City Council - 09/20/1988 APPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 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: City Manager Carl. J . Jullie, Assistant
to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City
Attorney Roger Pauly, Director of
Planning Chris Enger, Director of
Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources
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 IIEN5 0E BUS N S9
MOTION :
Anderson mewed, seconded by Harris to approve the Agenda as
published .
Jullie reported that an amended Developers Agreement had been
presented to the Council for Item J on the Consent Calendar,
LaVonne industrial Park Building IV. Jullie stated that the
changes clarified the dedication of an easement for a trail
and cash park fee .
MOTrON
Anderson moved, seconded by Harris to amend the previous
Motion and RamovE Item D from the Consent Calendar and place
under ITEM, VII .A. Motion carried .
Motion carried unanimously.
1
City Council Minutes 2 September 20, 1988
I ! . MI UTES
A . Reg_Upr_ City Council- Megtin���d Tuesd Ju1;�_19�,_ 19$8
MOTION •
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the Minutes
of the Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, July 19,
1988 as published . Motion carried unanimously.
B . Re- u_1_ar City CounC M et i nQ held Tuesday, August_91-
1988
MOTION :
Corrections : Page 23, Paragraph 2 should read : Harris
Inquired into the City' s legal rights .
P
R
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the Minutes
of the Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, August
9, 1988 as amended .
Motion carried unanimously.
III . CONSENT CALENDAR
A.
w
B . 2nd Reading of Ordinance No 42-88,� Rules Relating to
Irearms Regulationsm n ar 9,-
Sgqtion 9 . 40, Subd . 3A to Restrigt the Area Where
fQ.g.r,har9g of Firgar§ are Pgrmitted
C . 2p Rejding of Ordinance No . 39-8$, Rules end Regulatigns
Governing Municipal Cemetery
D. Egguest for CIty aBproyal of Cha,ritAble Gambling f_zQm tha
Hockey Association ofEden PralKie ( THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED
FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR AND MOVED TO ITEM VII .A)
E. F-L-nALR t Ap2ro a1 fgx Fgilfield ( JQrated weat, of Edgn
Fray; LC Road and south of Mitchell Lake_} Resolution No .
88-19 5
F. 'inal_fPlat AgQroval____€. �<'� �lo4y__..Farl _ 6th Addition
(located sogth of West 74th Strget and east of Golden
T.X.jang3�e� ival_ Resolution No . 88--196
G. Change Order No . 1 to Old Shsl!dy 0a .RoadL owland gQ5jd,,
I .C. 52-119
r H. Srr&qr. Facilitigs to
i E!rgvide !, Conogct between Bed Rgch Lake a,nS3 the ProRoaed
City Council Minutes 3 September 20, 1988
Fairfield and Cheyenng Place Additions, I .C. 52-152
(Resolution No . 88-197 )
I . Rece v_e_Egasihility Judy for Watermain_ E slora�n Eden.
Prairie Road (CSAH No . 1) and P i onger T;ail i CSAH No.
An_o_ Set Public Hearing pate, I . C. 52-147 (Resolution No.
88-199 )
J . LAVONNE INDUSTRIAL PARRK BUILDING IV, by LaVonne Industrial
Park Partnership IV. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No . 36-88
PUD-10-88, PUD District and Zoning District Amendment
within the I-2 Zoning District on 4 . 64 acres, Zoning
District Change from Rural to I -2 on 0 . 25 acres, and from
Rural to R1-13 . 5 on 0 .89 Acres; Approval of Developer 's
Agreement for LaVonne Industrial Park Building IV; and
Adoption of Resolution No . 88-204, Authorizing Summary of
Ordinance No. 36-88-PUD-10-88, and Ordering Publication of
Said Summary. 33 acres for PUD District; 7 . 66 acres into
one lot and one outlot for construction of 60, 000 square
feet of office/warehouse use . Location : South of
Edenvale Boulevard. (Ordinance No . 36-88-PUD-10-88, PUD
District and Rezoning; Resolution No . 88-204, Authorizing
Summary and Publication )
4
K . TECH PARK 6TH ADDITION_ (FKA Norseman Industrial Park 6th
Addition ) by Eberhardt/Hoyt Development . 2nd Reading of
Ordinance No . 37-88, Zoning District Amendment within the
I -2 Zoning District on 4 . 5 acres, Zoning District Change
from Rural to I -2 on 4 . 3 acres; Approval of Developer ' s
Agreement for Tech Park 6th Addition; and Adoption of
Resolution No. 88-205, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance
No . 37-88, and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 24 . 2
acres into one lot, 2 outlots and road right-of-way for
construction of a 90, 600 square foot building addition .
Location : South of W. 74th Street, east of Golden
Triangle Drive . (Ordinance No . 37-88, Rezoning;
Resolution No . 88-205, Authorizing Summary and
Publication )
L. THE OAKS BUSINESS CENTER--Resolution No . 88-202, Recording
Compliance with Developer 's Agreement Requirements for The
Oaks Business Center (Resolution No . 88-202 )
M. . _Sol tlgn Directing the County Audit .y1?!lon
QocUmgnts Withg-u ,Proper City Certification (Resolution
No . 88-192)
N. Hezolutign No . 88-212
Pr frig for Its Tgn Years of Service to the Commun&ty
City Council Minutes 4 September 20, 1988
MOTION :
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the Consent
Calendar with ITEM D being removed . Motion carried
unanimously.
IV . PUBLIC HEARINGS
A . 1988 Assessment Nearing (Resolution No . 88-1.94A ) Continued
from September 8, 1988
City Manager Jullie reported that this item was continued
from the September 8, 1988 Special Assessment Hearing.
Dietz reported that regarding I .C. 52-105, item 2, was
continued due to the request by the property owner to
allow a portion of the utility assessment be homesteaded .
This was done per the direction of the Council and in
addition the error in front footage was corrected . Dietz
reported that item 1 had been shown as homesteaded and was k
non-homesteaded and that item 3 was shown as non- k
homesteaded and was homesteaded . Dietz reported that all
the necessary corrections had been completed .
Dietz reported that regarding the Trunk Sewer and Water
Supplement Assessment, it was discovered that Mr . Touve
had been assessed and had paid the connection fees . Dietz
reported that item 3 had shown the properties as non-
homesteaded and the property should have been homesteaded
and therefore, the $520 . 00 would be moved from the 1989
column to the 1994 column .
Dietz reported that per the Council 's request Staff had
looked at the sod on Prairie View Drive and found that two
of the properties had taken care of the sod and it was
found to be in excellent condition; however, there were
other properties that had not taken care of the sod and
the sod was found to be in poor condition . Dietz stated
that Staff did not recommend to replace the sod . He said
that all the residents had been given adequate notice that
they would be required to take responsibility for the sod .
Dietz said that Staff did recommend that the center island
be reseeded and that weed control be implemented .
Pidcock asked Dietz what had been determined regarding the
grading. Dietz replied that the grading had been
corrected previously.
Dietz stated that regarding the request to allow the
assessment of fees which were charged at the time of
plumbing permit issuance to be paid over an extended
period of time, it was the Staff 's recommendation that
since the entire project had been allowed a 5-year
exclusion for utility assessments that no further change
City Council Minutes S September 20, 1988
in the policy of collecting the fee at permit issuance was
advisable .
Peterson stated that regarding the sod issue, that there
may have been extenuating circumstances . He said that
because of the drought two of the property owners had
stated a concern about their private wells, had watered
the sod to the extent that they had deemed safe for the
wells and had not ignored the warning about being
responsible for the sod . Peterson asked Dietz if an
exception could be made and some assistance given to the
residents . Dietz replied that it would be the Council 's
prerogative . Dietz stated that the Superintendent of
Parks had looked at the area and determined that
overseeding would not resolve the problem. He said that:
the old sod would have to be removed and the ground seeded
or the area resodded . Jullie suggested that the matter be
referred back to Staff to determine a compromise with the
residents of this neighborhood .
Anderson asked Dietz for more information on other
projects in the City and asked if this was an isolated
case . Dietz replied that related to City projects, this
project was the only one at the stage of sodding when the
drought started . Anderson commented that the reason for
the question was that he did not want to be caught with
the problem of helping out one neighborhood and not
another if more than one area had been effected . Dietz
believed this to be a unique case .
Bentley stated that he believed that the concerns were
Justified about the precedents that the City would be
setting . Bentley asked City Engineer Gray if he had
personally inspected the grade of the property in
question . Bentley said that based on the comments at the
Special Assessment Hearing he did not believe that the
situation had been corrected satisfactorily. Gray replied
that he understood that the situation had been corrected .
Gray stated that it was difficult to evaluate the
situation today and to judge what had happened due to the
sod shrinking . Bentley suggested that if the sod did need t
to be taken out that the grade be checked and corrected if
necessary.
s
Harris stated that she believed that it was important that
the residents understand their responsibility for the sod .
Anderson stated that even though the City had special
problems this year with the drought, two of the residents
had maintained the sod . Anderson believed that the City s
should take the old sod out, provide new sod, but the
residents should be responsible to replace the sod and to
maintain the soil . s
City Council Minutes 6 September 20, 1988
MOTION •
Bentley moved, seconded by Pidtock to close the Public
Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 88-194A to certify these
revisions to the 1988 Special Assessments . Motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION•
Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock to refer the matter of
sod replacement back to Staff for review and return to the
Council with recommendations . Motion carried unanimously.
B . DATASERV by Opus Corporation . Request for PUD Amendment
Review on 17 . 4 acres, Planned Unit Development District
Review on 17 . 4 acres with a waiver for office use up to
100% within the I-2 Zoning District, Zoning District
Change from Rural to I-2 on 7 . 4 acres and Preliminary Plat
of 17 . 4 acres into 1 lot for construction of additional
parking spaces for the Datasery Headquarters . Location:
South of Technology Drive, east of Prairie Center Drive .
(Resolution 088-188, PUD Concept Amendment to Overall
Prairie Center Business Park PUD; Ordinance No . 40-88-PUD
11-88, PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution. #88-189,
Preliminary Plat ) ( Continued from September 6, 1988 t
Council Meeting)
' Jullie reported that this item was continued from the
September 6, 1988 meeting and proper notices had been
mailed out.
Enger stated that Bob Worthington of Opus Corporation was
not present to address the project at this time . Enger
said the question on this project had been traffic and had
been resolved by a letter from the Opus Corporation.
Enger reported that the request was to add 350 parking
spaces south of the 650 spaces currently in place . He
said that building was zoned industrial currently with 50%
of the building utilized as office space . Enger said that
Datasery would like the flexibility to convert the
building to 100% office space over a gradual period of
time, but it would like to keep Industrial Zoning. Enger
stated that 100% office would be consistent with the use
expected in the center area of the City; however, traffic
was the main issue .
Enger stated that because of the location of the building
between Prairie Center Drive, Highway 5, and Technology
Drive it was important to be aware of the afternoon
traffic that would be generated . Enger said that Datasery
was flexible to have employees leaving at different times _
He said that the 1985 BRW study had indicated 217
afternoon peak-hour trips would be acceptable; however,
Datasery would generate 319 P . M. peak-hour trips . As 319
City Council Minutes 7 September 20, 1988
trips was an existing situation and that Datasery had not
physically altered the building, Staff recommended that
319 trips be used as a base figure for traffic . He said
that Datasery had agreed that as it added employees the
shifts would be staggered to keep the trips at the current
level . Enger stated that Staff was recommending that the
staggered shifts be a mandatory condition of the waiver of
the code limitation to 50% office . Enger stated that the
Planning Commission had reviewed the proposal at its
August 8, 1988 meeting and had recommended approval on a
5-0 vote .
Pidcock asked if Datasery was aware of the services
provided by Southwest Metro . Bob Worthington, having by
now arrived to represent Opus Corporation, stated that he
had not directly communicated with the administrator of
Southwest Metro . Worthington presented the Datasery
traffic management plan and the conversion plan of office
space on a yearly basis . Worthington stated that the
flextime and traffic management plans only pertained to
Datasery and that if another tenant were to take over the
building the traffic management plan would not apply and a
new program would be implemented at that time .
Peterson commended Datasery for voluntarily creating an
aggressive traffic management program . Worthington stated
that Datasery wanted to be a good neighbor in the
community and believed that implementing the traffic
management program represented such a commitment .
Bentley asked Enger if the BRW 1985 Study had taken into
consideration the potential of an overpass and
corresponding ramp at Highway 5. Enger replied that the
Highway 5 improvements had been taken into account .
Bentley asked Enger what specific intersections would have
significant problems. Enger replied that all the
Intersection would have problems, with the worst
intersections being at Prairie Center Drive and the
Highway 5 interconnect, and the ramps at Valley View Road
and Highway 169 . Bentley stated that he would support the
proposal because 100% office use was the original intent y
of the City for that property. `
Bentley wished to go on record as objecting to the City
imposing as a condition of approval for the project a 4
traffic management plan or traffic quotas to any parcel of
land in Eden prairie . Peterson suggested that a special
meeting be held to discuss the City's position on traffic
management .
Egad Hoyt, of Hoyt Development, was concerned with the
request for a variance to allow 100% office space on an I-
2 site, when as a developer he had been asked to make trip
City Council. Minutes 8 September 20, 1988
reductions of approximately 20% and to de- intensify
development projects . Hoyt believed that rather than
requesting a variance from I -2 to 100% office space, the
project should be zoned for 100% office with a variance to
limited industrial use . Hoyt was concerned with the
precedents being set and asked the Council where the line
would be drawn . Hoyt stated that as a taxpayer in the
community he objected to allowing 100% office use and
paying taxes on an industrial property. Hoyt concurred
with Bentley that In the near future there would be an
attempt to tie development intensity to trip generation
and believed that this would be a difficult issue to
resolve because it places the developer in a difficult
position to buy property without knowing in advance what
would be allowed to be built on the property. Hoyt
commended the proponent for the development of the traffic
management plan; however , he believed that the plan would
be difficult 4o monitor . Hoyt asked the Council about
enforcement procedures and what sanctions would be
Implemented if it was determined that the plan was not
working .
Peterson asked Enger if the proponent would request a
rezoning to 100% office at a later date . Enger replied
that the proponent did not plan to request 100% office
rezoning.
i
Bentley asked Enger if a ratio of occupancy could be set
when the proponent would be required to have the property
rezoned for 100% office use . Enger replied that Opus was
the building owner and Datasery was leasing the space from
Opus . He said that Opus had requested to have the
property remain industrial to allow flexibility if the
tenant should change . Enger stated that under the City
Zoning Code the City may not vary a permitted use through
a waiver or variance; however, the City may vary the
degree of the performance criteria to be met. Enger
commented that when discussions took place regarding
"high-tech" the problem was that industrial use could not
be allowed in an office zone . City Attorney Pauly stated
that in reply to Councilmember Bentley's suggestion, one
technique that could be employed would be to grant the
waiver of office use to only 85% or 90% usage and that
rezoning would be necessary to go to 100% office usage .
Peterson believed that the issue was the inequity of
valuation for tax purposes .
Hoyt stated that a variance should not be allowed to run
with the lease of a property. Hoyt believed that after a
building had been converted to 100; office use it would
Impractical for business with part office and part
industrial to consider the property. Hoyt stated that he
did not object to the entire project, but was concerned
about the precedents being set . Hoyt stated that a
City Council Minutes 9 September 20, 1988
developer pays two completely different prices for office
and industrial properties because of the economic factors .
Hoyt believed that the project should be zoned for office .
Worthington believed that a property was taxed based on
use and income stream. Worthington stated that the
building was finished to appear like an office building
per direction from the Council . Worthington did not
believe that the 1 -2 zoning would not depreciate the value
of the surrounding properties . Worthington stated that
Opus was not trying to subvert the zoning ordinance .
Worthington stated that the reason for the variance
procedure was because the conversion would take place over
a 3-to 4-year period . Worthington stated that if Datasery
went to 100% office use all the industrial space would
become non-conforming . He stated that a potential buyer
would not be interested in a property that was in non-
conforming use . Worthington believed that Opus had
developed the most reasonable solution to the problem.
Worthington stated that Opus would not object to rezoning
the property when and if the building would come close to
100% office use .
Peterson asked for clarification on the tax issue . He
asked if office use in an industrial zone was taxed the
same as office use in an office zone . Jullie suggested
that an opinion from the City Assessor be obtained .
Jullie said that there were alternative ways for the
assessing staff could determine the value of a property.
Jullie believed that the property would be evaluated on an a
Income basis .
Bentley stated that ultimately he would like to see the
property zoned office for the following reasons : 1 ) The r
use would be compatible with other buildings in the area
2) When the original request came before the Council the
problem was an overlapping of industrial designation onto
this parcel that represented Rosemount 's use and the
intent was not to indicate that the property had to be
Industrial . Bentley stated that the major issue at the
time of the original proposal was to designate the
building for office use . Bentley suggested that when a
specific level of occupancy was reached the property would
automatically require rezoning and the situation be
reviewed again in a designated period of time . Bentley
believed that there was a possibility to achieve the
original intended use for the property. Bentley concurred
with Hoyt that there were inconsistencies and did not
believe that the City should issue these types of waivers
on a regular basis .
Worthington believed that the Council and Opus agreed on
the objectives for the project and Opus would not have a
problem rezoning the property when it neared the 100%
City Council Minutes 10 September 20, 1988
office use . Worthington stated that while he agreed in
principle he suggested that the Council keep the
percentage as high as possible before the rezoning was
required .
Peterson asked Enger if after hearing the concerns of the
Council if the issues could be worked out between Staff
and opus as part of the Developer ' s Agreement between the
1st and 2nd Reading . Enger believed that the issues could
be resolved .
There were no further comments from the audience .
MOTION:
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to close the Public
Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 88-188 fo:. PUD Concept
Amending . Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION :
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the 1st
Reading of Ordinance No . 40-88-PUD-11-88 for Rezoning .
Motion carried unanimously.
e
MOTION:
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to adopt Resolution No .
88-189 approving the Preliminary Plat and to direct Staff
to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating
Commission and Staff recommendations and including the
Council ' s discussions . Motion carried unanimously.
C . FiNrREJELD CHASES 2 THROUGH 6, by Tandem Properties .
Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from
Industrial to Medium Density Residential on 49 . 5 acres
from Industrial to Low Density Residential on 24 . 4 acres,
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 148 . 2 acres and
review of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for
construction of a residential development . Location :
West of County Road 4 , southeast of Minneapolis and St .
Louis Railroad . (Resolution No . 88-2060 Comprehensive
Guide Plan Amendment; Resolution No . 88-207, PUD Concept
for Fairfield Phases 2-6, Resolution 088-209,
Environmental Assessment Worksheet Finding of. No
Significant Impact )
Jullie reported that notice of the Public Hearing was sent
to owners of 56 surrounding properties and published in
the September 7, 1988 issue of the Eden Prairie News .
Jim Ostenson, of Tandem Properties, presented the project .
Ostenson said that several weeks ago the Council had
approved Phase I of the project and tonight the request
C
y
City Council Minutes 11 September 20, 1988
was to approve Phase 2 through 6 . Ostenson believed that
after working with Staff for several months all of the
problems for the development had been resolved . Ostenson
stated that the access to County Road 4 had been
relocated, lots widened , provided access to the park to
the south of the project, reduced the tree loss, and
relocated the road to offer better access to the school .
Ostenson stated that the proponent was requesting rezoning
and PUD change for the balance of the property. Ostenson
said that the proponent was in agreement with the findings
of the Southwest Study.
Enger reported that this item had been reviewed by the
Planning Commission at the July 25, 1988 and August 22,
1988 meetings and recommended approval on a 6-0 vote .
Enger stated that the Zoning and Platting of the property
would be review by the Planning Commission at its next
meeting . Enger stated that the issues addressed in the
August 19, 1988 Staff Report had been resolved as the
proponent had indicated in the presentation. Enger stated
that it was important to note that approximately 1/3 of
the request was for R1-13. 5 and 2/3 for R1-9 . 5 single-
family lots . He said that approximately 1/2 of the R1-9 . 5
lots would be cluster home lots and would require r
variances . Enger stated that lots for the cluster homes
would be not be less than 8000 square feet and based on
past experiences with cluster home developments the
Planning Commission was comfortable with the size of the
tots for the cluster homes .
Enger reported that a memorandum had been presented to the
Council analyzing the R1-9 . 5 Zoning District and
considered the R1 -9 . 5 issue pertinent to this proposal .
Enger said that Staff had reviewed every RI-9 . 5
development since 1982 and looked at the market value of
the homes . Enger said that the conclusion of the review
was that approximately 1/2 of the homes in the R1-9 . 5
zones could be considered as starter homes per FHA
standards .
Enger stated that the Staff had recommended that a revised
concept plan be prepared by the proponent to reduce the
overall visual density by creating individual
neighborhoods with distinctive architectural themes such
that the R1-9 . 5 area would appear as a collection of
smaller neighborhoods . Enger stated that the proponent
had not had a chance to revise the plan . Enger reported
that Staff agreed with the concept of the PUD waivers;
however, the final decision on granting the waivers would
occur concurrent with the PUD District Review at a later
date . Enger said that a concept plan for tree replacement
had been completed; however , a more detailed plan would be
presented at the time of rezoning.
r
City Council Minutes 12 September 20, 1988
Enger reported that the Southwest Area Phasing Plan was
approximately 3/4 completed and he expected a first draft
to be available within a few weeks . Enger said that the
rezoning and PUD District Review with waivers for street
frontage and lot size for Phases 2-6 should be reviewed
subsequent to the completion of the Southwest Area Phasing
Plan . Enger stated that Staff recommended that no more
than 100 units be constructed within the Phase I area
prior to upgrading of County Road 4 and State Highway 5,
and the intersection at Scenic Heights going on to County
Road 4 and State Highway 5 .
Enger reported that Staff had recommended that Scenic
Heights Road be constructed in the early portion of Phase
II so that a traffic pattern for the neighborhood not
become established with heavy use on the internal roadways
of the project rather, Scenic Heights Road should function
as the collector road as designed . Enger stated that
Staff believed if the project would proceed before the
roadways were upgraded, there would be a significant
environmental impact to the area; however , if the phases
of the project proceeded per the Staff recommendations,
there would not be an environmental impact .
Lambert reported that the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Commission had reviewed this item at its
September 19, 1988 meeting and recommended approval with a
unanimous vote per the Staff Report of August 19, 1988 . i
Harris asked the proponent if the concept of the small
distinct neighborhoods for the R1-9 .5 was acceptable .
Tom Boyce, President of Centex Homes, stated that the
concept was acceptable and that Centex Homes had already
started working on the architectural plans for the
neighborhoods .
Bentley was concerned about proposing to include a waiver
In the concept approval without approving the Preliminary
Plat . He was concerned about the proponent coming back to
the Council requesting larger numbers of variances which
would automatically fall under the PUD waiver . Enger
replied that larger numbers of variances could be
requested; however, he believed that since the Southwest
Study was -,.ear completion, that Phase I had been approved,
and that Phase II would not be started this year that the
time factor was not as pressing . He said that the entire
plan was to be reviewed by the Planning Commission on
September 26, 1988 and that if the Council was not
comfortable with thy► proposal tonight the project could be
continued and the proposal recombined and reviewed again
In several weeks . Enger said that the proponent would
like some type of guideline to follow. Bentley asked
Enger if the granting of the waiver for variances could be
City Council Minutes 13 September 20, 1988
dealt with at the time the Preliminary Plat was approved .
Enger concurred .
Pidcock asked for clarification on when the intersection
of Scenic Heights Road on the west side of Eden Prairie
Road would be completed . Enger replied that Scenic
Heights Road would be realigned to the south when Highway
212 would be constructed . He said that the proponent was
anticipating the construction of Highway 212; however,
their location of Scenic Heights Road would not line up
with the current Scenic Heights Road, leaving the roads
disjointed . Enger said that existing Scenic Heights Road
needed to be upgraded, the new Scenic Heights Road needed
to be constructed to an upgraded level, and the upgrading
of County Road 4/Highway 5 intersection needed to take
place before any further development past Phase I of
Fairfield .
Bentley asked Enger what would happen to the road
alignment at Scenic Heights Road if Highway 212 was never
built . Enger replied that this had not been taken into
consideration . Dietz replied that the jog was
approximately 500 feet and that if Highway 212 was not
built an adjustment would not necessarily have to be made .
Bentley said that the road was intended to be a east/west
collector road . Bentley was concerned about approving the
plan based on the assumption the Highway 212 would be
built and that MN/DOT would realign Scenic Heights Road,
without making allowances for an interim period . Dietz
replied that because of the poor vertical and horizontal
alignment of Scenic Heights Road that it would be a
significant project to undertake to make Scenic Heights
Road an east/west major collector road .
Peterson stated that Tandem Development did not own the
property to the east of the development . Enger replied
that this was a problem; however, the road would have to
be extended to County Road 4 . Bentley asked what the City
would do if the road was not extended and the developer
came before the Council for approval of a plan . Enger
replied that the City had to control this . Bentley was
concerned about the position the City was being placed in .
He believed that it was premature to grant a zoning of the
property without a contingent that a completed Scenic
Heights Road to County Road 4 was in place prior to final
building permit issuance . Enger concurred .
MOTION:
Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to close the Public
Hearing and adopt Resolution go . 88-206 for the
Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment . Motion carried
unanimously.
i
City Council Minutes 14 September 20, 1988
MOT I ONE
Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to adopt Resolution No .
88-207 giving PUD Concept Approval for Fairfield Phases 2
through 6 . Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION :
Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to adopt Resolution No .
68-209 for a Finding of No Significant impact on the
Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Motion carried
unanimously .
MOTION :
Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to direct Staff to
prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission
and Staff recommendations and Council discussions . Motion
carried unanimously.
D. QRKS NUT PLACE by Chestnut Place Partners . Request for
Guide Plan Amendment from Medium Density Residential to
Neighborhood Commercial on 1 . 69 acres, Zoning District
Change from Rural to N-Com on 1 . 69 acres with variances to
be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Preliminary Plat of R
1 . 69 acres into 1 lot for construction of a 8, 208 square
foot commercial center . Location: Northwest corner of
Anderson Lakes Parkway► and Chestnut Drive . (Resolution
088-210, Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment; ordinance
#44-88, Rezoning; Resolution #88-211, Preliminary Plat )
Jullie reported that notice of this Public Hearing was
sent to owners of 17 surrounding properties and published
in the September 17, 1988 issue of the Eden Prairie News .
Brian Cluts, representing the proponent, presented that
project . Cluts stated that the project would be a
neighborhood commercial center , approximately 8200 square
feet in size . He said that a convenience store would be
the anchor for the center and that a small neighborhood
restaurant was currently being negotiated . Cluts stated
that the center would be unique in that pedestrian traffic
would make up 50% of the business for the center . Gluts
said that the Planning Commission was concerned about
traffic onto Anderson Lakes Parkway, internal traffic
congestion, and pedestrian access to the center . Cluts
stated that after working with Staff all the concerns had
been addressed . He said that new sidewalks would be
installed, there would be one access from Anderson Lakes
Parkway and one access from Chestnut- Drive, the parking
layout had been revised, and that increased landscaping
and screening was planned around the gas pumps .
City Council Minutes 15 September 20, 1988
Enger reported that this item was reviewed by the Planning
Commission at its August 22, 1988 meeting and recommended
approval of the proposal on a 4-2 vote, with Anderson and
Hallett voting No due to safety reasons regarding the
location of the gas pumps In traffic lanes . Enger said
that proponent agreed to look at alternative circulation
plans to reduce the conflict between cars and pedestrians .
Enger stated that Staff and the Planning Commission
believed that the corner of Anderson Lakes Parkway and
Chestnut Drive met the criteria for neighborhood-family
housing commercial designation . He said that there would
be a one-mile service area with several multiple units in
the area . Enger stated that the 1 . 69-acre site would
require a variance from the 2-acre minimum required by
Code for a neighborhood commercial district . Enger said
that the proposal was approved based on recommendations
per the Staff Report dated August 19, 1988 .
Lambert reported that the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Commission reviewed this item at Its September
19, 1988 meeting and recommended approval with a unanimous
vote .
Harris asked Enger how far this development was from the
Thom Thumb store located on Anderson Lakes Parkway. Enger
replied approximately one mile .
Harris asked If the developer had a tenant In mind for the
restaurant . Cluts replied that negotiations were taking
place with a Vietnamese restaurant for take o-it and
delivery.
Pidcock asked how many tenants would be In the center .
Gluts replied four units . He said that the two tenants
were already taking up 5400 square feet of the total .
Pidcock asked Enger how many dwelling units were in the
surrounding area . Enger replied approximately 3000 units
within one mile .
Peterson asked if Anderson Lakes Parkway were wide enough
to accommodate bypassing turning traffic . Enger replied
that Anderson Lakes Parkway was a wide 2-lane street at
this location, sight distance was good, a field check had
been done, and he believed that the road was wide enough
to allow traffic to bypass . Pidcock believed that going
around turning cars would be difficult . Bentley believed
that If any traffic flow problems did occur and street
improvements deemed necessary, the Improvement costs would
be assessed to the property owner . Peterson stated that
he would like to see the street system reviewed In this
area and determine If Improvements would be necessary.
Dietz stated that Anderson Lakes Parkway was a 36-foot-
wide street, which would be tight for a striped left turn
City Council Minutes 16 September 20, 1988
lane; however , this would not be a major project . Dietz
commented that when Anderson Lakes Parkway was originally
constructed it was determined that turn lanes would not be
necessary and he did not believe this development would
generate significant traffic in the peak hours . Peterson
commented that he could envision a striped lane at
Chestnut Drive; however, he did not believe that another
striped lane would be necessary at the north access, nor
should traffic be impeded on Anderson Lakes Parkway.
Peterson said that he would like more information on
traffic in this area .
Anderson asked what impact would traffic have on Chestnut
and were there currently any pathways or sidewalks on
Chestnut . Lambert replied that there was a sidewalk on
the south side of Chestnut . Anderson was concerned about
Increased traffic and the pedestrian traffic . Anderson
commented that the plan did not designate a pedestrian
system. Cluts stated that there was a plan to provide a
connection of the sidewalk at the intersection to
discourage pedestrian traffic from cutting across in the
middle of the street .
Pidcock was concerned about the increase of pedestrian
traffic along Anderson Lakes Parkway and asked what was
being proposed and if additional signs would be posted .
Lambert replied that he anticipated increased use of the
8-foot trail along Anderson Lakes Parkway, but did not
recommend additional signage . Pidcock was concerned about
the speed of the cars turning into the center off Anderson
Lakes Parkway.
Glenn Johnson, 7067 Springhill, stated that he had not had
difficulty getting around traffic as a firefighter on
Anderson Lakes Parkway. Johnson was concerned about the
speed of the traffic on Anderson, Lakes Parkway and the
number of small children in the area .
MQTI ON :_
Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley to close the Public
Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 88-210 for Comprehensive
Guide Plan Amendment . Motion carried unanimously.
�I�TI ON
Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley to approve the 1st
Reading of Ordinance No . 44-88 for Rezoning . Motion
carried unanimously.
City Council. Minutes 17 September 20, 1988
MOTION
Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley to adopt Resolution
No . 88-211 approving the Preliminary Plat . Motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION :
Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley to direct Staff to
prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission
and Staff recommendations . Motion carried unanimously .
E . TRUNK WATERMArN IMPROVEMENTS ON PIONEER TRAIL (CSAH N-Q-
F OM MTTCHELL ROAD WEST TO STARING LAKE 2ND ADDTTTON. I .C.
52-14_�_ (Resolution No . 88-200)
Jullie reported that notice of the Public Hearing was
published in the August 31 and September 7, 1988 issues of
the Eden Prairie News and that owners of affected
properties were notified .
Dietz reported that the project was to extend a 12"
watermain from Mitchell Road west to the Staring Lake 2nd
Addition . Dietz said that the project costs were
estimated at $81, 000 . Dietz stated that the adjacent
property owners would be assessed the equivalent of a 6"
watermain or $19 . 95 per lineal foot . He said that
sanitary sewer would be proposed at a future time and
would not come from Mitchell Road but would probably come
from the Staring Lake area . Dietz said that there were
two types of assessments proposed . He said that the
standard rate of $525 for trunk sewer and water for
residential property, the Staring Lake 2nd Addition would
be assessed at the per acre rate of $250 per acre, and the
rate of $19 .95 per lineal foot for adjacent properties .
D16tz said that the homesteaded properties would be
allowed the 5-year extension or until they connect to the
system . He said that the project would start this fall
and if approved tonight could have substantial completion
by November .
i
Jullie informed the residents that there were connection
charges in addition to the assessments .
Ed Fisher, 15160 Pioneer Trail, questioned why the
watermain had to be installed at this time . He said that
he was satisfied with the present setup.
Dietz stated that a property owner can request that
Improvements be made, then the City was obligated to go
through the feasibility study process . Dietz said that
the purpose of the Public Hearing tonight was to give the
Council a chance to hear from residents whether they
believe the improvements are needed . Dietz stated that
r
r
City Council Minutes 18 September 20, 1988
there had been a request from the developer of the. Staring
Lake 2nd Addition for the improvements . Dietz stated that
the project was timely based on other improvements taking
place in the area . He said that the City did recognize
that this could be bad timing for existing residents that
have functioning wells and that was why the 5-year
extension was proposed .
Ron Fischer, 15140 Pioneer Trail , asked how deep the pipe
would run. Dietz replied 7-1/2 feet . Fisher asked if a
soil study had been done because the soil was sand . Dietz
said that the project had not gone out for bids yet and
the f inal des ign had not been determined. Dietz said that the
contractor would not be allowed to close County Road 1 .
Fischer asked if there had been any consideration to
assessing the property on the other side of the road .
Dietz replied that the other side of the street was
outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area and that
City utilities were not to be installed in that area until
after the year 2000 . Dietz said that there was a clause
in the assessment policy which allowed for additional
costs incurred by the City to be assessed to properties
not on the original assessment . Fischer asked who at City
Hall he should see about the other connection fees . Dietz
replied that he should come to the Building Inspections
Department to obtain a fee schedule .
Carol Ehler, 14960 Pioneer Trail, asked when sewer would
be hooked up. Dietz replied that a plan was not available
currently. He said that the Red Rock Ranch project would
have to be in the 2nd phase of development before sewer
could be extended to this area . Ayler asked when the a
sewer would be installed for Staring Lake 2nd Addition .
Dietz replied that Staring Lake 2nd Addition would be on
private septic systems initially.
H-=V--L }
Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock to close the Public
Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 88-200 Ordering
Improvements and Preparation of Plan and Specifications
for I . C. 52-149 . Motion carried unanimously.
F. EASEMENT VACATION 88-OL NORSEMAN IN D 1USTRIAL PARK 5TH
ADDITION (Resolution No . 88-201)
MOTION•
Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to close the Public
Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 88-201 to vacate the
easement . Motion carried unanimously.
1�
I
1:
c i t y Counr i t Minutes 19 September 20, 1988
V. P �O --__MA I-TES
MOTION •
Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley to approve Payment of
Claims No . 45370 to No . 45671 . ROLL CALL VOTE: Anderson,
Bentley, Harris, Pidcock and Peterson all voting "Aye" .
VI . QRDINANC ES fi RESOLUTIONS
VII . PETTTIONS REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A . Item - ,from the Consent Calendar - Charitable Gambling for
the Hockey Association
Anderson stated that he was concerned about the youth
athletic organizations of the community getting involved
with gambling . Anderson was concerned about allowing the
selling of pulltabs in a public restaurant with a liquor
license . Anderson believed that the City should take a
closer look at this issue and would like more information
before he would be prepared to vote on this item.
Anderson was concerned that if the City allowed one
organization to use charitable gambling that this would
open up the. City to requests from more organizations to do
the same thing . i
Bentley suggested that the item be continued and allow
time to gather more information . Peterson suggested that
the Hockey Association be in attendance when this item
would be discussed again.
MOTION :
Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to continue the request
for Charitable Gambling for the Hockey Association and
refer the matter to Staff for additional information .
Harris commented that the letter of request did not have
enough information for her to vote on this issue tonight .
Motion carried unanimously.
VI T I . FYjM�,Sy OF ADV,I SSQRX CQMMI SS IONNS
4
A . Human- Rich & Services ComIRISsion - Report on Elim Homes
Proposal
MOTION •
Bentley moved, seconded by. Harris to accept the Human
Rights & Services Commission Report on the proposal by
Elim Homes . Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes 20 September 20, 1.988
IX. APPOINTMENTS
X . REPORTS OF OFFICE . BOARDS COMM S�, S I QN
A qp gX_t!j c _Cc��zncil Menibe
B . R_ e�ort of City__NOnager
1 . Fall Yard Taste Collection Proposals
Dawson reported that the City had issued an RFP to
licensed haulers within the City. He said that the City
had received a letter from the Woodlake Sanitary Services
stating that it was planning to offer a fall yard waste
program . Dawson reported that after further research it
was the reccmmendation of Staff not to authorize an
official residential yard waste collection program for
fall 1988 . tl.awson stated that Staff would work with
refuse haulex3 to gather data on yard waste collection and
forward the findings to the various agencies .
Peterson asked if the haulers would require the residents
to separate the yard waste from the regular refuse .
Dawson replied that the haulers would require separation
of waste
Harris asked if a yard waste collection program was
offered last year . Dawson replied that a program was
offered last year .
Peterson asked Dawson if the City was not responsible to
require all refuse haulers to comply with a separation j
program for yard waste ,due to the State :mandate that yard
waste could not be taken to the landfills . Dawson replied
that the State mandate wo:ild not take effect until 1990 .
Pidcock believed that the City should make sure that a
yard waste separation program did take place this year .
She believed that the City should have a program started
before the City was compelled to do so . Peterson
commented that if the City woull have 90% compliance with
a voluntary program that this would be an excellent start.
Anderson commented that if the haulers were asked to keep
records that the City would get credit for providing the
service . Dawson stated that the program did not have to
be sponsored by the City to obtain credit for a recycling
program.
Peterson commented that he would encourage the County to
look into the possibility for a facility similar to the
( one in Maple Grove be located in Eden Prairie . Dawson
replied that discussions had taken place with the County
regarding this matter . Peterson suggested looking into
City Council Minutes 21 September 20, 1988
providing biodegradable bags . Anderson stated that he
would like to have more information on the cost of the
bags . Dawson replied that the cost would be 25 to 30
cents per bag .
MOTION •
Harris moved, seconded by Anderson that the City not
conduct a fall 1988 yard waste collection program and that
Staff work with the refuse haulers to design a system for
recording and gathering data on the yard waste collected ..
Motion carried unanimously.
C . Report of City Attorney
D . Report of Diregtol of Planning
E . Regort of pirector o Community Services
F . Report of Director of Public Works
1 . Approve Preliminary Plan four T . H . 5 from 8001 West of
CSAH 4 tg QC11 Rood ( Resolution No . 88-185)
Continued from September 6, 1988
Dietz presented to the Council a letter from MN/DOT
summarizing a meeting that he attended along with City
Engineer Gray and MN/DOT representatives . Dietz said
that basically the letter points out that there are 4
areas of the project that need further consideration with
noise abatement being the most significant . He said that
MN/DOT would construction a 7-to 8-foot high earth mound f:
west of Heritage Road to the end of the urban section,
which would be to the west line of the Pauly property.
Dietz said that MN/DOT was proposing to lower the grade of
the road by 2 to 3 feet; however, this was not the final
design . He said that MN/DOT had combined the lowering of
the grade and the 7-to 8-foot high earth mound to
accomplish the equivalent of a 9-to 11-foot berm . Dietz
stated that MN/DOT was considering a request by the
property owner at the northwest corner of Heritage Road
and Highway 5 to buy the property and that if it purchased
the property the berm would be extended along that
property to allow for additional noise abatement . Dietz
commented that the located at the northwest corner of
Heritage Road was the lot that would have the most impact
by noise . Dietz stated that another issue was the speed
limit and that MN/DOT had agreed to do a speed study. He
said that the study would be done for the entire length of
Highway 5 from r-494 to the City limits . Dietz stated
that MN/DOT would re-sign the Highway for speed limits if
the study results indicated a need . Dietz said that
k MN/DOT had a copy of the City' s Tree Ordinance and agreed
to follow the guidelines :yet forth in the ordinance . He
{
i
h
1
City Council Minutes 22 September 20, 1988
said that MN/DOT was committed to transplanting as many
trees as possible and provide screening. Dietz stated
that MN/DOT did not believe that a signal at Heritage Road
was warranted; however, they did agree to review this and
to conduct a gap study at the intersection. He said that
MN/DrT had committed to installing conduit and that if a
signal was warranted one would be installed . Dietz stated
that MN/DOT agreed that a signal would be warranted as
Dell Road was developed . Dietz recommended that the
Council approve the layout plan with these qualifications .
Sidney Pauly, 17450 W. 78th Street, stated that she
appreciated the work that MN/DOT had done to address the
concerns of the residents . Mrs . Pauly was concerned about
the future noise that might possibly generated . She said
that it was her understanding that MN/DOT could come back
to correct the problem of noise if deemed necessary and
questioned who would have to initiate the request for
MN/DOT to conduct a noise study. Mr . Hofsted,
representing MN/DOT, replied that they did get requests
from residents to monitor noise along roadways . Mrs .
Pauly asked if the City would have this in writing .
Hofsted replied that the statement would become part of
the record tonight . Mrs . Pauly asked for clarification on
the tree replacement and what trees would be replaced .
Dietz replied that any significant trees would be
replaced . Mrs . Pauly was concerned about the evergreen
trees in the area being saved .
r
Roger Pauly asked after the monitoring took place, what
would happen if the noise levels were exceeded . Hofsted
replied that the determination would have to be made at
the time what was needed and funding would need to be
obtained.
Pidcock asked what the City could do to help residents
along the Highway if they did not get a response to their
satisfaction from the State . Peterson replied that they
could come to the Council and the City would then join
with the residents in presenting the complaints to the
State if the Council found them to be legitimate . Pidcock
agreed .
MaTION:
Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to adopt Resolution No.
88-185 to approve the Preliminary Plan for Highway 5 nest
of Eden Prairie Road .
Peterson commended Director of Public Works Dietz, Staff
and MN/DOT for working to achieve the improvements
presented tonight .
Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes 23 September 20, 1988
2 . sward Contract for Lime Sludge Removes and DLsp_osal "
._ r .C. 52-151
Dietz recommended that the contract be awarded to Max
Johnson Trucking per its bid at a cost not to exceed
$112, 500 .
MOTION:
Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock to award the contract
No . 52-151 for Lime Sludge Removal to Max Johnson Trucking
per its bid at a cost not to exceed $112, 500 .
Pidcock asked if any care was taken to improve the looks
of the area . Dietz replied that a fence and landscaping
would be placed in the area . Anderson concurred with
Pidcock that the area should be cleaned up.
Motion carried unanimously.
G. Report gf Finance Dlggtoz
XI . NEW BUS MESS
0
XII . ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 10 : 55 PM.
a
{
t
d
i
j
APPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 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: City Manager Carl J . Jullie, Assistant
to the City Manager. Craig Dawson, City
Attorney Roger Pauly, Director of
Planning Chris Enger, Director of
Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources
Robert Lambert, Director of Public
Works Eugene A . Dietz, and Recording
Secretary Deb Edlund
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL : All members present .
I . B,PPRQVAL OF AGENQ& &OD OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS ?
MOTION:
k,
Anderson moved, seconded by Harris to approve the Agenda as
published .
Jullie reported that an amended Developers Agreement had been
presented to the Council for Item J on the Consent Calendar,
LaVonne Industrial Park Building IV. Jullie stated that the
changes clarified the dedication of an easement for a trail
and cash park fee .
MOTION•
Anderson moved, seconded by Harris to amend the previous
Motion and REMOVE Item D from the Consent Calendar and place
under ITEM, VII .A. Motion carried .
Motion carried unanimously.
i
y
City Council Minutes 2 September 20, 1988
II . MI-NUTES
A.
NOT I ON:
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the Minutes
of the Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, July 19,
1988 as published. Motion carried unanimously.
B . Regular City CouncilMeeting u a August
1988
MOXI ON
Corrections : Page 23, Paragraph 2 should read : Harris
inquired into the City's legal rights.
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the Minutes
of the Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, August
9, 1988 as amended .
i
Motion carried unanimously.
III . CONSENT CALENDAR s
A . Clegk l-s License List
B . 2nd Reading . 4 - o
i
Section 9 . 40 SUbd . 3A to Restrict the Area Where
Discharge of Firegrma Arg e, r�,miitted
C. 2nd ReadLng of Qrdinancg No . 2-8,Q . Rules and gegulations
Governing, Municipal Cemetery
D.
Hockey fssgglatipn of Eden PralA1e (THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED
FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR AND MOVED TO ITEM VIL .A)
E.
Prairie Road and 392th 2f kitchell Lake) Resolution No.
88-195
F. Einal Plat AnprOvAl fQr Terhnoloay PAXk nth Addition
( located syth gf /Pest 74th Stream and east of holden
Tr isIQ9le Driyt ) Resolution No . 88-196
G.
I . C . 52-119
H. Provide, a Conner( between Red Rock -Lake and the Proposed
City Council Minutes 3 September 20, 1988
and Cheyt-nne Place t o s . 52-152
(Resolution No . 88-197)
I . Reggive Feagipi]icy Study ygr Watermajn Extepgion on Eden
.
an SCt Public Hearing mate, I .C. 52-,147 (Resolution
!l No.
88-199)
J. LAVQNNE INDUSTRIAL PARK BUILDING IV, by LaVonne Industrial
Park Partnership IV. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No . 36-88-
PUD-10-88, PUD District and Zoning District Amendment
within the I-2 Zoning District on 4 .64 acres, Zoning
District Change from Rural to I-2 on 0 . 25 acres, and from
Rural to R1-13 . 5 on 0 .89 acres; Approval of Developer 's
Agreement for LaVonne Industrial Park Building IV; and
Adoption of kesolution No . 86-204, Authorizing Summary of s
Ordinance No. 36-88-PUD-10-88, and Ordering Publication of
Said Summary. 33 acres for PUD District; 7 .66 acres into r
one lot and one outlot for construction of 60, 000 square
feet of office/warehouse use . Location: South of a
Edenvale Boulevard. (Ordinance No . 36-88-PUD-10-88, PUD
District and Rezoning; Resolution No . 88-2040 Authorizing
Summary and Publication )
K . TECH PARK 6TH AQj2I_TON4 (FKA Norseman Industrial Park 6th
Addition) by Eberhardt/Hoyt Development . 2nd Reading of
Ordinance No. 37-88, Zoning District Amendment within the
I-2 Zoning District on 4 . 5 acres, Zoning District Change
from Rural to T-2 on 4 . 3 acres; Approval of Developer 's
Agreement for Tech Park 6th Addition; and Adoption of
Resolution No. 88-205, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance
No . 37-88, and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 24 . 2
acres into one lot, 2 outlots and road right-of-way for
construction of a 90,600 square foot building addition .
Location: South of W. 74th Street, east of Golden
Triangle Drive . (Ordinance No. 37-880 Rezoning;
Resolution No. 88-205, Authorizing Summary and
Publication)
L. THE�QAKS BUSINESS C&NTER --Resolution No. 88-202, Recording
Compliance with Developer 's Agreement Requirements for The
Oaks Business Center (Resolution No. 88-202 )
M. Resolution D.ireCting the_ County Auditor to Deny Div„iaion
Documgnts without Proper City Cer am+ficatIon (Resolution
No . 88-192)
N.
i
City Council Minutes 4 September 20, 3.988
MQTI oN:
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the Consent
Calendar with ITEM D being removed . Motion carried
unanimously.
iv . Punic HEAR I Ncs
A. 1988 Assessment Hearing (Resolution No . 88-194A) Continued
from September 8, 1988
"Y
City Manager 3ullie reported that this item was continued
from the September 8, 1988 Special Assessment Hearing .
Dietz reported that regarding I .C. 52-105, item 2, was R
continued due to the request by the property owner to
allow a portion of the utility assessment be homesteaded .
This was done per the direction of the Council and in
addition the error in front footage was corrected . Dietz
reported that item 1 had been shown as homesteaded and was
non-homesteaded and that item 3 was shown as non-
homesteaded and was homesteaded . Dietz reported that all
the necessary corrections had been completed .
Dietz reported that regarding the Trunk Sewer and Water
Supplement Assessment, it was discovered that Mr . Touve
had been assessed and had paid the connection fees . Dietz
reported that item 3 had shown the properties as non-
homesteaded and the property should have been homesteaded
and therefore, the $520 .00 would be moved from the 1989
column to the 1994 column.
Dietz reported that per the Council 's request Staff had
looked at the sod on Prairie View Drive and found that two
of the properties had taken care of the sod and it was
found to be in excellent condition; however, there were
other properties that had not taken care of the sod and
the sod was found to be In poor condition . Dietz stated
that Staff did not recommend to replace the sod . He said
that all the residents had been given adequate notice that
they would be required to take responsibility for the sod .
Dietz said that Staff did recommend that the center island
be reseeded and that weed control be implemented .
Pidcock asked Dietz what had been determined regarding the
grading. Dietz replied that the grading had been
corrected previously.
Dietz stated that regarding the request to allow the
assessment of fees which were charged at the time of
plumbing permit issuance to be paid over an extended
period of time, it was the Staff 's recommendation that
since the entire proiact had been allowed a 5-yeas
exclusion for utility assessments that no further change
City Council Minutes 5 September 20, 1988
in the policy of collecting the fee at permit issuance was
advisable .
Peterson stated that regarding the sod issue, that there
may have been extenuating circumstances . He said that
because of the drought two of the property owners had
stated a concern about their private wells, had watered
the sod to the extent that they had deemed safe for the
wells and had not ignored the warning about being
responsible for the sod . Peterson asked Dietz if an
exception could be made and some assistance given to the
residents . Dietz replied that it would be the Council ' s
prerogative . Dietz stated that the Superintendent of
Parks had looked at the area and determined that
overseeding would not resolve the problem. He said that
the old sod would have to be removed and the ground seeded
or the area resodded . Jullie suggested that the matter be
referred back to Staff to determine a compromise with the
residents of this neighborhood . t
Anderson asked Dietz for more information on other
projects in the City and asked if this was an isolated
case . Dietz replied that related to City projects, this
project was the only one at the stage of sodding when the
drought started . Anderson commented that the reason for
the question was that he did not want to be caught with
the problem of helping out one neighborhood and not
another if more than one area had been effected . Dietz
believed this to be a unique case .
Bentley stated that he believed that the concerns were
Justified about the precedents that the City would be
setting. Bentley asked City Engineer Gray if he had
personally inspected the grade of the property in
question . Bentley said that based on the comments at the
Special Assessment Hearing he did not believe that the
situation had been corrected satisfactorily. Gray replied
that he understood that the situation had been corrected.
Gray stated that it was difficult to evaluate the
situation today and to judge what had happened due to the
sod shrinking . Bentley suggested that if the sod did need
to be taken out that the grade be checked and corrected if
necessary.
Harris stated that she believed that it was important that
the residents understand their responsibility for the sod .
Anderson stated that even though the City had special
problems this year with the drought, two of the residents
had maintained the sod. Anderson believed that the City
should take the old sod out, provide new sod, but the
residents should be responsible to replace the sod and to
maintain the sod .
City Council Minutes 6 September 20, 1988
�" MOTION
�4Y
Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock to close the Public
Hearing and adopt Resolution No. 88-194A to certify these
revisions to the 1988 Special Assessments . motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION•
Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock to refer the matter of
sod replacement back to Staff for review and return to the
Council with recommendations . Motion carried unanimously.
B . DATASERV by Opus Corporation. Request for PUD Amendment
Review on 17 . 4 acres, Planned Unit Development District
Review on 17 . 4 acres with a waiver for office use up to
100% within the I-2 Zoning District, Zoninq District
Change from Rural to I-2 on 7 . 4 acres and Preliminary Plat.
of 17 . 4 acres into 1 lot for construction of additional
parking spaces for the Datasery Headquarters . Location:
South of Technology Drive, east of Prairie Center Drive .
(Resolution #88-188, PUD Concept Amendment to Overall
Prairie Center Business Park PUD; Ordinance No. 40-88-PUD-
11-88, PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution 088-189,
Preliminary Plat ) (Continued from September 6, 1988
Council Meeting)
Jullie reported that this item was continued from the
September 6, 1988 meeting and proper notices had been
mailed out .
Enger stated that Bob Worthington of Opus Corporation was
not present to address the project at this time. Enger
said the question on this project had been traffic and had
been resolved by a letter from the Opus Corporation .
Enger reported that the request was to add 350 parking
spaces south of the 650 spaces currently in place . He
said that building was zoned industrial currently with 50%
of the building utilized as office space . Enger said that
Datasery would like the flexibility to convert the
building to 100% office space over a gradual period of
time, but it would like to keep Industrial Zoning. Enger
stated that 100% office would be consistent with the use
expected in the center area of the City; however, traffic
was the main issue .
Enger stated that because of the location of the building
between Prairie Center Drive, Highway 5, and Technology
Drive it was important to be aware of the afternoon
traffic that would be generated . Enger said that Datasery
was flexible to have employees leaving at different times .
He said that the 1985 BRW study had indicated 217
afternoon peak-hour trips would be acceptable; however,
Datasery would generate 319 P .M. peak-hour trips . As 319
City Council minutes 7 September 20, 1988
trips was an existing situation and that Datasery had not
physically altered the building, Staff recommended that
319 trips be used as a base figure for traffic . He said
that Datasery had agreed that as it added employees the
shifts would be staggered to keep the trips at the current
level . Enger stated that Staff was recommending that the
staggered shifts be a mandatory condition of the waiver of
the code limitation to 50% office . Enger stated that the
Planning Commission had reviewed the proposal at its
August 8, 1988 meeting and had recommended approval on a
5-0 vote .
Pfdcock asked if Datasery was aware of the services
provided by Southwest Metro . Bob Worthington, having by
now arrived to represent opus Corporation, stated that he '
had not directly communicated with the administrator of
Southwest Metro. Worthington presented the Datasery
traffic management plan and the conversion plan of office
space on a yearly basis. Worthington stated that the
flextive and traffic management plans only pertained to a
Datasery and that if another tenant were to take over the
building the traffic management plan would not apply and a
new program would be implemented at that time .
Peterson commended Datasery for voluntarily creating an
aggressive traffic management program. Worthington stated
f that Datasery wanted to be a good neighbor in the
l community and believed that implementing the traffic
management program represented such a commitment .
Bentley asked Enger if the BRW 1985 Study had taken into
consideration the potential of an overpass and
corresponding ramp at Highway 5. Enger replied that the
Highway 5 improvements had been taken into account .
Bentley asked Enger what specific intersections would have
significant problems . Enger replied that all the
intersection would have problems, with the worst
intersections being at prairie Center Drive and the
Highway 5 interconnect, and the ramps at valley view Road
and Highway 16.9 . Bentley stated that he would support the
proposal because 100% office use was the original intent
of the City for that property.
Bentley wished to go on record as objecting to the City
imposing as a condition of approval for the project a
traffic management plan or traffic quotas to any parcel of
land in Eden Prairie . Peterson suggested that a special
meeting be held to discuss the City' s position on traffic
management .
Brad Hoyt, of Hoyt Development, was concerned with the
request for a variance to allow 100% office space on an x-
2 site, when as a developer he had been asked to make trip
City Council Minutes 8 September 20, 1988
reductions of approximately 20% and to de-intensify
development projects . Hoyt believed that rather than
requesting a variance from 1 -2 to 100% office space, the
project should be zoned for 100% office with a variance to
limited industrial use . Hoyt was concerned with the
precedents being set and asked the Council where the line
would be drawn . Hoyt stated that as a taxpayer in the
community he objected to allowing 100% office use and
paying taxes on an industrial property. Hoyt concurred
with Bentley that in the near future there would be an
attempt to tie development intensity to trip generation
and believed that this would be a difficult issue to
resolve because it places the developer in a difficult
position to buy property without knowing in advance what
would be allowed to be built on the property. Hoyt
commended the proponent for the development of the traffic
management plan; however, he believed that the plan would
be difficult to monitor . Hoyt asked the Council about
enforcement procedures and what sanctions would be
implemented if it waL determined that the plan was not
working.
Peterson asked Enger if the proponent would request
rezoning to 100% office at a later date . Enger replied r
that the proponent did not plan to request 100% office
rezoning.
Bentley asked Enger if a ratio of occupancy could be set
when the proponent would be required to have the property
rezoned for 100% office use. Enger replied that opus was
the building owner and Datasery was leasing the space from
Opus . He said that Opus had requested to have the
property remain industrial to allow flexibility if the
tenant should change . Enger stated that under the City
Zoning Code the City may not vary a permitted use through
a waiver or variance; however, the City may vary the
degree of the performance criteria to be met. Enger
commented that when discussions took place regarding
"high-tech" the problem was that industrial use could not
be allowed in an office zone. City Attorney Pauly stated
that in reply to Councilmember Bentley's suggestion, one
technique that could be employed would be to grant the
waiver of office use to only 85% or 90% usage and that
rezoning would be necessary to go to 100% office usage .
Peterson believed that the issue was the inequity of
valuation for tax purposes .
Hoyt stated that a variance should not be allowed to run
with the lease of a property. Hoyt believed that after a
building had been converted to 100% office use it would
Impractical for a business with part office and part
Industrial to consider the property. Hoyt stated that he
did not object to the entire project, but was concerned
about the precedents being set . Hoyt stated that a
City Council Minutes 9 September 20, 1988
developer pays two completely different prices for office
and industrial properties because of the economic factors .
Hoyt believed that the project should be zoned for office .
Worthington believed that a property was taxed based on
use and income stream . Worthington stated that the
building was finished to appear like an office building
per direction from the Council . Worthington did not
believe that the I-2 zoning would not depreciate the value
of the surrounding properties . Worthington stated that
Opus was not trying to subvert the zoning ordinance .
Worthington stated that the reason for the variance
procedure was because the conversion would take place over
a 3-to 4-year period. Worthington stated that if Datasery
went to 100% office use all the industrial space would
become non-conforming . He stated that a potential buyer
would not be interested in a property that was in non-
conforming use . Worthington believed that Opus had
developed the most reasonable solution to the problem.
Worthington stated that Opus would not object to rezoning
the property when and if the building would come close to
100E office use .
Peterson asked for clarification on the tax issue . He
asked if office use in an industrial zone was taxed the
same as office use in an office zone. Jullie suggested
( that an opinion from the City Assessor be obtained .
Jullie said that there were alternative ways for the
assessing staff could determine the value of a property.
Jullie believed that the property would be evaluated on an
Income basis . a
Bentley stated that ultimately he would like to see the
property zoned office for the following reasons : 1 ) The
use would be compatible with other buildings in the area
2 ) When the original request came before the Council the
problem was an overlapping of industrial designation onto
this parcel that represented Rosemount 's use and the
intent was not to indicate that the property had to be
Industrial . Bentley stated that the major issue at the
time of the original proposal was to designate the
building for office use . Bentley suggested that when a
specific level of occupancy was reached the property would
automatically require rezoning and the situation be
reviewed again in a designated period of time . Bentley
believed that there was a possibility to achieve the
original intended use for the property. Bentley concurred
with Hoyt that there were inconsistencies and did not
believe that the City should issue these types of waivers
on a regular basis .
Worthington believed that the Council and Opus agreed on
the objectives for the project and Opus would not have a
problem rezoning the property when it neared the 100%
City Council minutes 10 September 20, 1988
office use . Worthington stated that while he agreed in
principle he suggested that the Council keep the
percentage as high as possible before the rezoning was
required.
Peterson asked Enger if after hearing the concerns of the
Council if the issues could be worked out between Staff
and Opus as part of the Developer 's Agreement between the
1st and 2nd Reading . Enger believed that the issues could
be resolved .
There were no further comments from the audience .
MOTiQN •
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to close the Public
Hearing and adopt Resolution No . ' 88-188 for PUD Concept
Amending. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION:
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the 1st
Reading of Ordinance No . 40-88-PUD-11-88 for Rezoning . p
Motion carried unanimously.
Oft TION:
z
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to adopt Resolution No.
88-189 approving the Preliminary Plat and to direct Staff
to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating
Commission and Staff recommendations and including the
Council 's discussions . Motion carried unanimously.
C. FFAIEFIELD PHAS&S 2 THROUGH 6, by Tandem Properties.
Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from
Industrial to Medium Density Residential on 49 . 5 acres k
from Industrial to Low Density Residential on 24 . 4 acres,
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 148 . 2 acres and
review of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for
construction of a residential development . Location:
West of County Road 4, southeast of Minneapolis and St.
Louis Railroad . (Resolution No. 88-206, Comprehensive
Guide Plan Amendment; Resolution No. 88-207, PUD Concept
for Fairfield Phases 2-6, Resolution #88-209,
Environmental Assessment Worksheet Finding of No
Significant Impact )
Jullie reported that notice of the Public Hearing was sent
to owners of 56 surrounding properties and published in
the September 7, 1988 issue of the Eden Prairie Nevs .
Jim Ostenson, of Tandem Properties, presented the project .
Ostenson said that several weeks ago the Council had
approved Phase I of the project and tonight the request
City Council Minutes 11 September 20, 1988
was to approve Phase 2 through 6 . Ostenson believed that
after working with Staff for several months all of the
problems for the development had been resolved . Ostenson
stated that the access to County Road 4 had been
relocated, lots widened, provided access to the park to
the south of the project, reduced the tree loss, and
relocated the road to offer better access to the school .
Ostenson stated that the proponent was requesting rezoning
and PUD change for the balance of the property. Ostenson
said that the proponent was in agreement with the findings
of the Southwest Study.
Enger reported that this item had been reviewed by the
Planning Commission at the July 25, 1988 and August 22,
1988 meetings and recommended approval on a 6-0 vote .
Enger stated that the Zoning and Platting of the property
would be review by the Planning Commission at its next
meeting . Enger stated that the issues addressed in the
August 19, 1988 Staff Report had been resolved as the
proponent had indicated in the presentation . Enger stated
that it was important to note that approximately 1/3 of
the request was for R1-13 . 5 and 2/3 for R1-9 . 5 single-
family lots . He said that approximately 1/2 of the R1-9 . 5
lots would be cluster home lots and would require
variances . Enger stated that lots for the cluster homes
would be not be less than $000 square feet and based on A
past experiences with cluster home developments the
Planning Commission was comfortable with the size of the
lots for the cluster homes .
Enger reported that a memorandum had been presented to the
Council analyzing the R1-9 . 5 Zoning District and
considered the R1-9 . 5 issue pertinent to this proposal.
Enger said that Staff had reviewed every R1-9 . 5
development since 1982 and looked at the market value of
the homes . Enger said that the conclusion of the review
was that approximately 1/2 of the homes in the R1-9 . 5
zones could be considered as starter homes per FHA
standards .
Enger stated that the Staff had recommended that a revised
concept plan be prepared by the proponent to reduce the
overall visual density by creating individual
neighborhoods with distinctive architectural themes such
that the R1-9 . 5 area would appear as a collection of
smaller neighborhoods . Enger stated that the proponent
had not had a chance to revise the plan. Enger reported
that Staff agreed with the concept of the PUD waivers; .
however, the final decision on granting the waivers would
occur concurrent with the PUD District Review at a later
date . Enger said that a concept plan for tree replacement
had been completed; however, a more detailed plan vould be
presented at the time of rezoning.
d
City Council Minutes 12 September 20, 1988
Enger reported that the Southwest Area Phasing Plan was
approximately 3f4 completed and he expected a first draft
to be available within a few weeks. Enger said that the
rezoning and PUD District Review with waivers for street
frontage and lot size for Phases 2-6 should be reviewed
subsequent to the completion of the Southwest Area Phasing
Plan. Enger stated that Staff recommended that no more
than 100 units be constructed within the Phase I area
prior to upgrading of County Road 4 and State Highway 5,
and the intersection at Scenic Heights going on to County
Road 4 and State Highway 5.
Enger reported that Staff had recommended that Scenic
Heights Road be constructed in the early portion of Phase
Ii so that a traffic pattern for the neighborhood not
become established with heavy use on the internal roadways
of the project rather, Scenic Heights Road should function
as the collector road as designed. Enger stated that
Staff believed if the project would proceed before the
roadways were upgraded, there would be a significant
environmental impact to the area; however, if the phases
of the project proceeded per the Staff recommendations,
there would not be an environmental impact .
Lambert reported that the Parks, Recreation 6 Natural
Resources Commission had reviewed this item at its
September 19, 1988 meeting and recommended approval with a
unanimous vote per the Staff Report of August 19, 1988 .
Harris asked the proponent if the concept of the small
distinct neighborhoods for the R1-9 .5 was acceptable .
Tom Boyce, President of Centex Homes, stated that the
concept was acceptable and that Centex Homes had already
started working on the architectural plans for the
neighborhoods.
Bentley was concerned about proposing to include a waiver
in the concept approval without approving the Preliminary
Plat. He was concerned about the proponent cowing back to
the Council requesting larger numbers of variances which
would automatically fall under the PUD waiver. Enger
replied that larger numbers of variances could be
requested; however, he believed that since the Southwest
Study was near completion, that Phase I had been approved,
and that Phase 11 would not be started this year that the
time factor was not as pressing . He said that the entire
plan was to be reviewed by the Planning Commission on
September 26, 1988 and that if the Council was not
comfortable with the proposal tonight the project could be
continued and the proposal recombined and reviewed again
in several weeks. Enger said that the proponent would
like some type of guideline to follow . Bentley asked
t Enger if the granting of the waiver for variances could be
1
City Council Minutes 13 September 20, 1988
dealt with at the time the Preliminary Plat was approved .
Enger concurred .
Pidcock asked for clarification on when the intersection
of Scenic Heights Road on the west side of Eden Prairie
Road would be completed. Enger replied that Scenic
Heights Road would be realigned to the south when Highway
212 would be constructed . He said that the proponent was
anticipating the construction of Highway 212; however,
their location of Scenic Heights Road would not line up
with the current Scenic Heights Road, leaving the roads
disjointed . Enger said that existing Scenic Heights Road
needed to be upgraded, the new Scenic Heights Road needed
to be constructed to an upgraded level, and the upgzading
of County Road 4/H4-ghway 5 intersection needed to take
place before any further development past Phase I of
Fairfield .
Bentley asked Enger what would happen to the road
alignment at Scenic Heights Road if Highway 212 was never
built . Enger replied that this had not been taken into
consideration. Dietz replied that the Jog was
approximately 500 feet and that if Highway 212 was not b
built an adjustment would not necessarily have to be made .
Bentley said that the road was intended to be a east/west k
collector road . Bentley was concerned about approving the
plan based on the assumption the Highway 212 would be
built and that MN/DOT would realign Scenic Heights Road,
without making allowances for an interim period. Dietz n
replied that because of the poor vertical and horizontal
alignment of Scenic Heights Road that it would be a
significant: project to undertake to make Scenic Heights
Road an east/west major collector road .
Peterson stated that Tandem Development did not own the
property to the east of the development. Enger replied
that this was a problem; however, the road would have to
be extended to County Road 4 . Bentley asked what the City
would do if the road was not extended and the developer
came before the Council for approval of a plan. Enger
replied that the City had to control this. Bentley was
concerned about the position the City was being placed in.
He believed that it was premature to grant a zoning of the
property without a contingent that a completed Scenic
Heights Road to County Road 4 was in place prior to final
building permit issuance . Enger concurred .
MOTION:
Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to close the Public
Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 88-206 for the
Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment . Motion carried
unanimously.
City Council Minutes 14 September 20, 1988
MOTION:
Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to adopt Resolution No .
88-207 giving PUD Concept Approval for Fairfield Phases 2
through 6. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION:
Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to adopt Resolution No.
88-209 for a Finding of No Significant Impact on the
Environmental Assessment Worksheet . Motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION:
Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to direct Staff to
prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission
and Staff recommendations and Council discussions . Motion
carried unanimously.
D. CHESTNUT PLACE by Chestnut Place Partners . Request for
Guide Plan Amendment from. Medium Density Residential to
Neighborhood Commercial on 1 . 69 acres, Zoning District
Change from Rural to N-Com on 1 .69 acres with variances to
be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Preliminary Plat of
1 . 69 acres into 1 lot for construction of a 8, 208 square
foot commercial center . Location : Northwest corner of
Anderson Lakes Parkway and Chestnut Drive . (Resolution
888-210, Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment; Ordinance
844-88, Rezoning; Resolution 888-211, Preliminary Plat )
Jullie reported that notice of this Public Hearing was
sent to owners of 17 surrounding properties and published
In the September 17, 1988 issue of the Eden Prairie News .
s
Brian Gluts, representing the proponent, presented that
project . Clots stated that the project would be a
neighborhood commercial center, approximately 8200 square
feet in size . He said that a convenience store would be
the anchor for the center and that a small neighborhood
restaurant was currently being negotiated . Cluts stated
that the center would be unique in that pedestrian traffic
would make up 50% of the business for the center . Cluts
said that the Planning Commission was concerned about
traffic onto Anderson Lakes Parkway, internal traffic
congestion, and pedestrian access to the center . Clots
stated that after working with Staff all the concerns had
been addressed . He said that new sidewalks would be
installed, there would be one access from Anderson Lakes
Parkway and one access from Chestnut Drive, the parking
layout had been revised, and that increased landscaping
and screening was planned around the gas pumps .
1.
City Council Minutes 15 September 20, 1988
Enger reported that this item was reviewed by the Planning
Commission at its August 22, 1988 meeting and recommended
approval of the proposal on a 9-2 vote, with Anderson and
Hallett voting No due to safety reasons regarding the
location of the gas pumps in traffic lanes . Enger said
that proponent agreed to look at alternative circulation
plans to reduce the conflict between cars and pedestrians .
Enger stated that Staff and the Planning Commission
believed that the corner of Anderson Lakes Parkway and
Chestnut Drive met the criteria for neighborhood--family
housing commercial designation. He said that there would
be a one-mile service area with several multiple units in
the area . Enger stated that the 1 .69-acre site would
require a variance from the 2-acre minimum required by
Code for a neighborhood commercial district . Enger said
that the proposal was approved based on recommendations
per the Staff Report dated August 19, 1988 .
Lambert reported that the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Commission reviewed this item at its September
19, 1988 meeting and recommended approval with a unanimous
vote.
Harris asked Enger how far this development was from the
Thom Thumb store located on Anderson Lakes Parkway. Enger
replied approximately one mile.
Harris asked if the developer had a tenant in mind for the
restaurant . Cluts replied that negotiations were taking
place with a Vietnamese restaurant for take out and
delivery.
Pidcock asked how many tenants would be in the center .
Cluts replied four units . He said that the two tenants
were already taking up 5400 square feet of the total .
Pidcock asked Enger how many dwelling units were in the
surrounding area . Enger replied approximately 3000 units
within one mile .
Peterson asked if Anderson Lakes Parkway were wide enough
to accommodate bypassing turning traffic . Enger replied
that Anderson Lakes ;Parkway was a wide 2-lane street at
this location, sight distance was good, a field check had
been done, and he believed that the road was wide enough
to allow traffic to bypass . Pidcock believed that going
around turning cars would be difficult . Bentley believed
that if any traffic flow problems did occur and street
Improvements deemed necessary, the improvement costs would
be assessed to the property owner . Peterson stated that
he would like to see the street system reviewed in this
area and determine if improvements would be necessary.
Dietz stated that Anderson Lakes Parkway was a 36-foot-
wide street, which would be tight for a striped left turn
a
City Council Minutes 16 September 20, 1988
lane; however, this would not be a maJor project . Dietz
commented that when Anderson Lakes Parkway was originally
constructed it was determined that turn lanes would not be
necessary and he did not believe this development would
generate significant traffic in the peak hours . Peterson
commented that he could envision a striped lane at
Chestnut Drive; however, he did not believe that another
striped lane would be necessary at the north access, nor
should traffic be impeded on Anderson Lakes Parkway.
Peterson said that he would like more information on
traffic in this area.
7
Anderson asked what impact would traffic have on Chestnut .
and were there currently any pathways or sidewalks on
Chestnut. Lambert replied that there was a sidewalk on
the south side of Chestnut . Anderson was concerned about
Increased traffic and the pedestrian traffic. Anderson
commented that the plan did not designate a pedestrian
system. Cluts stated that there was a plan to provide a
connection of the sidewalk at the intersection to
discourage pedestrian traffic from cutting across in the
middle of the street.
Pidcock was concerned about the increase of pedestrian
traffic along Anderson Lakes Parkway and asked what was
being proposed and if additional signs would be posted .
! Lambert replied that he anticipated increased use of the
l 8-foot trail along Anderson Lakes Parkway, but did not
recommend additional signage . Pidcock was concerned about
the speed of the cars turning into the center off Anderson
Lakes Parkway.
Glenn Johnson, 7067 Springhill, stated that he had not had
difficulty getting around traffic as a firefighter on
Anderson Lakes Parkway. Johnson was concerned about the
speed of the traffic on Anderson Lakes Parkway and the
number of small children in the area .
t(OT I ON
Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley to close the Public
Hearing and adopt Resolution No. 88-210 for Comprehensive
Guide Plan Amendment. Motion carried unanimously.
MQTI ON
Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley to approve the lot
Reading of Ordinance No . 44-88 for Rezoning . Motion
carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes 17 September 20, 1988
MOTION
Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley to adopt Resolution
No . 88-211 approving the Preliminary Plat . Motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION:
Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley to direct Staff to
prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission
and Staff recommendations. Motion carried unanimously.
E . Tg!INK WATEgMA,,IN IMPROVEMENTS ON PIONEER TRAIL ( CSAH No . J
FROM MITCHELL ROAD WEST TO STARING LAKE ZND ADDITION- I . C.
5_ -149 (Resolution No . 88-200)
Jullie reported that notice of the Public Hearing was
published in the August 31 and September 7, 1988 issues of
the Eden Prairie News and that owners of affected
properties were notified .
Dietz reported that the project was to extend a 12"
watermain from Mitchell Road west to the Staring Lake 2nd
Addition . Dietz said that the project costs were
estimated at $81, 000 . Dietz stated that the adjacent
property owners would be assessed the equivalent of a 6"
watermain or $19 . 95 per lineal foot . He said that
sanitary sewer would be proposed at a future time and
would not come from Mitchell Road but would probably come
from the Staring Lake area . Dietz said that there were
two types of assessments proposed . He said that the
standard rate of $525 for trunk sewer and water for
residential property, the Staring Lake 2nd Addition would
be assessed at the per acre rate of $250 per acre, and the
rate of $19 .95 per lineal foot for adjacent properties .
Dietz said that the homesteaded properties would be
allowed the 5-year extension or until they connect to the b
system. He said that the project would start this fall
and if approved tonight could have substantial completion
by November .
Jullie informed the residents that there were connection
charges in addition to the assessments.
Ed Fisher, 15160 Pioneer Trail, questioned why the
watermain had to be installed at this time . He said that
he was satisfied with the present setup.
Dietz stated that a property owner can request that
improvements be made, then the City was obligated to go
through the feasibility study process . Dietz said that
the purpose of the Public Hearing tonight was to give the
Council a chance to hear from residents whether they
believe the improvements are needed . Dietz stated that
i
City Council Minutes 18 September 20, 1988
there had been a request from the developer of the Staring
Lake 2nd Addition for the improvements . Dietz stated that
the project was timely based cn other improvements taking
place in the area . He said that the City did recognize
that this could be bad timing for existing residents that
have functioning wells and that was why the 5-year
extension was proposed.
Ron Fischer , 15140 Pioneer Trail, asked how deep the pipe
would run. Dietz replied 7-1/2 feet . Fisher asked if a
soil study had been done because the soil was sand . Dietz
said that the project had not gone out for bids yet and
the final design had not been determined . Dietz said that
the contractor would not be allowed to close County Road
1 . Fischer asked if there had been any consideration to a
assessing the proper�y on the other side of the road .
Dietz replied that the other side of the street was
outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area and that
City utilities were not to be installed in that area until
after the year 2000. Dietz said that there was a clause
in the assessment policy which allowed for additional
costs incurred by the City to be assessed to properties
not on the original assessment . Fischer asked who at City
Hall he should see about the other connection fees . Dietz
replied that he should come to the Building Inspections
Department to obtain a fee schedule .
Carol Ehler, 14960 Pioneer Trail, asked when sewer would
be hooked up. Dietz replied that a plan was not available
currently. He said that the Red Rock Ranch project would
have to be in the 2nd phase of development before sewer
could be extended to this area . Ayler asked when the
sewer would be installed for Staring Lake 2nd Addition.
Dietz replied that Staring Lake 2nd Addition would be on
private septic systems initially.
MOTION:
Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock to close the Public
Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 88-200 Ordering
Improvements and Preparation of Plan and Specifications
for I .C. 52-149 . Motion carried unanimously.
F. EASEMENT VACATION Q8-07. NOR$.EMAN INDUtgTRIAL PARK 5TH
ADDITION (Resolution No . 88-201)
MOTION :
Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to close the Public
Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 88-201 to vacate the
easement . Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes 19 September 20, 1988
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
MOTION•
Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley to approve Payment of
Claims No . 45370 to No . 45671. ROLL CALL, VOTE: Anderson,
Bentley, Harris, Pidcock and Peterson all voting "Aye" .
VI . ORDINANCES &RESQLUTIONS
VII . PETITIONS. REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Item D from the Consent Calendar - Charitable S':gmi2ling for.
the Hockey Association
Anderson stated that he was concerned about the youth
athletic organizations of the community getting involved
with gambling . Anderson was concerned about allowing the
selling of pulltabs in a public restaurant with a liquor
license . Anderson believed that the City should take a
closer look at this issue and would like more information
before he would be prepared to vote on this item.
Anderson was concerned that if the City allowed one
organization to use charitable gambling that this would
open up the City to requests from more organizations to do h
the same thing.
Bentley suggested that the item be continued and allow
time to gather more information. Peterson suggested that
the Hockey Association be in attendance when this item
would be discussed again.
MOTION•
Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to continue the request
for Charitable Gambling for the Hockey Association and
refer the matter to Staff for additional information .
Harris commented that the letter of request did not have
enough information for her to vote on this issue tonight .
Motion carried unanimously.
VI I I . REjaQRTS OF ADVI SQRX COMMI S,S I QNS
A. Human Rights & Services CQMM&Ssion - Report on Elim Homes
Proposal
MOTION :
Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to accept the Human
Rights & Services Commission Report on the proposal by
Elim Homes . Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes 20 September 20, 1988
I X. APPOINTMENTS
X. REPORTS OE OFI!VERS, BOAEtQS fi COMMISSIONS
A. Repsrts of CQO91 1 Members
B. ReQort of City Manager
I . Fall Yard Waste Collection Proposals
Dawson reported that the City had issued an RFP to
licensed haulers within the City. He said that the City
had received a letter from the Noodlake Sanitary Services
stating that it was planning to offer a fall yard waste
program. Dawson reported that after further research it
was the recommendation of Staff not to authorize an
official residential yard waste collection program for
fall 1988 . Dawson stated that Staff would work with
refuse haulers to gather data on yard waste collection and
forward the findings to the various agencies .
Peterson asked if the haulers would require the residents
to separate the yard waste from the regular refuse .
Dawson replied that the haulers would require separation
of waste .
Harris asked if a yard waste collection program was
offered last year . Dawson replied that a program was d
offered last year . '
Peterson asked Dawson if the City was not responsible to
require all refuse haulers to comply with a separation
program for yard waste due to the State mandate that yard s
waste could not be taken to the landfills . Dawson replied
that the State mandate would not take effect until 1990.
r
Pidcock believed that the City should make sure that a
yard waste separation program did take place this year .
She believed that the City should have a program started
before the City was compelled to do so . Peterson
commented that if the City would have 90% compliance with
a voluntary program that this would be an excellent start.
Anderson commented that if the haulers were asked to keep
records that the City would get credit for providing the
service . Dawson stated that the program did not have to
be sponsored by the City to obtain credit for a recycling
program.
Peterson commented that he would encourage the County to
look into the possibility for a facility similar to the
r one in Maple Grove be located in Eden Prairie . Dawson
replied that discussions had taken place with the County
regarding this matter. Peterson suggested looking into
City Council Minutes 21 September 20, 1988
providing biodegradable bags . Anderson stated that he
would like to have more information on the cost of the
bags . Dawson replied that the cost would be 25 to 30
cents per bag.
MOTION
Harris moved, seconded by Anderson that the City not
conduct a fall 1988 yard waste collection program and that
Staff work with the refuse haulers to design a system for
recording and gathering data on the yard waste collected .
Motion carried unanimously.
C. Report of City Attgrncy
D . Report of Director of PlAnnina
w
E . Report Qf Director of Community Services
k
F
F. Report ofpirector at Public works
I . Approve morel iminaYY Pl_a2 foX T.H. 5 f QM 8001 west of
CRAH No . 4 to 12ell Road (Resolution No . 88-185)
Continued from September 6, 1988
Dietz presented to the Council a letter from MN/DOT
summarizing a meeting that he attended along with City
Engineer Gray and MN/DOT representatives . Dietz said
that basically the letter points out that there are 4
areas of the project that need further consideration with
noise abatement being the most significant . He said that
MN/DOT vould construction a ?-to 8-foot high earth mound
west of Heritage Road to the end of the urban section,
which would be to the vest line of the Pauly property.
Dietz said that MN/DOT was proposing to lower the grade of
the road by 2 to 3 feet; however, this was not the final
design . He said that MN/DOT had combined the lowering of
the grade and the 7-to 8-foot high earth mound to
accomplish the equivalent of a 9-to 11-foot berm. Dietz
stated that MN/DOT was considering a request by the
property owner at the northwest corner of Heritage Road
and Highway 5 to buy the property and that if it purchased
the property the berm would be extended along that
property to allow for additional noise abatement . Dietz
commented that the located at the northwest corner of
Heritage Road was the lot that would have the most impact
by noise. Dietz stated that another issue was the speed
limit and that MN/DOT had agreed to do a speed study. He
said that the study would be done for the entire length of
Highway 5 from I -494 to the City limits . Dietz stated
that MN/DOT would re-sign the Highway for speed limits if
the study results indicated a need . Dietz said that
MN/DOT had a copy of the City's Tree Ordinance and agreed
to follow the guidelines set forth in the ordinance. He
City Council Minutes 22 September 20, 1988
said that MN/DOT was committed to transplanting as many
trees as possible and provide screening . Dietz stated
that MN/DOT did not believe that a signal at Heritage Road
was warranted; however, they did agree to review this and
to conduct a gap study at the intersection . He said that
MN/DOT had committed to installing conduit and that if a
signal was warranted one would be installed. Dietz stated
that MN/DOT agreed that a signal would be warranted as
Dell Road was developed . Dietz recommended that the
Council approve the layout plan with these qualifications .
i
Sidney Pauly, 17450 W. 78th Street, stated that she
appreciated the work that MN/DOT had done to address the
concerns of the residents . Mrs. Pauly was concerned about
the future noise that might possibly generated . She said
that it was her understanding that MN/DOT could come back
to correct the problem of noise if deemed necessary and s
questioned who would have to initiate the request for
MN/DOT to conduct a noise study. Mr . Hofsted,
representing MN/DOT, replied that they did get requests
from residents to monitor noise along roadways . Mrs .
Pauly asked if the City would have this in writing.
Hofsted replied that the statement would become part of
the record tonight . Mrs . Pauly asked for clarification on
the tree replacement and what trees would be replaced .
Dietz replied that any significant trees would be
replaced . Mrs . Pauly was concerned about the evergreen
trees in the area being saved.
Roger Pauly asked after the monitoring took place, what
would happen if the noise levels were exceeded . Hofsted
replied that the determination would have to be made at
the time what, was needed and funding would need to be
obtained .
Pidcock asked what the City could do to help residents
along the Highway if they did not get a response to their
satisfaction from the State. Peterson replied that they
could come to the Council and the City would then Join
with the residents in presenting the complaints to the
State if the Council found them to be legitimate . Pidcock
agreed .
MOT LON
Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to adopt Resolution No.
88-185 to approve the Preliminary Plan for Highway 5 West
of Eden Prairie Road .
Peterson commended Director of Public Works Dietz, Staff
and MN/DOT for working to achieve the improvements
presented tonight .
Motion carried unanimously.
city council Minutes 23 September 20, 1988
2 . award ContKact for Lime Sludge Removal and Deposal .
I ,C . L
Dietz recommended that the contract be awarded to Max
Johnson Trucking per its bid at a cost not to exceed
$112, 500 . B
I OT I Ot :
Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock to award the contract
No. 52-151 for Lime Sludge Removal to Max Johnson Trucking
per its bid at a cost not to exceed $112, 500.
Pidcock asked if any care ;gas taken to improve the looks
of the area . Dietz replied that a fence and landscaping
would be placed in the area. Anderson concurred with
Pidcock that the area should be cleaned up.
Notion carried unanimously.
G. RePQXt f Finance Dire for
X1 . NEW EVS I NEB
XII . ADJOURam&NT
Meeting adjourned at 10: 55 PM.
r