significant depth problem. The drainage problems are relatively small . City Engineer Gray added that another consideration taken into account was that possibly this development should not proceed until the City has a final solution for the pond outlet and that ,r a City Council Minutes 8 June 7, 1988 there have been considerable erosion problems on the western side of the pond . At this time there is no control over the drainage from the Bluffs East 4th Addition. Gray believed that with the Franlo Road Improvements and drainage conduits the erosion problems will be reduced and that this project could proceed . He suggested having some timetables in the Developer 's Agreement as to when the drainage and pond outlet issues will be finalized . Anderson stated that if the pond would rise over 2 feet significant vegetation and tree loss will take place, did the City or the developer want to take the chance of this loss . Hustad replied that a significant amount of erosion has taken place from the north and west and there was a need to contain the water . Hustad stated that he did not want to see any loss of vegetation, but if there would be any loss it would be replaced . The completion of Franlo road would give the project a completed sewer system. No further comments from the audience . MOTION • Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley to close the Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 88-102 for PUD Concept Amendment . Motion carried unanimously. HOT I ON: s Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley to approve lst Reading of Ordinance No 23-8-PUD-5-88 for Rezoning . Motion carried unanimously. MOTION a s, Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley to adopt Resolution No . s 88-103 approving the Preliminary Plat . Motion carried unanimously. MOTION • Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley to direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations and Council conditions and to have the Development Agreement contain a schedule for the completion of the storm sewer system and that the Developer is responsible for maintenance of the Pond. Motion carried unanimously. B . GLENSHIRE by Associated Investments . Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 30 . 6 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 17 . 3 acres, with waivers, and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9 . 5 s` q n' City Council Minutes 9 June 7, 1988 on 17 . 3 acres, Preliminary Plat of 30 . 6 acres into 56 lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way for construction of a single family development . Location : Northeast corner of Valley View Road and Edenvale Boulevard . (Resolution No . 88-104, PUD Concept for Glenshire; Ordinance No . 24- 88-PUD-6-88, PUD and Rezoning; Resolution No . 88-105, Preliminary Plat ) Dawson reported that notice of this Public Nearing was sent to owners of 48 surrounding properties and published in the May 25, 1988 issue of the Eden Prairie News . Kay Schumacher, representing the proponent, stated that the development would consist of a spine of lots covering 14 acres . Outlot A has difficult soil conditions . A townhouse development was being proposed in the future . Staff has recommended 3 to 5 units to the acre and the proponent was proposing 7 units per acre . It was difficult at this time to finalize plans until the railroad and graffiti bridge plans are determined . The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission pointed out that the park entrance and subdivision road would not align and that a new access to the park would be necessary. Equitable would assume the responsibility of restoration of berms . A concrete sidewalk was also suggested along Crestview Drive and Edenvale Boulevard and Equitable was in agreement with this suggestion . There were approximately 345 caliper of trees to be replaced . Enger reported that this item was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its first meeting in April and was recommended unanimously for approval at the May 9th, 1988 meeting with recommendations from the Staff Report dated May 6, 1988 . The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission recommended approval with a 6-0 vote at the May 16, 1988 meeting with the addition of a 5 ' -vide concrete sidewalk along south side of Woodlawn Drive to extend across the front of this project . Enger further reported that Outlot A would be designated as medium-density residential as currently on the Guide Plan, not to exceed 3 to 5 units per acre . Heavy landscaping should be provided for the transition in the future . Outlot B is currently designated as medium- density residential and church on the Guide Plan and any other use would require a Guide Plan change . The Planning Commission is suggesting a continuation of the single family units to outlot B or preserve it for a church site . Bentley asked Enger where the City stands on the R1-9 . 5 . Bentley believed this to be changed to RM1-9 . 5. Enger replied that the policy direction was as follows : that the Zoning District R1-9 . 5 was not to be considered on sites other than Medium Density Residential . Bentley asked a City Council Minutes 10 June 7, 1988 Enger if this project, incorporating full-sized residential homes, met the intent of R1-9 . 5. Enger replied that in the last 3 years he had not seen a request that met the original intent of the R1-9 . 5 Bentley believed that the City had stopped the development of a row of houses on either side of the street because of the crowded look to a development . Peterson stated that somewhere the original intent was lost . A Council study session may need to be scheduled to discuss the issue of R1-9 . 5 . Peterson questioned if there was screening or berming provided between the project and 0utlot A. The developer stated that they would work with Staff to arrive at a combination of berm or landscaping. Anderson concerned that the Hestia development is less than 1/4 mile from this development . The City has a cluster now of RI-9 . b homes in this part of the city more than in any other part . The developer stated that there t Is a 300-plus acre park in the area . Peterson suggested that the R1-9 . 5 issue be placed on the agenda at a future meeting so that the Council can give a clear direction to the Planning Commission. Bentley suggested asking the Planning Commission to review the issue and give its thoughts to the Council regarding this issue . Peterson suggested alerting developers that the Council does has reservations in regard to R1-9 . 5 developments . Enger stated that direction is needed because a 200-unit development request has been made in the southwest area . i No further comments from the audience . ` a MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to close the Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 88-104 for PUD Concept Approval . Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve 1st Reading of Ordinance No . 24-88-PUD-6-88 for PUD Review and` Rezoning. Motion carried 4-1 with Anderson voting "No" . WT I ON: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to adopt Resolution No. 88-105 approving the Preliminary Plat . Motion carried 4-1 with Anderson voting "No" . City Council Minutes I1 June 7, 1988 MOTION • t Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations and Council conditions to Include discussion between Staff and Proponent relative to reasonable berming and screening. Motion carried 4-1 with Anderson voting "No" . C . TRANSFER OF CABLE OWNERSHIP (Resolution No . 88-108 giving Final Approval to a Transfer of the City•s Cable Television Franchise; Ordinance No. 25-88 amending Ordinance No . 13-85 to change the Name of Grantee; and approval of Documents ) Dawson reported that Rogers Cable Systems was considering sale of its United States holdings . The matters for Council consideration would clear up changes in names of the responsible corporations within Rogers structure which had occurred over the past few years . This was a housekeeping item. No further comments from the audience . Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson to close the Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 88-108 giving final approval to the transfer of the City•s cable television franchise . Motion carried unanimously. MOTION• Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to approve 1st Reading of Ordinance No . 25-88 amending Ordinance No. 13-85 to change the name of the grantee . Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: w Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson to approve the documents necessary to effect these changes . Motion carried unanimously. D. VACATION 8 8-0 2 OE 128MIAGE AND 12TILITX EASEMENTS ON 991M RIDGE HILLS (Resolution No . 88-99) Dawson reported that this was a housekeeping item. No further comments from the audience . l r city council Minutes 12 June 7, 1988 M©TION: " Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock to adopt Resolution No. 88-89 for vacation of the drainage and utility easements In Golden Ridge Hills . Motion carried unanimously. V . PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to approve Payment of Claims No . 42582 to 43016 . Roll Call Vote : Anderson, Bentley, Harris, Pidcock and Peterson voting "Aye" . Vi . ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS A. Draft Ordinance re9ard e incz Recreational Vehicls ( continued from May 17 Council meeting) Harris questioned the grandfathering issue, noting there were a lot of recreational vehicles parked along Pioneer Trail across from the airport . Pauly replied that the area across from County Road 1 is not what this proposal is directed toward . There are possibly code violations now and the Planning Department is investigating this . Pidcock questioned on Page 2 of the draft which stated that only 2 recreational vehicles could be stored . Pidcock believed that only 1 had been recommended . Pauly } replied that he was not under the impression that any determinations were made or any guidance . Pidcock proposed that only 1 be considered per household . Pidcock stated that none are allowed on The Preserve . Peterson commented that the conflict between the property owner ' s rights of use of the property and the right of the neighbors to have a pleasant view. The rights of both parties need to be protected . Anderson questioned what was considered obstructive . When an object is higher than the garage then it becomes another building . Side yard setback was another issue . Anderson stated that if an object was parked for over 9 months out of the year on the property line this should be considered obstructive . Peterson asked Pauly about Section 2 .D where it stated that the vehicle must be owned by the resident . Peterson r believed there would be many exceptions to this. Pauly replied that this was part *of a first draft and should be taken out as it would be difficult to enforce . Peterson stated that the intent was to prevent renting of space . Pauly stated that this would be difficult .to police also. City Council Minutes 13 June 7, 1988 Anderson stated that Bloomington ' s ordinance was given as a guideline . Pauly stated that as it was written now, the ordinance would prohibit visitors coming and parking their boats for over a specific time limit . Bentley suggested a permit be built in to allow for these type of situations . Bentley questioned if. the City was not creating a bureaucracy. Bentley suggested the language from the Bloomington ordinance : In addition to the exterior storage of vehicles in excess of 7 ' is prohibited except in the buildable portion of a lot . No major recreational vehicle may be used for living, sleeping or housekeeping stored on a residential lot . The Bellevue Ordinance states that storage would only be permitted in the front yard if space Is not available in rear yard or side yard and there is no reasonable access to rear yard or side yard . Bentley believes that what was being proposed was not strict enough. Harris believed that Pauly had a good start . Peterson suggested dealing with this issue as problems arise . Pidcock replied that then the City is constantly revising the Ordinance and the issue keeps coming back . Bentley was concerned with the residents ' concern over front yard storage . This has been going on for years . The City has very restrictive rules for development, but once residents move in they can do anything with the property. Bentley believed that the City should put in an appropriately restrictive Ordinance or not bother with the issue . Pidcock stated that this Ordinance did not address all the A concerns brought up at the last meeting. Anderson stated that he did not believe the intent was to restrict all recreational vehicle storage, only the excessively large ones and concerned about how far the City was to go with this . Mrs . Bernadine Moser, 7263 Topview Road, stated that her concern was with a big blue boat stored year round within 10 feet of the lot line . She wished wanting to clear the neighborhood of such eyesores . Moser stated that it was not her intent to restrict all recreation vehicles, and the 7' height and 10 ' from the lot line limits would be reasonable with a time limi"t . Moser believed the ordinance as written to be confusing. Mike McCosky, 7251 Topview Road asked if this Ordinance �" means that one could not park on a city easement . Bentley + City Council Minutes 14 June 7, 1988 replied yes . McCosky stated that this was all the ordinance accomplished because this was how it has been interpreted . Bentley replied that one could not park in the side yard setback closer than 10 ' from the lot line or the backyard, nor could one park in the front except in the driveway and in which case the rear of the vehicle could not be closer than 15 ' from the street . Moser requested a definition of a driveway. Pauly replied there was not an official definition of a driveway. McCosky asked how long Bloomington 's ordinance has been in effect . Anderson believed approximately 10 years . McCosky stated that it must have been successful, so that would seem a good foundation to start with. Peterson suggested that the Council move to direct Pauly to redraft and ordinance similar to Bloomington 's . No further comments from the audience . MQTION: Harris moved, seconded by Anderson to refer this back to the City Attorney and pattern after the Bloomington Ordinance . Motion carried unanimously B . ALA ADDT.TIIOU, by Scott Brau . Request for Preliminary Plat and Final Plat of 2 . 12 acres into two single family lots within the R1-22 Zoning District . Location : 16201 Pioneer Trial . (Resolution 188-92, Preliminary Plat and Final Plat) MOTION : Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock to adopt Resolution No . 88-106 approving the Preliminary Plat and to direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement . Motion carried unanimously. C. MEL HANSEN ADDDITION, by Mel Hansen. Request for Preliminary Plat of 1 . 42 acres into two single family lots with the R1-22 Zoning District . Location: 9091 Mesa Staring Lane . (Resolution 088-107, Preliminary Plat ) HQT r QN: ` Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to adopt Resolution No. 88-107 approving the Preliminary Plat and to direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement and Special Assessment Agreement ( for future roadway and utilities) . Motion carried unanimously. H, City Council Minutes 15 June 7, 1988 l D. Rgsglution No 88-109 establishing a -Uniform Policy with Respect to Lgbbying by Cable ADD11gants with Individual uncil Members on Staff MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to adopt Resolution No. 88-109 establishing a uniform policy on lobbying by Cable applicants . Peterson questioned if this had anything to do with free speech . Pauly replied that he did not believe it to do SO . Motion carried unanimously. E. Reautst for Grading Permit prior to 2nd Reading. Dawson stated that Staff has review an early grading permit for the Wyndham Nob Addition prior to 2nd Reading. Staff had reviewed this request and recommended that this permit be issued prior to second reading if the applicant has secured all other required permits, and further that conditions be placed on the grading permit relating to tree restoration, erosion control, and financial guarantees . 6 Peterson questioned if all these conditions have been met . Proponent replied that it had received or would soon be obtaining the necessary permits . MOTION : Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock that in light of the applicant having met all conditions to issue a grading permit prior to second reading for Wyndham Nob with the clear understanding that the proponent proceed at its own risk . Motion carried unanimously. vII . P_EuTTrous REQuEm 6 commmicATigNs vI I I . Epun QF ADVISORY C ommusioNs I X . Appo i fTMENTS A. Nj.n_q,,...ftile CreCk Wg erred District - Endorsement of the reappointment of Dr . Eugene Davis to the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District M4TrON� Anderson moved, seconded by Harris to endorse Dr . Eugene Davis for reappointment to the Nine-Mile Creek Watershed ( District . Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes 16 June 7, 1988 B. RI ev-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District - Endorsement of the reappointment of Howard L . Peterson to the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District MQTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock to endorse Howard Peterson for reappointment to the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District . Motion carried unanimously. X . R PORT OF OFFICERS. BoAR12s & COIi,MI SSI oNS A . F&Vorts of Coung i . Members Pidcock asked Dietz if it was possible to post signs to notify motorists to be cautious of animals . Dietz replied this would be expensive and strongly urged not doing this . Dietz commented that the "Children at Play" signs had been taken down throughout the City because they became meaningless and believed a similar situation would happen with these signs . Pidcock questioned the reason for watering ban . Dietz replied that in the current situation we do well during weekdays, but weekends are becoming difficult . There is abuse of the odd/even system. The City is looking at some serious problems during weekends . This is a drought situation. Peterson stated that this is an unusual situation . Pidcock stated that people are confused about the ban rules and questioned how it could be posted effectively. Dietz replied that it has been on television, radio and in the papers . Dietz also stated that if the situation continued, even more restrictions may have to be put into place . Harris commented that based on Dietz's concern about the need for further restrictions there could be a benefit to Imposing them earlier so that the City could avoid a crisis situation. Harris concerned about fires and residents having water for routine uses . Dietz suggested an odd/even system" with hourly restrictions possibly from 9AM to 7PM. Dietz further commented that this is a State-wide crisis . Dietz would like to be able to discuss this with the City Manager . Anderson commented that in 'this community it takes at least two weeks to get the word out . Some time is necessary for people to respond . Dietz replied that the City could possibly run out of water this weekend if there Is no rain. i City Council Minutes 17 June ?, 1988 Peterson questioned if it would be possible to reduce the output and reduce the pressure . Dietz that there would be several operational problems with that . Bentley believed that the City had not begun to come close to compliance of the odd/even ban . Dietz replied that warnings are being issued, but the process was cumbersome . Bentley stated that if this were very serious, the City needed to make a major effort and go the extra mile to enforce the restrictions . Firefighter, Glenn Johnson stated that the people: do not understand the restrictions and if they are not kept simple; don 't go back and forth between odd/even and hourly and then back again. Peterson asked Dietz if a 50% compliance level was achieved could the City get by. Dietz replied no . The demand is currently 5 times our supply. Bentley stated that people with automatic sprinkler systems needed to be reminded of the restrictions as it would be an easy way to reduce water use significantly. MOTION : Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to authorize the Director of Public Works subject to confirmation from the City Manager to institute a watering ban with odd/even x with hourly restrictions from Noon to 6PM. e } Bentley believes 10 to 6 too restrictive . Pidcock asked how will this get the word out to the public. Dietz replied radio, television and the papers . Motion carried unanimously. B. HgCstt of City _i'iangger. No Report . No Report . D. $g2ort of Direct r, of Planning 1 . Etport on C Review f9r Cedar Ridge School Enger reported that Mr . Hamilton, an architect representing the Eden Prairie School District was present_ The site plan had been revised to reduce tree loss to 16%. CEnger stated that Hamilton was requesting that the tree City Council Minutes 18 June 7, 1988 replacement plan be submitted later in the process . The grading permit was ready to go. Peterson stated that he would be comfortable with this . The City has had a good relationship with the School . Anderson questioned if the School District or its architects had been told by the City that they would not be required to get approval . Hamilton replied not to his knowledge . Hamilton stated that working with the City Staff had been good and had helped to develop a better plan. He did not understand how the review was missed . Hamilton offered an absolute guarantee that it will not happen again and offered the Districts apology. Peterson asked Enger if there was a loophole in procedures. Enger replied that in the process for zoning review, the City had become used to looking at every single project . if it is required that every site have a site plan review, then the Planning Commission can catch the problems . Enger further commented that the Commission Is trying to sort out what happened and how public projects are reviewed. I OTT ON; Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to direct Staff to explore a code amendment that would look at a site plan j review for any proposed development even though the a project fits within the existing zoning . Anderson was disappointed with this proposal because the City had a plan for a combination playground and park, and now for the District to accomplish this plan will cost taxpayers more money. Motion carried unanimously. E. R Egsggrgea No Report . F. FSport of Director gf .Publ ig forks Dietz presented a draft layout plan for Highway 212 . Dietz stated that this was not a final plan and was not approved, but was the first step in the mapping process . Technology Drive would have to be relocated . Dietz commented that the plan did not show the way access had originally been proposed . With this proposal there will f i f City Council Minutes 19 June 7, 1988 be an impact on the Middle school site, and the Dell Road interchange was still under consideration. <. Peterson asked if the State was committed to this alignment . Dietz replied no, four alternates were being studied in the EIS . The Council has gone on record as approving the alignment depicted on the layout. Pidcock asked what would happen to new homes in the area. Dietz replied that the new homes would not be razed. Peterson asked if realignment of Scenic Heights Road would be the City' s responsibility. Dietz replied no, that this is a MnDot project. Dietz further commented that Staff would be getting back to MnDot in 45 days with recommendations . Peterson asked about what financial opportunities would be available for people to sell their homes . Dietz replied that a hardship acquisition can be applied for . Peterson asked Dietz about dates for letting contracts for Highways 169 and 5. Dietz ,replied Lhe 2nd phase of Highway 5 bid was to be April 1988, but now will be probably be looking at the spring of 1989 . G. Re tort of Einance Director No Report . XI . NEW BUSINESS XII . ADJOURNMENT MOTI OM i_ Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to adjourn the meeting at 11 : 20 PM. Motion carried unanimously. APPROVED MINUTES SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 1988 6 : 00 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7600 Executive Drive COUNCIL MEMBERS : Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Jean Harris, and Patricia Pidcock CITY COUNCIL STAFF : Assistant to the City Manager Craig W. Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, and Recording Secretary Deb Edlund 1 . ROLL CALF, All Present . II . QAbL MEETING TO ORDER III . DISC.'USSION ON SOLID WASTE/RECYCLING Assistant to the City Manager Dawson presented the highlights - of the memorandum. Dawson stated that the waste management environment is fluid and information changes frequently. For example, estimates of waste generation are not consistent from month to month . The county estimates the City•s waste generation to be 37,900 tons . Dawson reported that the definition of recyclable materials had changed to include material recovered from mechanical separation . The guiding body at this time is the Metropolitan Council, which still favors source separation. Dawson believed it would be difficult for the Metropolitan Council to be more restrictive than the State Law; however, there remains some risk if the City goes toward mechanical separation. Peterson requested clarification as to whether the County permits fluff or compost as recyclable . Dawson replied that the definition was on a State level and the State would not allow RDF, DRDF to be counted as recycled . Dawson reported other changes as; 1 ) disposal of yard waste in landfills will be prohibited after January 1, 1990 . 2 ) the Uniform Building Code would require suitable space be provided for separation, collection, and temporary storage of recyclable materials in new buildings . 3 ) Cities having landfills can increase their surcharge . Dawson stated that the County is looking for the major portion of the 16% to come from residential areas . The county has a funding assistance program, although a process such as that at t City Council Minutes 2 June 7, 1988 the Reuter facility would not be eligible for grants . The County only funds source separation and of that 6 - 10% may be required to come from the residential area . Dawson said that solid waste costs will rise . Tipping fees will increase, therefore, increasing hauling costs approximately 35-40% . Dawson reported that there are two recyclable collection services that are common enough to predict costs with some accuracy: biweekly residential curbside and yard waste collection . The City needs to consider yard waste collection . The question is what to do for the next two years and to what degree should the City become involved during the interim. Any program to be successful needs an extensive publicity campaign . Separate containers to store recyclables have proven to be effective to increase recycling. Hennepin County does provide assistance for container fees. City staff has some disagreement with the County staff regarding estimates of the waste generation numbers . Bentley asked Dawson what can or should the City do about the discrepancy between Hennepin County and our own projections . A formalized written request should be issued to look at the changes and get the process started . Peterson commented that the City would have to know what method would be used to measure the waste if the Reuter facility were used. Dawson commented that one question has been how should the 4 City pick up the recyclable waste and where should it go? The F first preference has been a mechanical separation system. The City Attorney has given an opinion that this waste could be directed to the Reuter facility as a condition of having a City waste hauling license . There is a public participation i process necessary. A public comment period of 90 days is required . If the Council wishes to have new licensing conditions adopted no later than the first meeting In December, a public hearing would need to be held and a resolution of intent adopted by the first meeting in September . The contract negotiations with Reuter should be substantially resolved by August . Anderson stated that it seems that the emphasis is being placed on source separation recycling . The easiest material to recycle is what is called clean material , which is mostly paper. Eden Prairie has a lot of office/warehouse space which produces this type of recyclable material . Bentley wanted clarification if with commercial program the City would have a separate type of collection system. The paper is intended to be made into pellets or fluff. Harris believed that the program should involve the City•s total population, both residential and commercial and make City Council Minutes 3 June 7, 1988 appropriate planning and processing to capture that waste . Harris was concerned about the refusal to accept the DRDF, the paper product as recyclable particularly if this product could be recycled as fuel . Dawson replied that the definition of recyclable is a product reused in its original form and those that go through a manufacturing process are not recycled in this sense . Bentley commented that anything that goes to the County 's downtown incinerator would not be considered recyclable . Harris questioned the costs issue . Would the focus be on the private homeowner or can an equitable distribution of costs be realized with a program of this type . Dawson replied that the costs to a corporation for waste disposal is a relatively small cost in doing business and to change the way they do business will not be an easy sell . Corporations ' costs will also be increasing with the County's proposal . The focus has been on residential because it is easy to understand and the residential area has been where the most effort for recycling awareness has been placed . The residential area is were the greatest cost differential will be. Anderson stated that in some places there is no charge for pick up if the paper is sorted out. They will be paid the current market price for the paper . What was considered garbage is now something profitable . For the larger paper users it could possibly cut costs by 2/3 . Peterson commented that this is all part of an expensive public relations program . Dawson stated that this recycling by smaller business would not be profitable and that somehow this would q have to be encouraged in whole buildings. Dawson continued to review the memorandum and stated that the County assistance should not be counted on for long-term uses. Dawson believed a collection center should be provided. Dawson reported that the Reuter facility system would be relatively inexpensive compared to a curbside program. Pidcock asked there were any other facilities like the Reuter facility in the metro area . Dawson replied there are none to his knowledge . Dawson reported that the Reuter facility has indicated an interest in looking at commercial recycling and he believes that this option should be explored . Dawson stated that the recycling program would take a lot of time and the Council should consider authorizing another Staff position during the Fall budget deliberations . Dawson said that in looking into paying for the recycling service, billing would be difficult with a curbside program to ( bill all the users . Pidcock asked if this could be billed 4 r City Council Minutes 4 June 7, 1988 with the sewer and water . Dawson replied that not everyone had City sewer and water and this would not be a totally fair system . Dawson added that this service is mandated by the State and will create a higher level of taxes . Bentley commented that Dawson had done an excellent job in preparing the information. Peterson questioned if the Council wanted to be the review agency or should a committee be established to do some of the preliminary work and make recommendations to the Council . Bentley believed the answers to be clear and that the Council did not have the time frame to work with an independent group. Publication should be in the paper by late August . Anderson believes that it is extremely important to get something started as soon as possible . Anderson asked Pauly If t-he Metropolitan Council did not have to adhere to the State Law . Pauly answered yes, it is a question of whether the Metropolitan Council or other opponents to mechanical separation and roll back the law to require non-mechanical, which is not likely to happen . Bentley stated that the Metropolitan Council does not have legislative power, it is only a planning agency. Anderson commented that he wished to go with the progwam that will serve the commurity the best and was not concerned with what the Metropolitan Council had to say as long as the City was in compliance . Anderson further stated that he did not want the City criticized for doing nothing . Peterson commented that the Council had been waiting for data and waiting for action from the County and State and believes that the Council has proceeded with' caution. Peterson commented that the City will continue to be criticized . Harris believed that this was not an either/or situation, but believed the City would receive the greatest benefit from a mechanical separation program . Harris suggested a collection center which would be of minimal cost and be able to combine the best of two worlds . Dawson replied that the City may have to amend the zoning ordinance to allow for outside storage trailers . Bentley believed there to be two primary issues to consider, effectiveness and cost and that the most effective way to deal with this is to keep it within the private sector as much as possible . Bentley commented it comes to the point of property taxes or user fees and that user fees are the fairest way if it can be administered with cost effectiveness . Peterson commented that the Council should have more information about the Reuter process and that a public meeting should be scheduled. The Council should prepare questions for the Reuter Facility so that they can have answers . Peterson _ d City Council Minutes 5 June 7, 1988 asked if the Council is saying something about recycling when it supports the burning of paper is acceptable, but that it wants to recycle glass, aluminum and ferrous metals . Harris questioned what has the market for paper been . Peterson questioned what the market was for recyclables in general . Peterson questioned the likelihood that pellets will be allowed to be burned in Minnesota and if the Reuter facility had to ship the pellets more than 100 miles, would that be offset by acceptable tipping fees . Peterson questioned what time line is projected for Minnesota to permit burning pellets and if permits are not received where will the compost go and if doesn't become part of the income stream and becomes part of the cost stream will the tipping fees be effected . Anderson stated that it becomes important for industry to find a market for recyclables . The problem being that the capability for recycling is there, but the government has to encourage for companies to get into the recycling business . r Bentley stated that the questions being asked are of economic Issues and are out of the Council 's realm of responsibility. Reuter has committed to charge 95% of what the County mould charge . Bentley questioned what the justification was for that figure . Peterson stated that the economic element was Important . If it becomes a cost to the private sector and there is not a lucrative market then the recyclables will end up in landfills or somewhere else . Harris stated that the City has no control over this . Bentley questioned the viability of pellets in the future . Harris asked Katy Boone from Reuter, Inc . if there was no 1 market for the pellets, does Reuter have a plan for recycling paper . Katy replied that currently it is either shipping the pellets out of state or storing them. Reuter is processing about 200 tons a day. Reuter hopes to get this issue resolved with the PCA this summer . Reuter is looking at DRDF. Information on test burns for pellets is available. 40 to 50% of residential waste is made into pellets . Bentley stated that he was prepared to make a motion to give direction to Staff as to how this issue should proceed . 1 F City Council Minutes 6 June 7, 1988 MOTTON: Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to continue to pursue mechanical separation of recyclables as the primary component of the program and that commercial wastes be included in the overall program and be directed to the Reuter Resource Recycling Facility as a probable tipping location. Further, that a collection center be provided for those persons who will not have curbside or mechanical separation available . Peterson stated that he is not willing to imply that that is his favorite option. Peterson would still like answers to questions, have public input, and possibly meet with Hennepin County Commissioner Randy Johnson . Peterson stated that he would vote for the motion with the understanding that it is still an open question and that it does not represent a commitment to this form of waste management . Motion carried unanimously. Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to direct Staff to follow the statutory time periods for hearing and public comment and final Council action by December 6, 1988 . Dawson stated that Staff would be working to accelerate the time table . Motion carried unanimously. Peterson asked for an answer to some of his questions . He wished to hear from Reuter Inc .and also to have the public Informed of the meeting at which these issues would be discussed . Harris commented that she would like to have some of the garbage haulers present . Pidcock requested background information on the Reuter facility prior to the meeting. Bentley asked Dawson if the addition of a Staff person had to be dealt with tonight . Dawson replied no . Bentley commented that it would make sense to put it on the budget for the Fall . Bentley further stated that he believed that user fees should be used to whatever extent possible . Pauly stated that under the law collection can be organized through ordinance, franchise, bided or negotiated contract or other means . In order to designate - a specific delivery point It has to be a collection that is engaged in by the municipality or by contract per the statue . He believed Individual licenses and contracts could be tied together . City Council Minutes 7 June 7, 1988 I V . ,A.DIQURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 7 : 15 PM. i l