HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission - 10/28/2019
AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, October 28, 2019 - 7:00 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEMBERS:
John Kirk, Charles Weber, Ann Higgins, Andrew Pieper, Ed
Farr, Michael DeSanctis, Christopher Villarreal, Carole
Mette, Balu Iyer
STAFF MEMBERS: Julie Klima, City Planner; Rod Rue, City Engineer;
Matt Bourne, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -- ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
IV. MINUTES
A. Approval of the Minutes for the October 14, 2019 meeting
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. 11000 VIKING DRIVE PARKING RAMP (2019-14)
Request for:
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 16.2 acres
Planned Unit Development District Amendment with waivers on 16.2 acres
Site Plan Review on 16.2 acres
VI. PLANNERS’ REPORT
A. HISTORIC YORKVILLE AND BLOOMINGTON ROAD- LOCAL PRESERVATION
DESIGNATION
VII. MEMBERS’ REPORTS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
ANNOTATED AGENDA
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Julie Klima, City Planner
RE: Planning Commission Meeting for Monday, October 28, 2019
_______________________________________________________________________________
MONDAY, October 28, 2019 7:00 PM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE- ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A. MOTION: Move to approve the agenda.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MONDAY, OCTOBER 14,
2019
MOTION: Move to approve the Planning Commission minutes dated October 14, 2019.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. 11000 VIKING DRIVE PARKING RAMP (2019-16)
Request for:
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 16.2 acres
Planned Unit Development District Amendment with waivers on 16.2 acres
Site Plan Review on 16.2 acres
The applicant is proposing to construct a 69,300 square foot parking ramp at 11000 Viking
Drive east of the existing office buildings. The proposed ramp includes 2.5 stories of parking
to better meet parking standards for the Office zoning district. There will be no alterations to
the principal office buildings. The applicant is proposing similar exterior materials for the
parking ramp to compliment the office buildings. Trees removed as part of construction will
be replaced at a one-to-one ratio to comply with the existing landscaping plan.
As part of the PUD amendment, the applicant is seeking waivers for architectural materials,
accessory structure height, and parking stall and aisle dimensions.
Staff recommends approval.
MOTION 1: Move to close the public hearing.
MOTION 2: Move to recommend approval for a Planned Unit Development Concept
Review on 16.2 acres; Planned Unit Development Amendment with waiver on 16.2 acres
and Site Plan Review on 16.2 acres based on Plans stamped dated October 11, 2019 and the
Staff Report dated October 23, 2019.
ANNOTATED AGENDA
October 28, 2019
Page 2
VI. PLANNERS’ REPORT
A. HISTORIC YORKVILLE AND BLOOMINGTON ROAD- LOCAL
HERITAGE PRESERVATION DESIGNATION
The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) has recommended that the City approve
designating a segment of the historic Yorkville and Bloomington Trail located within the City
owned James A. Brown Conservation Area as a Heritage Preservation Site. The Planning
Commission is being asked to review the request for consistency with the Comprehensive
Plan and recommend approval to the City Council of the Local Historic Preservation
Designation. Paul Thorp, HPC member and Dave Lindahl, Interim Staff Liaison to the HPC
will provide brief presentation and answer any questions.
VII. MEMBERS’ REPORT
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Move to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2019 7:00 PM—CITY CENTER
Council Chambers
8080 Mitchell Road
COMMISSION MEMBERS: John Kirk, Charles Weber, Ann Higgins, Andrew
Pieper, Ed Farr, Michael DeSanctis, Christopher
Villarreal, Carole Mette, Balu Iyer
CITY STAFF: Julie Klima, City Planner; Rod Rue, City Engineer;
Matt Bourne, Parks and Natural Resources Manager;
Kristin Harley, Recording Secretary
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
Chair Pieper called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – ROLL CALL
Commission members DeSanctis and Weber were absent.
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Higgins moved, seconded by Iyer to approve the agenda. MOTION
CARRIED 7-0.
IV. MINUTES
MOTION: Farr moved, seconded by Kirk to approve the minutes of September 9, 2019.
MOTION CARRIED 7-0.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
COSTCO FUEL FACILITY EXPANSION (CONTINUED ITEM))
Request for:
Planning Unit Development Concept Review on 18.18 acres
Planning Unit Development District Amendment with Waivers on 18.18
acres
Site Plan Review on 18.18 acres
Julie Anderson, project planner of Barghausen Consulting Engineers, displayed a
PowerPoint and explained the application. The project called for a PUD
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
October 14, 2019
Page 2
amendment and a site plan review for the expansion of the Costco gas station at
the eastern edge of the facility and on the north of the development. Four new
multi-product dispensers, coming to a total of 8 new fueling stations, an expanded
canopy, one new 40,000-gallon UST and a new controller enclosure would be
constructed to reduce vehicles queues, improve circulation, and produce a more
fuel-efficient purchasing experience. The expansion would be in keeping with the
existing fuel facility, the Costco warehouse, and the surrounding area. The
applicant would abide by the conditions of the staff report.
Mette asked if the attendant station would be completely reconstructed. Anderson
replied this was more of a mechanical equipment enclosure and it would be
constructed and the existing one demolished. Mette noted the new one would
have steel panels, whereas the existing was brick in a style that matched the
pillars under the gas station awning. She urged the applicant to maintain the
current architectural style. Anderson stated the new design was Costco’s current
standard, but the applicant was willing to reevaluate if the City Council found an
issue.
Villarreal asked if the transformer was being moved or expanded and if the site
was amenable to a larger transformer. Anderson replied the transformer would not
be expanded. Villarreal noted this site was across from a large substation that
could accommodate other types of fueling sources, such as DC fast charging, and
it would not be a bad idea to prepare for that. Anderson replied Costco had not
considered that; current plans showed the site remaining a gas station offering
regular, unleaded, and premium gas. Costco had no plans for piloting electric
fueling. Higgins asked if circulation would be improved to avoid vehicles being
lined up without egress in conflict with cross traffic. Anderson replied there
would be no circulation issues to her or Costco’s knowledge due to this redesign;
the intent was to have members stop before exiting the fuel facility.
Pieper asked for metrics for wait times and busy times. Anderson introduced
Costco’s traffic consultant, Chris Teasler of Kittleson and Associates. Teasler
stated there was no planned change in configuration for egress. Pavement
markings would indicate traffic should stop for cross traffic. This was a common
setup for Costco across the fleet. Regarding traffic volume, Costco was a
members-only fuel service, and so no straight line growth in audience would
result. There would be only a nominal increase increased traffic due to increased
demand. Members likely would shop instead of waiting if there was a queue.
Costco envisioned increasing the processing capacity by 50 percent. The average
wait times were variable; traffic analysis looked queues at two peak periods.
Costco anticipated a 30-50 percent decrease in queue length which translated into
30-50 percent decrease in wait time with this proposal.
Mette expressed concern about the layout moving from two- to three-stalls deep
which could cause delays. Teasler replied the design was set up to provide
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
October 14, 2019
Page 3
additional space of five feet between the second and third dispensers, allowing
cars to pull in and out. Costco adopted a new system for stalls over two deep: an
LED board detects the presence of a car and a symbol turns to green from red
when a stall becomes empty. This plus the presence of gas station attendants
should address this concern. Mette commended the design.
Klima presented the staff report. The Costco Fuel Facility Expansion project was
initially scheduled for the August 12, 2019 Planning Commission meeting. The
applicant requested a continuance to September 9, 2019 in order to address staff
concerns regarding internal traffic flow on the east driveway. The applicant
requested a second continuance to October 14, 2019 Planning Commission
meeting. The applicant proposed a fuel facility expansion of the canopy and
addition of four new pump dispensers. There will be no alterations to the principal
Costco building. The applicant addressed the internal traffic flow concern with a
revised plan without altering the east driveway and provided a traffic analysis
report supporting the new fuel facility layout. The applicant was seeking a PUD
amendment with waivers to construct this project and there would be some
parking removal, but the parking exceeded the required number of stalls. Staff
recommended approval.
Farr noted two aerial photos showing the current and original construction and
asked for the timeline. Klima replied to the best of staff’s knowledge there was
not a public hearing on the first expansion and the addition of those pumps. Farr
asked if Costco was not increasing impervious area why the easement was
required. Rue replied this was a Watershed District requirement rather than a City
one. The original station could have been built before the Watershed regulations
went in. Farr asked if the second parking reduction met the City Code minimum,
and Klima replied the parking still exceeded Code requirements.
Mette added she took a quick look at the Code, and all buildings were required to
meet the architectural materials of Class One materials, but this redesign did not
follow that. Klima replied the Code did require a 75:25 ratio of Class I to Class II
materials, but for an accessory structure of this type, the building materials would
need to be consistent and complementary to those materials used in the primary
structure. Staff would continue to work with the applicant to increase the Class I
materials such as brick. Mette reiterated the continuation of the brick as a
preference for this redesign.
MOTION: Iyer moved, seconded by Farr to close the public hearing. MOTION
CARRIED 7-0.
Farr agreed with Mette on having a brick-clad enclosure, urging an oak color to
match the brick. He also underscored Villarreal’s suggestion regarding preparing
for electrical charging stations; Costco should move toward embracing this. Farr
urged the applicant to take this idea back to management and show leadership on
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
October 14, 2019
Page 4
this question. Villarreal thanked Farr for supporting his suggestion, and agreed
with Farr and Mette on using Class I materials. He explained the difference
between DC-fast charging (seven minutes or less) and conventional charging (up
to 45 minutes). Pieper also urged the applicant to keep the materials as similar to
the current structure as possible.
MOTION: Farr moved, seconded by Kirk to recommend approval of the
Planning Unit Development Concept Review on 18.18 acres, the Planning Unit
Development District Amendment with Waivers on 18.18 acres, and the Site Plan
Review on 18.18 acres based on plans stamp dated September 23, 2019 and the
information contained in the staff report dated October 3, 2019. MOTION
CARRIED 7-0.
B. NINE MILE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT OFFICE BUILDING
ADDITION (2019-17)
Request for:
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 5.31 acres
Planned Unit Development District Amendment with Waivers on 5.31
acres
Site Plan Review on 5.31 acres
Randy Anhorn, Administrator of Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, presented a
PowerPoint and detailed the application. The land in question, in the northwest
quadrant between Highway 494 and Valley View Road was donated in 2011. The
building’s setback would be 350 feet from Gerard Drive and be open to the
public. The use and development of the land would be limited due to an
agreement between the City and the Minnesota Land Trust. He did not anticipate
further increases in the future. The style attempted to be a Prairie Style/Frank
Lloyd Wright design, in keeping with the architectural integrity of the existing
home, and there was a landscape plan including a rain garden, a cistern for rain
water, screening plantings, buckthorn removal and permeable pavers
accompanying the parking design. A neighborhood meeting was held to explain
the development; one resident attended.
Kirk noted there seemed to be minimal traffic impact with this design. There were
no neighbors in attendance tonight.
Klima presented the planner’s report. The Nine Mile Creek Watershed District
proposed to construct a 486 square foot addition onto the northwest corner of the
existing building, on the property located at 12800 Gerard Drive just west of
Gordon Drive. The proposed building addition included three office spaces for
existing staff. This project did not include increases to staff or meetings. The
applicant proposed the same building architecture and materials so the addition
would match the existing building. An existing raingarden in the location of the
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
October 14, 2019
Page 5
addition would be relocated to the north and east sides of the addition. Staff
recommended approval with conditions.
MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Villarreal to close the public hearing.
MOTION CARRIED 7-0.
Farr commended this low-impact, environmentally sensitive project and
encouraged commissioners and the public to visit the area, called “Discovery
Point.” Mette stated the waiver was well justified as the building would not be
visible from the street. Villarreal noted there was roughly 480 square feet left in
the allowance and asked if there would be new additions. Anhorn replied there
were no specific plans for future additions. He could not put constraints on future
boards but there were no plans for future changes to his knowledge.
MOTION: Kirk moved, seconded by Villarreal to recommend approval Planned
Unit Development Concept Review on 5.31 acres, Planned Unit Development
District Amendment with Waivers on 5.31 acres, and Site Plan Review on 5.31
acres based on plans stamp dated September 23, 2019 and information contained
in the staff report dated October 3, 2019. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.
VI. PLANNERS’ REPORT
VII. MEMBERS’ REPORTS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Iyer moved, seconded by Kirk to adjourn. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. The
meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m.
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Sarah Strain, Planner I
DATE: October 23, 2019
SUBJECT: 11000 Viking Drive Parking Ramp
LOCATION: 11000 Viking Drive
REQUEST: Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 16.3 acres
Planned Unit Development District Amendment with Waivers for 16.3 acres
Site Plan Review for 16.3 acres
120 DAY
REVIEW
PERIOD:
February 11, 2020
BACKGROUND
The applicant is requesting a PUD Concept Review, Site Plan Review, and PUD District
Amendment with waivers to construct a 69,300 square foot parking ramp at 11000 Viking Drive.
This site is approximately 16.3 acres. The site
is located north of Highway 494 on Viking
Drive and is on the southern shore of Lake
Smetana. The site is bordered by other office
land uses and park/open space. The site is
outlined in the included aerial image.
The proposed parking ramp will replace the
existing surface parking at the easternmost
portion of the site. The ramp will be 2.5 stories
and will be constructed with the potential to
add levels as parking demand increases. The
proposed maximum height is three (3) stories
for parking.
There is an existing PUD on the site, granted
in 2003. The PUD Master Plan noted a parking
ramp in the approximate proposed location as
this application. The 2003 PUD also noted the
potential for another office building on the site
Staff Report – 11000 Viking Drive Parking Ramp
October 23, 2019
Page 2
2
as a Phase III development. This building is not proposed as part of this application. Should the
applicant wish to develop Phase III, the plans will need to go through site plan review and approvals.
In the 2003 PUD site plans, the Phase III office building was proposed to be constructed on top of
structured parking in the eastern portion of the lot. Plans submitted as part of this application do not
show the future build-out potential of locating office space on top of the parking ramp. Future build-
out of the proposed ramp includes an additional level of parking and an elevator and stairwell. The
location of the proposed ramp may not allow the Phase III office building to be constructed in the
location noted in the 2003 plans.
ZONING & GUIDE PLAN
The property is currently zoned Office, and the 2040 comprehensive plan guides the property for
Office use. There are no proposed zoning or comprehensive plan changes. The proposed parking
ramp is intended to bring parking ratios closer in line with current parking ratio standards for office
uses. The existing parking ratio on the site is 2.77 stalls per 1,000 square feet. The low parking ratio
than district standards was unique to the previous tenant who required large, open work spaces for a
smaller number of employees due to the nature of their work.
SITE PLAN
The proposed parking ramp will be located on the eastern edge of the property. There are no new
access points proposed. The eastern most access point off Viking Drive is proposed to be an entrance
and exit for the parking ramp. The access directly west of the proposed parking ramp will provide
access to both the ramp and the existing surface parking to the west. There are no proposed changes
to the other site
accesses.
The proposed
parking ramp
complies with
district setback
standards,
meeting the 35
foot front lot
line setback and
the 10 foot side
and rear lot line
setbacks
required for
accessory
structures.
Staff Report – 11000 Viking Drive Parking Ramp
October 23, 2019
Page 3
3
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WAIVERS
The purpose of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) as stated in the City Code is to provide for a more
creative and efficient approach to the use of land within the City; to allow variety in the types of
environment available to people and distribution of overall density of population and intensity of land
use where desirable and feasible; and provide for greater creativity and flexibility in environmental
design.
The proposed parking ramp largely complies with City Code and the existing PUD. As part of the
PUD process, the applicant is seeking waivers to City Code requirements as outlined below.
1. Parking Stall and Aisle Dimensions
The applicant is requesting smaller parking stall and aisle dimensions than required by
City Code. The applicant is requesting a stall depth four (4) inches shorter than required
for stalls perpendicular to the drive aisle.
The applicant is also requesting waivers for angled parking dimensions. Since the parking
stall dimensions outlined in the City Code do not include 75 degree parking requirements,
the applicant interpolated requirements based on the 70 degree and 80 degree parking
requirements. Staff agrees with the interpretation. For stalls at a 75 degree angle, the
applicant is requesting a stall depth about six (6) inches shorter than required and an aisle
width about four (4) feet narrower than required. Engineering staff has some reservations
about this proposed narrow dimension, particularly that it is four (4) feet narrower than
city requirements.
Parking for office uses typically has lower turnover rates than retail or commercial uses.
The lower intensity may allow for smaller aisle and stall dimensions. Other parking ramps
located in the City of Eden Prairie have smaller stall and aisle dimensions due to lower
turnover and to maximize the efficiency of the structure. These parking ramps have stalls
perpendicular to the drive aisle. The layout of the proposed parking ramp is for one
directional traffic in the drive aisles, including the narrower 75 degree parking.
2. Exterior Building Materials
The applicant is requesting a waiver from the number of building materials used on the
façade of the structure. The parking ramp is proposed to be 100% Class I materials,
exceeding code requirements. The proposed composition is 75% face brick and 25%
cream colored, architectural precast concrete. City Code currently requires at least 3
(three) contrasting yet complimentary materials or colors/textures to be used in exterior
building materials. The proposed structure utilizes two (2) materials/colors/textures to
avoid drawing more attention to the parking structure than the principle building.
City Code Chapter 11 notes that use of brick may be considered in requests for exterior
Staff Report – 11000 Viking Drive Parking Ramp
October 23, 2019
Page 4
4
material waivers in the PUD process.
3. Accessory Structure Height
The applicant is requesting a waiver from the maximum height for accessory structures.
The maximum permitted height for accessory structures in any zoning district is 15 feet.
The proposed parking ramp will be 26 feet with the potential to build up to 42 feet for
proof of parking and the future elevator and stairwell. The PUD granted in 2003 granted a
waiver for a maximum building height for the office building of 65 feet.
PARKING
The purpose of this proposal is to increase the parking ratio on the site to better meet current parking
standards for the Office zoning district. Buildings 150,000 square feet or more in the Office zoning
district are required to have 4 stalls per 1,000 square feet; the gross square footage of the existing
office building is 260,361 square feet, requiring the site to have 1,042 stalls. The site currently has 18
handicapped stalls, 659 regular parking stalls, and 36 underground parking stalls, including 1
handicapped space, for a total of 723 parking stalls. This creates a parking ratio of approximately 2.8
stalls per 1,000 square feet, consistent with the approved plans.
The proposed ramp will increase the ratio to approximately 3.6 stalls per 1,000 square feet.
The proposed plan will remove 246 existing surface parking stalls and will add 460 stalls for a gain
of 214 stalls. This will increase the number of spaces on the site to 937 and increase the parking ratio
to 3.6 stalls per 1,000 square feet, meeting 90 percent of the total parking requirement for the site.
Proof of parking, which can be provided by building the third level of the parking ramp, will offer
the required ratio of 4 stalls per 1,000 square feet. This proof of parking may be built according to
the submitted plans with a building permit; variation from the submitted plans may require site plan
review. Accessible parking spaces will be provided according to State Building Code.
The applicant notes that electric charging stations will be installed in desirable stall locations.
However, the number of stations is not provided, as they are proposing to install stations to meet
tenant demand. Staff recommends the installation of two charging station as a condition of approval
to be installed prior to certificate of occupancy; additional charging stations may be provided to meet
tenant demand.
LANDSCAPING AND TREE REPLACEMENT
The original PUD approved in 2003 included a landscape plan. The proposed plan will replace all
significant trees lost at a 1:1 ratio to maintain compliance with the approved landscape plan. In
general, the proposed plantings match the approved landscape plan. Wetlands shrubs are being
proposed along the northeast corner of the ramp as buffer restoration between the proposed ramp and
Lake Smetana.
Staff Report – 11000 Viking Drive Parking Ramp
October 23, 2019
Page 5
5
In the existing surface parking lot east of the office building, there are parking islands on the ends of
the aisles with few of them being planted. There are long rows of parking without parking islands,
which is not compliant with City Code. The applicant is proposing to install two (2) new parking
islands where none currently exist to break-up the expanse of parking and bring the site closer into
compliance with City Code. Both new and existing parking islands near the proposed parking ramp
will be planted. This area is anticipated to be disturbed by the proposed project, warranting the
improvements to comply with parking island landscaping requirements. The surface parking lot in
front of the existing office building largely complies with existing parking standards and is not
proposed to be modified as part of this project.
SIDEWALKS AND TRAILS
The previous developer’s agreement required the conveyance of a 5 foot sidewalk easement along
the property line. This easement has not yet been conveyed. The easement documentation and legal
description will be prepared and executed prior to the issuance of a building permit for the parking
ramp. A 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk will be constructed by the City along Viking Drive from
Prairie Center Drive to Washington Avenue in the future. The timeline for the construction of this
sidewalk by the City has yet to be determined.
A new sidewalk is also proposed internal to the site
between the proposed parking ramp and the existing
office building, shown at left. A crosswalk will also
be installed across the access to the existing
building’s underground parking. Both the sidewalk
and the crosswalk will be concrete to match existing
materials in the parking lot.
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
Grading on the site will largely be limited to the perimeter of the proposed parking garage to
transition between the existing sidewalk and building grades. There are notable grade changes along
the northern and eastern property lines. During construction, a small portion of the eastern slope will
be impacted. The area will be restored in-kind with no increase to the area of the overall
embankment upon completion of the project.
Proposed stormwater management meets the requirements of the City and the Nine Mile Creek
watershed district. The applicant is proposing to collect stormwater in a new underground storage
system, where water will collect and infiltrate into the ground or overflow into the existing
stormwater ponds to the northeast. This infiltration structure is intended to reduce the rate of runoff
Staff Report – 11000 Viking Drive Parking Ramp
October 23, 2019
Page 6
6
onsite.
As proposed, the underground stormwater management system is located underneath or within the
parking ramp. City staff recognizes that space onsite is limited to accommodate stormwater
management. However, the proposed location of the system may provide significant challenges if
major maintenance of the system is necessary. Access for maintenance vehicles, including trucks and
equipment to perform the maintenance of the system, may be challenging as well as the disruptive
with a temporary loss of parking stalls while the maintenance is performed. The most desirable
location of the underground system would be outside of the parking ramp structure. If the
underground stormwater management system is located underneath or within the parking ramp, City
staff recommends that all routine maintenance as outlined in the Operations and Maintenance Plan is
followed rigorously to minimize major maintenance needs and extend the life of the system.
Maintenance of the stormwater management system is a private responsibility.
WETLANDS
Three (3) wetlands were identified on or adjacent to the site during a recent wetland delineation. As a
property on the shores of Lake Smetana, structures on the site are required to be setback 200 feet
from the Ordinary High Water Level. The PUD approved for the site in 2003 granted a waiver for
this setback, reducing the required setback to 100 feet for this site. The proposed parking ramp is
setback approximately 150 feet from the Ordinary High Water Level, exceeding the PUD
requirements.
There are existing conservation easements on the site. However, these easements need to be amended
to include the entirety of wetlands and wetland buffers. The applicant is working with city staff to
record those easements prior to the issuance of a building permit. The proposed easement boundaries
are included in the submitted plans.
LIGHTING
The top level will be lit by pole mounted LED light fixtures. Lower levels of the ramp will have
ceiling mounted LED fixtures. Existing surface parking light fixtures throughout the site will be
upgraded to LED lamps as part of this proposal to provide a consistent color of light throughout the
site. Wall mounted lights are proposed over the driveway entrances/exits and the stairwells. The
proposed lighting plan complies with city requirements for maximum footcandles at the property
line. Lighting will be required to be cut off and downcast. The Development Agreement will include
these requirements.
SIGNS
The only signs proposed as part of this application are internal directional signs. “Enter” and “Exit
Only” signs above the entrance/exit driveways are under consideration but are not proposed at this
time. Any signage will be required to comply with sign standards in the Office zoning district and
Staff Report – 11000 Viking Drive Parking Ramp
October 23, 2019
Page 7
7
will be reviewed administratively at time of sign permit application.
UTILITIES
The existing fire hydrant on Viking Drive located between the two access drives will be relocated
and extended into the site. The salvaged hydrant will be relocated in the parking island north of the
entrance/exit of the parking ramp.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the following request:
PUD Concept Review on 16.3 acres
PUD District Amendment with waivers for 16.3 acres
Site Plan Review on 16.3 acres
This recommendation is based on the plans stamped dated October 11, 2019, staff report dated
October 23, 2019 and the following conditions:
1. Prior to the 1st reading before the City Council, the applicant shall:
A. Update the plans to include two (2) electric vehicle charging stations.
2. Prior to land alteration permit issuance, the applicant shall:
A. Submit detailed storm water runoff, wetland, utility, street and erosion control
plans for review and approval by the City Engineer.
B. Submit a tree replacement letter of credit or escrow surety equivalent to 150% of
the cost of the tree replacement.
C. Obtain and provide documentation of Watershed District approval.
D. Notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours in advance of grading.
E. Install erosion control at the grading limits of the property for review and approval
by the City.
3. Prior to building permit issuance for the property, the applicant shall:
A. Developer shall receive the Traffic Engineer’s approval of a Traffic Demand
Management (TDM) plan. The developer shall implement the TDM at the site to
reduce traffic congestion.
B. Developer shall furnish to the Traffic Engineer and receive the Traffic Engineer’s
approval of a TDM performance bond, cash escrow, letter of credit with a
corporation approved by the City Manager or other guarantee acceptable to the
City Manager equal to 100% of the cost of implementing the start‐up and first two
(2) years of the TDM Plan.
C. The documentation, legal description, and execution of the sidewalk easement.
Staff Report – 11000 Viking Drive Parking Ramp
October 23, 2019
Page 8
8
D. The documentation, legal description, and execution of the conservation easement
amendment.
4. The following waivers have been granted through the PUD District Review for the project as
indicated in the plans stamp dated October 11, 2019.
A. Parking Stall and Aisle Dimensions - The applicant is requesting smaller
parking stall and aisle dimensions than required by City Code. The Waiver allows
for a stall depth four (4) inches shorter than required for stalls perpendicular to the
drive aisle. The Waiver also allows for a stall depth about six (6) inches shorter
than required and an aisle width about four (4) feet narrower than required for
stalls at a 75 degree angle.
B. Exterior Building Materials - City Code requires at least 3 (three) contrasting
yet complimentary materials or colors/textures to be used in exterior building
materials. The Waiver allows for two (2) Class I materials/colors/textures to be
used for exterior building materials on the parking ramp accessory structure.
C. Accessory Structure Height - The maximum permitted height for accessory
structures in any zoning district is 15 feet. The Waiver allows a maximum
accessory structure height of 42 feet.
5. All signage shall require review and approval of a sign permit and shall comply with
Section 11.70.
Lake Smetana
Anderson Lake NW
§¨¦494
§¨¦494
W 78TH ST
VIKING DR
SMETANALN
¯
Location Map: 11000 Viking Drive Parking RampAddress: 11000 Viking DriveEden Prairie, MN 55344
0 410 820205 Feet
SITE
DISCLAIMER: The City of Eden Prairie does not warrant the accuracy nor the correctness of the information contained in this map. It is your responsibility to verify the accuracy of this
information. In no event will The City of Eden Prairie be liable for any damages, including loss of business, lost profits, business interruption, loss of business information or other
pecuniary loss that might arise from the use of this map or the information it contains. Map information is believed to be accurate but accuracy is not guaranteed. Any errors or
omissions should be reported to The City of Eden Prairie. Map was updated/created: October 1, 2019
Guide Plan Map: 11000 Viking Drive Parking Ramp
Address: 11000 Viking Drive, Eden Prairie, MN 55344
City of Eden Prairie Land Use Guide Plan Map 2010-2040
N
SITE
NE
Lake Smetana
Anderson Lake NW
§¨¦494
§¨¦494
W 78TH STPRAIRIE CENTER DRVIKING DR
SMETANA LN
City of Eden Prairie Zoning Map
In case of discrepency related to a zoning classification on this zoning map, the Ordinanceand attached legal description on file at Eden Prairie City Center will prevail.
¯
Shoreland Management Classifications
100 - Year Floodplain
Natural Environment WatersRecreational Development WatersGeneral Development Waters (Creeks Only)GD
NERD
Up dated through approved Ordinances #26-2008Ordinance #33-2001 (BFI Addition) approved, but not shown on this map editionDate: March 1, 2009
0 0.150.075
Miles
DISCLAIMER: The City of Eden Prairie does not warrant the accuracy nor the correctnessof the information contained in this map. It is your responsibility to verify the accuracyof this information. In no event will The City of Eden Prairie be liable for any damages,including loss of business, lost profits, business interruption, loss of business informationor other pecuniary loss that might arise from the use of this map or the information itcontains. Map information is believed to be accurate but accuracy is not guaranteed.Any errors or omissions should be reported to The City of Eden Prairie.M:\GIS\Users\Departments\CommDev\Themes\Shapes\Zoning and all other land use information\OfficialMaps\OfficialZoning.mxd Map was Updated/Created: June 11, 2008
Zoning Map: 11000 Viking Drive Parking RampAddress: 11000 Viking DriveEden Prairie, MN 55344
Rural
R1-44 One Family- 44,000 sf. min.
R1-22 One Family-22,000 sf min.
R1-13.5 One Family-13,500 sf min.
R1-9.5 One Family-9,500 sf min.
RM-6.5 Multi-Family-6.7 U.P.A. max.
RM-2.5 Multi-Family-17.4 U.P.A. max.
Office
Neighborhood Commercial
Community Commercial
Highway Commercial
Regional Service Commercial
Regional Commercial
TC-C
TC-R
TC-MU
Industrial Park - 2 Acre Min,
Industrial Park - 5 Acre Min.
General Industrial - 5 Acre Min.
Public
Golf Course
Water
Right of Way
SITE
¯
Aerial Map: 11000 Viking Drive Parking RampAddress: 11000 Viking DriveEden Prairie, MN 55344
0 410 820205 Feet
SITE
Lake Smetana
1
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: David Lindahl, Economic Development Manager
DATE: October 28, 2019
SUBJECT: Historic Yorkville & Bloomington Road – Local Heritage Preservation
Designation
LOCATION: James A. Brown Conservation Area – South of Spyglass Dr. and Riverview
Road
REQUEST: Review for consistency with Comprehensive Plan
Recommend approval to City Council
BACKGROUND
The Eden Prairie Heritage Preservation Commission held a public hearing on October 21, 2019
and recommended to the City Council designating a segment of the historic Yorkville and
Blooming Trail located within the James A. Brown Conservation Area and owned by the City of
Eden Prairie as a Heritage Preservation Site. From1864 to 1892, the Yorkville and Bloomington
Road was part of a critical area of animal-drawn transit within the southern Twin Cities region,
with particular importance for commerce and trade between Carver County and Hennepin
County, including Eden Prairie, Minneapolis and St. Anthony.
The enclosed nomination report prepared by McDonald & Mack Architects provides the basis for
the proposed designation and includes several maps showing the location of the historic road in
Eden Prairie.
The Planning Commission should review the proposed heritage preservation designation for
consistency with comprehensive plan and recommend approval to the City Council.
City of Eden Prairie
Heritage Preservation Commission
Yorkville and Bloomington Road Nomination
Prepared by
August 15, 2019
(Revised September 25, 2019)
Yorkville and Bloomington Road Nomination 2
Summary
This report serves as a nomination for Yorkville and Bloomington Road for designation as a
Heritage Preservation Site within the city of Eden Prairie, Minnesota. It was prepared by
MacDonald & Mack Architects for the City of Eden Prairie and adapted from the Minnesota
Individual Property Inventory Form prepared by Two Pines Resource Group in February 2018.
Per Ordinance No. 5-2010, Subd. 3, the City of Eden Prairie’s Heritage Preservation Commission
(HPC) has established a series of criteria for listing a historic district, site, building, or object as a
Heritage Preservation Site. Yorkville and Bloomington Road is eligible for listing under
Criterion 1, “[association] with events that have made significant contribution to the broad
patterns of our history.”
Contents
1. Planning Information .....................................................................3
2. Site Maps and Aerial Photos .........................................................4
3. Physical Description .......................................................................7
4. Statement of Significance ............................................................ 12
5. Bibliography .................................................................................. 13
Yorkville and Bloomington Road Nomination 3
1. Planning Information
Name
Yorkville and Bloomington Road
Location
Approximately 1,000 feet south of the intersection of Riverview Road (former) with Riverview
Road (current). It is situated roughly midway between the Minnesota River and Spyglass Drive.
Boundaries
The intact portion of the road within the city-owned conservation area is approximately 1,200
feet long. (See next page.)
Owner
City of Eden Prairie
Classification
The site was used for Transportation during the period of significance.
Present Use
The site is now categorized as Landscape within the James A. Brown Conservation Area.
Yorkville and Bloomington Road Nomination 4
2. Site Maps and Aerial Photos
Figure 1 / Topo map showing affected area
Figure 2 / 1873 map overlaid with local portion of road
Yorkville and Bloomington Road Nomination 5
Figure 3 / Present-day area of road
Figure 4 / Overhead satellite view of affected area
Yorkville and Bloomington Road Nomination 6
Figure 5 / Survey and map of affected area by Paul Thorp.
Yorkville and Bloomington Road Nomination 7
3. Physical Description
This information is adapted from the Minnesota Individual Property Inventory Form prepared by Two
Pines Resource Group in February 2018.
General site location and conditions
The site is located within the James A. Brown Conservation Area. The intact road segment
within this area is 1,200 feet (0.23 miles; 366 meters) in length and consists of a narrow terrace
cut into the hillside about halfway up the bluff at an average elevation of 730 to 740 feet ASL.
The visible west end of the continuous segment begins just to the east of a spring and a series of
small erosional ravines; the eastern end is marked by a transmission corridor. The route can
again be discerned at a distance of about 100 ft. to the east of the transmission corridor where
another approximate 30 foot (9 m) length is present within the boundary of the conservation
area.
The vegetation on the hillside is mature open woodland with an understory of buckthorn and
prickly ash. The road alignment is covered by this understory vegetation, which in many places
renders it impassable. A former barbed‐wire fenceline also parallels and crosses the trail.
The earthen roadbed averages 12‐15 ft. in width, though erosion has softened its edges and
narrowed its width.
Along the road segment there are occasional small erosional ravines that have removed small
sections of roadbed. A single, more substantial ravine was likely in existence at the time of the
road’s use. The sloped embankments to either side of this large ravine suggest it was bridged in
some fashion although no evidence of a bridge structure or support elements remain. No
associated features such as retaining walls or culverts were observed. However, on the 1994
inventory form for the Schlampp segment (HE‐EPC‐097), located 0.25 miles further to the east,
the landowner reported that remains of corduroy surfaces had been discovered along the route
together with occasional artifacts (Vogel 1994).
Historic use
Evidence suggests that this road may be a segment of the Minnesota Valley Oxcart Trail, given
that it is a continuation of road segments (HE‐EPC‐97 and HE‐EPC‐98) previously interpreted
as part of the trail network. Evidence and analysis by Eden Prairie Heritage Preservation
Commission member Paul Thorp, including historic plat maps and surveying information,
indicates that this road follows the same path as the Oxcart Trail and may have its origins in
that precursor. Heritage Group North’s analysis reached a different conclusion, finding that,
while the road segment within the conservation area is clearly visible on the historical aerial
Yorkville and Bloomington Road Nomination 8
photography flown in January of 1937 and on modern LiDAR imagery (Map 2), it was not
recorded during the initial 1854 government land survey; on the encompassing1853‐54 plat of
the Hennepin townsite; or on Cook’s 1860 plat map of Hennepin County. Heritage Group
North’s work suggests the road postdates 1854 and thus the period of the Minnesota Valley
Trail’s use (Gilman et al. 1979:8, 16‐17, 24‐26). In support of the road’s later period of origin, a
road alignment below the bluff and within the southern portions of Sections 35 and 36 is
recorded on the 1873 and 1879 plat maps of Hennepin County (Wright 1873; Warner and
Cooley 1879). While the oxcart trails developed organically along the easiest path across an
undeveloped landscape, the historic road within the conservation area does not follow a natural
terrace, but instead was clearly graded across the hillside midway up the bluff.
We recommend further study to resolve the uncertainty whether or not any roads existed on the
same site prior to the Yorkville and Bloomington Road. That said, the Yorkville and
Bloomington Road is worthy of documentation, celebration, and local designation unto itself.
Initial impetus for the road
Documentary research revealed that the road segment within the James A. Brown Conservation
Area is a remnant of a state road known as the “Yorkville and Bloomington Road,” which was
constructed at the request of the residents of Carver County who sought a more direct and
passable route to Minneapolis and St. Paul (The Valley Herald 1863a).
The advantages gained by this road are that you save about five miles travel over a rough and
hilly road. In going to St. Paul via Shakopee, you expend one dollar in ferriage for each trip. The
money paid out annually to ferrymen, by citizens of this county in going to St. Paul via
Shakopee, would pay for making the road to the eastern line of the county. During high water,
and even at its present state, it is almost impossible to go that way, and people are forced to climb
the bluffs, and, with loaded teams, follow a circuitous, hilly and poorly work‐road, all of which
could be avoided by working our new State road, which runs through the Yorkville Prairie and
along the foot of the bluff, to Bloomington.
In March of 1863, the Minnesota State Legislature passed “An Act to Locate and Open a State
Road from Yorkville in Carver County, to intersect the St. Paul Road south of Gibson’s, in
Bloomington Township, Hennepin County” (State of Minnesota 1863:242‐243).1 The road was to
be a “State road and public highway” platted along the river between Yorkville on the west and
a point on the St. Paul Road “about one mile south of Gibson’s.”2 The counties of Hennepin and
1 Yorkville, or Yorkville Landing, was a location on the Minnesota River in Carver County.
2 According to the Cook’s 1860 plat map the Gibson place was on Section 19 in Bloomington Township,
which would place the east end of the road in Section 30 of T 27N R 24W, however the east terminus was
pulled back to an intersection with the Chaska and Bloomington Road at “a point eighty rods east of the
quarter section post, between section 31 and 36, on the range line between 21 and 22 town 116” (The
Valley Herald 1864b).
Yorkville and Bloomington Road Nomination 9
Carver were responsible for opening and improving the road within six months of the passage
of the bill. Within two months, in May of 1863, Carver County had contracted for the
Construction of the road to the county line (The Valley Herald 1863a). An article about the plans
to complete the Carver County segment urged the completion of the Hennepin County portion
by highlighting the economic benefits of the road (The Valley Herald 1863b):
Now that we have provided for the building of the road through Carver County, an effort should
be made to secure an appropriation from Hennepin County to build that portion of the road lying
within its borders. The trading men of Minneapolis and St. Anthony should know that good
roads to their market are essential requisites to prosperity in business; that immense quantities of
pork and produce from Carver County are taken to their market and exchanged for lumber and
other kinds of goods, not easily obtained nearer home; that the better the road, the less inducement
is required to bring the people of Carver County to their market. This road, once built, will avoid
the roughest, longest, and most dreaded portions of the road leading to Minneapolis.
Great interest is felt here in having the road pushed through, and the market to which it leads
must receive even greater benefits than parties traveling the road. The influence of the city of
Minneapolis can secure a necessary appropriation, and will oblige its business men and a large
scope of country lying west of the road by making an effort to see the road completed. We are
informed also, that citizens of this county are ready to subscribe liberal sums in aid of that
portion of the road lying in Hennepin County. If the citizens of Minneapolis will do as well,
either by private subscriptions or through their county board, the road may be in a condition for
travel in the fall.
Despite this appeal, the commissioners of Hennepin County were resistant to opening the road
due to the perceived difficulty of constructing the route as platted (The Valley Herald 1864a).
However, after mediation with an arbitrator and further examination of the route, the originally
platted alignment was recommended for construction in 1864 (The Valley Herald 1864b).
Road construction
The platted route as surveyed in January of 1863 went “from the county line between Carver
and Hennepin counties to a point where said road intersects the section line between Section 28
and 33 Town 116 Range 22, thence easterly along the base of the river bluff on the most feasible
ground to the Bridge across the creek, on the surveyed route of the Yorkville and Bloomington
road in Section 33, then along the line of the road as surveyed by J. O. Brunius to a point of
junction with the old Chaska and Bloomington road eighty rods east of the quarter stake
between section 31 and 36 on the range line between section 21 and 22 town 116” (The Valley
Herald 1864b). The road was to be constructed so that it was “not less than eighteen feet in width
on its face, and so as to allow teams to safely pass each other at any, and all points on said road”
(The Valley Herald 1864b). The revised completion date was pushed back to October of 1864 (The
Valley Herald 1864b).
Yorkville and Bloomington Road Nomination 10
That the historic road within the James A. Brown Conservation Area is a portion of the
Yorkville and Bloomington Road is confirmed by a number of references to the road passing
through the lands of Georgiana F. Leigh. According to the 1873 plat map, members of the Leigh
family owned all that land north of the Minnesota River in the W ½ and the W ½ of the E ½ of
Section 35 which encompasses the historic road alignment and the majority of the James A.
Brown Conservation Area (Wright 1873). By 1879, this land was consolidated under the
ownership of Georgiana F. Leigh, whose house was located on the SE ¼ of the NW ¼ of Section
35 (Warner and Cooley 1879). Among the recorded notices is a petition entered on December 6,
1875 by James A. Brown and others requesting an alteration to the Yorkville and Bloomington
Road to which Mrs. Leigh was opposed (Hennepin County Board; MHS 127.F.7.7B; 461). The
county sided with Mrs. Leigh and rejected the proposed change.
However, just two years later, in December of 1877, the Hennepin County Board of
Commissioners had an official survey completed of the same proposed change to the Yorkville
and Bloomington Road (Hennepin County Board; MHS 112.J.16.3.B‐1):
Commencing in Sec 34 T116 R22 at a point in said road about 12 rods east of a point where said
road crosses the line between Secs 34 & 35, T116 R22 and running thence northeasterly and
south of Mrs. Leigh’s house, Thence Easterly to the road running south from the Wolf
schoolhouse, Thence South Easterly so as to intersect said Yorkville and Bloomington road where
said road is crossed by “Purgatory” Creek.
Again, Mrs. Leigh successfully appealed the county’s proposed change in the road (St. Paul
Daily Globe, 27 Feb. 1878). Then, in September of 1880 Mrs. Leigh, herself, successfully
petitioned the Eden Prairie supervisors to open a route that would connect the Yorkville and
Bloomington Road with the Wolf School house road, but not continue east to Purgatory Creek.
Her petition describes a road leading from the “road running south form the Wolf school
house” along the centerline of Section 35, west to a point at “the top of the hill opposite Mrs. G.
F. Leigh’s Residence” then to the west of the rut of the “old travelled track” (the former
Hennepin Landing Road) to its intersection with “the Yorkville and Bloomington road six rods
[99 feet] west of Mrs. Leigh’s Spring on said Yorkville and Bloomington Road all in Sec Thirty
Five Township 116 R 22” (Eden Prairie Clerk’s Records, MHS).
This alignment corresponds to the portion of Riverview Road (now closed) that descends the
bluff along the west boundary of the conservation area.
An actively flowing spring about 100 feet into the James A. Brown Conservation district and
located along the path of the historic road corresponds to “Mrs. Leigh’s Spring.”
Yorkville and Bloomington Road Nomination 11
The road’s final years and closure
Eventually, new roads in the area and changes to the Yorkville and Bloomington Road itself led
to the closure of the portion within the James A. Brown Conservation Area.
While an alternative route up the bluff past Mrs. Leigh’s was opened in 1880, the portion of the
Yorkville and Bloomington Road below the bluff between Riverview Road (now closed), on the
west, and Purgatory Creek, on the east, was still in use through 1892. In July of that year, the
Hennepin County Board of Commissioners approved a change in the road’s alignment from “a
point in said highway sixty rods east of the section line running north and south between
sections 34 and 35, town 116, range 22, to the creek in the northeast quarter section 36 in said
town and range” (The Minneapolis Tribune, 7 Sept. 1892, p.7). With that alteration, the segment of
the Yorkville and Bloomington Road within the boundary of the conservation area was
abandoned.
Figure 6 / Portion of the affected area, looking west (October 2017).
Yorkville and Bloomington Road Nomination 12
4. Statement of Significance
As an overland transportation route, the segment of the Yorkville and Bloomington Road
within the James A. Brown Conservation Area is evaluated under National Register of Historic
Places Criterion A, association with events that have made a significant contribution to the
broad patterns of our history.
For three decades, this road was a key component of a critical area of transit within the southern
Twin Cities region—as an article at the time stated: “This road, once built, will avoid the
roughest, longest, and most dreaded portions of the road leading to Minneapolis” (The Valley
Herald 1863b). It served this purpose for nearly three decades, during a period when this area of
Minnesota was growing, as seen in the table below, which shows county population per U.S.
Census data (National Historical Geographic Information System, www.nhgis.org).
Year Carver Hennepin
1860 5,106 12,849
1870 11,586 31,566
1880 14,140 67,013
1890 16,532 185,294
Unlike many early roads that were eventually upgraded and widened, this road segment was
abandoned and not subsequently modified. In its unimproved condition, the road retains its
original trajectory while its narrow width reflects its use during a period of animal‐drawn
transportation. As such, it retains excellent integrity of location and association.
While the roadbed has suffered in places from the effects of erosion, the overall integrity of the
design and workmanship is good as the length of this segment is sufficient to retain the sense of
a continuous corridor despite minor losses. The integrity of setting and feeling of this segment
is also good as its location within a conservation area has kept it free of modern visual
intrusions. However, presently, the alignment is overgrown with wooded undergrowth which
diminishes its setting and feeling. For this reason, it is recommended that a vegetation
management plan for the road be developed in consultation with the City.
Based on these findings, the portion of the Yorkville and Bloomington Road within the James A.
Brown Conservation Area is recommended as for designation as a Heritage Preservation Site
within the city of Eden Prairie under Criterion 1, “[association] with events that have made
significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.”
Yorkville and Bloomington Road Nomination 13
5. Bibliography
Case, J. A.
1854 Hennepin, Hennepin County. Plat map on file with Hennepin County.
Cook, R.
1860 Sectional Map of Hennepin Co. Minnesota Showing cities, Townships, Townsites,
Roads & Railroads. R & F Cook, St. Paul.
Foote, C.M. and Company
1887 Map of Ramsey and Washington Counties with Adjacent Portions of Anoka,
Dakota & Hennepin Counties, Minnesota and Parts of St. Croix & Pierce Counties. C. M.
Foote & Co., Minneapolis.
General Land Office (GLO)
1855 Township 116N, Range 22W. General Land Office, Washington, D.C.
Gilman, Rhoda R., Carolyn Gilman and Deborah M. Stultz
1979 The Red River Trails, 1820‐1870. Minnesota Historical Society Press, St. Paul.
National Historical Geographic Information System
“Download U.S. Census Data Tables & Mapping Files,” www.nhgis.org.
State of Minnesota
1863 General and Special Laws of the State of Minnesota, Together with the Joint
Resolutions and Memorials Passed during the Fifth Session of the State Legislature.
Frederick Driscoll, St. Paul.
The Valley Herald (Chaska)
1863a New State Road. March 28, 1863
1863b State Road. May 23, 1863.
1864a Yorkville Road. March 12, 1864
1864b The Road Commissioners. March 26, 1864
Two Pines Resource Group
Literature Search and Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Town of Hennepin, City of
Eden Prairie, Hennepin County, Minnesota. February 2018.
Minnesota Individual Property Inventory Form. February 12, 2018.
Yorkville and Bloomington Road Nomination 14
Vogel, Robert C.
1994b Minnesota Valley Trail North – Schlampp Segment. Eden Prairie Cultural
Resources Survey Historic Landscape Inventory Form. On file at the Minnesota State
Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul.
Warner, George E. and George W. Cooley
1879 Map of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Warner and Foote, Minneapolis.
Wright, George B.
1873 Map of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Geo. B. Wright and G. Jay Rice, Minneapolis.
1
PROJECT PROFILE – OCTOBER 28, 2019
PLANNING COMMISSION – OCTOBER 28, 2019
1. 11000 VIKING DRIVE PARKING RAMP (2019-16) by United Properties Development
(SARAH)
Proposal for a parking structure on top of existing parking lot
Location: 11000 Viking Drive
Contact: Bill Jundt, 952-893-8664
Request for:
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 16.2 acres
Planned Unit Development District Amendment with waivers on 16.2 acres
Site Plan Review on 16.2 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 08/02//19
Date Complete 08/30/19
120 Day Deadline 02/11/20
Initial DRC review 08/08/19
Notice to Paper Date 10/10/19
Resident Notice Date 10/11/19
Meeting Date 10/28/19
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/19
Resident Notice Date 00/00/19
1st Meeting Date 00/00/19
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/19
2. HISTORIC YORKVILLE AND BLOOMINGTON ROAD LOCAL HERITAGE
PRESERVATION DESIGNATION by the City of Eden Prairie
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING – NOVEMBER 12, 2019
1. COSTCO FUEL FACILITY EXPANSION (2019-12) by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc.
(STEVE)
Proposal for a fuel facility expansion and site improvements
Location: 12011 Technology Drive
Contact: Julie Anderson, 452-656-7403
Request for:
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 18.18 acres
Planned Unit Development District Amendment with waivers on 18.18 acres
Site Plan Review on 18.18 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 06/04//19
Date Complete 06/04/19
120 Day Deadline 01/31/20
Initial DRC review 06/06/19
Notice to Paper Date 07/24/19
Resident Notice Date 07/26/19
Meeting Date 08/12/19
Notice to Paper Date 10/23/19
Resident Notice Date 10/25/19
1st Meeting Date 11/12/19
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/19
2
2. NINE MILE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT ADDITION (2019-17) by Nine Mile Creek
Watershed District (BETH)
Proposal for an approximate 400 square foot building addition
Location: 12800 Gerard Drive
Contact: Randy Anhorn, 952-835-2078
Request for:
Planned Unit Concept Review on 5.31 acres
Planned Unit Development District Amendment with waivers on 5.31 acres
Site Plan Review on 5.31 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 08/30/19
Date Complete 09/13/19
120 Day Deadline 12/19/19
Initial DRC review 09/05/19
Notice to Paper Date 09/26/19
Resident Notice Date 09/27/19
Meeting Date 10/14/19
Notice to Paper Date 10/23/19
Resident Notice Date 10/25/19
1st Meeting Date 11/12/19
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/19
CITY COUNCIL CONSENT – NOVEMBER 12, 2019
1. PARAVEL APARTMENTS (2019-11) by Timberland Partners (JULIE)
Proposal for a 246-unit multi-family community as Phase 2 of the Castle Ridge redevelopment
project
Location: 635 Prairie Center Drive
Contact: Robert Fransen, 952-843-2040
Request for:
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.962 acres
Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.962 acres
Site Plan Review on 4.962 acres
Preliminary Plat of an outlot into one lot on 4.962 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 05/20/19
Date Complete 07/22/19
120 Day Deadline 11/18/19
Initial DRC review 05/30/19
Notice to Paper Date 07/24/19
Resident Notice Date 07/26/19
Meeting Date 08/12/19
Notice to Paper Date 08/28/19
Resident Notice Date 08/30/19
1st Meeting Date 09/17/19
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/19
PLANNING COMMISSION – NOVEMBER 18, 2019
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING – DECEMBER 3, 2019
CITY COUNCIL CONSENT – DECEMBER 3, 2019
3
1. 10197 EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD (2019-20) by Perry Ryan (JULIE)
Proposal for Guide Plan, Zoning Change and MUSA boundary extension
Location: 10197 Eden Prairie Road
Contact: Perry Ryan, 952-221-3700
Request for:
Guide Plan Change from Rural to Low Density Residential on 1.05 acres
Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.05 acres
MUSA Boundary Extension on 1.05 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 07/19/19
Date Complete 07/19/19
120 Day Deadline 01/14/20
Initial DRC review 07/25/19
Notice to Paper Date 08/21/19
Resident Notice Date 08/23/19
Meeting Date 09/09/19
Notice to Paper Date 09/12/19
Resident Notice Date 09/13/19
1st Meeting Date 10/01/19
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/19
IN BUT NOT SCHEDULED
1. TARGET REMODEL (2019-19) by Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. (SARAH)
Proposal for façade improvement and site improvements
Location: 8225 Flying Cloud Drive
Contact: Ryan Hyllested, 612-568-0698
Request for:
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 10.6 acres
Planned Unit Development Amendment with waivers on 10.6 acres
Site Plan Review on 10.6 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 10/10/19
Date Complete 00/00/19
120 Day Deadline 00/00/20
Initial DRC review 00/00/20
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/20
Resident Notice Date 00/00/20
Meeting Date 00/00/20
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/20
Resident Notice Date 00/00/20
1st Meeting Date 00/00/20
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/20
2. CENTRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL ADDITIONS AND REMODEL 2020 (2019-22) by Eden Prairie
Public Schools (BETH)
Proposal for building additions, interior remodeling and site improvements
Location: 8025 School Road
Contact: Jason Mutzenberger, 952-975-7071
Request for:
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 57.4 acres
Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 57.4 acres
Site Plan Review on 57.4 acres
Preliminary Plat to combine multiple parcels into 1 lot on 57.4 acres
4
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 10/11/19
Date Complete 00/00/19
120 Day Deadline 00/00/20
Initial DRC review 00/00/20
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/20
Resident Notice Date 00/00/20
Meeting Date 00/00/20
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/20
Resident Notice Date 00/00/20
1st Meeting Date 00/00/20
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/20
3. EDEN RIDGE, LLC (2019-20) by Eden Ridge, LCC (BETH)
Proposal for 10 single family lots
Location: 15807 & 15817 Valley View Road
Contact: Ralph M 952-494-3630
Request for:
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.3 acres
Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.3 acres
Preliminary Plat to divide 2 lots into 10 lots on 4.3 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 10/11/19
Date Complete 00/00/19
120 Day Deadline 00/00/20
Initial DRC review 00/00/20
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/20
Resident Notice Date 00/00/20
Meeting Date 00/00/20
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/20
Resident Notice Date 00/00/20
1st Meeting Date 00/00/20
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/20
4. FLYING CLOUD COMMONS (CASTLE RIDGE RETAIL) (2019-21) by Oppidan Investment
Company (JULIE)
Proposal for retail area as Phase 3 of the Castle Ridge redevelopment project
Location: 615-635 Prairie Center Drive
Contact: Oppidan Investment Company, 952-294-1259
Request for:
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 7.338 acres
Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 7.338 acres
Site Plan Review on 7.338 acres
Preliminary Plat of one outlot into 3 lots and 2 outlots on 7.338 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 10/11/19
Date Complete 00/00/19
120 Day Deadline 00/00/20
Initial DRC review 00/00/20
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/20
Resident Notice Date 00/00/20
Meeting Date 00/00/20
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/20
Resident Notice Date 00/00/20
1st Meeting Date 00/00/20
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/20
5. SOUTHWEST STATION PUD AMENDMENT (2015-23) by SW Metro Transit Commission
(JULIE)
Proposal for additional parking structure at southwest station
Contact: Julie Klima, 952-949-8489
5
Request for:
Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 11.38 acres
Zoning District Amendment within the Commercial Regional Service Zoning District on
11.38 acres
Site Plan Review on 11.38 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 00/00/15
Date Complete 00/00/15
120 Day Deadline 00/00/15
Initial DRC review 00/00/15
Notice to Paper Date 11/19/15
Resident Notice Date 11/20/15
Meeting Date 12/07/15
Notice to Paper Date 12/17/15
Resident Notice Date 12/18/15
1st Meeting Date 01/05/16
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/00
6. HUELER PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT (2019-18) by Greg &
Kelli Hueler (JULIE)
Proposal for amendment to the Development Agreement to relocate driveway location
Location: 12300 Riverview Drive
Contact: Greg & Kelli Hueler, 612-221-4172
Request for:
Development Agreement Amendment 4.45 acres
Application Info Planning Commission City Council
Date Submitted 09/03//19
Date Complete 10/07/19
120 Day Deadline 02/03/20
Initial DRC review 09/05/19
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/19
Resident Notice Date 00/00/19
Meeting Date 00/00/19
Notice to Paper Date 00/00/19
Resident Notice Date 00/00/19
1st Meeting Date 00/00/19
2nd Meeting Date 00/00/19
VARIANCES
TELECOMMUNICATION